Ecumenism Today

The Universal Church in the 21st Century

Christopher Asprey, Francesca Aran Murphy, Francesca Aran Murphy

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781351941716
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Théologie et religion
• Categoría: Théologie

What is Ecumenism? Is Christian unity a legitimate hope or just a pious illusion? The aim of this book is to analyze the real obstacles that stand in the path to unity and to propose solutions, where these are possible. Distinguished authors from the main Christian denominations offer a unique insight into the problem of Christian divisions and the relationships between Christian communities. This work is not a politically correct exercise in diplomacy; rather, it informs the reader about the actual state of the ecumenical dialogue.

Part I
Theological Ecumenism

Chapter 1
Stumbling upon Peter?
The Question of the Church in
Ecumenical Dialogue

Philip G. Ziegler

I. Introduction

My aims in what follows are first descriptive, then analytical and finally therapeutic. I begin by setting out and substantiating a diagnosis: that the present ecumenical distemper is first and foremost ecclesiological. This involves a rather direct stocktaking of the place of the question of the church at this moment in our ecumenical history. The second part of the chapter moves to consider one striking and recurrent theme in ecumenical ecclesiology – the acknowledgement of what I will call the church's 'asymmetrical and referential identity'. I hope to be able to show that this theme is present and important in several significant ecclesiological studies and documents, including the most recent offering from the WCC, The Nature and Mission of the Church, a significant contribution from the churches of the Leuenberg fellowship entitled. The Church of Jesus Christ, and, if I may, also some of the ecclesiological reflections of the recently elected Bishop of Rome on the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council. What becomes clear is. I will argue, that alongside real and troubling ecclesiological differences, there is a significant agreement concerning the origin of the church's identity and the locus of its centre of gravity.

On the other side of this, the chapter's filial section proposes a revised diagnosis of the ecumenical distemper and recommends for your consideration a particular – if perhaps somewhat alternative – therapy for the present ecclesiological difficulty.

II. Ecclesiology in Contemporary Ecumenics – The State of the Question

Let me begin by convincing you that the question of the church has indeed come to the forefront of present ecumenical discussion and debate. In recent statements and speeches. Walter Kasper, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, has notably identified the question of the church itself as a primary source of stumbling in recent discussions. First, the knot of tensions and questions that have led Roman Catholic dialogue with Orthodox churches to what Kasper calls bluntly 'an impasse' are all ecclesiological; focussed on matters of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and charges of 'uniatism' and the 'crucial theological problem' of autocephaly.¹ Second, international dialogue with the Anglican communion in recent years has highlighted 'perhaps more than any other dialogue' Kasper claims, 'the current problem and aporia of ecumenism', namely the 'internal fragmentation of an Ecclesial Communion'.² Both the problems and proposed solutions to this fragmentation are predominantly ecclesiological. Third, beneath the various 'mainly transient challenges' that beset Catholic engagement with Protestant churches. Kasper discerns a single and 'fundamental problem': 'diverse ecclesiologies'. Following the 'clarification' on the doctrine of justification, the Cardinal sees 'the issues still pending [to be] predominantly those dealing with ecclesiology'.³ In fact, one of the most significant issues to arise from the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification was precisely ecclesiological: the question, from the Catholic side of just what 'quality', 'true ecclesial value' and 'real authority' was carried by the signature of the Lutheran World Federation upon the document.⁴ The upshot of all this is that there exists. Kasper asserts, a 'stalemate that makes substantial progress impossible, at least until the questions relating to ecclesiology have been fundamentally resolved'⁵ since, in the Catholic view, 'these issues represent the key to moving forward'.⁶

Kasper's sense of the prominence and problematic place of the church at this juncture finds strong confirmation in key documents from the World Council of Churches coming out of its 9th General Assembly, held during February 2006. One of the important events at this Assembly was receipt of the report of the Special Commission on Orthodox Participation in the WCC. This report identifies ecclesiology as the first and only strictly doctrinal of five areas of dispute to be addressed.⁷ Not only have the discussions with the Orthodox unearthed the 'ecclesiological presuppositions lying behind both the basis and constitution of the WCC', but also they have brought to light a sharp division between 'two basic ecclesiological self-understandings, namely of those churches (such as the Orthodox) which identify themselves with the one. holy catholic and apostolic church, and those which see themselves as parts of the one. holy, catholic and apostolic church'. For the first group, the key ecumenical question is nothing less than 'is there space for other churches in [their] ecclesiology?'; for the second, the key question is how they 'understand, maintain, and express [their] belonging to the one ... church?' In light of the seriousness and urgency of these matters, the Special Commission pleads that ecclesiology 'form an important part of the next assembly of the WCC'.

It would be a mistake to think that this appeal to make the question of the church central to the future work of the WCC comes only from this 'special' quarter. The 9th Assembly as a whole extended to the churches a rather remarkable 'invitation ... to renew their commitment to the search for unity and to deepen their dialogue' under the title. Called to be the One Church.⁸ This document leads by laying out 'what the churches, at this point on their ecumenical journey, can say together about some important aspects of the church' as the way into 'renewed', 'deep', 'fresh', 'candid' and 'more pointed' discussions of the divisive issues that must still be addressed.⁹ The text is remarkable in a number of ways, not least for its clear reiteration of visible unity as set forth at New Delhi (1961) as the unshakable aim of the ecumenical enterprise and equally strong reassertion of the important role of the Faith & Order side of the shop in achieving this aim. For our purposes, what is most striking, however, is that the WCC should look to ecclesiology (i.e., 'what the churches can say together about some important aspects of the church') to orient and put legs under this resurgent ecumenical effort. The very recent Faith & Order 'consensus' text on The Nature and Mission of the Church¹⁰ is designed to begin to make good on this prospect. The wager is that achieving what Norwegian ecumenist Ola Tjørhom has called an 'ecumenical ecclesiology' is the key to breaking the icejam of our present ecumenical winter.¹¹

Other signs and portents confirming this trend could certainly be marshalled – among them the issues and questions regarding the church surfaced in the dustup surrounding Dominus Iesus,¹² the deeply ecclesial vision of the recently issued Princeton Proposal for Christian Unity,¹³ and the heated debate surrounding the statement recently issued by the Synod of the Evangelical Church in Germany, A Protestant Understanding of Ecclesial Communion. What really cannot be doubted is the unprecedented prominence, predominance and possibly even 'absolute centrality of ecclesiology to the ecumenical movement'¹⁴ at the present time.

III. A Common Thread – The Church’s Asymmetrical and Referential Identity

Now, with this in view, I want to pull just one – yet to my mind highly significant thread from amidst the complicated tapestry of present ecumenical ecclesiology. This single theme is what Christoph Schwöbel (Jüngel's successor at Tübingen University) characterizes as the 'asymmetrical' and 'referential identity' of the church. What these notions mean is just this: the identity of the Christian church is decisively rooted in something other than the church itself, namely in an 'understanding of Christian faith and its practice, and of that which makes it possible: the action of God. Father. Son and Spirit in reconciling sinful humanity to himself by disclosing the truth' about their relationship. When asked about its identity, the Christian church must in answering inevitably 'refer' to 'the focal point of the nature of Christian faith and its constitution'.¹⁵ However this 'focal point' is understood, it will always include, as I mentioned, the action of the triune God. And this is where the asymmetry comes in. For it is the identity and activity of the God of the gospel which gives rise to and establishes the faith and life of the Christian community, and which does so with irreversible priority so that 'all human action remains forever dependent on God as its creative ground'.¹⁶ Not only must the church 'refer' the question of its identity, it much refer it in such a way that it never regains its balance, no matter how much it should make of the human comings and goings that also constitute it. Reference to the action of the God of the gospel is not one element of ecclesiology among others; it is the determinative and decisive element, bar none. This is why the church not only has a 'referential identity' but, more fully, an asymmetrical referential identity.

On their own, Schwöbel's terms are quite formal, as is my description of their meaning so far. In order to put some meat on these bones, let me set out for you three concrete examples of this form at work in recent ecumenical ecclesiology. In doing so. I make no pretence to be exhaustively interpreting the texts I take up; my limited goal is merely to demonstrate in and from them the common and cardinal place of acknowledgment of the church's referential and asymmetrical identity.

(a) The Nature and Mission of the Church (WCC)

In the preface to this document there stands an invitation to the churches to engage with the ecclesiological questions it addresses because 'The self-understanding of the church is essential for its proper response to its vocation' (p. 11). True and important. But listen to how this claim is set up by the preceding sentence: 'In God's providence the Church exists, not for itself alone, but to serve God's work of reconciliation and for the praise and glory of God' (p. 11). The grammar tells us everything we need to know: the basic statement is 'the church exists', but for this to be stated truly, it must be embedded within a clause of origin ('in God's providence'), two purpose clauses ('to serve God's work of reconciliation' and 'for the praise and glory of God') and accompanied by an explicit negation ('not for itself alone'). In this single sentence, the church's identity is explicitly related to God no less then three times: God's work. God's glory and God's providence provide the total relevant context within which the church exists and within which the proposition 'the church exists' becomes theologically meaningful. The asymmetry of the church's relation to God is plain both quantitatively (it's 3:1 for God) but, more seriously, also qualitatively, as God provides the origin, formative task and ultimate end of the church's existence.

And that's just the preface. The exposition of the nature of the church within the body of the report doesn't fail to demonstrate further this same logic. The church is first and foremost the creation or creature of the Word and of the Holy Spirit, having been 'called into being' by the Father. As such 'it belongs to God, is God's gift and cannot exist by and for itself', since it is 'called and sent to serve, as an instrument of the Word and the Spirit, as a witness to the Kingdom of God' (p. 13). Coming from God. the church is and remains 'centred and grounded in the Word of God' even as it is continually 'formed', 'incorporated', 'enlivened', 'strengthened', 'nourished', 'sustained' and 'led' by the Spirit (p. 14). Indeed, all of the church's 'essential attributes' – unity, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity – 'flow from and illustrate the Church's dependence upon God'; the church is these things if and only 'because' of the identity and action of the God of the gospel (p. 14). Further, each of the four biblical tropes for the church favoured by this document – people of God. body of Christ, temple of the Spirit and koinonia with God – all share the referential and asymmetrical logic: the church is God's people, elected and commissioned to the task of witness by God; it is Christ's gifted body, of which he himself is the head, whose unity is 'through [his] cross' (Ephesians 2:16); it is the Spirit's temple, made holy and vital by...