Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
A N ORTHODOX EVALUATION*
By IAKOVOS
Metropolitan of Germany
I. INTRODUCTION
Yves Congar is a modern theologian one has to know in order
to become familiar with the present day Roman Catholic theology
and ecclesiology. Congar won recognition within and outside
his church. Faithful to the theological tradition and the authority
of his church, he has been very open to appreciate the biblical and
sacramental values in other churches.
Because of this openness he developed an ecumenical under-
standing of the nature and of the mission of the Church.
Son of a devout Catholic family, Congar dedicated himself to
the service of his church and its theology.1 Although he was
trained in Thomistic theology, he did not find absolute satisfaction
with the apologetic character of the Catholic medieval ecclesi-
ology, but he urged a return to the sources. He even looked for
new inspirations in all the great works of human thought, even
the non-Catholic Christian thinkers.2 He is very familiar with
modern Orthodox and Protestant theologians. The ecumenical
encounter has helped Congar to shape his ecclesiology on a deeper
foundation. Because of his progressive ideas he was misunder-
stood, even severely criticized by his church authorities at the
early stage, but a few years later he was unanimously justified as
a relevant modern theologian. Stanislas Jaki counts Congar among
the present time theologians whose primary intention is "the in-
tegration of everything that can enrich our knowledge of the
85
86 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
3
S . Jaki, Les Tendances Nouvelles de Ecclsiologie (Rome: Casa
Editrice Herder, 1957), p. 12.
4
Congar deals with the gradual disclosure of the mystery of the Church
in The Mystery of the Temple, trans. R. F. Trevett (Westminster, Md.; The
Newman Press, 1969); see also, The Mystery of the Church, trans. A. V.
Littledale (Baltimore: Helicon Press, I960), p. 60.
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 87
"the people of God" denotes life and history. This term describes
the Christian existence common to all and as such it was accepted
by Vatican II.
But still Congar thinks that the term cannot be an adequate
substitution for the Church because it has its genuine foundation
in Christ through whom the people of the new covenant have re-
demption and new life.
Christ is the foundation of the Church for two reasons: first,
because through incarnation we have the true religious encounter
between God and man, and second, because the incarnation is the
fulfillment of the given promises and the inauguration of a new
era. Christ as second Adam represents the whole humanity and
submits himself to the will of God. The Divine-human nature of
Christ determines the nature of the Church which is also divine and
human. Congar thinks that human nature plays its part in the
work of salvation. John the Baptist and Mary are human instru-
ments.5 The dependence of the Church on Christ is established by
the New Testament where Christ is called "the head over all
things for the Church,"6 the leader, the kyrios.
Through his death and resurrection Christ became the cause
of the Church in a theological and ontological sense. He insti-
tuted the Church as a covenant between God and man and pro-
vided it with the Holy Spirit and the apostolic authority. Al-
though the Church is also human and divine, still it has not
Christ's personality, kingly authority and independence, but draws
its power and mission from Christ himself. Christ's authority on
the Church is ultimate, because he established it and sent the Holy
Spirit to assist the ministry and grant the gifts of grace.
Congar deals with the theology of the Holy Spirit along the
lines of the Roman Catholic interpretation. The three persons
have the community of essence, wisdom and power but also their
own hypostases, their proper mission in the Trinity. So Christ re-
vealed the mystery of God and proclaimed the Gospel; the Holy
Spirit makes this message ever present and keeps it living. Yet
for Congar the Holy Spirit is dependent on the Word. Christ
promised the Spirit to the apostles and his presence appears to be
5
Y. Congar, Christ, Our Lady and the Church, trans. Henry St. John
(London: Logmans, Green Co., 1956), pp. 14 f.
e
Eph. 1:21-22.
88 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
7
I I Cor. 3:17.
8
The Mystery of the Church, p . 153.
9
Ibid., p. 107.
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 89
10
(Tournai, Belgium: Desclee, 1962).
11
For the issue of Faith and Reason from Kant till today, see John
Cobb, Living Options of Protestant Theology (Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1962), pp. 27 and 144 ff.
90 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
The visible aspect gives the right to call the Church an organ
ization as living in a social structure and composed of sinful men.
Of course the Church differs from a secular society, but still it has
a social form with the spiritual power which Christ gave to the
hierarchy in order to grant a form to the Society of Believers.
Yet this Christian organization differs from a secular society;
it is a \congregatio fdelium and it is composed of clergy and
laity. Both live by the grace and partake in the sacramental life
of the Church. But Congar makes a clear distinction between the
magisterium as the teaching church and the laity as the taught
church. The laity has a sensus fdei which means for Congar "a
power of adhesion and a sense of oneness and fellowship."12 The
laity under the spiritual leadership of the ministry should partici
pate in the apostolic mission to the world, which is God's world
and has to be transformed through the Christian faith.13 Congar
sees the great task of the Church in the present time between the
two comings of Christ. The Church has to reform and renew it
self in order to keep up with the problems and the new needs of
its people. He understands the reform as a development of faith, a
renewal of the Christian moral life and an adaptation of church
discipline to the needs and methods of our time. 14 The Church
has to be always active and missionary because the kingdom of
God has not only an eschatological meaning but also a dynamic
one. The Church lives in expectation; the reality of the work of
God is not given, "but the means are given and operating among
us corporeally/'1
. Evaluation
The western moral view led Congar to the picture of structure
with powers and authorities in the Church. This idea makes Con
gar distinguish between the Church which makes Christians and
the Church which is made by the magisterium. One must appre
ciate the intention and the conviction Congar has when he speaks
of the communio sanctorum. But still the Church takes the form
12
Y. Congar, Lay People in the Church, Revised Edition, trans. D.
Attwater (Westminster, Md.: Newman Press, 1965), p. 283.
13
Ibid., p. 237.
14
Y. Congar, Vraie et Pausse Rforme dans l'glise (Paris: ditions du
Cerf, 1950), pp. 140 f.
15
Ibid., p. 469; Sainte glise, p. 53.
92 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
What one feels uneasy about is the heavy structure and insti
tution that leaves little room for the free communion of the be
liever with the Savior. Congar is aware of these problems and
rejoices upon the fact that Vatican II put laity before hierarchy.
Yet he cannot help joining grace with the mediation of hierarchy;
thus he minimizes the existential meaning of salvation as deliver
ance from sin and a safeguard in the present, through a hope for
the hereafter, as S. Paul Shilling remarks.17 The ministry exists
with the Church and not apart from it.
Only the fellowship of the individuals in the redeeming grace
of Christ through the Holy Spirit provides a sound basis of unity
against the existing diversity.18 There can be no distinction in the
realm of salvation and freedom in Christ. The eastern realistic
view of the ontology of being in Christ through the Spirit explains
clearly the inner relationship between ministry and laity. Ministry
is an order and its service is subject both to the operation of the
Holy Spirit and the free faith of the believer. The figure of body,
as a participation through the Holy Spirit, indicates that what
makes the Church "an order by itself" is not the hierarchical struc
ture, but Jesus Christ himself.19
Yet the Church lives in the world and has to be in a dialogue
with all the systems and groups if it does recognize its role of a
messenger of Christ. For this reason an Orthodox has to appre
ciate the sociological developments in the west. An exchange of
experience would help both traditions.
From this aspect an Orthodox has to welcome Congar's ideas
on the reform of the Church. One should agree that the Church
16
Lay People, p. xxi.
17
S . P. Shilling, Contemporary Continental Theologians (New York-
Abingdon Press, 1966), p. 203.
18
1 Cor. 12.
Theol
TA " i f ^ / ^ < " Sy of the Laity," Journal of Religious
Thought, VIII (1950-51), p. 44. ' i s
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 93
needs a renewal in its style, methods and approach. Yet one has
some reservations in this regard. Congar understands the reform
on a moral basis as an act of the Church through the deposited
means and authority. But, at the same time, he contends that God
sometimes sends prophets who stimulate the need for renewal.
To accept the role of a new prophet means that the grace of God
acts freely.
One can hardly disregard the authority and the high respon-
sibility of the magisterium, but one would prefer to be closer to
the biblical tradition which understands every faithful bearer of
a charisma, a responsibility and a voice in the life and the needs
of his Church. Because it is not only the leading ministry but also
the laity that gave saints and martyrs. There can be no Church
without apostolic hierarchy and ministry, but also there can be no
Church without laity. The ministry teaches and leads; the laity
consents and participates. The ministry keeps the faith and inter-
prets the apostolic tradition, while the people adopt the apostolic
faith as the faith of the whole Church. For this reason the laity
also, as Congar says, expressed their consent to the creeds of
various councils.
IV. T H E ATTRIBUTES OF THE CHURCH
A. Exposition
In dealing with the attributes of the Church Congar has not
much originality.
The Church is one because its origin comes from God who acts
in history. The promises of God to Israel and the fulfilment in
the person of Jesus Christ make the Church one foundation and
a unique place for salvation. Our unity in Christ is unity in God,
because "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.,>20
The unity of the Church is realized through the Holy Spirit who
is given to each one as a member of the organic whole. Also the
sacraments, faith and love that are shared by the members of the
fellowship realize the oneness of the Church.
To understand the holiness of the Church, one has to bear in
mind the distinction that Congar makes between sinful men and
the sacred means of salvation, i.e. faith and the sacraments of
faith. The Church is holy because God is personally involved
20
II Cor. 5:19.
94 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
through his acts and means for salvation. When the ministry
through the Holy Spirit administers these means it is holy and
infallible. As simple men clergy and bishops may fail. Thus the
sacraments are ex opere operato. Congar holds the view that the
Holy Spirit acts in many ways and that outside the Church there
may be salvation.
Congar understands catholicity not only in a geographic but
also in a dynamic meaning. Catholic means the one Church of
truth and grace in contrast to the heresies. Catholicity draws its
power from the fullness of Christ. Catholicity is the universal
capacity of the principles of being and of the unity of the
Church.21 As a fullness of Christ's power and grace, catholicity
has to be understood as a principle of transformation and in-
clusiveness. By virtue of this the Church can absorb and transform
the varieties and diversities into a new creation.
The Church is also apostolic. Apostolicity is the historic mani-
festation of the work of salvation through an institution accord-
ing to the will of God. The apostles together with the Holy Spirit
are the two agents of Christ. Their number is a symbol of repre-
sentation like the twelve tribes of Israel. Jesus sent them as God
sent him. This mission establishes the basis of the apostolic trans-
mission. So apostolicity makes the Church an instrument of salva-
tion. The Church by the apostolic powers keeps the teaching of
Christ and of the apostles, administers the sacraments of grace
and bestows the power of priesthood inherent in the hierarchy.22
Since apostolicity was a divine origin, it is not subject to any
human authority and is free of imperfection. So the magisterium
has a guarantee of infallibility in the exercise of its teaching
authority.
Primacy is an expression of the unity of the Church. It ap-
peared in the West as a need of the Church's independence against
the political power. Yet Congar thinks that primacy is implicitly
found in the Bible. Thus Congar agrees with Newman and others
that the event of primacy led the Church to recover the prophetic
meaning of those texts that refer to St. Peter. Primacy has to be
understood not in a personal but a rather hereditary sense. Con-
gar recognizes that primacy was pushed to the extremes sometimes
21
Sainte glise, pp. 58-9.
22
Christ, Our Lady, p. 6.
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 95
and annihilated the place of the bishops. For this reason he wel-
comed the idea of collegiality of Vatican II.
B. Evaluation
Congar rightly stresses the affinity between East and West as
far as the structure of the Church is concerned. The existing dif-
ference is a matter of understanding and interpretation. The west-
ern legalistic view which Congar follows humanizes too much the
divine realities of the Church on the one hand and on the other
it grants the Church institution such a divine authority that Christ
himself disappears from the actual life. Thus the oneness and the
holiness of the Church appear as a function of the magisterium.
He understands holiness as an ethical idea for the sinful man.
But this view minimizes redemption and sanctification which we
are bestowed freely in Christ. Besides St. Paul and the Eastern
Fathers, also the Roman Catholic theologian A. Vonier holds that
holiness is an attribute of the whole Church. The fact that the
Church was established through the cross-resurrection act of Christ,
is sustained by him and lives with him, makes it holy. This is
the ground of deification of the believers, which the Eastern Fa-
thers speak of.
Catholicity also seems in him a function. Of course hierarchy
is indispensable in the life and mission of the Church, but its
authority leaves very little room for the sanctifying and unifying
power of the Holy Spirit. Congar understands the sensus fdei as
a gift of adhesion rather than a sense of unity in Christ. But his-
tory teaches, as Congar accepts, that hierarchy expresses the sensus
fdei, but the whole Church accepts and lives by it.
We have the same difficulty with apostolicity. While Congar
calls the Holy Spirit the interior agent of the Church, he wants
it exclusively related to the apostolic authority. Undoubtedly,
hierarchy is the historic reality of the Church, but the Holy Spirit
hierarchizes the Church and perpetuates the order and the gifts.
Hierarchy has the authority of faith and sacraments, but it is the
Holy Spirit who brings about grace and unity.
The overemphasis on the apostolic authority justifies the idea
of primacy. The whole idea socializes the Church too much and
makes ambiguous the spiritual presence of Jesus Christ himself.
The Church needs, of course, a visible unity, but this unity cannot
be detached from the invisible Christ who once present in the world
96 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
does not abandon his people until he carries out the work of re-
demption and comes again personally. The Church needs to be
aware of Christ's spiritual presence.
The arguments that Congar brings for primacy are not con-
vincing. It is true that the Christian West wanted legal expres-
sion of its unity. But the independence and authority of the
Church can easily be established on a spiritual basis as well. To
try to make a spiritual empire has not always been helpful for the
Church, as Congar showed. On the other hand this idea had a
local acceptance and the conflicts that it created in the West can
hardly justify its usefulness for the unity of the Church. Yet we
have to deal with this issue with understanding and brotherly love.
Congar is also very irenic. He often speaks of a spiritual primacy
and recognizes that the Bishops obtain their status through ordina-
tion and are indispensable in the Church. The non-Catholic
Churches have to examine the meaning of the primacy within the
Catholic Church itself and its meaning in a time of fellowship
and unity in Jesus Christ.
23
Y. Congar, Tradition and Traditions, trans. M. Nassby and T. Rain,
borough (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1967), pp. 205, 296 f.
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 97
24
Ibid., pp. 380 f.
25
Ibid., pp. 194, 205.
98 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
texts into relation 'Ve can sometimes go beyond the formal terms
of the text."26
It is not only the formal power of the Holy Spirit and the
analogia fdei that prepare the ground for dogmatic development,
but also the human limitations that necessitate it. This does not
mean that the doctrines of the Church are fallible as a whole, but
rather that current doctrinal teaching may appear incomplete. The
idea of dogmatic development was accepted by Vatican II.
B. Evaluation
Congar's studies on Scripture and Tradition have been a con-
siderable contribution to ecclesiology in ecumenical contexts. His
analysis of the origin, meaning and transmission of Tradition is
very helpful and illuminating.
In his discussions with Cullmann he succeeds in proving that
the Church cannot live without the actual Tradition which is al-
ways renewed through the Holy Spirit. Some protestant theolo-
gians also pointed out the historical dimension of the reality of
Christ which passed on to the Church not only by the apostolic
kerygma but also by the acts of the Christ and of the apostles.27
Congar makes clear two things: first, the unity of the acts of
God that have been accepted by faith of the first witnesses and
have been deposited through the written word or the tradition;
and second, the relationship between the Holy Scripture and Tra-
dition through the Holy Spirit. Sometimes, though, Congar's
thought is too dialectical so that one may be confused. The
material sufficiency of the Bible is so much stressed that one would
expect to see Tradition subordinated to the Bible. On the other
hand by making the magisterium the subject of Tradition he turns
the whole theory all the way around and makes the present time
of the Church more important than the time of Christ and the
apostles themselves.
Congar defends his view by accepting the noetic view of the
revelation, which needs new understanding. But the redemptive
work of Christ has not only a noetic aspect, but also a salvific one
that is comprehensive and is actualized through the Holy Spirit.
26
Ibid., pp. 907-8.
27
Samuel Miller and Ernest Wright, eds., Ecumenical Dialogue at Har-
vard (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1964), pp. 126-40.
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 99
28
" Scripture and Tradition: Sources or Source?" in Journal of Ecu-
menical Studies, 1 (1964), pp. 449-51.
100 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
A. Exposition
Congar is one among the few Roman Catholic theologians
who made a pause to polemical and entered into ecumenical
and irenic dialogue with Orthodox and Protestant theologians.
His real concern is the way back to unity. With this goal in mind
he studied the history and the various types of theology.
Congar was one of the few to single out the non-theological
factors that created an unpleasant climate and gradually an
estrangement between East and West. The removal of the capital
from Rome to Constantinople and the rise of the Eastern Patri
archate created an antipathy and a rival mood in Rome which lost
29
Irenaeus, Contra Haereses, Bk. I, ch. x.2, el. Apostolike Diakonia
tes Ekklesias tes Hellados, , vol 5 (Athens
1955), p . 116.
THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF YVES CONGAR 101
30
Y. Congar, "Neuf Cents Ans Aprs/' L'glise et les glises (1054-
1954), ditions d'Irnicon (Chevretogne, 1954), pp. 10 f.
102 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
32
Y. Congar, Dialogue Between Christians, trans. Philip Loretz (West-
minster, Md.: The Newman Press, 1966), pp. 91-7.
33
Y. Congar, Le Concile au four le four (Paris: Edit, du Cerf., 1964),
II, pp. 92-3.
104 THE GREEK ORTHODOX THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
VII. CONCLUSION
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.