If the project of the Pan-Orthodox Conference could not be implemented in 1960 because of the evasive answers of some Churches, by the end of the year the situation had changed for the better. Patriarch Alexy of Moscow, on his way back from the Holy Land, stops in Istanbul and celebrates the Christmas Liturgy together with Patriarch Athenagoras. He received assurances that the decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Conference would be free from all anti-communism and that the disputed issues between Moscow and Constantinople would be gradually resolved. Moscow recognizes the independence of the Finnish Church in the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which, for its part, recognizes the Bulgarian Patriarchate. In 1966, Constantinople abolished the temporary exarchate for Russian parishes in Western Europe.

For his part, Patriarch Athenagoras receives a promise that the Eastern European Churches will participate in the conference with the consent of their governments, but without too much political pressure from them. At that time, the communist governments, while continuing their efforts to strangle the Church from within, especially during the entire period of Khrushchev's rule, gave them more freedom in the international arena within the framework of a policy of "peaceful coexistence." Thus, it was decided that the Pan-Orthodox Conference would be able to meet. A few weeks later, at an assembly in New Delhi, the Orthodox Churches of Eastern Europe will join the World Council of Churches.

The success of the second convocation of the conference in 1961 rewards Athenagoras' tenacity and dedication. The preparation and holding of the conference show what it can mean for a primate that puts itself at the service of the unity of all. The Patriarch only proposed, never imposing anything, made decisions, but only with the consent of all the sister Churches and always pursuing common interests, and thus conquered distrust. The Ecumenical Patriarch convened the conference on his own initiative, sent out invitations, drew up its program, established the schedule, presided over the sessions, and all this without any pressure of authority, but only after consulting with the sister Churches, as if expressing their consent.

* * *

"For the first time," says the final epistle, "after a long period, Orthodoxy gathers for a conference in which all its fullness is expressed." Or, to be more precise, for the first time, Orthodox unity manifests itself in the new structures that have emerged in modern Orthodoxy, especially in the nineteenth century, in connection with the movement of nationalities. Whatever it is, the very fact of this meeting remains decisive.

The delegation of each Church, consisting of six or seven people, included three bishops of the autocephalous Churches (two for autonomous Churches), two theologians (priests or laymen), most often professors of the Theological Academy, and two counselors (priests or laymen). The emphasized presence of the laity should be noted.

The delegates arrived in Rhodes without haste, as pilgrims, first visiting the island of Tinos, where one of the venerated shrines dedicated to the Virgin Mary is located, and the island of Patmos, marked by the memory of John the Evangelist. In Rhodes, public meetings took place in the large church of the Annunciation, built during the Italian occupation and after liberation decorated with magnificent frescoes in the Byzantine style created by Photios Kontoglou, who renovated sacred painting in modern Greece. Closed-door meetings took place in the smallest of the churches of the metropolia, the commissions worked in the administrative building of the metropolitan, which was directly subordinate to Constantinople. The three official languages were Greek, Russian and Arabic.

The mighty and the evil of this world were on guard. For them, East and West were bound to collide once again. Immediately after the conference, which recommended pilgrimages to the most revered shrines of Orthodoxy, the Greek government, under the pretext of an election campaign, opposed the pilgrimage to Mount Athos, which the Russian delegation sought with the blessing of the Ecumenical Patriarch. Politicians know how to convince themselves that their fears are justified. However, the vigorous protests of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Greek Church showed that something had happened that the politicians did not expect.

This "something" was what Metropolitan Iakovos of Mytilene called "the miracle of unity." From the moment when the heads of all the delegations concelebrated the Great Vespers of Holy Pentecost, according to the custom of the ancient councils, "love drove out fear," in the expression of the Scriptures, which the Ecumenical Patriarch was so pleased with, and received its final expression in 636

final message. National and political problems, the confrontation between the East and the West, without completely disappearing, were sufficiently relativized. Political issues have never been in the spotlight. Of course, distrust played a role. But it did not prevent everyone from working together.

A great mystery at this conference was the position taken by Metropolitan Nikodim, chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate and head of the Russian delegation. He showed himself above all to be a man of the Church: accommodating, capable of making concessions, like the young and assertive representative of Constantinople, Metropolitan Chrysostomos Konstantinidis. Of course, at the first meeting, Vladyka Nikodim made a statement in a strictly Soviet spirit – about peace, disarmament, colonialism. But he limited himself to this, and the final document of the conference spoke only of "the peace of Christ, the peace of our Lord."

But while political considerations ultimately played only a secondary role, ecclesiological problems gave rise to serious discussions at the very first closed-door sessions. Constantinople, which had taken the initiative to convene the conference, sought, by virtue of its prerogatives, to preside over the conference. The Russians and Romanians, on the contrary, believed that each of the local Churches should preside for one day. There is a danger of the usual confrontation of two concepts – unity based on some discipline and an overzealous commitment to diversity. The synthesis was achieved thanks to the moderation of the Ecumenical Patriarch: Constantinople would preside. But under its representative, a collegium of six members is established, which includes representatives of the old Eastern Patriarchates and two autocephalous Churches, which follow in seniority after the ancient patriarchal sees: the Russian Church and the Serbian Church... The final document was worked out by Constantinople, but then it was revised at the collegium and the conference.

* * *

The work of the conference consisted in the development of an "agenda" for the pre-conciliar conference. The Greeks as a whole showed themselves to be conservatives. They removed from this agenda the mention of the possibility of priests marrying after ordination, which was especially insisted on by Patriarch Athenagoras, who, however, did not consider himself defeated. Some of the Greek delegates did not even dare to touch upon the dogmatic problems, for in this sphere everything had already been said. Vladyka Nikodim, a conservative in the liturgical field, showed openness in other areas. The Ecumenical Patriarchate strove to open new paths and to creatively renew Holy Tradition.