Ecumenism: Lost Cause Or Lost Chord?

Editorial FAITH Magazine November-December 2000

The aggrieved reaction to Dominus Jesus, (the recent document from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which re-emphasized the uniqueness of Christ and his Church), of many involved in ecumenical relationships has an air of tragic inevitability to it. It may have been a long time coming, but given the course on which modern ecumenism set out in this country some thirty and more years ago, the day had to come when Rome would have to reassert the routine Catholic position about the nature of the Church. Then, sadly, our non-Catholic brethren would have some justification for feeling that they have been led up the garden path, or perhaps one could say: led down the ecumenical aisle only to be jilted at the Roman altar!

They can fairly argue that they have been given the impression in recent years that there had been a sea-change among the RC’s about what ‘the Church’ means, and that there might now be re-union among the main Christian denominations, not without a change of heart indeed, but without a fundamental change of mind on anybody’s part. This is, after all, the basis on which ecumenism is pursued among the various offspring of the Reformation.

The much vaunted ‘Vatican II’, it is often asserted, shifted the whole self image of the Roman Church. Have there not been Catholic theologians queuing up in recent years to inform us that the old claims to unicity are no longer tenable? Surely everyone now accepts that no one branch of Christendom has exclusive title to truth and grace and apostolic legitimacy? And more importantly, is it not now recognised by everyone, including any really intelligent and thinking Catholics, that doctrinal statements are always provisional and historically relative, so there should be no expectation nor ultimately any need for full agreement on doctrine in order to achieve inter-communion among Christians – especially between Catholics and Anglicans.

It is true, of course, that the more recent Agreed Statements from ARCIC have run into difficulty with regard to outstanding issues like the precise nature of ecclesial authority, and then there is the thorny problem of women priests … but does this not merely confirm the suspicion that arguments over ‘truth’ just end in tears and further divisions? On all essentials of Christianity are we not really at one already? This is certainly what the average RC in the pew seems to hold now anyway.

And since top level Catholic ecumenicists keep repeating like a mantra that ‘ecumenism is a road with no exits’ what can this mean but that we should leave aside the fruitless pursuit of doctrinal agreement and build corporate reunion from the ‘bottom up’ – local initiatives of ever closer devotional and social merger which will eventually bring about sacramental communion, at first unofficially then finally sanctioned at ‘official’ level by the ever conservative Church authorities? After all is this not the way Catholics bring about progressive change of all kinds in their Church these days?

Then wicked old Rome suddenly steps in and blows everybody out of the water by saying that nothing has really changed, the traditional Catholic position has remained in tact all along, and when they spoke of ‘sister’ churches they were just being polite. It does look rather two faced. At least this is how it must appear to the non-Catholic participants in ecumenical dialogue. Well may our Catholic ecumenical leaders sound embarrassed, awkward and apologetic in trying to explain how we got into this fix.

But it need not have been like this. All through the wilderness years of the theological and pastoral chaos of the last several decades FAITH has been critical of the line taken by official ecumenism in Britain, sometimes to the intense annoyance of those charged with ecumenical responsibility. But this was never done out of mere mischief making or reactionary spikiness. It was precisely out of concern for ecumenical honesty, to avoid just such a set back as this for ecumenical trust and good will, and for the eventual re-union of all sincere Christians on a sound and lasting basis.

There are doubtless those who will greet the current impasse with unholy and somewhat self-righteous smugness, thinking that corporate ecumenism was always a dead letter from the start. That is not our position. On the other hand there may be those who feel with genuine sadness and confusion that ecumenism is now effectively a lost cause, at least for the foreseeable future. That is not our position either.

Modern ecumenism got off on the wrong theological footing and the crisis now provoked by Dominus Jesus is the inevitable consequence of this. At worst there have been those engaged in ecumenism who do not accept the teaching of the Church anyway and have seen it as an opportunity to promote a theological agenda and ‘a model of being church’ which was at odds with Rome from the start.

At best our ecumenical representatives have naively assumed that there was already agreement across the major denominations on the fundamentals of Christianity – about God, creation, revelation, the Incarnation, redemption, even about the sacramental constitution of the Church - and therefore that all we needed to do was to clarify and negotiate over the remaining contentious issues of the Reformation – the eucharist, ministry, authority.

It is true that these discussions inevitably touch on the wider questions of fundamental theology, but there has been no systematic pondering together of the whole Christian Mystery. It would seem a much better basis for ecumenism to assume nothing, to go back to the sources and examine together the basic questions at the heart of the Faith, presenting side by side the very foundations of our mutual visions of Christianity.

We could then see the ecumenical sticking points more clearly in the light of this overall vision. To do this would be truly to prescind from denominational prejudice and from language loaded with historic controversies, and then to draw out honestly what we ought to expect the Church of Jesus Christ – Son of God and Son of Man - to be like.

From our Catholic standpoint we could outline the whole Covenant of Life and "life to the full" which is given from God to men in the Person of Jesus Christ. We could show how this covenant is written into the very meaning of creation and how it reaches its culmination in the Word made flesh.

We would go on to see the Church flowing directly from the Incarnation, how her infallibility and her sacramental power must be written into her constitution as the Body of Christ, because she is the organic instrument of communion between God and men which has been restored in the crucified and risen Lord. It would also be possible go on to show the rightful distinction and complimentarity of the sexes in the plan of God and in the sacred order of creation and redemption.

The more specific ecumenical points of contention might then be resolved without any sense of ‘you-come-in-ism’, but without compromise either – only a shared sense of wonder at the grandeur and perfection of the wisdom of God in Christ. For such a course to be ecumenically fruitful would, of course, take time and patience and much prayer. The latter has not been lacking in recent times, and there has been progress of sorts in good human relations and mutual respect, but much time and effort has been wasted, and maybe some of the good will has now evaporated too.

If ecumenism is indeed ‘a road without exits’ then we must ask ourselves what this means. Clearly it means that we cannot give up on the ideal and effort of bringing about reconciliation among Christians, but does this mean settling for corporate reunion without honest unity in the truth? To the liberal theological way of thinking, unity of heart and definitive truth claims are incompatible in principle. So the traditional Catholic claims about the Church are seen as inherently divisive, oppressive and anti-ecumenical in themselves. In such a mindset ecumenical reconciliation can only mean either compromise on key doctrines or better still leaving behind doctrinally defined Christianity altogether. The pursuit of ecumenism has too often and for too long been built on this presumption, whether consciously or unconsciously. Hence the resentment and dismay over Dominus Jesus.

Actually the warning signs have long been there, but it is obvious now that this whole policy has foundered on the rock that is Peter. Does this mean that Rome is trying to kill off ecumenism and ‘turn the clock back’ to the bad old days of exclusivity and narrow mindedness? Not at all. In fact it is the Holy Father himself who constantly insists on the ecumenical imperative. But he does so at the very same time as insisting on certainty in truth and clarity of meaning in matters of doctrine. This must be a matter of some perplexity as well as frustration to theological liberals.

But the reality is that the liberal ecumenical dream is flawed and failing on many levels already anyway. It only succeeds in bringing together a dwindling band of middle aged , middle class modernists - a reunion of the liberals - just in time to find that the vast majority of God’s people, especially the young, have lapsed away from the Church altogether! John Henry Newman saw that it was theological liberalism that was eating away at the pastoral roots of Anglicanism over a century ago. It is that same disease, often inflamed by the promotion of false ecumenism, which has now blighted the Catholic heartlands.

So we should not be tempted to back pedal on the central claims of Catholicism, even, and perhaps especially in the name of ecumenism. This is to rob God’s people of their birthright and ultimately it fails to attract those who are genuinely searching for God with a sincere heart, whatever their starting point. As Catholics we can and we must make the claim to integrity, unity and fullness in the truth which belongs properly to Christ’s Church. But we can do this without the tribal triumphalism of the recent past.

Rightly understood and humbly explained it is not oppressive or narrow minded, neither need it imply any slight or insult to others who live by the Christian name. Did not Jesus say to the Samaritan woman at the well that ‘salvation comes from the Jews’ - a statement which in its day was a very forthright ecumenical truth claim – but this did not prevent him from treating her with dignity and respect and engaging her in a fascinating and fruitful dialogue, quite against the fashion and prejudice of the times.

Of course we do acknowledge that individual non-Catholics are truly joined to Christ and to his Church by baptism. Although Vatican II also makes it clear that the communion so established is imperfect and incomplete and that, as corporate entities, the non-Catholic churches (as they are called in common parlance) lack the fullest title of ‘churches’ in the proper theological sense since they lack the Eucharist and the apostolic order of Priesthood. (The Eastern Orthodox are therefore in a different position). We can be just as clear that this does not prevent us at the same time from honouring and even being enriched by those elements of grace and truth which are genuinely found in them and in the lives of their members.

At the end of the day it is really a humble admission to say that we, as Catholics, (often by a providence of birth and upbringing), have been entrusted with the fullness of Christianity. For we must also admit that it is not through any virtue of ours. After all Jesus was also clear that the Pharisees sat rightfully in the chair of Moses, exercising authority from God, but this did not prevent him from excoriating them for their hypocris

To start ecumenism all over again on a new footing will take real courage and humility, real repentance and of course realism. We will have to accept at the outset that we won’t win everyone, but there could well eventually be a massive realignment across all denominations, a great and joyful gathering back to the centre of all who genuinely believe in a transcendent God, objective revelation and the truly divine Jesus Christ. As for the rest, well, we will have to re-evangelise them later!

The vision of all God’s works centred on Christ, which we contend can form the basis of a truly exciting and fruitful new ecumenism, also urgently needs opening up for our own people, in order to re-catechise them and shore up their crumbling faith. And it is this same vision which will eventually be used to re-evangelise the new pagans and anti-Christian humanists of our times. This way of thinking is very much in line with the actual documents of the Second Vatican Council in which the call to ecumenism was presented as part and parcel of the rallying call to renewal and mission on all levels, which was the overall message of the Council.

In ecumenism as in other areas this is not the time for either despair or recriminations. It is a time for humble reassessment, for going back and starting again, and for faith in God, that his Truth can eventually unite all people of good will – not by compromise and watering down , but by deeper insight, fuller development and courageous proclamation, coupled as always with genuine inner conversion of both mind and heart.