Page 227 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

C O N F E S S I O N A L I S M A N D T H E C R I S I S O F T H E O L O G Y
pursued as a science detached from ecclesial communion.
The crisis this produced was inevitable. As Orthodox theol-
ogy in modern times sought to recover the patristic ethos, it
became clear that one cannot return to the Fathers while re-
taining a Scholastic methodology. A deep contradiction arose
between content and method. Theology lost not only its or-
ganic connection with the Church, but also its ecumenical
dimension, becoming either confessional polemics or simply
one specialized discipline among many.
The spirit of confessionalism assumes that faith is primar-
ily an intellectual process, that truth consists in propositions,
and that agreement in such propositions constitutes agree-
ment in faith. Tradition is then understood as the handing
down of formulations; theology becomes the systematization
of these propositions; and the Church acquires identity
through adherence to them. Thus Christendom is divided into
confessional bodies, each defined by its own credo.
Yet this is foreign to the ancient Church. It was inconceiv-
able in the early Church that faith could be reduced to the
acceptance of propositions, or that such acceptance could
constitute the basis of the Church. Creeds existed, and became
prominent in the struggle against heresy, but they never
formed the foundation of ecclesial existence. The Church was
understood as the mystery of God’s plan for the salvation of
the world, revealed and experienced in the Eucharistic com-
munity. It was membership in this concrete local community
that determined both theology and belonging to the Church.
For this reason there were no confessional Churches in
antiquity, but local communities called to unity; no parallel
confessional theologies, but one theological life rooted in the
Eucharist. What we later describe as Alexandrian or Antio-
chene “schools” were not confessional systems, but diverse
227