Ecumenism and Inter-religious dialogue: CommentsResponse to "West Engaging East" by Joseph Loya From "Eastern Christians in Australia" by Lawrence Cross in Australian eJournal of Theology 19.2 (August 2012): In a very concrete way Vatican II itself was a beneficiary of gifts from the Christian East, and not the other way around... The contribution of the Patriarchate of Antioch was amazing for its size. Patriarch Maximos was accompanied only by some sixteen bishops, as well as the four superiors general of the Melkite religious orders. But this small band, in a sea of Latin Rite hierarchs, managed to introduce such items as the use of the vernacular, eucharistic concelebration, and communion under both kinds in the Latin liturgy, the restoration of the diaconate as a permanent order, the creation of what would become the periodically held Synod of Bishops and the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, while championing new attitudes to and less offensive vocabulary in ecumenical relationships with other Christians, especially with the Orthodox Churches, and the recognition of Eastern Catholic communities for what they are, “Churches,” not “rites.”
Robert Taft outlined the source of the remarkable role of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church at the Council. (From: Robert Taft SJ, Introduction to Discourses and Memoranda of Patriarch Maximos IV and other Hierarchs of His Church at the Second Vatican Council. Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome 1992):
In his Preface to the 1967 French edition of this volume, Patriarch Maximos IV attributed it, first, to the fact that the Catholic Melkites had never lost contact with their Orthodox roots, and thus never became closed in on themselves. This allowed them to discern what is essential (i.e., Catholic) from what is contingent (i.e., Latin) in Catholicism, enabling them at Vatican II to witness to a pensée complémentaire, another, complementary way of seeing things, as a counterbalance to Latin Catholic unilateralism.
Taft believed that the Melkites, as the Orthodox presence on the floor of the Council, achieved what they did because they possessed collegiality ante factum, well before the later work of the Council had made this ecclesiology common coin and that they were successful because of the audacious yet unfailingly courteous courage of Maximos IV and his close collaborators.
Lea Hunter & Consilia Karli, 4Vatican2Rite@gmail.com Ecumenism with many “ifs” I agree that progress has been made since the Reformation Era among the Christian churches, but it is definitely NOT enough. I am asking myself nowadays the following question: Are we not simply just drinking 'kool aid' to make us feel good about our little concessions made toward the ecumenical discourse? When shall we engage the radical and difficult issues on the table that continue to divide the churches? I am currently teaching in a Lutheran University, being the only Roman Catholic theologian in the theology department and I am beginning to understand the pain and scandal of our divisions. It may surprise you all to know that, at our departmental meetings, the chair of the department, an ordained Lutheran pastor, happily gives the benediction and includes such Roman Catholic saints as Ignatius of Loyola, Francis Xavier and others who symbolize the Counter Reformation of the Roman Catholic Church. This, in my opinion, is the radical commitment needed among those involved in the ecumenical discourse. Can we include Martin Luther among the canonized saints in our Catholic list of saints? When we still believe that the other side lacks aspects of the full witness of and in Christ, the encounter will always be superficial. This is the paradox we have to engage today in our ecumenical discourse. I believe that the ecumenical communion we desire may come to be only when those of us in the pews visit each other's traditions and begin to share in the breaking of the word and bread. It will entail a form of defiance of the legalistic narratives that perpetuate division. I find it contradictory that I am welcomed to teach at a Lutheran institution and yet cannot break bread with them due to restrictions from my tradition. Reflections drawing from W. Kasper 2. Part of the crisis is due to the “ordinariness” of the ecumenical divide. For most people a divided Christian Church does not present them with a problem. To put it crassly, “What’s the big deal?” 3. We are at a stage where ethical issues have become a major factor in ecumenism. Doctrinally the Christian churches have significant agreement. But, in terms of gender and sexual ethics, and ecclesial leadership, there is division. I would simply point out, however, that there is significant division within the Catholic Church regarding gender and sexual ethics, and ecclesial leadership. 4. My final point. In ecumenism, we have to keep an eschatological point of view. There are no shortcuts. Lowest common denominator ecumenism is hollow. We have to be willing to stay in the dialogue even when it appears to offer no way forward. Early in his career Walter Kasper wrote about the importance of “preserving the connection of dialogue.” It is worth quoting him at length: Jeffrey Kirch, secgencpps@gmail.com What impact does ecumenism have? In the meantime, I put it to my fellow Catholics: What impact did the vaunted Catholic-Lutheran Agreement on Justification register in your local parish? (Absolute zero, in my experience.) Also, from my experience as a participant in the recent Parliament of the World’s Religions in Salt Lake City, warming is indeed detected within inter-religious climes. The ecumenical future of the church in Scandinavia Looking inward, our great challenge is to foster a genuine Scandinavian Catholic identity. Our churches have become thoroughly global and multicultural through migration. More than half of the Catholic population consists of immigrants. In some cases it has created a tendency to segregate into language groups living in isolation. Our challenge is to foster a common Scandinavian Catholic language and identity, which can integrate a critical openness towards the Scandinavian heritage and the rich Catholic diversity, and integrating the different groups and movements within the Church, those labeled “conservative”, “liberal”, “Charismatic”, or “Traditionalist.” Scandinavia is characterized by both high church membership (of national Lutheran churches) and extreme low church attendance and low adherence to basic Christian dogmas. Scandinavia can be characterized as post-Lutheran agnosticism. Therefore the Catholic churches should be an example of living church communities, in the every-day worship of parish life. Catholicism has retained an unconstrained way of talking about religion, engaging in prayer and religious practice – something Lutherans find inspiring. The ecumenical journey of a Protestant clergyman I cut my spiritual baby teeth on the very conservative Missouri Synod Lutheranism. A born-again experience late in high school sent me on my next spiritual journey into a fundamentalist Southern Baptist context. However, during college, in large part because of intensive Bible study, my fundamentalist world view collapsed. Literalism cannot withstand serious study of what the texts say. Anchorless and adrift, I went to a liberal Protestant seminary, which “saved” me for Christianity, and maybe more. But I found there so much disdain for conservative Protestants that I wrote a paper titled “Do Not Staple, Fold, or Mutilate the Fundamentalist.” (Those of you who remember IBM punch cards will know the metaphor.) Since then, though, Protestant fundamentalists and most evangelicals have aligned themselves with conservative, even reactionary, American culture and politics. This makes it a bit more difficult for me to . . . uh . . . reach across the aisle, if you will. In my first pastorate, a Jewish friend of mine became very active in my church, committees, communion, and all. He never abandoned his Judaism, and we never asked him to. He’d lead us in a progressive Jewish Passover Seder. We’d tease each other: I’d raise a clenched fist and cry, “Jesus saves!” And he’d respond with the raised fist, “Moses saves!” One Sunday morning, I presented him with a t-shirt that said, of course, “Moses Saves!” I doubt that he ever wore it, but he got a kick out of it. Several years ago, I attended an interfaith panel discussion. On the panel were a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Muslim, a Unitarian Universalist, and others. In the audience, I was sitting next to a Jew. While sitting there it occurred to me, I have more in common with the people in this room than with most of the people in my Christian faith. Yes, “The Kingdom of God is greater than any church.” I would merely add: “The Kingdom of God is greater than any faith tradition.” |