Page 231 - Orthodoxy Zizioulas

D E V E L O P M E N T S I N C O N T E M P O R A RY O R T H O D O X T H E O L O G Y
Afanasiev’s identification of Church and Eucharist leads to
problematic conclusions. One is the apparent opposition be-
tween canonical structure and the essence of the Church. An-
other concerns the status of the parish: if every Eucharistic
assembly is the Church in its fullness, the role of the bishop
becomes unclear. A further issue arises regarding the univer-
sal Church. While Eucharistic ecclesiology rightly emphasizes
the catholicity of the local Church, it risks opposing local and
universal rather than integrating them. Finally, the principle
“where the Eucharist is, there is the Church” can lead to a re-
duction of ecclesial life to the act of Eucharistic celebration
alone, raising questions about the role of faith, repentance,
and other dimensions of the Church’s existence.
Thus, Eucharistic ecclesiology points in the right direction,
but requires further development.
Closely related to ecclesiology are the priesthood and the
sacraments. Here, pneumatology and Eucharistic theology
have introduced new perspectives. Two dimensions are espe-
cially emphasized.
The first is the communal dimension. The Holy Spirit cre-
ates not isolated individuals but a community. Therefore,
priesthood and sacraments can only be understood within the
community.
The second is the eschatological dimension. The Eucharist
is not simply the remembrance of a past event, but the celebra-
tion of the last days. Through the Holy Spirit, it manifests the
coming Kingdom.
This has direct implications for apostolic succession. Since
ordination takes place within the Eucharist, succession is not
a mechanical transmission of power, but the continuity of the
eschatological community. It presupposes an epikletic context
of prayer and expectation.
231