Page 230 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

O r t h o d o x y
deeper question of the place of the Holy Spirit in theology as
a whole. Orthodox theologians have criticized Western theol-
ogy for becoming excessively Christocentric, even Christo-
monistic—an accusation directed, for example, against Karl
Barth and even aspects of the Second Vatican Council.
Orthodox theology has therefore insisted that pneumatol-
ogy must have a constitutive place alongside Christology. Yet
this emphasis has at times led to extremes, such as the idea of
a distinct “economy of the Holy Spirit.” These reactions reveal
the need for a renewed synthesis in which Christology and
pneumatology are reintegrated, as in the patristic period.
The importance of pneumatology becomes especially clear
in ecclesiology, which has become perhaps the central theo-
logical theme of our century. Building on insights already
present in the nineteenth century, particularly in Alexei Kho-
miakov, modern Orthodox thought has emphasized the
Church as communion, expressed in the concept of sobor-
nost. The Church is by nature conciliar and communitarian,
because it is the communion of the Holy Spirit.
A characteristic development of this ecclesiology is “Eu-
charistic ecclesiology,” first articulated by Nikolai Afanasiev
and further developed by Alexander Schmemann and John
Meyendorff. Its central claim is that the Eucharist is the place
where the Church is fully manifested. Wherever the Eucharist
is celebrated, there the Church exists. This reverses the scho-
lastic notion that the Church produces the Eucharist.
This approach offers significant insights. It overcomes in-
stitutionalism by presenting the Church as an event as well as
a structure. It also suggests that apparent oppositions—such
as event and institution—may be reconciled if the structure of
the Eucharist is taken as normative. Yet this approach also
raises serious questions.
230