www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West The Use of the Term "sister churches"

In Christian literature, the expression begins to be used in the East when, from the fifth century, the idea of the Pentarchy gained ground, according to which there are five Patriarchs at the head of the Church, with the Church of Rome having the first place among these patriarchal sister Churches. In this connection, however, it needs to be noted that no Roman Pontiff ever recognized this equalization of the sees or accepted that only a primacy of honour be accorded to the See of Rome. It should be noted too that this patriarchal structure typical of the East never developed in the West.

NOTE
ON THE EXPRESSION
�SISTER CHURCHES�


A. LETTER TO THE PRESIDENTS OF THE CONFERENCES OF BISHOPS

Rome, June 30, 2000

Your Eminence (Your Excellency):

In recent years, the attention of this Congregation has been directed to problems arising from the use of the phrase �sister Churches,� an expression which appears in important documents of the Magisterium, but which has also been employed in other writings, and in the discussions connected with the dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches. It is an expression that has become part of the common vocabulary to indicate the objective bond between the Church of Rome and Orthodox Churches.

Unfortunately, in certain publications and in the writings of some theologians involved in ecumenical dialogue, it has recently become common to use this expression to indicate the Catholic Church on the one hand and the Orthodox Church on the other, leading people to think that in fact the one Church of Christ does not exist, but may be re-established through the reconciliation of the two sister Churches. In addition, the same expression has been applied improperly by some to the relationship between the Catholic Church on the one hand, and the Anglican Communion and non-catholic ecclesial communities on the other. In this sense, a �theology of sister Churches� or an �ecclesiology of sister Churches� is spoken of, characterized by ambiguity and discontinuity with respect to the correct original meaning of the expression as found in the documents of the Magisterium.

In order to overcome these equivocations and ambiguities in the use and application of the expression �sister Churches,� the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has judged it necessary to prepare the enclosed Note on the Expression �Sister Churches� which was approved by Pope John Paul II in the Audience of June 9, 2000. The indications contained in this Note are, therefore, to be held as authoritative and binding, although the Note will not be published in official form in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, given its limited purpose of specifying the correct theological terminology on this subject.

In providing you with a copy of this document, the Congregation asks you to kindly communicate the concerns and specific indications expressed therein to your Conference of Bishops and especially to the Commission or Office entrusted with ecumenical dialogue, so that the publications and other texts of the Episcopal Conference and its various offices will carefully abide by what is established in the Note.

With gratitude for your assistance and with prayerful best wishes, I remain

Sincerely yours in Christ,

+ Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Prefect


B. TEXT OF THE NOTE

1. The expression sister Churches occurs often in ecumenical dialogue, above all, in the dialogue between Catholics and Orthodox, and is the object of continuing study by both parties. While there is certainly a legitimate use of this expression, an ambiguous use has become prevalent in contemporary writings on ecumenism. In conformity with the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and the post-conciliar Papal Magisterium, it is therefore appropriate to recall the correct and proper use of this expression. It is helpful to begin with a brief historical outline.

I. The origin and development of the expression

2. The expression sister Churches does not appear as such in the New Testament; however, there are numerous indications of the sisterly relations which existed among the local Churches of Christian antiquity. The New Testament passage which most explicitly reflects this awareness is the final sentence of the Second Letter of John: �The sons of your elect sister send you their greetings� (2 Jn 13). These are greetings sent by one ecclesial community to another; the community which sends the greetings calls itself the sister of the other.

3. In Christian literature, the expression begins to be used in the East when, from the fifth century, the idea of the Pentarchy gained ground, according to which there are five Patriarchs at the head of the Church, with the Church of Rome having the first place among these patriarchal sister Churches. In this connection, however, it needs to be noted that no Roman Pontiff ever recognized this equalization of the sees or accepted that only a primacy of honour be accorded to the See of Rome. It should be noted too that this patriarchal structure typical of the East never developed in the West.

As is well known, the divergences between Rome and Constantinople led, in later centuries, to mutual excommunications with �consequences which, as far as we can judge, went beyond what was intended and foreseen by their authors, whose censures concerned the persons mentioned and not the Churches, and who did not intend to break the ecclesial communion between the sees of Rome and Constantinople.�[1]

4. The expression appears again in two letters of the Metropolitan Nicetas of Nicodemia (in the year 1136) and the Patriarch John X Camaterus (in office from 1198 to 1206), in which they protested that Rome, by presenting herself as mother and teacher, would annul their authority. In their view, Rome is only the first among sisters of equal dignity.

5. In recent times, the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, Athenagoras I, was the first to once again use the expression sister Churches. In welcoming the fraternal gestures and the call to unity addressed to him by John XXIII, he often expressed in his letters the hope of seeing the unity between the sister Churches re-established in the near future.

6. The Second Vatican Council adopted the expression sister Churches to describe the relationship between particular Churches: �in the East there flourish many particular local Churches; among them the Patriarchal Churches hold first place, and of these, many glory in taking their origins from the apostles themselves. Therefore, there prevailed and still prevails among Eastern Christians an eager desire to perpetuate in a communion of faith and charity those family ties which ought to exist between local Churches, as between sisters.�[2]

7. The first papal document in which the term sisters is applied to the Churches is the Apostolic Brief Anno ineunte of Paul VI to the Patriarch Athenagoras I. After having indicated his willingness to do everything possible to �re-establish full communion between the Church of the West and that of the East,� the Pope asked: �Since this mystery of divine love is at work in every local Church, is not this the reason for the traditional expression �sister Churches,� which the Churches of various places used for one another? For centuries our Churches lived in this way like sisters, celebrating together the ecumenical councils which defended the deposit of faith against all corruption. Now, after a long period of division and mutual misunderstanding, the Lord, in spite of the obstacles which arose between us in the past, gives us the possibility of rediscovering ourselves as sister Churches.�[3]

8. The expression has been used often by John Paul II in numerous addresses and documents; the principal ones, in chronological order, are the following.

In the Encyclical Slavorum Apostoli: �For us they [Cyril and Methodius] are the champions and also the patrons of the ecumenical endeavour of the sister Churches of East and West, for the rediscovery through prayer and dialogue of visible unity in perfect and total communion.�[4]

In a Letter from 1991 to the Bishops of Europe: �Hence, with these Churches [the Orthodox Churches] relations are to be fostered as between sister Churches, to use the expression of Pope Paul VI in his Brief to the Patriarch of Constantinople, Athenagoras I.�[5]

In the Encyclical Ut unum sint, the theme is developed above all in number 56 which begins in this way: �Following the Second Vatican Council and in the light of earlier tradition, it has again become usual to refer to the particular or local Churches gathered around their Bishop as �sister Churches.� In addition, the lifting of the mutual excommunications, by eliminating a painful canonical and psychological obstacle, was a very significant step on the way toward full communion.� This section concludes by expressing the wish that the �traditional designation of �sister Churches� should ever accompany us along this path.� The topic is taken up again in number 60 of the Encyclical: �More recently, the joint international commission took a significant step forward with regard to the very sensitive question of the method to be followed in re-establishing full communion between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, an issue which has frequently embittered relations between Catholics and Orthodox. The commission has laid the doctrinal foundations for a positive solution to this problem on the basis of the doctrine of sister Churches.�[6]

II. Directives on the use of the expression

9. The historical references presented in the preceding paragraphs illustrate the significance which the expression sister Churches has assumed in the ecumenical dialogue. This makes the correct theological use of the term even more important.

10. In fact, in the proper sense, sister Churches are exclusively particular Churches (or groupings of particular Churches; for example, the Patriarchates or Metropolitan provinces) among themselves.[7] It must always be clear, when the expression sister Churches is used in this proper sense, that the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Universal Church is not sister but mother of all the particular Churches.[8]

11. One may also speak of sister Churches, in a proper sense, in reference to particular Catholic and non-catholic Churches; thus the particular Church of Rome can also be called the sister of all other particular Churches. However, as recalled above, one cannot properly say that the Catholic Church is the sister of a particular Church or group of Churches. This is not merely a question of terminology, but above all of respecting a basic truth of the Catholic faith: that of the unicity of the Church of Jesus Christ. In fact, there is but a single Church,[9] and therefore the plural term Churches can refer only to particular Churches.

Consequently, one should avoid, as a source of misunderstanding and theological confusion, the use of formulations such as �our two Churches,� which, if applied to the Catholic Church and the totality of Orthodox Churches (or a single Orthodox Church), imply a plurality not merely on the level of particular Churches, but also on the level of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church confessed in the Creed, whose real existence is thus obscured.

12. Finally, it must also be borne in mind that the expression sister Churches in the proper sense, as attested by the common Tradition of East and West, may only be used for those ecclesial communities that have preserved a valid Episcopate and Eucharist.

Announcement of the Chief Secretary of the Holy and Sacred Synod regarding the denouncement by Pope Benedict XVI of Rome of the title "Patriarch of the West".


ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATΕ

ANNOUNCEMENT

Pope Benedict XVI of Rome denounces the title of �Patriarch of the West�

It is hereby announced that during its last meeting the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate discussed the importance and the consequences for the relations between the Roman Catholic and the Orthodox Churches of the recent decision of His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome, to remove from his titles that are mentioned in the Pontifical Yearbook (Annuario) of 2006 the title �Patriarch of the West�, and to retain titles such as �Vicar of Christ�, �Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church�, etc. Concerning this decision, as well as the comments and explanation on this matter given by the President of the Pontifical Council for the Unity of the Christians, Cardinal Walter Kasper, the Ecumenical Patriarchate would like to make the following observations:

1. The removal of the title �Patriarch of the West� from the Pontifical Yearbook of this year, as well as the retention of the above mentioned titles, have a particular importance for the relations between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches, especially now in view of the reopening of the official Theological Dialogue between the two Churches, given that this Theological Dialogue will also deal with the issue of Primacy in the Church.

2. Out of all the titles that are used by the Pope, the only one that goes back to the period of the Undivided Church of the first millennium, and which has been accepted in the conscience of the Orthodox Church is the title of �Patriarch of the West�. In the beginning this was related to the institution of the �Pentarchy�, but, it became widely accepted in the East even after the Schism of 1054 AD. A proof of this is the fact that throughout the centuries the Ecumenical Patriarchate has avoided the founding of bishoprics in the West with titles that had been already used by bishops of the Church of Rome. Further proof is the protest of the Ecumenical Patriarchate any time the Church of Rome, especially after the 4th Crusade, including our own times, would found bishoprics within the jurisdiction of the Orthodox Patriarchates with titles that were being already carried by Orthodox Bishops. The consciousness of the geographical limits of each ecclesiastical jurisdiction has never ceased to be a basic component of Orthodox ecclesiology.

3. The fact of course that the �Pentarchy�, which was based on the geographical structure of the known �oecumene� during the time of the Byzantine period, has weakened ecclesiastically through the creation of other Patriarchates and Autocephalous Churches within the Orthodox Church after the fall of the Byzantine Empire, is an undeniable historical reality. However, there was never a time that the Orthodox Church did not make a distinction between the so-called �ancient� Patriarchates, that go back to the institution of the �Pentarchy�, and the Patriarchates that have been added later on. Among the �ancient� Patriarchates, the first place belongs to the Patriarchate of the West, under the bishop of Rome, even though its communion with the Orthodox Churches has been interrupted after the Schism of 1054 AD. This fact remains always very important for the approach by the Orthodox of the primacy issue of the bishop of Rome in case of the restoration of full communion between the two Churches.

4. It is also an undeniable reality that in the recent past the term �West� has acquired a cultural context, and has expanded to areas unknown during the times of the ancient Church, such as the American continent, Oceania etc. It would, however, be unthinkable for the Orthodox ecclesiology to denounce the geographical principle and to replace it with a �cultural� one in the structure of the Church. The unity of the Church cannot be conceived as a sum of culturally distinct Churches, but as a unity of local, namely geographically determined, Churches. The removal of the title �Patriarch of the West� must not lead to the absorption of the clearly distinct geographical ecclesiastical �jurisdictions� by a �universal� Church, consisting of Churches which are distinguished on the basis of either �culture� or �confession� or �rite�. Even in today�s historical circumstances, the one Church must, from an ecclesiological point of view, be considered as a unity of full local Churches.

5. At this point it is of extreme importance to the Orthodox Church that Pope Benedict, while having rejected the title �Patriarch of the West�, retained the titles �Vicar of Christ� and �Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church�. These titles create serious difficulties to the Orthodox, given the fact that they are perceived as implying a universal jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome over the entire Church, which is something the Orthodox have never accepted. By retaining these titles and discarding the �Patriarch of the West� the term and concept of �sister Churches� between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Church becomes hard to use. This concept which was first introduced by Patriarch Ioannis of Constantinople, the Kamatiros, as a response to the positions of Pope Innocent III, in the 13th century, has been repeated and promoted in our times by Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, both of blessed memory.

6. In view of the reopening of the official theological dialogue between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches and the discussion of the issue of primacy, the Ecumenical Patriarchate expresses its wish and prayer that no further difficulties may be added in the discussion of such a thorny problem, as that of the primacy of the bishop of Rome. In this connection we find it appropriate to recall the view of Professor Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, published some years ago, that �Rome cannot demand from the East regarding the primacy issue more than what has been expressed and applied during the first millennium�. If such a principle is accompanied by an ecclesiology of �koinonia" (communion) through placing every aspect of primacy within the context of the synodical structure of the Church, this would greatly facilitate the effort to solve a very serious issue for the unity of the Church of Christ.

At the Phanar, 8 June 2006.
From the Chief Secretary of the Holy and Sacred Synod.

It is my fervent hope that the Roman Church will return to an understanding of the papacy (and primacy) as it existed during the first millennium.

The liturgy is normative in matters of faith, because it is the living experience of the divine economy.

Here was a case where Rome had unjustly sought to impose the discipline of its patriarchal rite on another patriarchal jurisdiction, and it was rightfully ignored by the hierarchs and the faithful. To my mind it is an example of exceeding one's mandate (ecclesiastical and divine), and attempting to commit an injustice (violence against another rite's legitimate practices and traditions) - ergo morally Maronites had no obligation to follow the pope's command. I was told once that the canonists have always held to the idea of a principle that an unjust law is not binding on anyone. Perhaps a canon lawyer here can expand more on that principle.

So when you talk about "absolute power", it may be more limited than you think.

Really, why do you think this would be attractive to Eastern Orthodox Christian: in theory and according to Catholic canon law, the Pope has absolute primacy but we ignore him when we feel like it.