Editorial Note
Links to other media and further information regarding this topic can be found in the German version of this article.
1. Introductory Considerations
The Orthodox Church sees itself as the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church (according to the Nicene and Constantinopolitan Creeds), whose unity is founded in the risen body of Jesus Christ. This unity is reflected in the communion of the Holy Trinity, which is the foundation and living image of church life. The church is a divine-human reality in which Christ is present as its head and works salvation through the synergy (cooperation) between human beings and God in the sacraments of the church. The church is not only the mediator of the sacraments, but the sacrament par excellence, through which the communion between God and human beings becomes concretely visible and the world is transformed and enters into divine reality. The unity of the church is therefore not merely a form of organization, but a lived spiritual and sacramental reality.
From an Orthodox perspective, the primary goal of ecumenical efforts is to restore full ecclesial communion with those who have separated from the Orthodox Church throughout history and who are close or distant from it today. It has played an important role in the search for ways and means to restore unity in Christ since the beginning of the twentieth century, providing initial ecumenical impetus, participating in the ecumenical movement from the outset, and contributing to its formation and development.1Ecumenical responsibility was repeatedly emphasized in the pan-Orthodox pre-synodal conferences. This stance was officially expressed in the document “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World,” which was adopted by the Council of Crete in 2016. In it, the Orthodox Church reaffirmed its willingness to cooperate with other Christians traditions in order to contribute to Christian unity on the basis of the truth of the gospel. See Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World Draft Document of the Pan-Orthodox Council, Adopted by the 5th Pan-Orthodox Pre-Council Conference in Chambesy 10–17 October 2015, in: The Ecumenical Review 68/2–3 (2016), 305–311, 305. Also see Holy and Great Council, Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World (https://www.holycouncil.org/rest-of-christian-world), accessed on 09.04.2026. See also the third pre-synodal pan-Orthodox conference (1986): Gennadios, Limouris (Ed.), Orthodox Visions of Ecumenism. Statements, Messages and Reports on the Ecumenical Movement 1902–1992, Genf 1994, 112–115. Although the goal of full visible unity is still far off, bilateral and multilateral ecumenical dialogues to date have led to significant rapprochement and a deeper understanding of theological differences. In addition to theological aspects, ecumenical dialogue also pursues spiritual goals by promoting mutual enrichment through the spiritual life and liturgical traditions of the various churches.
Practical goals include cooperation in social and humanitarian areas to strengthen Christian presence and witness in the world. Joint projects in the areas of the environment, education, bioethics, health care, social justice, and peace underscore the Orthodox commitment to the well-being of humanity and to unity with all of creation. Through dialogue, churches can develop ethical guidelines based on common Christian values.
In many regions of the world, especially where Christians are a minority, ecumenical understanding contributes to the promotion of peace and stability and to the strengthening of Christian witness. In migration contexts, where Orthodox Christians are a minority, exchange and cooperation can help to break down misunderstandings, creating a climate of mutual respect and cooperation. The Orthodox diaspora provides new impetus for ecumenical engagement in the countries of origin by experiencing and promoting interdenominational exchange and cooperation in more pluralistic societies in a closer and more intensive way.
2. Historical Developments
2.1 First Concrete Steps toward Dialogue with Other Churches
The relationship of the Orthodox Church to other churches extends back to the early twentieth century, when it was the only church calling for cooperation even before the modern ecumenical movement began. As early as 1902, the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, Joachim III 
, wrote to the autocephalous Orthodox churches to find ways to unite divided Christians. In this encyclical, he clearly expressed his desire for cooperation with other churches and emphasized that the Orthodox Church sincerely seeks unity with all who believe in Christ and prays constantly for this.2Cf. Patriarchal and Synodical Encyclical of 1902, in: Limouris, Gennadios (ed.), Orthodox Visions of Ecumenism. Statements, Messages and Reports on the Ecumenical Movement 1902–1992, Genf 1994, 3.
Another important document of the Orthodox Church’s ecumenical commitment is the open letter from the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, Meletios IV , dated 1920. Under the title “Unto all the Churches of Christ Wheresoever They Be,”3Cf. Unto all the Churches of Christ Wheresoever They Be, in: [Ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει]: Ἐκ τοῦ Πατριαρχικοῦ Τυπογραφείου (Ed.), Ἐγκύκλιος Συνοδικὴ τῆς Ἐκκλησίας Κωνσταντινουπόλεως πρὸς τὰς ἁ πανταχοῦ Ἐκκλησίας τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Encyclique de l’Église de Constantinople a toutes les Églises du monde, Konstantinopel 1920; Bell, G. K. A., Documents on Christian Unity 1920–1930, London 1955, 17–21; G. Patelos, Constantin (Ed.), The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement. Documents and Statements 1902–1975, Genf 1978, 40–43; Limouris, Gennadios (Ed.), Orthodox Visions of Ecumenism. Statements, Messages and Reports on the Ecumenical Movement 1902–1992, Genf 1994, 9–11. he called on Christian churches worldwide to work and come closer together. The letter called for the establishment of a “League of Churches,” comparable to the League of Nations that had been created shortly before, in order to promote unity and cooperation among Christians. This encyclical is considered an “ecumenical milestone” that initiated the modern ecumenical movement and contributed significantly to the establishment of the World Council of Churches (WCC) in 1948.4Cf. Tsompanides, Stylianos C., Orthodox Participation in the Ecumenical Movement. A Detailed Historical Survey, in: Kalaitzidis, Pantelis et al. (Eds.), Orthodox Handbook on Ecumenism. Resources for Theological Education, Oxford 2014, 104–115, 105; FitzGerald, Thomas, How to Understand Christian Unity (Ecumenism) in Relation to Orthodox Identity? A First Theological Approach, in: Kalaitzidis, Pantelis et al. (Eds.), Orthodox Handbook on Ecumenism, Oxford 2014, 9–12, 11.
2.2 Participation in Multilateral and Bilateral Ecumenism
The Orthodox Church actively participates in ecumenical dialogues at the bilateral and multilateral levels for theological and pastoral reasons. Its goal is to bear witness to the fullness of the truth in Christ and to share its spiritual riches with other Christian traditions in order to pave the way to unity.5Cf. Holy and Great Council, Relations, § 6.
The pan-Orthodox conferences, which began in 1961 under the leadership of the ecumenical patriarchate, played a central role in the development of theological dialogues between the Orthodox Churches and other Christian traditions. Originally intended to prepare for a pan-Orthodox synod, they evolved into a forum for inter-Orthodox relations. The first conference in Rhodes (1961) focused on rapprochement with other churches, in particular the Oriental Orthodox Churches, the Roman Catholic Church, the churches of the Reformation, as well as the old Catholics and the Anglican communion.
At the same time, theological exchange was intensified at the regional and national levels, as more concrete progress could often be achieved there than at the global level.
2.3 Participation in the World Council of Churches
Since its founding and especially since 1962, when the majority of Orthodox churches joined the WCC, they have borne special witness to Christian unity. The WCC became a central forum for theological dialogue, bringing Orthodox churches out of their isolation. It advocated for peace, justice, and human rights, especially where Orthodox churches were under political pressure.
However, the structures of the WCC made Orthodox participation difficult. Orthodox theologians saw this as an “ecclesiological challenge”6Cf. Florovsky, Georges, The Doctrine of the Church and the Ecumenical Problem, in: The Ecumenical Review 2 (1950), 152–161. and criticized Protestant denominationalism, which did not correspond to their understanding of church unity. Orthodoxy rejects the “equivalence of denominations” and sees the restoration of unity not simply as an interdenominational adjustment,7Cf. Orthodox Contribution to New Delhi Assembly, 01.12.1999 (https://www.oikoumene.org/resources/documents/orthodox-contribution-to-new-delhi-assembly), accessed on 09.04.2026. but as the restoration of the broken unity of the church.8See Orthodox Contribution. The Orthodox Church recognizes “the historical name of other non-Orthodox Christian Churches and Confessions that are not in communion with her, and believes that her relations with them should be based on the most speedy and objective clarification possible of the whole ecclesiological question, and most especially of their more general teachings on sacraments, grace, priesthood, and apostolic succession.”9Holy and Great Council, Relations, § 6.
A revised CUV draft from 1997 led to the categorization of Orthodox challenges: (1) theological criticism of superficial dialogues, the relativization of faith, the neglect of Scripture and tradition, “inclusive” names for God, sexual morality, and new theological trends; (2) cultural challenges: Orthodox churches perceive that their theology is often regarded as “Eastern” and irrelevant to the West within the WCC. They reject the idea that secular values should be considered universally binding for all churches and insist that ethics should be person-oriented rather than principle-oriented; (3) procedural challenges: Orthodox representatives felt they were a minority in the WCC’s decision-making bodies and often saw their concerns ignored. They called for better consultation on policy statements, a more equitable distribution of resources, and stronger Orthodox representation in WCC staff.10Cf. „Common Understanding and Vision of the WCC“: Preliminary Observations on the Reflection Process. Final Document of the Consultation, in: Lemopoulos, George (Ed.), The Ecumenical Movement, the Churches, and the World Council of Churches. An Orthodox Contribution to the Reflection Process on „The Common Understanding and Vision of the WCC“, Genf 1996, 14–16.
Although Orthodox churches were a minority in the WCC, they represented almost half of the Christians present in the WCC. They criticized the fact that decision-making processes were based on a majority principle rather than taking consensus-oriented models into account. Orthodox churches demanded that a “community of churches” develop its own mechanisms that take into account the theological, ecclesiological, and spiritual traditions of the participating churches.
In response to these concerns, a special commission on Orthodox participation in the WCC was established in 1998. This commission was tasked with examining and analyzing issues related to Orthodox participation and proposing necessary changes in the structure, style, and ethos of the council. In order to continue the discussion of outstanding issues, the WCC central committee recommended in 2003 that the speciall commission should continue as the Permanent Committee on Consensus and Collaboration (PCCC). This committee advises the WCC’s governing bodies, addresses issues of common interest, monitors consensus-building processes, and devotes particular attention to discussions on ecclesiology.
It should be emphasized that the introduction of the consensus method in decision-making processes was significantly influenced by Orthodox impulses. The Orthodox developed this model at the first pan-Orthodox conference in Rhodes (1961), thereby breaking away from a diachronically handed-down principle of ancient synodal practice, namely the decision-making model of the “Majority Consensus,” which had been considered predominant and acceptable for centuries.11Cf. Meimaris, Theodor A., The Holy and Great Council of the Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Movement, Thessaloniki 2013, 44. Many non-Orthodox churches have now adopted this decision-making model.
2.4 Bilateral Dialogues
The document “The Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World” from the Synod in Crete (2016) describes the methods of ecumenical bilateral dialogues (§ 6–15).12Cf. Morariu, Alexandru/Ioniță, Viorel, Bilateral Dialogues of the Orthodox Churches with Other Christian Churches. Lending Impetus to the Orthodox Theological Thought, in: Orthodox Theology in the 20th Century and Early 21st Century. A Romanian Orthodox Perspective, koordiniert von Viorel Ioniță, Bukarest 2013, 109–132. Bilateral dialogues are decided upon in a pan-Orthodox manner and take specific theological circumstances into account, while multilateral dialogues strive for broader understanding. If an Orthodox church withdraws from a dialogue, inter-Orthodox consultations are held in order to restore full Orthodox representation. Regular evaluations analyze progress and challenges. The coordination of inter-Orthodox commissions is intended to strengthen the unity of Orthodoxy in ecumenical discussions. The goal remains the restoration of ecclesiastical unity in true faith and love. At the conclusion of a dialogue the inter-Orthodox commission submits its report to the ecumenical patriarch, who, in consultation with the heads of the local Orthodox churches, announces the official end of the dialogue. The Orthodox Church does not regard ecumenical dialogue as a purely human endeavor, but as a spiritually guided process under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, characterized by theological rigor, inter-Orthodox coordination, and a clear commitment to the truth of Christ.
3. Orthodox Theological Contributions to Ecumenical Discussions
3.1 Unity
Church unity is not only a theological ideal, but is also the central fountain of an authentic ecclesiology and a viable ecumenical approach. According to an Orthodox understanding, this unity is not constructed or negotiated, but is a lived reality that consists in a return to the original unity established by Christ.13Cf. Bria, Ion, Living in the One Tradition. An Orthodox Contribution to the Question of Unity, in: The Ecumenical Review 26/2 (1975), 224–233, 231. This unity is both the origin and the goal of creation in Christ and is founded on the inseparable communion of the Holy Trinity. It is not a human work, but a divine gift that we do not create, but rediscover – in its universal dimension and in its unchanging historical forms that shape the life of the church and embrace the whole world.
Orthodoxy sees itself as a servant of this unity.14For a comprehensive study of the understanding of unity in the Orthodox Church as presented in ecumenical dialogues, see Ioniță, Viorel, The Vision of Unity in the Multilateral Dialogues and in the Bilateral Dialogues of the Orthodox Churches with Other Churches, in: Studii Teologice 3 (2008), 7–58. It emphasizes that the unity of the church has not been lost, but continues to exist in it. In their approach to ecclesiological unity, Orthodox theologians have developed various models:
- The “ecclesiology of sobornost”15Sobornost is a Slavic word that describes “communal consciousness.” It refers to the principle of spiritual unity that overcomes divisions through koinonia – the power of community – and promotes harmony and diversity in shared faith. As it is said, “Sobornost is the community conscience which interrelates unity, catholicity and conciliarity. It is the ‘principle’ of spiritual unity and the understanding of the power of koinonia to transcend all that divides, alienates and segregates, to sustain harmony and diversity in common faith and life, to combine Christian freedom with church authority, structure with movement” (Sabev, Todor, The Orthodox Churches in the World Council of Churches. Towards the Future, Genf 1996, 61). emphasizes the synodal and communal nature of the church as the body of Christ, in which every believer participates in the grace of the Holy Spirit.16Cf. Bulgakov, Sergius, The Orthodox Church, London 1935, 45; Florovsky, Georges, The Catholicity of the Church, Belmont 1975, 27.
- “Eucharistic ecclesiology” sees the church primarily realized in its eucharistic communion with the local bishop and the entire ecclesial assembly, whereby each local community represents the fullness of the church.17Cf. Afanasiev, Nicholas, The Church of the Holy Spirit, Notre Dame 2007, 123–127; idem, The Church Which Presides in Love, in: Meyendorff, John (Ed.), The Primacy of Peter. Essays in Ecclesiology and the Early Church, Crestwood 1992, 91–144; Zizioulas, John D., Eucharist, Bishop, Church. The Unity of the Church in the Divine Eucharist and the Bishop During the First Three Centuries, übersetzt von Elizabeth Theokritoff, Brookline 2001.
- The “ecclesiology of open sobornost” describes the church as a dynamic community that preserves its catholic fullness while actively bringing Christ’s love and truth into the world.18Cf. Stăniloae, Dumitru, Sobornicitate deschisă, in: Ortodoxia 23 (1971), 165–180.
- “Pneumatological ecclesiology” emphasizes the role of the Holy Spirit as the link between Christ and the church, as well as the prophetic dimension of the ecclesial community. The church is not only an organization, but is a body animated by the Spirit, which is constantly being renewed and made present.19Cf. Nissiotis, Nikos, The Holy Spirit and the Church, Genf 1968, 56–72.
- “Eschatological ecclesiology” describes the church as a reality unfolding in history, whose fulfillment will only be achieved in the kingdom of God.20Cf. Florovsky, George, Bible, Church, Tradition. An Eastern Orthodox View, Belmont 1972, 45–49. The liturgy is an eschatological event in which the past, present, and future of the church come together.21Cf. Schmemann, Alexander, The Eucharist. Sacrament of the Kingdom, Crestwood 1988.
- Complementing this, “mystagogical ecclesiology” emphasizes the spiritual experiential aspect of church life. Here, unity is achieved not only through theological understanding or canonical structures, but through the actual sacramental and liturgical experience of the church.22Cf. Lossky, Vladimir, The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, Crestwood 1957, 110–115.
These models show that orthodox ecclesiology understands the church not only institutionally, but as a spiritually alive, Trinitarian-centered community in which the Eucharist, tradition, pneumatology, eschatology, and mystagogy interact. The tension between the local church and universal unity remains central.23Cf. Zizioulas, John D., Being as Communion. Studies in Personhood and the Church, Crestwood 1997, 110–122.
3.2 Koinonia
One of the central concepts that plays a key role in Orthodox theology and shapes ecumenical theology is koinonia (community).24Cf. Munteanu, Daniel, Theologie der Koinonia. Ökumenische Einführung in die Orthodoxe Theologie und Spiritualität, Leipzig 2013. Orthodoxy understands koinonia not only as structural unity, but as a reality sustained by the Holy Spirit, which finds its deepest model in the Trinity. The Holy Trinity shows that unity does not mean uniformity, but rather a harmonious relationship between different persons who are united in mutual love and fellowship (koinonia). This view makes a valuable contribution to the ecumenical discussion on church unity by emphasizing that unity has an ontological and sacramental dimension.25Cf. Zizioulas, Communion.
3.3 Conciliarity
Orthodoxy emphasizes that true ecclesial unity is not achieved through mere administrative structures, but only through the harmonious interaction of episcopal authority, synod, and the entire ecclesial community, taking into account both local and universal dimensions.26Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue Between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church. Ecclesiological and Canonical Consequences of the Sacramental Nature of the Church – Ecclesial Communion, Conciliarity and Authority [Ravenna-Dokument], 13.10.2007 (https://www.christianunity.va/content/unitacristiani/en/dialoghi/sezione-orientale/chiese-ortodosse-di-tradizione-bizantina/commissione-mista-internazionale-per-il-dialogo-teologico-tra-la/documenti-di-dialogo/testo-in-inglese.html), accessed on 09.04.2026. This model differs from both highly centralized and purely federal structures and has been recognized in ecumenical dialogues as an authentic principle of church unity.27Cf. Afanasiev, The Church Which Presides in Love.
3.4 Catholicity and Locality
Orthodoxy has shaped the concept of the catholicity of the church, which goes beyond mere universality and encompasses the fullness of faith in each individual local church.28Cf. Vischer, Lukas, Die lokale Kirche – Ort der Gegenwart Christi in der Kraft des Heiligen Geistes. Der Beitrag der orthodoxen Kirche und Theologie zur ökumenischen Diskussion über ein zentrales Thema der Ekklesiologie, in: Église locale et Église universelle. TOPIKE KAI KATA TEN OIKOUMENEN EKKLESIA. Édition du Centre Orthodoxe du Patriarcat Œcuménique, Chambésy-Geneva 1981, 297–307. In its self-understanding, Orthodoxy is a conciliar koinonia, a universal, organic unity of local eucharistic communities, united not only by a central authority but by the common preservation of the apostolic tradition and participation in the one body of Christ. The catholicity of the church has both an ontological and a pneumatological dimension, since it is manifested through the presence of the Holy Spirit in the community of believers.
3.5 Deification (theosis)
Theosis is a central concept in Orthodox theology and spirituality and describes humanity’s participation in God’s energies through Christ, without dissolving human nature. This concept can serve as a bridge in ecumenical dialogue, especially with Western theologies, which often emphasize a more dualistic separation between God and humanity. Theosis is not only the highest goal of human life, but also the key to understanding church unity: unity is not the result of human negotiations, but the restoration of the original communion with God, which at the same time implies the reconciliation of all humanity in Christ.29Cf. Clément, Olivier, Questions sur l’homme, Paris 1972, 56.
3.6 Moral Judgment
Moral judgment is inseparably linked to Sacred Scripture, church tradition, theology, and the liturgical experience.30Cf. Engelhardt jr., H. Tristam, An Orthodox Approach to Bioethics, in: Walker, Andrew/Carras, Costa (Eds.), Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World, Crestwood 1996, 108: “The ethics of the Orthodox is liturgical rather than discursive. It is an ethics founded in the transfiguring, liturgical worship of a God who transcends human categories, but who reveals himself in worship. In this transfiguring worship, the individual finds moral identity and the community finds its integrity.” The experience of the Eucharist is considered a source of moral judgment.31Cf. Metropolitan, Vasilios/Mantasasvili, Kristina, Approaching Moral Questions from the Conscience of the Church, in: Shmaliy, Vladimir/Wijlens, Myriam (Eds.), Churches and Moral Discernment 1, Genf 2021, 1–8. Moral decision-making takes place in a conciliar process in which prayer, tradition, spiritual experience, spiritual guidance, and ascetic practice interact. Moral decisions must not be based solely on social developments or rational considerations, but must be rooted in the theology of creation and the sanctity of life.
4. Current Challenges
A central problem in the ecumenical movement is the difficulty of communicating Orthodox theology and spirituality in a way that is comprehensible to Western terminological framework.32Cf. Brüning, Alfons, Übersetzungsprobleme. „Apophatische Anthropologie“ und politisch-soziale Konzepte von Menschenwürde in der Orthodoxie, in: Munteanu, Daniel/Selaru, Sorin (Eds.), Holding Fast to the Mystery of the Faith. Festschrift for Patriarch Daniel of the Romanian Orthodox Church, Brill/Schöningh 2022, 153–172. This requires a balanced approach: on the one hand, fidelity to tradition must be maintained; on the other hand, it is necessary to articulate the Orthodox perspective in a way that enriches ecumenical dialogue. The tension between the deep roots in the mystical and liturgical experience of the church and its missionary witness in the world remains central. For Orthodoxy, unity is not primarily an institiutional agreement, but a spiritual reality that arises from shared participation in church life. It is based on eucharistic community, apostolic tradition, and the work of the Holy Spirit, through which the church is preserved in its entirety. It is precisely this balance between tradition-conscious identity and openness to dialogue that is crucial for the future of ecumenical relations.
At the same time, ecumenical dialogue is increasingly challenged by social developments. The Orthodox Church must find ways to deal with current issues, such as social, political, and moral challenges, in a manner that does justice to both the truth of the faith and charity.
5. Future Prospects for Ecumenical Dialogue
From an Orthodox perspective, the future of ecumenical dialogue depends on the willingness to engage openly and honestly with existing differences in ecclesiological and moral-ethical challenges and on the joint search for unity. The continuation of theological dialogues, the intensification of social and humanitarian cooperation, and the promotion of constructive coexistence are central elements for the future development of ecumenical dialogue. The concept of “receptive ecumenism” could offer an important perspective in this regard. This methodology emphasizes the need not only to work toward unity by approaching existing theological positions, but also to consciously learn from the theological and spiritual treasures of other traditions.33Cf. Bria, Ion, La „réception“ des résultats des dialogues, in: Papandreou, Damaskinos, Les dialogues oecuméniques hier et aujourd’hui, Chambésy–Genève 1985, 286–293; Murray, Paul D., Receptive Ecumenism and Ecclesial Learning. Receiving Gifts for Our Needs, in: Louvain Studies 33 (2008), 30–45; idem, Receptive Ecumenism and Catholic Learning. Establishing the Agenda, in: Murray, Paul D. (Ed.), Receptive Ecumenism and the Call to Catholic Learning. Exploring a Way for Contemporary Ecumenism, Oxford 2008, 5–25; Ware, Kallistos, Receptive Ecumenism. An Orthodox Perspective, in: Louvain Studies 33 (2008) 46–53. Orthodoxy should not find this approach alien, but rather an enrichment that is deeply rooted in its own Trinitarian theology.
Despite existing differences, the dialogue has already made valuable progress. Cooperation in social and humanitarian projects in particular shows that Christian unity is visible not only on a dogmatic level, but also in joint service to the world. As has already been emphasized, Orthodoxy cannot preserve its spiritual depth without also being aware of the worldwide Christian community: “we cannot expect to develop today a living sense of the Church, one of the main spiritual features of Orthodoxy, without a living sense of the oikoumene, i.e. without a sense for all those catholic dimensions of Christian life which go well beyond the canonical limits of the Orthodox Church.”34Bria, Living, 232.
The Orthodox Church is thus faced with the task of keeping its apostolic tradition without isolating itself from the world. The tension between withdrawal and openness is not a contradiction, but a necessary dynamic process that characterizes Orthodoxy as a preserving and at the same time missionary church. Nissiotis warned against viewing Orthodoxy as a static system. He argues that true Orthodoxy is an ongoing living reality that unfolds in the church community and must not be allowed to become rigid in dogmatism or isolation.35Cf. Nissiotis, Nikos A., Interpreting Orthodoxy, Minneapolis 1980, 27. This insight can help to overcome rigid confessional boundaries and open up new avenues for ecumenical dialogue.
In its exchanges with other traditions, Orthodoxy should also promote critical self-reflection on its own position. From an eschatological perspective, the Orthodox Church considers itself to be the true church of Christ, but recognizes that the complete unity of the church will only be achieved eschatologically. This implies that Orthodoxy must remain open to new insights and developments that accompany it on its path to final unity.