Exploring Ecumenism

Protection from the Evil One

Image via Wikipedia

Harmon in his book Ecumenism Means You, Too refers to Jesus' prayer for his followers in John 17.  Here Jesus prays they will be protected from 'the evil one'.  Harmon writes on page 7:

The "evil one" is the one elsewhere in the New Testament called the "devil", diabolos in Greek, which literally means "one who divides".  The work of the diabolical one is to bring division, to divide people from God, and to divide people from one another  The evil one seeks especially to bring division to those who ought to have the unity shared  by God the Father and God the Son.

I am planning a series about the devil in my other blog, So What?.   So, I won't say too much here but there are a few observations I must make.

1. There is a real need for Christians to get a grip.  The mythology around the devil seems largely Medieval rather than from the time of Jesus.  Walter Wink's work on the powers for example, clearly explains the subtext of writings about the devil or evil one.
2. The term "evil one" is an interesting circumlocution.  It is too easy to equate it with Satan, who appears for instance in Matthew's account of the temptations.  But surely 'evil one' could as easily refer to anyone who causes division?
3. Harmon's equation of 'evil one' with the devil, leaving aside the subtleties of what Jesus might have intended, is a point well made.

I have made the point many times that the idea of conversation is core to ecumenical theology.  Genuine conversation, free to generate new ideas is fundamental not only to ecumenism but also to oikoumene, the reconciliation of all things.   

Conversation, or relationship, is core to life, to all that flourishes throughout the universe.  Wink shows power usurps life by restricting free conversation.  When people stop listening, relationships fail.    When people are no longer aware they are not listening, divisions become entrenched.  Power generates its own immortals who are omniscient, always knowing what is right and true. 

The nature of a God who is forever new is alien to this worldview based upon certainty.  The Spirit of God is found upon the knife-edge between order and chaos.  To move off this knife edge in either direction is to move into isolation.

Hell (closed down by Jesus, by the way) is where no communication, no conversation, no relationship is possible.  It is being totally alone.  The churches show they are alive through their conversations and this can be seen however formal they are.  Even the most dull ecumenical document is a sign that the churches are alive and able to engage with God's world

Related articles by Zemanta

• Ecumenism Means You, Too (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• Ecumenism Not Pluralism (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)

Subversive Ecumenism 5: Options for the Future

In England, many are seeking a vision for a new ecumenism and this implies the need for subversion of the existing ecumenical structures.  There is a need not just for new ideas but for a new paradigm and this is a task for all churches together - the authorities and the subversives holding each other to account and inspiring each other to change.

So, here are a few possibilities for the future:

Subversive Ecumenism 1: Achieving a Whole Church Oikoumene

The Penguin English Dictionary defines subversive as 'tending or attempting to undermine authority, established ideas, etc'.  I like this definition because it places subversive somewhere between active and passive.  It is an equivocal definition, so that subversion  tends, or attempts, not to destroy but to undermine.  Of course, some people won't like the word because it questions authority in the churches.  If you are one of them, stay with me; the choice is not between authority and subversion.

This phrase 'Subversive Ecumenism' came out of a paper I was invited to write called 'The Discipline of Subversive Love', where I chose to examine ecumenism as subversive love. I presented this paper on 22 May 2010 and some of the issues arising are listed in a post two days ago.  This short series will present a more coherent exploration of the idea.  What exactly is subversive ecumenism?

Fine Nets and Stratagems

This paper by Monsignor Mark Langham, Fine Nets and Stratagems, is a well written summary of the position of the Roman Catholic Church, with respect to their ecumenical work in Britain.

The paper is divided into three parts and I will summarise  what Langham is saying and my reaction to it.

Called to be One 14: Providing Space

This post relates to the fourteenth and final critical issue in Called to be One: What Now?, More than Institutions - Providing Space .

Throughout this sequence of posts, I have disagreed  profoundly  with the paper's thinking about the nature of institutions. 

Their view is a near universal problem.  I spend most of my paid working life helping local churches find a way forward that enables them to engage with one another without breaking the rules.

They do not state what they mean by 'institution' and so I assume they mean the churches.  It is bizarre that institutions are seen to be such terrible things and yet at the same time are expected to provide all the good things in the paragraph.

If they can provide these good things, it is because they are institutions.  Time and again, I hear of fresh expressions of church which don't want to be tied up with buildings, or rules and regulations (many of which are requirements of the state rather than the churches).  To me this seems childish - are they really saying they want someone else to do the hard work?

Often what they really need is an administrator and this is perfectly legitimate because administration is a gift of the spirit.  It is in working around difficulties that creativity is born.  Complex relationships may be an asset, generating new ideas and initiatives.

Ecumenism is based upon conversation and generative conversations can resolve many issues if we have the patience and stamina to see them through and to be open minded enough to understand when something new and significant emerges and that it might not emerge from the minds of experts or leaders.

Called to be One 13: Ecumenical Initiative

This post relates to the thirteenth critical issue in Called to be One: What Now?, Ecumenical Initiative: Whose Responsibility? 

This critical issue follows on from the last and in some ways responds to it.  They write: In the past certain ecumenical networks (often quite informal) have been catalytic in challenging the churches and ecumenical bodies alike.  This implies local churches are making their views known, although it is not easy to grasp what is meant by ecumenical networks (if they are not networks of local churches, what are they?). 

I stand by my last post, confirming 'ecumenical prodding' must come from local churches.  They need to be networked and they need to take the initiative.  This has been the message of this blog from the beginning.

Ecumenism will get nowhere if it is solely the province of church leaders and academic theologians.  This is in no way a criticism of their abilities.  They cannot enable progress independently of fully participating local churches.

Paradoxically, the problem lies in the progress that has already been made.  As more issues are identified and settled in formal talks, the remaining issues become more difficult; the easy things have been settled and now we turn to those entrenched issues, which have so far defeated the best minds.  These issues are difficult because they are about authority and decision making; the thing Christians cannot agree about is how they make decisions together.

This is not as dreadful as it might seem.  Churches can empower people to make decisions together and so now and again Christianity has inspired the growth  of local organisations, co-operatives, businesses, trade unions, banks, insurance companies - you name it.  This wealth of ways of making decisions has been a great gift of God to the world.

These form a generative tension  and so will never be reconciled because this tension is the crack in the broken Body of Christ that allows God's love to flow to the whole of humanity.

This is why the prodding must come from local churches.  As they struggle with the implications of irreconcilable authorities, against the need to collaborate for the Kingdom of God, they are generating solutions and pressing church authorities to relax their regulations.

It is out of this debate that real change will come.

Called to be One 8: Ecclesiastical and Ecumenical Ambiguity

This post relates to the eighth critical issue in Called to be One: What Now?, Ecclesiastical and Ecumenical Ambiguity .

This critical issue is a sense of distance between contemporary churches.  It is in contrast to the pre-Marigold  dispensation, presumably up to and including the Interchurch Process .  Is this a really a problem?  Apparently, the following account for this distance:

1. Courtesy can create distance.
2. So can pragmatism.
3. The argument that ecumenism is a luxury we cannot afford.
4. The final point reads: Distance legitimises theological difference and in turn we become comfortable with theological difference. Theological difference in turn legitimises distance and the end result is complacency.

Called to be One 6: Leaders and the Whole People of God

This post relates to the sixth critical issue in Called to be One: What Now?, Leaders and the Whole People of God .

Support is offered to local church leaders, through organisations like Churches Together in England.  This includes an annual training conference for new ecumenical officers.  The English National Ecumenical Officers offer support for anyone working ecumenically.  The Methodist and United Reformed Churches have a mentoring scheme for ministers new to Local Ecumenical Partnerships and a retired Bishop offers support to Diocesan Bishops and Methodist District Chairs.  Further work continues to identify resources and opportunities for developmental support.

And yet everyone knows this is not enough.  I don't believe the problem is lack of training and development, resources or even the negative attitudes of some church leaders.  The problem goes deeper.  It resides in a superficial understanding of ecumenism. 

Called to be One 3: Our Context and its Influence

This post relates to the third critical issue in Called to be One: What Now?, Our Context and its Influence .

This critical issue does not seem to be very well defined.  What is our context?  Presumably, the writers mean England.  England is a big and complex place, so what is the context?

I do not think decline is a particularly significant part of our context.  Some parts of the church are declining and others are growing.  What is important is consumerism, as the writers suggest.

Called to be One 1: Some Concerns about Power

A few weeks ago I mentioned the document, Called to be One - what now? ; an account of a conference held last November.  Many of the people who attended were involved in the publication of a document, Called to be One, in 1996.  Re-reading this 15 years later, it seems both fresh and dated at the same time.

Much of it is still current today and yet things are very different.  The main difference is a loss of confidence in the ecumenical movement in England.  The people who organised and attended the November 2009 conference can easily be dismissed as an older generation, out of touch with the painful realities of the present day. I think the reality is more complex.