I want to say more about the whole as it relates to the Christian faith. It is not an ideal form of Christianity. It is the whole behind all the parts that we encounter. It is incomplete without the parts and unknowable in the sense that there is no single interpretation of the whole.
Yesterday I suggested 'networks of Christian traditions' as a description of the Christian faith. This is not a satisfactory description but may be helpful to enable us to get a hold of what the whole might be. The problem for those who wish to approach this from a conventional or Newtonian worldview, is that as each of us sees the whole through the lenses of our own tradition plus our personal experience, then everyone is going to see it differently. Presence on page 51 puts it like this:
The problem-solving mind-set can be adequate for technical problems. But it can be woefully inadequate for complex human systems, where problems often arise from unquestioned assumptions and deeply habitual ways of acting. Until people start to set their own handprint on such problems, fundamental change rarely occurs.
This strongly implies that it may be advantageous that everyone has a different view of the whole. This does not mean that everyone is equally right or that their view remains static. Indeed one of the aims of ecumenical conversations is to enable people to learn more of other traditions and hence of their faith as a whole. Remember also that ecumenical conversations often result in a deeper understanding of ones own tradition. Clearly there is much more to explore here.
In the meantime we need to take stock of what we do not know. There are three things (at least!).
We do not know what the whole is ...
It is easy to say the whole is the Christian faith. Maybe it is but even if it is, we are still left asking what is the Christian faith? Each Christian (and maybe others) will bring their own insights from their experience, their tradition to bear on their view of the faith. As ecumenists are we dealing with just this one faith or the whole of creation (oikoumene)? And whatever it is, how does it hang together, how do we make sense of it?
We do not know what the parts are ...
The easy answer is 'the traditions' but they themselves can be split into many smaller groups. Or is it the relationships between the traditions? Or relationships with the wider world? To choose the traditions as a sort of unit of the Christian faith invites the ecumenist to look inwards. But how much looking outwards can we endure before the whole vision becomes unmanageable?
What is the ecumenical problem?
Some believe it is 'full visible unity' and argue, convincingly, that it is a favoured goal because it is a clear goal. Others might argue it is reconciled diversity or even reconciliation with the whole of creation. Others dissent from all of these. These differences are not going to go away and ecumenism threatens to become increasingly frustrating whilst they are not acknowledged. This means we need to find new ways of describing our goal(s) as ecumenists.
Comments