Horizontal and Vertical Ecumenism

This idea has been around for a long time and I think it is something anyone who is involved in ecumenism will eventually encounter.

Usually we think of ecumenism as a movement to bring reconciliation to the historic mainstream churches.  So, we may be inclined to think of ecumenism as simply agreement between the councils of the various churches.  Such agreement may be a long way off but it is the vision that keeps ecumenism going.

The diagram shows the historic churches as columns but the rows are additional theological positions, which divide the historic churches and at the same time unite Christians with similar views across the churches.  So, for example, evangelicals are found in most traditions and will have more in common with evangelicals across the traditions than with non-evangelical members of their own tradition.

This seems to be widespread and it is difficult to see how the traditions might hold together with the often tense relationships these horizontal divisions might have with their tradition of origin, whilst they are attracted to similar believers in other traditions.

Indeed it is possible the growth of many new churches can in part be accounted for by some people saying, we are Christians first and so will unite with other Christians whose beliefs and practices are similar to ours.  Of course there are other reasons for new churches but it is likely this is a factor.

This has interesting implications for ecumenical reception.  Where traditions are divided horizontally, any formal decisions made between the churches will need to be received by several different divisions within each historic church.  Arguments in favour of a particular agreement may need to be explained in several, maybe contradictory, ways to make sense to these divisions.

It also suggests ecumenical reception has an application amongst those new churches that have formed out of frustration with historic churches.  This may seem an odd thing to suggest but we must not forget reception is not just one way, it includes hearing what local churches are saying to the national.  Many new churches exist because of frustrations with traditional churches.  If historic churches together  listen to the new churches, this might shape future agreements between them.  

We have to recognise the implications of these unprecedented changes amongst churches in England, over the last ten years.  The historic churches are no longer able to claim their talks involve the majority of Christians.  New models will be needed to develop conversations locally as well as nationally that genuinely reflect the breadth of Christian faith and experience.

Comments

[Ian Chisnall]

Come on this is abject nonsense. Ecumenism is not about bringing structures together to create a reconciled structure, ecumenism is the recognition that despote our differences (structural or tradition based) that we are one church and despite these we can work together on matters of mission and bring reconciliation between man and God. If we wait for denominations to be reconciled to one another we will all have to watch hell freeze over.

[Chris Sissons]

Thanks Ian. This was a difficult post to write and your response illustrates this. The point you make is one I have made many times in this blog. I thought I was showing why bringing structures together won't work. You think I'm advocating structural unity. I suspect I still have not expressed myself very clearly. The seoond paragraph is probably the problem. Even today this vision of structural unity keeps ecumenism going. This post explores one reason why the vision is no longer viable.

The last paragraph is saying that the old structural approach cannot work.

Formal talks will continue because they have been and continue to be to some degree successful. But this success is severely limited because the churches can no longer depend upon reception by local Christians, for many reasons, and particularly because many local Christians are no longer part of the historic churches.

I have explored at great length how a new approach to ecumenism might be approached. This post is the first in a sequence exploring more traditional ecumenism from the perspective the alternative approaches I'm exploring.

I will take greater care to spell out my position in future.

[Ian Chisnall]

So we are on the same page after all. Unity breaks out at least between us!