After Brexit?

European Unity and the Unity of European Churches

Matthias Grebe, Jeremy Worthen, Matthias Grebe, Jeremy Worthen

• Publisher: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9783374061594
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Ecumenismo religioso y cuestiones interconfesionales

The political, social and cultural dimensions of European unity are going through a period of unsettling change and challenge. Whatever direction it takes, Brexit marks a crossroad from which there is no easy return to the way things were before.How do the churches of Europe make sense of what is happening, and how should they respond? Is the unity between them, the focus for a century of ecumenical endeavour, a strength on which they can draw, or does that unity itself face new threats?"After Brexit" is a vital resource for all those interested in these questions, bringing together contributions from scholars and church leaders. It reviews the role of the churches in European integration as a post-war project, analyses the current political and social landscape, and identifies key issues for the future of ecumenism in Europe.[Nach dem Brexit? Europäische Einheit und die Einheit der europäischen Kirchen]Die politischen, sozialen und kulturellen Dimensionen der europäischen Integration erleben eine Zeit tiefgreifender Veränderungen und Herausforderungen. In jeder Hinsicht ist der Brexit eine Weichenstellung, die eine Rückkehr zu früheren Verhältnissen nahezu unmöglich macht.Wie sollen die Kirchen in Europa diese Entwicklungen interpretieren und wie darauf reagieren? Ist die Einheit zwischen den Kirchen – die den Fokus auf die ökumenische Zusammenarbeit legt – ein Plus, von dem sie zehren können, oder wird diese Einheit erneut in Frage gestellt?"After Brexit" ist eine reichhaltige Ressource für alle, die sich für diese Fragen interessieren, und beinhaltet Beiträge von Akademikern und Kirchenleitenden. Das Buch hinterfragt die Rolle der Kirchen bei der europäischen Integration als einem Nachkriegsprojekt, analysiert die aktuelle politische und soziale Situation und identifiziert Schlüsselthemen für die Zukunft der Ökumene in Europa.

1.Introduction

Matthias Grebe and Jeremy Worthen

The “After Brexit” Colloquium

The origins of this book lie in the concern to connect two distinct but related conversations: the conversation about European unity, which is primarily political, social and cultural, and the conversation about the unity of the European churches, which is primarily ecumenical and theological. In their current form, both conversations have their roots in the immediate post-war period; both offer reflections on achievements that seemed to have reached a certain level of maturity and stability by the end of the twentieth century, and since that time both have become increasingly marked in variegated ways by tension and uncertainty. In the case of the conversation about European unity, this tension and uncertainty were dramatically heightened with the outcome of the United Kingdom’s referendum on leaving the European Union in 2016 and consequent preparations for “Brexit”, as it has come to be known. Those like the editors of this volume, who are directly involved in the second conversation about the unity of the European churches, are bound to wonder both what the implications of the changing nature of European unity may be for the unity of the European churches, and likewise what the unity of the European churches may have to say to those seeking a way forward for the political, social and cultural unity of Europe at this critical juncture in its history.

It was with the aim of connecting those two conversations that ecumenical staff at the Church of England and at the Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland (EKD) conceived plans for a colloquium to bring together those individuals deeply involved in each of them. The visit of the Chair of the EKD Council, Bishop Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop Justin Welby, in late 2018 provided an obvious context for holding such an event, and both church leaders were present for the colloquium that took place at Lambeth Palace on 16 November 2018. “After Brexit: European Unity and the Unity of the European Churches”, supported by a generous grant from the EKD, brought together politicians, church leaders and senior ecumenical figures along with researchers and academics from a range of fields, including social and political sciences as well as theology. Over 60 people were present in total.

The day was structured to maximize time for discussion and interaction while also being informed by expert contributions from a number of the participants. These contributions were circulated in advance and then briefly introduced before responses and comments were invited. The first session, The Church and the Unity of Society, began with contributions from Ben Ryan and Arnulf von Scheliha, with Rosemary Nuamah Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Social and Public Affairs Adviser, acting as the chairperson. The second session, The Churches and the Unity of Europe, brought together contributions from Gary Wilton and Piers Ludlow; the chairperson was James Walters, Chaplain and Senior Lecturer at the London School of Economics. The third session, on The Unity of European Churches, had a slightly different format. Two papers were circulated in advance, one from Sarah Rowland Jones, Dean of St Davids, and the other from staff at the Church of England’s Council for Christian Unity, Will Adam, Matthias Grebe and Jeremy Worthen. After Rowland Jones had commented on her paper, there was a panel discussion facilitated by Guli Francis-Dehqani, the Bishop of Loughborough and Vice-President of the Conference of European Churches, between Nick Baines, the Bishop of Leeds, Robert Innes, the Bishop in Europe, Heikki Huttenen, the General Secretary of the Conference of European Churches and Sarah Rowland Jones.

Inevitably, passionate convictions were exchanged at various points over the course of the day about why Brexit was happening and what the United Kingdom should now do. It was invaluable in this context to have the benefit not only of a range of perspectives from across the United Kingdom but also to be in conscious dialogue with the EKD, and to hear views from those residing elsewhere within the European Union, including Belgium, France and the Republic of Ireland. The day ended with a session in which Bishop Bedford-Strohm and Archbishop Welby were interviewed together by Lord Wallace of Saltaire. What emerged from the event as a whole was a further doubling down of what is a significant attempt to establish key questions which the churches must face in the coming weeks, months and years. It drew out crucial themes for current discussions about what kind of European society the churches envisage for a post-Brexit future, and what the church’s role should be in shaping it.

The main chapters of this book constitute papers that were prepared for the “After Brexit” colloquium and then revised in the light of the lively interchanges that took place. They are grouped under three headings: “History: the churches and the European Union”; “Context: European societies and the place of the church”; and “Response: what can the churches do?” This introduction uses these same headings to reflect on the discussion that unfolded during the day itself. It aims to identify critical issues, some of which receive substantial treatment in the chapters that follow, some of which are less prominent. All, however, are likely to require continuing attention in the coming years from those who share the view that the two conversations referred to above – about the political, social and cultural unity of Europe, and about the unity of the European churches – must find appropriate points of connection if the churches are to find their footing in a changing and often disorientating environment. Otherwise, they will struggle to understand properly their place in the current chapter of European history, and to witness effectively at this time to the joyful good news of peace and reconciliation in Jesus Christ.

History: the churches and the European Union

The sense of crisis about Brexit reached one of its peaks of intensity in the UK during the very week the colloquium was taking place. In such circumstances, it is easy for attention to narrow onto choices that must be made imminently and the issues that accompany them. Yet to understand where we are and the decisions that face us, we need to have some grasp of the history that has brought us to this point. Moreover, proposals for action in the present inevitably invoke a narrative about the past, and responsible decision-making requires us to be ready to reflect on its adequacy.

The roots of European integration

The colloquium presentations linked to the papers in the first part of this book both focused on the extent to which the churches played a role in the post-war origins of the project of European integration. Wilton focused on Robert Schuman’s declaration of May 1950 as the original inspiration for the EU, with its primary aim of peace in Europe being sought by the practical mechanism of placing coal and steel production under a common authority, thereby making war materially impossible. While it was a political, not a theological, statement, Wilton maintained that the Schuman Declaration was nonetheless motivated by deep Christian faith and consequently could and should be read theologically. Its horizons extended beyond Europe: the solidarity sought within the European continent could also be extended across the Mediterranean Sea in concern for Africa. For Schuman, the creation of a supranational organization did not undermine nation states but enabled them to operate together to achieve common goals.

In his contribution to the same session, Ludlow agreed that religion was an important motivator for many of the key figures involved in the initial moves after World War II towards European integration. He also concurred that this did not reflect an ideological principle of weakening the nation state but rather two overriding concerns. The first was to avoid the relapse into deadly conflict that had swiftly engulfed the good intentions expressed by European leaders after World War I. The second was to address the new reality that political agency at the global level was shifting into the hands of non-European actors, in the form of the United States and the Soviet Union. In order to respond to these challenges, political leaders drew on pre-existing networks and connections, including, crucially, that of political Catholicism, or Christian Democracy, as it became in the post-war context.

Ludlow stressed, however, that there was little engagement with formal church bodies in this formative period, while explicitly religious language was studiously avoided in public statements. He argued that this reflected a recognition that in a context where political consensus was a priority, religion could be a catalyst for division, not least in that the Catholic Social Teaching on which Schuman and others naturally drew was an object of suspicion to many Protestants. The idea that Roman Catholics held an ambivalent approach to issues of national sovereignty was one that still resonated in some European societies, while it remained commonplace in the 1950s for Catholics to refuse so much as to pray the Lord’s Prayer with other Christians. Of course, as well as divisions within Christianity itself, the further challenge remained of how to gain support from those who did not identify as Christians or who did not accept faith-based positions as a valid basis for modern political life. From the very outset, therefore, there was a reluctance to talk in explicitly religious terms about European integration, despite the critical role of religious motivations, reasoning and connections.

Inevitably, different rationales for participating in the project of European integration were influential for different European countries. In his presentation, von Scheliha emphasized the importance of the opportunity it represented for Germany’s rehabilitation by the international community. Full participation in the emerging European institutions and eventually the EU was seen as a way to establish and stabilize democracy, advance the economy, reconstruct the country and seek peace and reconciliation with former enemies.

Ryan’s paper highlighted the extent to which unresolved tensions around the role of religion in the origins of European integration continue to have an effect in the contemporary context. Affirming with Wilton and Ludlow the dependence of the great designers of the European project, such as Konrad Adenauer, Alcide De Gasperi and Jean Monnet as well as Robert Schuman, on Catholic Social Teaching, he proposed that:

The European project was, in its origins, a Catholic ideological project. It is accordingly little surprise that it prompts a greater degree of scepticism from those whose politics and identity are inspired by a more Protestant intellectual tradition. The Church of England and its adherents have tended to be closer to continental Protestants (particularly Scandinavians) than to Catholics when it comes to support for European integration.

It may not be accidental that the Church of England’s historic (if now somewhat embattled) self-understanding as “the church of the nation” finds a strong parallel in the Scandinavian Lutheran churches. Ecclesial and national identities have been strongly intertwined in the past, even if they have been unravelling from one another for some time.

In some contrast to this historical picture, the colloquium demonstrated how far close involvement in European ecumenism today tends to be accompanied by strong support for European integration expressed in overtly religious terms. Yet the European ecumenists of the 1950s and 1960s were principally focused on how the unity of European churches across the “Iron Curtain” could make a significant contribution to European social and cultural unity that might offer a counterweight to the East-West division of the deepening Cold War. In this context, the closer integration of Western European nation states, aimed in part at increasing their political “reach” on the global stage in terms of economics and diplomacy, was more likely to attract suspicion than enthusiasm in those Eastern bloc countries to whose beleaguered churches Western ecumenists were seeking to reach out as a matter of urgency.¹ Rowland Jones, formerly a British Diplomat during the Cold war era and its immediate aftermath, suggested in a comment at the colloquium that this dynamic of suspicion on the part of Russia regarding European integration had been stirred up by both the fact and the manner of the expansion eastwards of the European Union and also NATO during the 1990s and 2000s. Historic tension between the project of post-war peace-building through European integration among member states of the EU and the concern for peace and solidarity across the European Continent as a whole now plays into a wholly different context. What are the implications for the European Churches in framing their current witness to peace and reconciliation, and in their striving for visible unity across Europe?

Eclipse of the post-war narrative

From the outset, the idea of European integration was presented as a means of binding together Western European nation states, whose conflicts had precipitated two world wars, into peaceful politics. Tensions would be resolved by other means than violence. The framing of European integration, including the creation of transnational institutions, as a project for peace was a crucial strategy in building support for it. While, as was stressed above, it was not cast in overtly religious terms, Christians could be expected to respond positively to this rhetoric. How can those who preach a gospel of peace be against the things that make for peace? And if the EU has – as its advocates routinely claim – assisted in sustaining an unprecedented era in the modern age of peace between the major European powers, how could the churches possibly fail to support it?

A number of participants in the colloquium expressed views along these lines. There were also some critical voices, however. Nick Baines, the Bishop of Leeds, spoke about growing up in the city of Liverpool when it was still marked by bomb sites: “you could look at the end of a terraced house and see the fire place on the second floor, because it had been bombed and there was a crater.” For those who carry such memories, the imperative of embedding peaceful relations within Europe has immense force. As Baines pointed out, however, his children – and their children – do not share them: the repair to the city’s landscape was complete by the time they were old enough to walk its streets. Of course, the presence or absence of memories of the effects of war does not determine the validity of arguments about whether the European Union has or has not made a contribution to fostering peace, but it does have a critical bearing on what he called “emotional, imaginative engagement”. Baines’ point was that the post-war narrative linking European integration and European peace has lost its power to inspire. If a new generation is to be motivated to sustain and deepen relations between different European societies, it needs to create a new narrative about what Europe could become – and why it matters. The failure so far to do that became evident, Baines suggested, in the debate within UK on its membership of the EU.

Jonathan Chaplin, a political theologian, also questioned relying solely on the post-war narrative about the EU ensuring peace in Europe, and thereby co...