The interface between the authorities of the traditional churches and those who would subvert them is a place of creativity. I should stress subversive ecumenism has nothing to do with heresy. It is an attempt to undermine from below practices that have created the ecumenical impasse. It does not aim to destroy ecumenical work or to jeopardise future work. The aim is to shake up deadlocked talks by bringing new perspectives to bear.
What are these new perspectives? They are the view from the margins. In my paper for the Sheffield Jesus Seminar, I mentioned Kim's work on the Body of Christ. He suggests that the Body of Christ is incomplete when the marginalised are not heard. Where are the places where the church meets those hitherto excluded and so where creativity occurs? The first question must always be, who is still not being heard? Ecumenism without full participation lacks credibility.
The Global Christian Forum enabled contact between the new Pentecostal, charismatic and evangelical churches and the mainstream ecumenical churches. Many of the newer churches have been marginalised from the mainstream traditions, in part by their suspicions of ecumenism, but also by distrust on both sides. But we must go further than this.
Fresh Expressions in Britain targets groups who have had no experience of church at all. It is exactly those people with no previous experience of the churches, who need to be heard and enter into ecumenical conversations. As their new churches encounter local churches from the mainstream traditions, the fruits of these encounters will lead to demand for change becoming more insistent.
Theological Differences
Scripture is a gift from God for the churches but its interpretation is a major stumbling block to relationships between traditions. Christians are invited to interpret Scripture and therein we find a multitude of problems. There is no one God-given interpretation, so how can we be certain any given interpretation has validity?
There are a number of ways to tackle disagreements. Some traditional approaches involve putting heretics to the sword or schism, where people with a new interpretation form their own church. To a remarkable degree, established churches accommodate a range of interpretations and I will examine how later in this sequence of posts.
The reality is churches have no control over what their people believe. People find their niche and then decide whether they wish to follow an interpretation from their tradition, or whether they intend to rif upon it until such time as they are thrown out because they no longer fit in.
The role of the traditional churches then is not so much to enforce rules and beliefs. Their real purpose is to protect the fountainheads, so future generations always have the option of resetting their beliefs and starting over.
So, the churches need to get the balance right. Too authoritarian and people will vote with their feet because they cannot in conscience hold to traditional beliefs, at odds with life as they experience it. Too much subversion and the institutions unravel, losing the fountainheads of the faith.
We must remember all our interpretations are of earth, not heaven. This includes the brand new spirit filled vision as much as it does the traditional view. They are all ours and we choose the ones that suit us best. They simultaneously reveal and mask God's purpose. Held together, perhaps all of us might see a little further.
Comments