• 按：此是维尔主教：关于东正教与其他基督教派区别的采访。本采访提供英文讲稿，并提供中文翻译。注：本文参考了DeepL的中译。
  • 若要引用本文，请按以下格式：维尔主教《关于东正教与其他基督教派区别的采访》（伦敦：光从东方来，2024年11月23日），阿甲整理修订，本网页网址，引用日期。具体也请参考版权申明

What is the charateristic difference between Orthodox Christianity and Catholic Christianity on the one hand, and Orthodox Christianity and Protestant Christianity on the other? Is there an essential difference between Orthodoxy’s relationships to both?

东正教与天主教之间，以及东正教与基督教新教之间的区别是什么？东正教与两者的关系是否存在本质区别？

Answer:

First, so far as Catholic Christianity goes, the root difference, the most important single difference, in my view, is the papal claims. We are willing, on the Orthodox side, to accept that in a reunited Christendom, the Pope would have the first place. But we don’t believe that he should have universal power of jurisdiction. He simply has a role of coordination, of leadership, but so far as the Christian East goes, not a power of direct, immediate and ordinary jurisdiction. So, there I see the biggest difference between Orthodoxy and Rome.

首先，就天主教而言，在我看来，最根本的区别，也是最重要的区别，就是教皇权威的主张。在东正教方面，我们愿意接受在一个统一的基督教世界里，教皇是居于首位。但我们并不认为他应该拥有普遍的管辖权。他只是起到协调和领导的作用，但就东方基督教而言，他没有直接，立刻和普遍的管辖权。因此，我看到了东正教与罗马之间最大的不同。

Of course, there is also the question of the procession of the Holy Spirit, the Filioque, and, to some extent, the question of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which we Orthodox don’t agree with. But, at the present moment, in the international dialogue between our two churches, we are concentrating on the papacy. And I think if we could solve that, the other issues wouldn’t be so difficult.

当然，还有圣灵的发出、“和子句”（Filioque）的问题，以及在某种程度上，我们东正教不同意的圣母无原罪（Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary）的问题。但目前，在我们两个教会之间的国际对话中，我们集中讨论的是教皇问题。我认为，如果我们能解决这个问题，其他问题就不会那么困难了。

As regards Protestantism, it is much more complex because there is such variety of belief among the Protestants. In the past, the group with which the Orthodox felt closest was the Anglican Church, the Episcopalians. I would say the high point of our dialogue with the Anglicans was in the 1930s. But there have been a lot of changes in Anglicanism which are difficult for the Orthodox. Not only the ordination of women priests and bishops, but also the question of appointing practising homosexuals to high positions in the church, and the practice that is now beginning in some Anglican churches of blessing same-sex marriages. And that is very problematic for the Orthodox.

With the Roman Catholics, we have a great deal in common. Our view of the communion of saints, our view of the sacraments is not so different, though of course there are some points of divergence. Whereas with the Protestant world, we have far more differences.

至于新教，情况要复杂得多，因为新教徒的信仰多种多样。过去，与东正教关系最密切的是英国圣公会和圣公会。我想说，我们与圣公会对话的高潮是在 20 世纪 30 年代。但英国圣公会发生了许多变化，这让东正教感到为难。不仅是女祭司和女主教的任命，还有任命同性恋者担任教会要职的问题，以及现在一些圣公会教会开始祝福同性婚姻的做法。这对东正教来说是个大问题。我们与罗马天主教有很多共同之处。我们对圣人共融的看法、对圣礼的看法并无太大不同，当然也有一些分歧点。而我们「东正教」与新教的差异，相比「天主教」而言，要大得多。

Why is the finding of ancient Christianity an important quest? What might you tell a modern Western evangelical who suspected that such inquiry about ancient Christianity was inspired only by pomp and a fancy for ritual? 为什么寻找古代基督教是一项重要的探索？如果一个现代西方福音派信徒怀疑对古代基督教的探索只是出于浮华和对仪式的迷恋，你会怎么说？

答：

The first and most important thing about ancient Christianity is the faith of the early church. Not ritual, not pomp. We Orthodox believe that for our understanding of the faith today, we should look back to the period of the ecumenical councils of the ancient fathers, to the period where the Greek East and the Latin West were united in communion. And what we are looking for is primarily what was the understanding of the faith in the ancient church. How did they understand the New Testament? So we would look at the continuity from the apostolic period onwards. That would be our guide. But of course tradition needs to be living tradition. We cannot simply go back to the period of the early fathers and the councils in an archaeological way. We cannot simply repeat in a parrot-like manner what they said. We have to relive their experience. We have to ask ourselves how are we to interpret the message of the early church, the unchanging message. How are we to present this in terms of today’s world? So our honouring of tradition is living tradition. But we start with the faith rather than with a particular type of ritual. Precious though the Byzantine liturgy is, what is fundamentally important is the faith that is enshrined in the liturgy.

关于古代基督教，最重要的是早期教会的信仰。不是仪式，不是浮华。我们东正教认为，为了理解今天的信仰，我们应该回顾古代教父的大公会议时期，回顾希腊东方和拉丁西方联合共融的时期。我们要寻找的主要是古代教会对信仰的理解。他们是如何理解新约的？因此，我们要看的是从使徒时期开始的连续性。这就是我们的指南。当然，传统必须是活的传统。我们不能简单地以考古学的方式回到早期教父和大公会议时期。我们不能只是鹦鹉学舌般地重复他们所说的话。我们必须重温他们的经历。我们必须扪心自问，我们该如何诠释初期教会的信息，这个亘古不变的信息。我们该如何根据当今的世界来呈现这些信息？因此，我们对传统的尊重就是活的传统。但我们的出发点是信仰，而不是某种特定的仪式。拜占庭礼仪固然珍贵，但最重要的是礼仪中所包含的信仰。

Then the ancient traditions that are not extant within modern Western Protestantism. Why are these facets of ancient Christianity so crucial for the faith?

现代西方新教中不存在的古老传统。为什么古代基督教的这些方面对信仰如此重要？

答

We should take as our starting point the Holy Eucharist. Communion in the Body and Blood of Christ. We are to see the church essentially as a Eucharistic community. The church becomes truly itself when celebrating the divine liturgy. So what is lacking for us in much of Protestantism is the acceptance that the Holy Communion is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. That is believed I suppose by the Lutherans, but we also as Orthodox believe that the divine liturgy is a mystical sacrifice. That of course the Lutherans would not accept. But for so many Protestants the Eucharist is seen simply as a memorial meal. And that would not be sufficient for us as Orthodox. I was brought up from childhood in the Anglican Church. And I have good memories of Anglicanism. If I left the Anglican Church and became Orthodox it was not for negative reasons, because I objected to things in Anglicanism, but rather to the fact that, rather for positive reasons, because I found in Orthodoxy a fullness that I did not find in Anglicanism.

我们应该以圣餐礼为出发点。在基督的身体和宝血中领受圣餐。我们应该把教会看作是一个领圣餐的团体。在庆祝神圣礼仪时，教会才真正成为自己。因此，我们在新教中缺乏的是接受圣餐是真正的基督的身体和宝血。我想路德教派相信这一点，但作为东正教，我们也相信神圣礼仪是一种神秘的献祭。路德宗当然不会接受这一点。但对许多新教徒来说，圣餐仅仅被视为一种纪念餐。这对我们东正教来说是不够的。我从小在圣公会长大。我对圣公会有着美好的回忆。如果我离开圣公会而成为东正教徒，那不是因为消极的原因，因为我反对圣公会的东西，而是因为事实，而是因为积极的原因，因为我在东正教中找到了在圣公会中找不到的充实感。

Now the Anglican Church that I knew sixty years ago was very different from what it is now. I was brought up in a traditional Anglicanism, mainly in the High Church tradition, and so I was brought up in an Anglicanism that honoured the fathers and the ancient councils. And certainly I was taught that the Eucharist is the true Body and Blood of Christ and that one should go to confession. But what troubled me then, and would trouble me today, is the diversity of viewpoints within Anglicanism. There is of course the High Church tradition in which I was brought up, but there is also the evangelical wing of the Anglican Church and, still more troubling, the liberal wing, liberal Anglicans who deny the bodily resurrection of Christ, even his Godhead. And I was troubled by this diversity within Anglicanism. I found in becoming Orthodox I did not have to change my faith, but I could say this is the faith of the Church, instead of having to say as an Anglican, this is the faith of the particular group within Anglicanism to which I belong. So I would prefer to say that in becoming Orthodox I was not rejecting Anglicanism, but I was finding a firm basis for the faith I had already held as an Anglican, but a firm basis in the sense that I could say this is the teaching of the Church, not just this is the teaching of a certain group with which I am linked. And in that sense I found a fullness within Orthodoxy. I do not wish to say that other Christian bodies have nothing, we are not to think in terms of a contrast between light and then unredeemed darkness.

六十年前的圣公会与现在大不相同。我是在传统的圣公会中长大的，主要是在高教会传统中长大的，所以我是在尊崇教父和古代大公会议的圣公会中长大的。当然，我也被教导说，圣餐是基督真正的身体和宝血，人们应该去忏悔。但当时困扰我的，也是今天困扰我的，是圣公会内部观点的多样性。其中当然有我从小接受的高教会传统，但也有圣公会中的福音派，还有更令人不安的自由派，即否认基督肉身复活，甚至否认他的神性的自由派圣公会教徒。英国圣公会内部的这种多样性令我感到不安。我发现成为东正教徒后，我不必改变我的信仰，但我可以说这是教会的信仰，而不必像圣公会教徒那样说，这是我所属的圣公会内部特定群体的信仰。因此，我更愿意说，我成为东正教徒并不是在拒绝圣公会，而是在为我作为圣公会教徒时已经持有的信仰找到一个坚实的基础，但这个坚实基础的意义在于，我可以说这是教会的教导，而不仅仅是与我有联系的某个团体的教导。从这个意义上说，我在东正教中找到了一种充实感。我并不想说其他基督教团体一无是处，我们不应该从光明与未得到救赎的黑暗之间的对比角度来思考问题。

There are many elements of Orthodoxy to be found in Anglicanism, particularly the High Church Anglican tradition, as represented by people like the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Michael Ramsey. But one could not say as an Anglican, this is the faith of our Church. As an Orthodox I am able to say this is not simply the faith of a group that I choose to belong to, this is the faith of the total Church. It gave me a firm basis for what I had already been taught to believe as an Anglican. You uniquely bring us through the world in a way that private personal faith alone cannot. To answer that we might first ask, how did the Church start? And what we are told in the opening chapters of the Book of Acts was that those who turned to Christ, who were converted, were first of all baptised. And then we are told that what the early Christians did was to break bread together, to celebrate the Eucharist. And the sharing together in Holy Communion, from the very beginning, has been central to the life of the Church. So Christ did not simply say, at the Last Supper, believe these things. He said, do this in remembrance of me. Christ bequeathed to his disciples, not just a theory, an ideology, but an action. And an action that could only be performed by people together, not alone. The action of the Eucharist. So yes indeed, personal faith is presupposed. We do each need to believe personally. But that is not enough. Since Christianity is founded on the Eucharist, the command of Christ at the Last Supper, do this. We need to belong to a worshipping community. A worshipping community that celebrates the Holy Mystery of his Body and Blood. This is why simply to have personal faith is not enough. That personal faith is expressed, through the corporate action of the Church community. The corporate action of Holy Communion. The Orthodox Church, the understanding of its members, is the true Church of Christ on Earth. It is the one Catholic Apostolic Church of Christ. Therefore, we would be happy if everybody became Orthodox. In that sense, the Orthodox Church has a universal mission. But we in the Orthodox Church do not think it right to practice negative proselytism. In other words, we do not wish to seek out members of other churches and to attack their beliefs and seek to undermine their loyalty to the Church they belong to. We do not think it right, in this way, to attack other churches and to disturb Christians in their faith.

在圣公会，特别是以坎特伯雷大主教迈克尔-拉姆齐为代表的高教会圣公会传统中，可以找到许多东正教的元素。但作为圣公会教徒，我们不能说这就是我们教会的信仰。作为一名东正教徒，我可以说这不仅仅是我选择加入的一个团体的信仰，这是整个教会的信仰。它为我作为英国圣公会教徒已经接受的教导提供了坚实的基础。您独一无二地带领我们走过这个世界，这是个人信仰所无法企及的。要回答这个问题，我们可能首先要问，教会是如何开始的？使徒行传》开篇告诉我们，那些归信基督的人首先接受了洗礼。然后我们得知，早期基督徒所做的事情就是一起擘饼，庆祝圣餐。一起分享圣餐，从一开始就是教会生活的核心。因此，基督在最后的晚餐上并没有简单地说，要相信这些事。祂说，这样做是为了纪念我。基督留给门徒的不仅仅是一种理论、一种意识形态，而是一种行动。这种行动只能由人们共同完成，而不是单独完成。这就是圣餐礼。所以是的，个人信仰的确是有前提的。我们每个人都需要个人信仰。但这还不够。既然基督教是建立在圣餐礼之上的，那么基督在最后的晚餐上的命令就是要做到这一点。我们需要属于一个崇拜团体。一个庆祝基督身体和圣血这一神圣奥秘的崇拜团体。这就是为什么仅仅有个人信仰是不够的。个人的信仰要通过教会团体的集体行动来表达。圣餐的集体行动。东正教会及其成员的理解是基督在地球上的真正教会。它是基督独一的、大公的、使徒的教会。因此，如果人人都成为东正教徒，我们会很高兴。从这个意义上说，东正教具有普世使命。但我们东正教会不认为实行消极的改宗是正确的。换句话说，我们不希望寻找其他教会的成员，攻击他们的信仰，试图破坏他们对所属教会的忠诚。我们认为，以这种方式攻击其他教会和干扰基督徒的信仰是不对的。

If people ask us about the Orthodox Church, indeed we are happy to tell them. And if they feel that they should join the Orthodox Church, then, yes, the door is open. But I do not think it our task to undertake evangelism and missionary work against other Christians. If we are going to undertake evangelistic work, then let us go to the people who belong to no church and have no Christian faith. And there are plenty of those in Britain and in Western Europe. So I do not think of us as carrying out a missionary campaign at the expense of other Christians. But, of course, if they ask us, we would have sincerity to tell them the points where we didn’t agree with them.

如果有人向我们询问东正教的情况，我们确实很乐意告诉他们。如果他们觉得应该加入东正教会，那么，是的，大门是敞开的。但我不认为我们的任务是针对其他基督徒开展传福音和传教工作。如果我们要开展布道工作，那就让我们去找那些不属于任何教会、没有基督教信仰的人。在英国和西欧，这样的人比比皆是。因此，我并不认为我们在开展传教活动时牺牲了其他基督徒的利益。但当然，如果他们问我们，我们也会坦诚地告诉他们我们不同意他们的观点。

I think of this statement, quote, as the first thousand years of Christendom were those of unity and the second thousand of disunity, so the third thousand years of Christendom will be of reunity. First of all, unity was not complete in the first thousand years.

我想到了这样一句话：“正如基督世界的第一个千年是合一的千年，第二个千年是不合一的千年，基督世界的第三个千年也将是合一的千年。”这句话的意思是，基督世界的第一个千年是合一的千年，第二个千年是不合一的千年。首先，在第一个千年里，统一并不完全。在最初的一千年中就已经出现了分裂。

Already, there was a division in the fifth and sixth century between those who accepted the Council of Chalcedon, 451, and those who rejected it. And so, we have already a division between the non-Chalcedonian churches, that’s to say the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Syrians, the Armenians, and on the other side, the Chalcedonian churches, the Orthodox Church, and the Roman Catholic Church. So, there was already a division in the first millennium. Now, in the second half of the 20th century from the 1960s onwards, there was considerable progress in reconciliation between the Orthodox Church, that’s to say the Greek, Russian, and Romanian, and other Orthodox churches on the one side, and the non-Chalcedonians, the Copts, the Ethiopians, the Armenians, on the other. And they have not yet restored communion, but it has been said on each side that the main doctrinal difficulties concerning the person of Christ have been clarified and agreement has been reached. So I hope in the next 20 or 30 years there would be reconciliation there.

在五世纪和六世纪，接受 451 年卡尔西顿会议的教会和拒绝接受该会议的教会之间已经出现了分歧。因此，非卡尔西顿教会，即科普特人、埃塞俄比亚人、叙利亚人、亚美尼亚人，与另一方卡尔西顿教会、东正教会和罗马天主教会之间已经出现了分裂。因此，在第一个千年就已经出现了分裂。现在，在 20 世纪下半叶，从 20 世纪 60 年代起，东正教（即希腊、俄罗斯、罗马尼亚和其他东正教会为一方）与非卡尔西顿派、科普特人、埃塞俄比亚人、亚美尼亚人为另一方的教会在和解方面取得了相当大的进展。他们还没有恢复共融，但每一方都表示，有关基督位格的主要教义难题已经得到澄清，并达成了一致。因此，我希望在未来的 20 年或 30 年里，双方能够实现和解。

So there was division in the first millennium behind the division between Rome and Protestantism in the 16th century, and behind the division between Eastern and Western Christendom, which evolved over a long period but is usually fixed the division to the 11th century. There is this earlier division that we should not forget. So in the end of the second millennium there’s already been a movement towards reconciliation. I consider that it’s going to be much more difficult for an agreement to be reached between Orthodoxy and Rome. But with the help of the Holy Spirit all things are possible and we should remain in dialogue together. What will happen in the third millennium is known to God and not to me. We should not isolate the incident of 1054, the estrangement a bit between the Orthodox Church and Rome was a gradually evolving process. And the roots of it go back a long time before the 11th century. And on the other hand the division was not completed until some time after the 11th century. So 1054 is just one incident in a much longer story. What happened was that there were already tensions between East and West. Cardinal Humbert came as delegate from the Pope to Constantinople on what was intended to be a mission of reconciliation. But he and the patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Serularius, quickly fell out with one another. One of the key issues at that time was the use of bread in the Eucharist. In the West, unleavened bread is used. In the East, leavened bread. And that led to quite a sharp conflict. In fact, today, many people on both sides would say this is not, in the end, a fundamental doctrinal question. There is room in the Church for different liturgical practices. The West may follow its practice and the East its practice over the nature of the bread in the Eucharist. That is a view that many Orthodox would take today. However, in the 11th century the two sides were not so willing to allow for diversity.

因此，在16世纪罗马与新教分裂的背后是第一个千年的分裂，在东西方基督宗教分裂的背后是一个漫长的时期的演变，但通常将分裂固定在11世纪。我们不应忘记早先的分裂。因此，在第二个千年末期，已经出现了和解运动。我认为，东正教与罗马之间要达成协议要困难得多。但在圣灵的帮助下，一切皆有可能，我们应继续保持对话。第三个千年会发生什么，只有上帝知道，与我无关。我们不应孤立地看待 1054 年的事件，东正教与罗马之间的隔阂是一个逐渐发展的过程。其根源可以追溯到 11 世纪之前的很长一段时间。另一方面，分裂直到 11 世纪后的一段时间才完成。因此，1054 年只是一个更长故事中的一个事件。当时东西方之间的关系已经非常紧张。红衣主教亨伯特作为教皇的代表来到君士坦丁堡，本意是进行和解。但他和君士坦丁堡的宗主教迈克尔-塞拉留斯很快就闹翻了。当时的关键问题之一是圣餐中面包的使用。在西方，使用的是无酵面包。东方则使用发酵面包。这导致了相当尖锐的冲突。事实上，今天，双方的许多人都会说，归根结底，这并不是一个基本的教义问题。教会中存在着不同礼仪做法的空间。在圣餐中面包的性质问题上，西方可以遵循它的做法，东方可以遵循它的做法。这是今天许多东正教徒的观点。然而，在 11 世纪，双方并不那么愿意允许多样性。

But already at an earlier point in the 9th century, there had been a disagreement between Patriarch Photius at Constantinople and Pope Nicholas in the West in the 860s. And there the issues were, yes, the procession of the Holy Spirit and also the primacy of the Pope. And these two questions were not really solved in the 9th century. And so they also underlay the difficulties in the 11th. Anyway, Humbert and Serularius disagreed. Cardinal Humbert lost patience. He therefore drew up an anathema excommunicating Michael Serularius and he put it, he put it on the altar of the church in Saint Sophia. And in retaliation, Michael Serularius and his synod excommunicated Cardinal Humbert. But the excommunication of Humbert was not directed to the Byzantine church as a whole, only against Serularius. And the response of Serularius was not directed against the Pope, but only against Humbert. So the excommunications were limited in scope. However, when Humbert went home, he presented the whole incident as a great victory for the Roman see and the papacy endorsed it. He endorsed his anathema. And on the other side, the emperor supported Michael Serularius. So in that way, the scope of the anathemas was enlarged. But this was not the end of friendly relations between the two churches. And in fact, in Byzantium, the incident of 1054 was quickly forgotten.

但早在9世纪，君士坦丁堡牧首普提乌斯（Photius）和西方教皇尼古拉（Nicholas）之间在860年代就出现了分歧。是的，当时的问题是圣灵的发出和教皇的首要地位。这两个问题在 9 世纪并没有得到真正的解决。因此，它们也是11世纪困难的根源。总之，亨伯和塞拉留斯产生了分歧。红衣主教亨伯失去了耐心。于是，他起草了一份将迈克尔-塞拉留斯逐出教会的诅咒，并把它放在了圣索菲亚教堂的祭坛上。作为报复，迈克尔-塞拉留斯和他的主教团将红衣主教亨伯特逐出教会。但对亨伯特的驱逐并非针对整个拜占庭教会，而只是针对塞拉留斯。塞拉留斯的回应也不是针对教皇，而只是针对亨伯。因此，开除教籍的范围是有限的。然而，亨伯特回家后，将整个事件说成是罗马教廷的一次伟大胜利，教皇也对此表示赞同。教皇认可了对他的诅咒。另一方面，皇帝也支持迈克尔-塞拉留斯。这样一来，诅咒的范围就扩大了。但这并不是两个教会友好关系的终结。事实上，在拜占庭，1054 年的事件很快就被遗忘了。

What was much more damaging was the sack of Constantinople in 1204 by the Fourth Crusade. That is something which the Christian East has never forgotten or forgiven. So I think the schism dates, if you want to choose a single date, much more from 1204. than from 1054. But the roots of the division go back at least to the 9th century to the conflict between Photius and Rome, even though communion was not permanently broken at that point. First of all, the will of our Lord is quite clear. In the prayer that he offered at the Last Supper in John 17, he says with very great emphasis, referring to his disciples, may they all be one.

更具破坏性的是第四次十字军东征于 1204 年洗劫了君士坦丁堡。东方基督教从未忘记或原谅过这一事件。因此，我认为，如果你想选择一个单一的日期，那么分裂的日期更多的是1204年，而不是1054年。但分裂的根源至少可以追溯到9世纪，即Photius与罗马之间的冲突，尽管那时的共融并未永久破裂。首先，我们主的旨意非常明确。在《约翰福音》第 17 章中，主在最后的晚餐上祷告时，非常强调地对门徒说：“愿他们合而为一。

As you, Father, are one with me and I with you, may they also be one in us. So, first of all, the unity of Christians is to reflect the unity in diversity of the Holy Trinity. That is the basis that Christ gives. In his prayer for unity, we are to be one as Christ and the Father are one. Our unity reflects the mystery of the Holy Trinity. Church is an icon of the Holy Trinity. So the basis for the prayer for unity is in the life of God himself. But a second reason is alongside and arising out of Christ’s prayer at the Last Supper. What the early Christians did, as I have already mentioned, from the very beginning was to break bread together to celebrate the mystery of Holy Communion. Christ wanted his disciples to be visibly one, to share visibly in the Eucharist. And therefore, the heart of the problem of Christian unity is this. We do not receive communion together. That is the real problem. Now, you might say, in that case, why do we not just have communion together and that will solve everything? But Holy Communion is not to be separated from the faith. And until we agree in the faith on the Orthodox understanding, we should not share in the sacraments. However, I speak of agreement in faith, not agreement in theological opinions. There is room for diversity of viewpoints. What we are seeking is unity, not uniformity.

父啊，你与我合一，我与你合一，愿他们也在我们里面合一。因此，首先，基督徒的合一就是要体现神圣三位一体的多样性中的合一。这是基督给出的基础。在他的合一祷告中，我们要合而为一，就像基督和天父合而为一一样。我们的合一反映了神圣三位一体的奥秘。教会是神圣三位一体的象征。因此，合一祷告的基础是上帝本身的生命。但第二个原因是与基督在最后的晚餐上的祷告相伴而生的。正如我已经提到的，早期基督徒从一开始就一起擘饼，庆祝圣餐的奥秘。基督希望他的门徒明显地合而为一，明显地分享圣餐。因此，基督徒合一问题的核心就在于此。我们没有一起领受圣餐。这才是真正的问题所在。现在，你可能会说，既然如此，我们为什么不一起领圣餐，这样不就什么问题都解决了吗？但圣餐不能与信仰分离。在我们对东正教的理解在信仰上达成一致之前，我们不应该分享圣餐。不过，我说的是信仰上的一致，而不是神学观点上的一致。观点的多样性是有空间的。我们追求的是统一「unity」，而不是一模一样「uniformity」。

And what we have to clarify when we as separated Christians talk together is which things belong to the heart and essence of the Christian faith on which we must agree, and which things can be left to private opinion. Now, the different Christian groups do not agree on where to draw the line. So, we do need to be one in faith in order to be one in the sacraments. But unity in the vision of Christ was indeed to be visible because it is founded on the Holy Eucharist, which is a visible action.

当我们作为分离的基督徒在一起讨论时，我们必须澄清的是，哪些事情属于基督教信仰的核心和本质，我们必须达成一致，哪些事情可以留给私人意见。现在，不同的基督教团体并没有就在哪里划线达成一致。因此，我们确实需要在信仰上合一，才能在圣礼上合一。但基督异象中的合一确实是可见的，因为它建立在圣餐礼上，而圣餐礼是一种可见的行动。

how that would work out in a practical way, if there’s any consensus on that among the Orthodox and Roman? Pope is the first among equals? 如果东正教在这一点上有任何共识的话，那么在实践中会如何实现呢？

Answer

The phrase, first among equals, is often applied, is it not, to the Pope. And that is probably what you are thinking of, the way it is applied to the Pope. There are three levels of authority in the Church. And this was recently stated in the Ravenna document put out by the International Commission for dialogue between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics in 2007.

平等中的第一 “这句话经常被用在教皇身上，不是吗？这可能就是你所想到的，它被用于教皇的方式。教会的权威分为三个等级。最近，东正教与罗马天主教国际对话委员会于2007年发的 “Ravenna文件 ”中对此作了说明。

And the Ravenna document distinguishes first the authority of the local bishop in his diocese. Then you have regional authority or regional primacy. And that means for us Orthodox the position of the patriarchs and heads of the autocephalous churches. And then thirdly, the Ravenna document distinguished the universal primacy of the Pope. Now I think the phrase first among equals applies to the second level. The Pope is the senior among the patriarchs and therefore the first among equals. But Ravenna also said and the Orthodox agreed with this that the Pope does have a special ministry beyond that of being patriarch in the West. That he is also endowed with a universal authority over the whole church. Not a power of direct jurisdiction on the Orthodox understanding. But he has a certain ministry to watch over the unity of the church. But the Ravenna document says there must be mutual consultation the Pope as first should not do anything without consulting the patriarchs and they should not do anything without consulting the Pope. Mutual consultation. All of this is implied in the Ravenna document rather than stated clearly.

Ravenna文件首先区分了当地主教在其教区的权威。然后是地区权威或地区首要地位。对我们东正教来说，这意味着宗主教和自治教会首领的地位。第三，拉文纳(Ravenna)文件区分了教皇的普世首要地位。现在，我认为 “平等中的第一 ”这句话适用于第二个层次。教皇是宗主教(patriarch)中的宗主教(patriarchs)，因此是平等中的第一位。但是，拉文纳还说，教皇在西方的宗主教之外还有一个特殊的职务，东正教对此也表示同意。他还被赋予了对整个教会的普世权威。按照东正教的理解，这不是一种直接管辖的权力。但他有一定的职责来监督教会的合一。但拉文纳文件说，必须相互协商，教皇首先要做的就是不征求宗主教们的意见，而宗主教们也要做的就是不征求教皇的意见。相互协商。所有这些在拉文纳文件中都是隐含的，而不是明确的。

But there is there the suggestion that the Pope as supreme pontiff has a ministry that is different from that of the other patriarchs. Now not all Orthodox would accept that. But the Orthodox at Ravenna agreed to it. However we are now having further discussions to work out exactly what this signifies. So the title first among equals applies really to the middle level of authority. What I call regional primacy. The patriarchs. But there is an understanding among many Orthodox that the Pope has a special position in the church. And there is plenty of evidence to support that from the first millennium when there was communion between us. And we are looking at that evidence at the moment and trying to see whether we can reach a common understanding on this basis.

但文件中暗示，教皇作为最高教皇，其职责有别于其他宗主教。现在，并非所有东正教徒都会接受这一点。但拉文纳的东正教徒对此表示同意。不过，我们现在正在进一步讨论，以确定这究竟意味着什么。因此，“平等中的第一 ”这一称谓实际上适用于中间一级的权威。我称之为地区首领。宗主教。但许多东正教徒都认为教皇在教会中有特殊地位。从第一个千年开始，我们之间就有了共融，有很多证据可以证明这一点。我们目前正在研究这些证据，并试图了解我们是否能在此基础上达成共识。

What would you say to Christians of all stripes whether Southern Baptist or Methodist or Catholic or even Eastern Orthodox that they can do to work for in their own small ways greater unity among one another?

你想对各派基督徒说什么，无论是美南浸信会、卫理公会还是天主教，甚至东正教，他们都能以自己的微薄之力为彼此间更大的合一而努力吗？

Answer

The most important thing that we can do to bring about greater unity is for each one of us in our different church traditions to come closer to Christ. Three things go together in work for unity. Truth, unity and holiness. There can be no unity except unity in the truth. But also there can be no unity except unity in holiness. If we would all draw nearer to Christ we would also all of us draw nearer to one another. So the best thing we can do to help the work of Christianity the work of Christian unity each one of us is to be converted more deeply more radically to Christ our one Saviour. Amen.

要实现更大的合一，我们所能做的最重要的事情就是让我们每个人在不同的教会传统中更亲近基督。在合一的工作中，有三件事是相辅相成的。真理、合一和圣洁。除了在真理上的合一，就不可能有合一。同样，除了在圣洁中合一，也不会有合一。如果我们都更亲近基督，我们也会彼此更亲近。因此，为了帮助基督教的合一工作，我们每个人所能做的最好的事情，就是更深入、更彻底地皈依基督。