Exploring Ecumenism

Reframing Ecumenical Theology in Local Churches

I was asked in a comment to my last post : how might we reframe our theology of ecumenism in real life terms for the average person in the pew?  This is of course in the context of the Global Christian Forum  and the increasing sense of Christianity as a global movement of people.

In my last post, I suggested local ecumenism in Britain might have more in common with global than national ecumenism.  This means local churches are perhaps less interested in the faith and order approach to ecumenism than they are in the practicalities of joint mission. 

Local and Global Ecumenism

Reading about the Global Christian Forum  has helped me think about local and national ecumenism in Britain.  It appears local ecumenism has more in common with global ecumenism than the national  ecumenical work of the denominations.

It seems local and national ecumenism have had less in common in recent years.  Think back to the English Covenant in the early eighties and then the 'Not Strangers but Pilgrims'  process in the late eighties.  The latter involved many local churches in meeting over Lent 1986 to discuss the future of ecumenism in Britain.  This process led to the Swanwick Agreement  and the new ecumenical instruments.

Distinctive Features of the Global Christian Forum

So, what is distinctive about the Global Christian Forum ?  The GCF has been extremely successful bringing together Christians including those from traditions which were and remain sceptical about ecumenism.  This is true not only of the Limuru meeting of 2007 but also of four earlier regional meetings in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America.  It is also true of an earlier meeting in Pasadena, which was taken to cover North America.

The Reconciling Mission of Global Christianity

The second of the papers from the plenary sessions at the  Global Christian Forum  meeting in Limuru 2007, by Dr Cheryl Bridges Johns , a Pentecostal scholar, underlies this post.  It is called 'When East Meets West and North Meets South: The Reconciling Mission of Global Christianity' and can be found on page 93 of  Revisioning Christian Unity .

Johns makes two assumptions: that the 'mainstream' ecumenical paradigm is no longer viable to meet the challenges of the 21st century; and that when global Christians are honoured as equal partners, their gifts are adequate for the tasks of unity and mission.

What God is Doing Amongst His People Today

A review of the papers for the plenary sessions at the Global Christian Forum  meeting in Limuru 2007, will help us understand something of the significance of the event.  One of the papers, by Rev Dr Wonsuk Ma , a Korean Pentecostal pastor, underlies this post.  It is called 'Discerning What God is Doing Amongst His People Today' and can be found on page 80 of Revisioning Christian Unity .

Ma writes of how

I quickly learned that "not all mission is created equal", and not everyone means the same thing when they talk of mission.  The biggest divide I soon encountered was the emphasis on human life in reference to death: one group has a mission to preach "life after death", while the other has a mission to work for "life before death".  This divide was particularly evident among the normal (or western) missionaries, and soon I also realised that "mainline" churches are distinguished from "evangelical" ones by their mission emphases.

Ma argues that it 'is logically apparent ... that these two approaches are complementary to each other, as we need to live our life both before and after death'.  Unfortunately, he explains, the focus of many evangelical churches has been upon conversion of other Christians as well as, if not more than, non-Christians.  This makes little sense in remote areas where there may be fewer than one church per village.

This divergence was reinforced by the different origins of the two approaches.  The liberal or mainstream approach to mission developed from the the 1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference .  During the same decade, the Pentecostal churches emerged as a movement from the poor at the Azusa Street Mission in Los Angeles (illustrated).  This movement was attractive to the marginalised and the poor, and was in its turn marginalised and criticised by the mainstream churches.

This has resulted in the present primary divide between churches of the north and south.  The new churches of the south are not impressed by the mainstream traditions of the north:

• they emphasise both the spiritual and material aspects of the faith; integrating life before and life after death
• they have an equally holistic understanding of the natural and supernatural, with an emphasis on miracles and exorcism.
• Given their minority status in many countries, such churches need to have strong convictions to offset the high costs of faith.  This goes a long way to explain the differences between north and south over such issues as sexuality.
• These churches will for the same reason tend to take scripture at face value and not approach Biblical interpretation with the scepticism often found in the north.
• Northern churches tend to look inward to unity, in contrast to southern churches where the emphasis is spreading outwards

This is not to deny there are problems facing the southern churches.  Ma expresses concern about the possibility of Christianity being reduced to the old religion, where deities are used for human benefit.

This primary divide was explored in more depth by the second plenary speaker at the GCF meeting. 

The Global Christian Forum

After a month''s break, to work on my other blog , I thought it might be helpful to write a few posts about the Global Christian Forum (GCF). 

The first meeting of the GCF took place in November 2007 at Limuru  in Nairobi, Kenya, after nine years of preparation.  So, why discuss it now?  Recently, an account of this first meeting has been published, Revisioning Christian Unity  : The Global Christian Forum by Huibert van Beek (editor). 

The book reads as if someone has emptied the contents of their filing cabinet into it but amongst the reproduced reports and surveys, there is a wealth of useful information about what amounts to a new approach to ecumenism.

I will examine its distinctive features in more detail in future posts but here I will fill in a few broad brush strokes.  Limuru was the most comprehensive gathering of churches and Christian traditions there has ever been.  It is likely to have a similar significance for global ecumenism as the Edinburgh 1910 Missionary Conference had, as the start of the modern ecumenical movement.

The meeting brought together representatives from most Christian traditions, including: the member churches of the World Council of Churches  (primarily mainstream Protestant and Orthodox) who together form about 25% of the world's Christians, the Roman Catholic Church with one billion members representing half the world's Christians, and the other 25% comprising Pentecostal and evangelical churches.

It is this last group, the fastest growing group of Christians in today's world, who have not been represented at ecumenical gatherings in the past.  There are a variety of reasons for this.  One is their suspicion of the motives of the member churches of the World Council of Churches.  Their agenda is mission and they have not seen unity as a major priority.  Also, they tend to be congregationalist in ecclesiology and so there are issues about the extent to which any individual represents these churches.

One priority of the Forum was to ensure the regions (usually continents) were represented at Limuru.  The Limuru meeting was preceded by a series of regional meetings, over several years, and this helped to ensure all regions were represented.  The choice of Limuru as the venue, was intended to ensure African churches were well represented.

So, the list of churches not represented was very small.  Chinese Christians were not permitted to attend by the Chinese authorities and churches in the Middle East seem to have been under-represented.  This latter seems to have been an oversight and in future there will be regional meetings in the Middle East.  The only tradition that chose not to attend seems to have been some parts of the Assemblies of God.

Overall, the aim of representing all traditions seems to have been achieved.  This is a significant development in global ecumenism in itself.  In later posts I will explore some other innovations that have accompanied the GCF.