Exploring Ecumenism

God Was Pleased to Reconcile All Things

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

Colossians 1: 15 - 20

The bombshell is in verse 16: 'in him all things ... visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers - all things have been created through him and for him'.  These are the very things that enslave us!  And these things were created through him and for him!

But note these are human institutions.  The very institutions that enslave and disempower us are created though and for him.  The thing is, these institutions are both necessary and oppressive.

The law is necessary to enable the development of culture and society.  There has to be legal redress for wrongs done because the alternative is vigilantism.  But these very institutions, designed to protect us, become oppressive.  Why?  Because in our minds we absolutise them and make them into gods.

The promised reconciliation is where these institutions begin to work as they should and not as the play things of perfectionist control freaks.

And so we learn, the church is intended to be the beginning of this alternative way, verse 18 'he is the head of the body, the church'.  This accounts for the difficulties we all encounter.  We have institutions based on the old methods shot through with the brilliance of a new way of working.  The church is a hybrid institution, both near to and far from the will of God.

I think this is why the church is broken.  It is the broken body of Christ because it is only in its brokenness that a place can be found for all. 

Related articles

• To Gather Up All Things in Him (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• That They All Be One (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• God Will be All in All (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)

We Will be Saved by His Life

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

Romans 5: 10 - 11

It beats me what this has to do with ecumenism, although once again it is about the reconciliation of all to God.  And of course, the wrath of God is not far away (in verse 9).

So, let's nail this - how are a God of Love and the wrath of God compatible?  This question is muddied by 1000 years of atonement theology.  This theology is alien to the Bible and Paul would not have recognised it.  So, what is this passage about?

The powerful use fear of death to control others.  Jesus through his death and resurrection conquered death and so also the fear of death.  The thing that makes God wrathful is not individual sins but the way in which we all collude with power, out of fear.

When we abandon fear, we no longer depend upon things that distract us from God and so we are reconciled to God.  No longer fearing death, we are saved.

In addition verse 11 is saying, those who no longer fear death may boast in God.  Those who live by control, use God to justify their actions.  They practice unspeakable cruelty in God's name.  Those who know Jesus abandon control, as they are no longer fearful.  In this they are modelling themselves on Jesus and so reconciled with God.

And presumably this is the nature of the unity that exists between Christians, despite the best efforts of the institutional churches to find ways to keep Christians apart.

I am aware I'm sounding negative about the institutional churches in this series of posts.  I hope for an opportunity to redress the balance as the series continues.

Related articles

• To Gather Up All Things in Him (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• God Will be All in All (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)

That They All Be One

Image by leolo2u via Flickr

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

John 17: 20 - 23

This is the passage most commonly quoted in ecumenical circles.  If we read it in the light of the last post though, we see it is not just about ecumenism between churches, but the wider Oikoumene.

Jesus prays not only for his disciples but for those who believe through their word.  He is asking for unity not of a narrow community but of the whole world.  Jesus prays not for the church but the world.  The intention is clearly the whole world and not some subset of self-appointed Christians.

The prayer then focuses upon the disciples.  The world will know who Christ is through the unity of the disciples.  It is the love we have for one another, whatever our differences, that is persuasive for the world.  The unity of Christians is a precursor to Oikoumene.

The word 'glory' means those attributes of God we perceive through our senses.  The glory, the sensory evidence of God, is the unity of Christians.  This is why the ecumenical movement is essential.

If Christians are seen to be one, then God's glory is seen throughout the world and this will lead to the greater Oikoumene, the unity of all things.

Related articles

• All of Creation Waits with Eager Longing (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• A Great Nation (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• The World Belongs to the Lord (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• Called to be God's Holy People (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)

To Gather Up All Things in Him

Image via Wikipedia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

Ephesians 1: 7 - 12

This passage moves between past, present and future, although not necessarily in that order.  It focuses on Oikoumene, the ultimate reconciliation of all things to God.  But we need to understand this is pointless, unless it makes a difference in the here and now.

So, the author begins in the present, reminding his readers of their experience of gifts of redemption and forgiveness.  A third gift we have here and now is knowledge of the mystery of his will; the gathering up of all things in Christ, in heaven and on earth.

It is interesting how Universalist this passage seems to be.  It does say 'all things'.  The main problem with Universalism is, to imply all will be saved rather subverts the idea that a saviour is necessary.  My understanding of the Methodist take on this question is that it is God's intention that all shall be saved.  There is, however, no certainty that all will be saved.  If there is free will then there must always be the possibility that some will not choose God.

I feel great discomfort with the idea that we must fear the wrath of God.  God is wrathful certainly, but the wrath is not directed to those who don't believe in evangelical doctrine.  It is directed against the oppressors, those who exploit others for personal gain, lust for power or take pleasure in cruelty.  Make no mistake about it, these are the true atheists.  Whether or how they might be saved need not detain us here.

Christians are not called to condemn those who do not believe.  They are called to lead the way in every generation.  The passage deals with the past in its final verses.  Christians have obtained an inheritance, they are destined, they are the first and live for the praise of Christ's glory.

To be destined is to be selected for a purpose.  It does not necessarily imply anything about those who are not selected.  They surely have a destination too and this might be facilitated in a positive way by those who have already been selected.  It is easy to jump to the conclusion that we are called for our own benefit rather than the benefit of others.

The problem from an ecclesiological point of view is this reading of the passage sets aside the necessity for church.  Institutional structures are not necessary for salvation.  They support those who choose to live in the way of Jesus Christ but are not necessary as institutions.  This will be a less than welcome idea for several traditions.  There is more to be said about this.

Related articles

• One Flock, One Shepherd (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• A Great Nation (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)

To Draw Everyone to Himself

Image by Tod Polson via Flickr

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

John 12:32

One verse today, from John.  John differs from the synoptic gospels because he climbs inside the story, telling it from an inner perspective.  All the gospels are post-resurrection, John takes this to the furthest point those who chose the canon could tolerate.

Why should all people be drawn to a man on a cross?  It is difficult to imagine, living in a country where we have no death penalty.

I imagine most people treat executions as 'there but for the grace of God go I'.  'I'm just relieved I'm not being executed.'  Perhaps some people delight in judicial killing, they see justice enacted before their eyes.  Whose justice?

The point is, physical force is used as the ultimate last resort for the powers and authorities.  The Christian story negates this power.  They no longer have any means to scare us into compliance with their delusions of perfection.

Some find God on the cross offensive.  God is supposed to be perfect.  If God hasn't got things sorted, what hope have we?  It is bad enough believing God could be incarnated as a mere human being.  But then for him to be treated in this way ...

Eventually, the penny drops.  How else can God approach us, except from the cross?  If God comes in some other form, how are we tell God from all the ego-maniacs who would possess our souls? 

God Will be All in All

Image by Combined Media via Flickr

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

 

1 Corinthians 15: 24 - 28

This is a passage about Oikoumene, the final reconciliation of all things to God.  Let's take note of a few things about it.

First, it is about the destruction of every ruler, authority and power.  Paul understands that oppression is not only physical; it has a spiritual dimension.  Our fear of death, enables rulers to oppress us or recruit us to oppression.  They are not loving fathers, whatever their self-image might be, but people who thrive on fear.  They are driven by their own fear and fueled by others fear of them.

Second, it is hard not to read this passage as about the ultimate end of the universe.  Indeed, it is not wrong so to read it.  But we need to remember that if God has said it is so, it is so.  Thus we need to read it as true now; we can live as if it is true!

Paul's ironic style would have been understood by the churches he wrote to because their experience was of the rule of Rome.  Today, after centuries of Christianity as the continuation of Roman rule (I refer to all institutional religion, not just Catholics), we tend to read him literally.  This passage is about liberty.  To love God is not to be subject to Rome (or any other power or authority).  We can achieve that in our own lifetime whilst at the same time look forward to when all things will be subject to God and so free of oppression.

Related articles

• Better that One Man Die for the People (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• The World Belongs to the Lord (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• Called to be God's Holy People (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)
• A Great Nation (chrississons.typepad.co.uk)

We Are His Children

Image by brtsergio via Flickr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

Galatians 4: 6 - 7

Two points about this passage.

It is one of only three places in the New Testament, where the Aramaic word 'Abba' is used.  It is always presented as 'Abba! Father!'.  In the original Greek, the word for 'Father' is 'Pater'.  The reason 'Pater' features is the first readers did not know Aramaic and so needed a translation.  Why feature 'Abba' at all?  Because it was the word Jesus actually used.  The beauty of it is all Christians, whatever their language read 'Abba' followed by their word for 'Father'.  Given that to this day in some places 'Abba' is the first word a child speaks, it is a word for all people - all ages and everywhere.

My other point is, what difference does being a child of God make?  The text says God has sent the Spirit into our hearts because we are children.  So, what does this mean?

The meaning hinges on how we understand the metaphor of a loving father.  The slave receives and obeys orders.  The good father encourages his children to stand on their own two feet.  It is no longer a question of obedience to a dictator God, but liberty supported by a father (or loving parent).  To be a child is a commitment to learning to do without the father figure.  This includes human father figures such as priests. 

When the inevitable questions start about why God allows the good (whoever they're supposed to be) to suffer in earthquakes, for example, our understanding is these are not judgements on human behaviour.  We do good in the way we take responsibility for others, as we respond such events.

One Flock, One Shepherd

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

John 10: 14 - 16

This is a similar message to the last post.  The difference is a matter of emphasis.  You can read this passage as a vision of unity;  all the different traditions will in time be united.

Or else you are invited to understand there are others, not counted by the existing churches because they are peripheral.  They are people who Jesus died for (John is writing from after the passion) and are not a part of the recognised Christian traditions. 

There is a lot of debate these days about Universalism, the belief that ultimately all people will be saved.  One argument against Universalism assumes those who are saved must accept Jesus Christ as saviour. 

What is rarely discussed is, the identity of the saved.  It is easy to discount those who are on the margins.  It is very easy to condemn those who are peripheral to social norms, for example gays; people who are already oppressed because they are despised.

If the anti-Universalists are right, and the axe will fall, cutting some off from God, the question is where the axe will fall.  I suspect it will fall in unexpected places.

But it seems many are only too keen to leap to conclusions on God's behalf.  Those who are saved in this passage are those who listen to God's voice.  The key is not their goodness, you do not have to be good to qualify.  It is by entering into a relationship with God that we learn to be good.  It is those who 'listen to my voice' who are part of the flock.

Better that One Man Die for the People

Image by Happy A via Flickr

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

John 11: 49 - 52

Reading the passion narratives, it is obvious Jesus unites not his friends (they run away) but his enemies.  What united them?  Caiaphas does not speak for himself alone.  He's named because he was High Priest that year.  Those he represents agree because they are fearful of the Romans (v48).

The passion narratives show us the reality of human political and religious systems.  They will dispose of an awkward individual because they are under threat.  Make no mistake, their fear is not for the people but for their own power base.  We have seen this caricatured in recent weeks by General Gaddafi's self-serving rhetoric.

Of course, the reason CTE has chosen this passage is v52.  The idea is Caiaphas prophesied the gathering into one of 'the dispersed children of God'.  So, what are we to make of this? 

First, whatever it means it is obvious John is reading post-resurrection learning into his account of events.  So, why are the children dispersed?  We cannot divorce our understanding of this text from the passion narrative.  It is about oppression.  The children of God are dispersed because they are oppressed.  This story is uniting them, so they may act as one people.

These days in England, the children of God are neither oppressed nor dispersed.  They are not a people on the margins, but a people at the power centres.  To a degree, adepts themselves at oppression and dispersal.

We see the Christians in the Middle East suffering because of the activities of Western Christians, alienating the settled religious peoples and causing conflict between them.

What really divides Christians is power. 

We Are His People

Image by B A Bowen Photography via Flickr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is part of a series of posts based on the Churches Together in England publication one light: one world.  If you click on the link you will find the biblical texts.  This post of the same name covers the purpose of this series.

Psalm 95: 1 - 7

This and three previous texts are meant to illustrate, as far as CTE is concerned, 'The Unity of God's People'.  I find these texts rather unconvincing.  I don't find nationhood theologically helpful and the last two, whilst moving onto more helpful ground, don't really lead me anywhere meaningful.

This last text in the sequence presumably invites us to see Christians worshipping the same God together.  The (Jewish) community for whom this was written will have found this helpful, they were a real, not metaphorical, nation.

When I read this in the context of unity, it reminds me of our divisions.  This is one kind of worship for one kind of people.  It is not my worship or any other Christian's.  The ways in which we worship tend to divide us.  From disagreement about what constitutes a good hymn (or song) through to the politics surrounding the eucharist, worship divides.

The frog croaks, the bird sings.  We don't believe their prayers are devalued because we like the noise of one but not of the other.  We worship according to our dispositions.  Genuine worship is accepted by God, whatever it is.  The problem is where we find we cannot enter whole-heartedly into another's worship.  But is it so difficult to find at least a little common ground?