Zenit News -- Cardinal Kasper Proposes a Synod With Orthodox
The Vatican continues to reach out to the Eastern Church as well as Protestants in this latest effort to unite against secularism. Read the article from Orthodoxy Today here.
8 Comments:
I am excited about this news. Unity in the Church of Jesus Christ is of God. May the Holy Spirit continue to help His people unite as one body of Christ.
Ron,
In my vast reading of the left behind series and the great teachings of Darby, Scolfield, and Hagee it is quite disturbing that you would so readily endorse this movement of ecumenicalism. Is it really of God? What is the test? Or is it one more great ploy by the enemy? Just food for thought.
Anonymous,
Ron is on vacation.
I'm not sure if you're serious about your authoritative sources such as Darby, Scofield, Hagee, Jenkins, and Lahaye. However, I can certainly understand your reservations with the word "ecumenism." This term carries with it a number of connotations and I was wondering when/if anyone would ever say anything about it. If your understanding of the idea is simply the NCC (National Council of Churches) then I would say you are being more specific than we. Sadly, much of what is termed "ecumenical" these days is really a guise for overt liberalism. Any supposed "unity" that sacrifices truth and authority and primacy of God is really not unity at all. But any effort that can reestablish communion, mend fragmentation, and restore unity throughout Christendom without sacrificing a true orthodoxy is welcomed by us. And I suppose that is the true thrust behind our usage of and interest in the general concept of ecumenism - the idea that we can have open fellowship and communion with true Christians in all contexts; not just dialogue with each other, but fellowship in the reconciliatory divine-human person of Jesus Christ. Part of this involves debate in theology, such as our disagreement with the way Catholics interpret Matthew 16:13-20; part of this involves finding and celebrating the benefits of having a Pope like Benedict XIV; but all of this involves finding communion in the God-man and corporately entering into the transforming communion with God the Father, through God the Son, in God the Holy Spirit.
One can be ecumenical and still be conservative, believe in the inspiration and absolute authority of Scripture, and remain uncompromising with truth.
It just requires work.
Do you find it ironic that we are applauding this "dialogue" between the western and eastern churches as unity building. Yet, we protestants are simply onlookers - we truly are not in the conversation. We can't even get along amongst ourselves. We can't even get along generationally with in our local churches. Or we sit on our high horse and critique all of our little sects. For an example, we need to look no further than the post concerning church growth/cotemporary worship.
In our Wesleyan/Armenian/Holiness denominations in which share the same "heritage," we can't even agree on such issues as polity, baptism, or even our cardinal doctrine sanctification. And if someone disagrees with us, we start a new group. Is the we start a new "fellowship" a biblical precedent or an American value/ideal that we worked into the fabric/DNA of the American church?
So, how do we enter the conversation? Not just that, but Sean you said it would take "work." What is that work? How do we protestants learn to get along? You threw around the word "communion" quite abit. Communion implies sharing - sharing life. How do we move beyond merely conversation, and begin sharing life?
Just some ramblings. By the way, not really a big fan Scofield and others - I just thought to be a true American Evangelical we'd have to through out some of those names for fun. BEWARE Of THE ONE WORLD CHURCH.
Anonymous,
Assuming that Protestants are simply "onlookers" is not at all an accurate assessment of the situation. True, the only attention that the mainstream media has given to any forms of dialogue lately has been between Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. But they are not the only ones involved. There are many evangelicals who are engaging Christians of other traditions, and those of other traditions are engaging evangelicals. You mentioned the "Wesleyan/Armenian/Holiness" heritage in another point. Just one example of this relatively small group of Christians in the U.S. becoming involved is Wesley Biblical Seminary in Jackson, MS. The seminary has gone to great lengths to participate in "dialogue" with the Eastern Orthodox.
Recently I e-mailed questions on WBS' involvement to Dr. Bill Ury. I asked Dr. Ury, "What efforts is Wesley Biblical Seminary making to participate?" He replied, "Both I and Steve Blakemore have been in conferences with Orthodox folks.
Ron Smith and Ray Easley have traveled to Istanbul to ask the Patriarch to come and speak here in the seminary. He was very favorable and we yet hope to have him. We make mention of the Eastern church throughout our teaching so that our students are at least informed about the
strengths and weaknesses of this part of the Lord's Church."
Here is an example of people within our own tradition who are making efforts. I agree that from within our local church buildings there doesn't appear to be much involvement. It is a problem to which I am becoming all too aware. I personally have made efforts to establish personal contacts with people from other traditions. Ron Adkins and I have recently attended a Greek Orthodox church in Columbus and have been in e-mail correspondence with the head priest there. Ron and I have also come into contact (by seemingly chance) with another fellow who recently converted to Orthodoxy and we have established a relationship with him. So you see, this "dialogue" is not just about dialogue. It is about developing relationships with people - meaningful relationships based on what unites us, the divine-human Person of Jesus Christ. That is part of what takes "work." It's the only way that I know how to move beyond mere "dialogue."
You mentioned the disunity that exists among Protestants, and even within the holiness tradition. You said, "we can't even agree on such issues as polity, baptism, or even our cardinal doctrine sanctification." We have no fellowship because we have only focused on our differences. Will there ever be a day when all Christians share perfect communion? Yes, but not in this life. But we can all make efforts to strive in that direction. That is a good thing.
You mentioned the posts concerning the church growth/contemporary worship as an example of "We can't even get along amongst ourselves. We can't even get along generationally with in our local churches. Or we sit on our high horse and critique all of our little sects." I find it somewhat saddening that this is how you interpreted our discussions. That discussion is an example of the exact opposite of what you suggested. There was no one not getting along, or sitting on ones high horse. That topic was a perfect example of how people can disagree on issues, and every person that participated in that discussion can leave the computer and worship together in the exact same place at the exact same time as Christian brothers and friends. Tristan and I may disagree on issues, but we can always find common ground in Jesus Christ. He is one of my best friends, and yet we debate all the time. I only wish that more Christians were able and willing to live this way with people with whom they disagree.
I think you're own logic has left you in a bind. You started off by criticising our interest in dialogue with other types of Christians. You said, "it is quite disturbing that you would so readily endorse this movement of ecumenicalism." But then you went on to list all the evils of our fragmented Christianity as a problem. So which is it? If fragmentation is such a problem, then why the criticism of those who are trying to end it? It seems to me that if you are identifying the present disunity within Christ's church as a real problem then your attitude towards the efforts to fix the problem should be more positive. I know the efforts aren't perfect. I know there is more to be done. But thank God that at least someone is trying.
P.S. Read and rely less on Hagee and the Left Behind series and get acquainted with books and articles that are better suited for this discussion.
Sean,
Ouch. Let me lick my wounds. I suppose that your sarcasm was much deserved. Anyway, I am sorry if my comments were perceived as critical. I did not mean to do such. I suppose I should apologize for generalizing all Protestants as “onlookers.” I was aware of institutions such as Wesley who are in serious Dialogue with the East and I applaud individuals such as Ury and Blakemore for their work. In addition, I suppose I will forever be labeled as a non intellectual due to my poor attempt at humor referencing Lahaye and Jenkins, and thus, I may deserve that label.
In actuality, I have a great affinity for both the Eastern and Roman traditions. I believe that reversing the schism of 1054 would greatly benefit the whole church. Personally, I believe the division is the greatest weapon of enemy. It is the warring amongst churches and denominations over secondary doctrines that prevent us from fulfilling His great commission.
However, in your critique of my post you never really addressed my question. How do we move from dialogue to action? How do we experience this “communion” you expressed in your original reply? Where the Body of Christ is so unified that we truly “participate in the divine nature” of the Godhead? A place where we are found to be in Him “whom we live, move and have our very being” corporately.
Being the intellectual that you are, I’m sure you are aware that every great movement in Christendom even though it may have had intellectual element to it, - it was largely lay led. We can examine Methodism, the Great Awakenings, or even the growth of the early church – there was an amazing comradely between the laity and clergy/intellectuals. So, how do we get our typical, grassroots, American Evangelical to actively enter into this discussion with their American Idealistic predispositions toward individualism, and nonconformity which is the American way? Especially, to top it all off, for the typical evangelical or even mainline protestant Christian their champion preachers are Hagee and Olsteen. Plus, they are not reading Torrance, Kinlaw or Zizioulis, but bestsellers Purpose Driven Life and the Left Behind Series. So, they have privatized their Gospel and are wary of Rome, because the next pontiff just may be the Anit-Christ.
The only reason I posted that earlier comment was to get clarification on what was the “work?” How are we going to mend this fence? How do we move the conversation from the Seminary to the local church?
P.S. I can't wait to Ron gets back. He is less intimidating. In the future, I will try harder to read better books.
Anonymous,
First off, I want to clarify that none of what I said was intended to be sarcastic. My last comment in my post-script was an honest suggestion as you appeared to be relying solely on those authors/books. Your original humor was too sophisticated for me and I assumed you were serious. My apologies. No sarcasm intended, I was completely serious. Fortunately in reality you are aware of other valuable sources and have a certain level of sensitivity towards Christians of other traditions. This knowledge and sensitivity were not evident to me based on your original two posts. But I suppose that is an inherent pitfall of text messages: We make assumptions based solely on words without the added benefit of facial expressions, tone of voice, etc. Hence I missed your humor, and you took me as sarcastic.
Water under the bridge…
Actually I tried to at least begin to answer your question in my last comment. I told you how I personally have tried to move beyond the realm of academics and into the realm of the local and personal. How else can anyone mend broken relationships than to meet with people, talk with them, show interest to enter into their life and allow them to enter into yours? In my last comment I said, “I agree that from within our local church buildings there doesn't appear to be much involvement. It is a problem to which I am becoming all too aware.” I wish that there was more interest on the local level. Instead I find ignorance and/or indifference – not to use these terms in a mean way, but people don’t know any better or they don’t care. The solution? Educate. Lead by example. Don’t wait until others reach out to us, but take the initiative to reach out to them first. Other than these things I suppose I don’t have an answer.
How deep and to what extent will we ever have communion with Roman Catholics, Orthodox, other Protestants, etc.? I cannot say. In my last comment I did say, “Will there ever be a day when all Christians share perfect communion? Yes, but not in this life. But we can all make efforts to strive in that direction. That is a good thing.” Will we ever be able to have an “ecumenical” Eucharist where all branches of orthodox Christianity can unite? I have no idea. But can we work towards that goal? Yes, I really hope so.
Concerning how to interest the “typical, grassroots, American Evangelical” in dialogue, that is a good question. My only solution at this point is education and leading by example. I know in my own family there has been a very real hostility towards Roman Catholicism and an equally real ignorance of Eastern Orthodoxy – two traits that probably characterize the majority of American Evangelicals. I too was in this same state of mind not that long ago. But through the work and example of people like Dr. Ury and Steve Blakemore I have learned and becomed sensitive to these matters. Already right there I see a transition from the academic world to the lay world. I, in turn, have tried to open the eyes of those in my immediate context at home, at church, etc. My efforts to educate and lead by experience have actually been relatively fruitful. There is still a long way to go. I try to encourage people to investigate and change their attitudes. Read some of the other posts under the blog quick link Ecumenism. This blog, in fact, this comment, is yet another effort to educate and lead by example. Hopefully this will serve as yet another tool to try to make a difference.
I don’t have many more answers than these. If they are not enough, I would suggest contacting someone who may have more experience in this arena than I. Or, like I suggested earlier, read up some more from those who are actively engaged in the dialogue. I know that I have tons of reading to do myself and have a long way to go in answering your questions.
But thank-you for asking them. Thank-you for participating in this discussion. I stand by all I have said and pray that none of it comes across as intended to be offensive or divisive. In fact, I desire only the opposite. And I too wish Ron would get back, his more subtle ways can balance out my more….. vivacious ways.
It appears that I have been the object of a well-constructed gag. Our good friend "Anonymous" actually turned out to be a friend who was role-playing to get beneath my skin. However, despite his iniquitous motives I think a decent and relevant discussion emerged. Therefore I will leave the discussion as is and we can all pretend it was real and continue on with the dialogue.
Thanks, "Anonymous," you made my afternoon quite eventful.... Just remember, payback is not fun >:)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
Back to Blog