By Dimitriοs Keramidas*
In 2006, the Holy See published its Annual Directory were, without any previous announcement, the title “Patriarch of the West” was removed among the official papal titles. This caused several reactions among the Orthodox, including the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the Church of Greece, as well as individual theologians, from the Russian Ilarion Alfeev to the Greek-French Michel Stavrou.
During the first millennium, there was a long period, particularly from the Second (381) and Fourth (451) Ecumenical Councils to the seventh century, when the Church of Rome and the four Eastern Patriarchates had formed a “Pentarchy”. Following this system, each Patriarchate had a proper ecclesiastical jurisdiction within a specified territory. Accordingly, the Patriarchate of Constantinople enclosed Thrace, Pontus, and Asia Minor, the Patriarchate of Alexandria exercised canonical leadership over the provinces of Egypt, while the Patriarchate of Antioch over the Roman provinces of the Middle East. Lastly, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem ruled over the city of Jerusalem and the territories of the Holy Land. On its part, the Church of Rome was recognised as the “Patriarchate of the West”, though its jurisdiction was not defined by any specific geographical area. However, the very word “West” was evidence that there was no overlapping authority between the patriarchal jurisdictions. Rome exercised its authority over the territories that the Eastern Patriarchates did not administer. From a geographical viewpoint, accepted by Byzantium, the “West” included the Italian peninsula, the territories of Western Europe, and the Eastern Illyricum (Western Balkans, Greece), the last being, until the middle of the 8th century, under the ecclesiastical dependence of Rome. From a merely “Latin” point of view, the “West” included all the non-Greek speaking (i.e., Latin) Christianity.
Therefore, in the context of the first millennium, the title “Patriarch of the West” could be understood as follows:
- The administration of the “one” Church was carried out by five Patriarchates. In other words, the one Christian Roman/Byzantine “Oecumene” was distributed in five territories, in which each Patriarchate exercised its ecclesiastical administration.
- The bishop of Rome did not govern the “universal” Church but had a specific jurisdiction. This was because the term “West” in itself had some limitations, being different from the “East” as a geographical, cultural, and linguistic entity.
- The rights of the Patriarchs concerned the geographical area where they exercised their jurisdiction. However, this did not restrict the prestige of the local Patriarchal Councils, nor did it abolish the possibility of conveying Ecumenical or General Councils with the presence of the Eastern Churches and representatives of Rome. This was the case until the 9th century, for example, in the Seventh Ecumenical Council and the Council of Constantinople of 879-880.
- The Bishop of Rome held the highest position among the five Patriarchates, but this did not give him authority over the other Eastern Patriarchates. However, he did have some moral and canonical rights, for example, the right to receive appeals or to express the position of the Roman Church on doctrinal issues.
In the seventh century, the Arab conquest of Egypt, Syria, and Palestine distanced Byzantium from Rome, causing the latter to seek new political patronage. This and increasing linguistic and cultural differences between the “Greek” East and “Latin” West favored a diarchy among Rome-Constantinople. Rome was strongly convinced to be one of the “Petrine” Churches (along with Alexandria and Antioch). The theological elaboration of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome was based on his special “Roman” identification with the Apostle Peter, who, according to tradition, was the first bishop of the Church of Rome and whose tomb was located in that city.
Since the second millennium, the popes began viewing their office as an authority that concerned the “whole” Church. These claims were reinforced by Byzantium’s decline, as well as by the discovery of the New World and the expansion of European hegemony, which made the Latin Church a “global” Church. Whereas in the Council of Florence (1439), mentions of the “order” of the five Patriarchates were made, the papal titles began to multiply; the pope was now also referred to as the “Christ’s Vicar”, the “Pastor of the universal Church”, etc. Thus, the title “Patriarch of the West” represented only one aspect of the papal prestige. It is worth noting that when John IV the Nisteutes of Constantinople introduced the title “Ecumenical Patriarch” in the 6th century. As a reaction, Pope Gregory the Great called himself “servant of the servants of God” (servus servorum Dei).
The title “Patriarch of the West” was officially introduced in the Papal Annual Directory in 1863 and became one of the various papal titles. These titles included Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Eparchy of Rome, Sovran of the State of Vatican City, and Servant of the Servants of God.
The Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, following the reactions mostly among the Orthodox, issued in 2006 a Communiqué stating the following:
- Today, the term “West” has a broader connotation, as it includes – besides Western Europe – the Americas, Australia, and New Zealand. This implies that the term cannot be used to describe a specific region.
- The title “Patriarch of the West” was used to designate the relationship and jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome in the Latin Church.
- The title “Patriarch of the West” became obsolete as history progressed. Shifts in the Catholic Church, such as the emergence of Catholic national and continental episcopal Assemblies in the last two centuries, made this title less meaningful. Thus, the removal of the title, on the one hand, expresses a theological realism, and, on the other, it does not introduce claims that could damage inter-Christian dialogue.
So, the reasoning behind removing the title can be explained in this way: A) the Catholic Church, with the bishop of Rome as its visible head, has a global presence; B) the bishop of Rome holds authority wherever the Catholic Church is present, and he is not limited to any geographical area, such as “West”, “East, etc.
From one perspective, these arguments can be empirically confirmed. Contrary to the first millennium, the Catholic Church is not limited to Europe or the West alone. The same can be said for Orthodoxy, which, through the diaspora, has many jurisdictions in Western Europe, the Americas, and Oceania.
On the other hand, for Catholic ecclesiology, the papal office is a visible element of unity against centrifugal tendencies. Therefore, the extension of the papal authority does not have territorial limitations similar to those of the Eastern Patriarchates.
When Pope Francis was elected in March 2013, he made a significant gesture as he addressed himself, the night of his election, to the faithful in St. Peter’s Square as the “Bishop of Rome”. This was immediately appreciated by the Orthodox, as it seemed to emphasize the priority of the local church over the universal church, which is a fundamental principle in Orthodox ecclesiology. Being “Bishop of Rome” highlights that the pope is not a bishop above the other bishops but rather a bishop of a local church like all other bishops.
In the first Annual Directory after Francis’ election (2013), the major papal title was “Bishop of Rome”, while all other historical titles were displayed on a separate page. Later, Francis initiated a synodal process of reflection on the idea and practice of synodality, which could lead to a convergence with the Orthodox Church as per the government of the unified Church, to forms of church government that could be inspired by the exercise of the ancient “Pentarchy” without being identical to it. Another significant step towards a West-East convergence was the meeting of church leaders of the Mediterranean, organised in 2018 by the Pope. The meeting was attended by Orthodox representatives, including the Ecumenical Patriarch, the Patriarch of Alexandria, and representatives from the Churches of Jerusalem, Cyprus, and Moscow.
In that sense, it was not a surprise that the title “Patriarch of the West” reappeared in the 2024 Papal Directory. This can be seen as a sign that the pope is working on structural changes in the Catholic Church. It is also a sincere gesture that aims to repair what had caused tensions between Catholics and Orthodox. This gesture can be interpreted as strengthening the bonds between Rome and Constantinople. However, it is important to clarify that reintroducing the title “Patriarch of the West” is not a return to the exact conditions of the first millennium. Such a task is unrealistic for both the Orthodox and the Catholics, as “time” in the Church is not returning to an ideal past but to move forward towards the Kingdom.
At any rate, explaining the reasoning behind the reintroduction of the title would be very helpful. Are the arguments exposed in 2006 defending the removal of the title no longer valid? Although it is not wise to affirm this, the reintroduction of the pope’s patriarchal honour represents an opportunity for theological research and official church declarations. It is also crucial that the Churches recognize the need for a common proclamation of the gospel of Christ to today’s world. To do this, actions that provoke negative sentiments should be avoided. In a globalised world, the Churches do not live in isolation from each other; on the contrary, they have the power to influence each other positively or negatively. Our Churches should promote a message of love and inclusivity, rather than one of division and intolerance. Therefore, anything that can help maintain the memory of the unity of Christianity, including ancient titles that are mutually accepted, should be welcomed and be accepted without prejudice.
*Dr. Theol., Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas “Angelicum” of Rome
