Speeches
The Ecumenical Agenda at the Beginning of the 21th Century - Nikaean Club, Invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury Lambeth Palace, London
Bishop Dr. Wolfgang Huber, Chairperson of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD)
September 10, 2009
I.
When Pope Paul VI visited the World Council of Churches in Geneva in 1969, he met the then WCC General Secretary, Eugene Blake, whom his colleagues called "Gene". His Holiness reportedly began his address with the dignified sentence. "We are Peter"; the general secretary is said to have replied: "Call me Gene".
I am very grateful to have been invited to Lambeth Palace, without having to deal with such subtleties of protocol. The fact that our friendship and personal cooperation is so fruitful and ongoing, brother Rowan Williams, is based on the foundations that have been laid for us and on which we are glad to build. Since 1988 we have been bound by the Joint Declaration of Meissen with its unfolding of our common faith and its consequences for the communion of our Churches. Therein we commit ourselves to give each other a share in our respective church life, to grant one another Eucharistic hospitality and to strive for visible unity.
Our regular theological conversations are leading us to increasing mutual understanding. Central theological topics are taken up again and again. Examples are ecclesiastical office and training for this office (in which we are both particularly interested, for obvious reasons), the relationship between office and Eucharist or - as last November in Düsseldorf-Kaiserswerth - the ecumenical understanding of authority and the use of scripture. This month an British-German symposium on church history is to take place in Berlin entitled "Sister Reformations", concluding with a joint service in Berlin Cathedral. These examples of our common work on fundamental theological questions illustrate how robust the Meissen process has become.
However, our relations have long since gone beyond the stage of theological discussion. In the spirit of Meissen, many lively encounters are developing that are bringing together the parishes and regional churches from Germany and the dioceses of the Church of England. I am, of course, particularly attached to the twinning between London and Berlin, which I had the privilege of setting up with Bishop Richard Chartres. A prime example is, however, the twinning between the Lutheran Church in Brunswick and the Diocese of Blackburn with its many visits, projects with confirmation candidates and numerous joint services. With respect to these partnerships, we are very grateful that the Brunswick Bishop Friedrich Weber is willing to take on the chair of the Meissen Commission for the German side. I am sure that, in cooperation with Bishop Nick Baines, he will take the Meissen Process significantly forward on the path that lies ahead, towards visible unity.
Another field for our fruitful ecumenical fellowship is the rewarding fraternal cooperation between Church of England parishes and the German-speaking parishes in Britain. We are grateful for this daily relationship of trust, which enables these German-speaking congregations, so closely linked to us, to carry out their mission of proclamation in an ecumenical spirit.
It is still of great significance that these ecumenical bonds between us contribute to the process of reconciliation between our two peoples that has led us out of the guilt and burden of our history of hostility to a new community of peace and common responsibility. A few days ago we recalled the beginning of the Second World War, which began with Hitler's attack on Poland. Mourning and shame in view of the countless number of victims mingles with wonder and gratitude for the readiness to seek reconciliation that emerged from the rubble of that war. For the next few weeks we will be remembering the gift of the peaceful revolution [in East Germany and eastern Europe] twenty years ago, recalling that the European peace project, which arose in response to the destructive power of war, can now cover the whole European continent. That offers great opportunities to European churches but also involves major commitments in their common responsibility for peace-making.
Looking back on the century of world wars, we must also, however, remember the peace initiatives with which far-sighted Christians in our two countries strove to anticipate the dynamic of violence and war. In 1908, six years before the beginning of the First World War, the "The Associated Councils of Churches of the British and German Empires for fostering Friendly Relations between the Two Peoples" was founded. This was an important contribution in developing the work of peace-building and friendship between the churches, a significant outcome being the friendship between Bishop George Bell and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Both of them ecumenists, they made their own contribution to the founding of ecumenical organisations after World War II, which gave a hitherto unprecedented institutional shape to our ecumenical commitment.
Our two churches are bound by a shared ecumenical experience and, at the same time, by a shared ecumenical responsibility. We look back with gratitude to the new ecumenical initiatives that arose from the upheavals of the age of world wars. The year 1925, in which the Nikaean Club arose, also featured the First World Conference on Life and Work in Stockholm, which was of particular ecumenical importance. In my files I have the documents my mother brought back from this event, which, as a young student, she had attended with her father, who was a delegate in Stockholm in 1925. This impetus led - much later - to the founding of the World Council of Churches. We celebrated its 60th anniversary last year; it was followed this year by the 50th anniversary of the Conference of European Churches.
II.
The gratitude for these multilateral ecumenical organisations is combined with considerable concern about their future. It is all the more encouraging to note that a new process of reflection has been launched about their role and how to make them more effective.
In our preparations for the assembly of the Conference of European Churches (CEC) - and more particularly, at the debates and decisions of the assembly itself, which took place in July this year in Lyon - we experienced mutual support and advice, and a shared success. The contributions of Churches Together in Britain and Ireland, and particularly the Church of England, made a substantial contribution to the adoption in amended form of the EKD's original motion to fundamentally reform CEC - by a majority of 90% of the delegates. In the next few years we will have the job of putting this reform of CEC into practice. Let us collaborate to ensure that, in its work, CEC can concentrate on the particular opportunities available to multilateral organisations:
- promoting fellowship among one another and discovering and renewing elements of common spirituality,
- conducting the debate about fundamental ethical orientations in such a way that it is heard in the cultures and societies of an ever more united Europe and contributes to their orientation,
- gathering up the positions of the churches on important questions of European development so that they can be raised with greater effectiveness vis à vis the European institutions and in the general public of Europe.
We are not guided here by an ideal of uniformity in ecumenism. Visible unity does not presuppose the disappearance of differences. Our ability to respect our difference and deal with disparities in a brotherly and sisterly way will be a particularly important contribution to the future of our continent and our world. After all, that shows what Christian churches, indeed religions in general, can contribute to the coherence of a society characterised by pluralism.
In the same way, in the WCC we have great combined potential for helping to gain support for its work from the member churches, and enabling it to deal with its agenda better and more effectively. During the meeting of the WCC's Central Committee a few days ago it became clear that the initiative to reform CEC will also have repercussions on the WCC.
The prospects for the WCC were described in outline at its last assembly in Porto Alegre. The task of sharpening this, concentrating on the main points and, above all, of putting it into practice, has not been really tackled, however. I hope that the election of Olav Fykse Tveit as the new general secretary and the ongoing process of reconfiguring the WCC will give it new impetus. A working group on governance, accountability and staff policy has made proposals for drawing on the competences and resources of the member churches and thus raising the public profile and perception of the WCC.
III.
The courageous term "Sister Reformations" has already clearly expressed the categories used today to consider the relationship between our respective churches dating from the Reformation. The closeness we have achieved can encourage us to regard the relationship with other confessional families from a common perspective.
The churches of the Reformation are - like the Roman Catholic Church - churches of the West. Regardless of their theological differences they have much in common culturally. At present it is hard to recognise prospects of deepening their fellowship. The issues that can be explored by means of consensus documents seem to have been largely cleared up. We can together declare that the mutual condemnations of the Reformation century no longer apply to the present-day ecumenical partners. The differences that remain are all the more serious. They relate - at least from our viewpoint - to the questions of how to understand ecclesiastical office. The lack of agreement in the understanding of office significantly hampers the mutual perception of the other as a church and this fact is, without any doubt, one of the obstacles for ecumenism in the first decade of this century. It is my hope that the second decade will witness the emergence of a different approach to this question. I am convinced that there can only be ecumenical progress when the ecumenical partners mutually respect each other's way of being church.
The issue of the position and contribution of the Orthodox churches has been a special challenge in international ecumenism in the last few years. I am particularly hopeful due to the fact that outstanding Orthodox Church leaders, including, in particular, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Patriarch Bartholomew, and the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, are convinced of the indispensable importance of the ecumenical challenge. We sensed effects of this conviction when in the efforts to reform the Conference of European Churches constructive contributions were made by Orthodox Churches and, most particularly, by the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Yet the picture of worldwide Christianity has dramatically changed within only a few decades. The number of members of charismatic movements and Pentecostal churches is rapidly growing on our planet. With about 500 million Christians, these movements and churches are almost as large as the WCC, whose member churches add up to 560 million Christians. These developments are developing a considerable dynamism not only in Latin America, Africa and Asia. Their influence cannot be overlooked in Europe, either. We need a dialogue on the resultant theological questions. Only thus can we prepare ourselves and our congregations and provide theological direction. The WCC also needs such contributions for its internal debate and to establish relations with these movements at the appropriate theological level.
A core question occurs to me right away: what is the importance in our churches of the Third Article of our creed? How do we have to penetrate and unfold it theologically? What effect emerges for the worship and spiritual life in our congregations and parishes? Those are questions that can also be handled with the possibilities offered us in the Meissen Process. They are, moreover, questions that quite match the spirit of this evening, when we confront the tradition of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicea, and thus call to mind the Spirit "proceeding from" the Father and the Son (homousia) in the Holy Trinity.
Inter-faith dialogue confronts the ecumenical community with comparable challenges. On the basis of our experience with this dialogue in Britain and Germany - in particular with Muslims - we have a considerable lot to contribute. We can also link up with the common experiences we gained in the trilateral dialogue with the Institute for Inter-religious Dialogue in Teheran and its director Mullah Seyed Muhammad Ali Abtahi. We follow developments in Iran with concern and are doing our utmost to end his detention and to stand up for human rights, particularly for freedom of religion, in that country.
There are other opportunities for such dialogues. For example, the Loccum Protestant Academy has for years very successfully organised a dialogue with CEOSS, the diaconal organisation of the Coptic Church in Egypt, in which Christians and Muslims from Egypt exchange views on the relationship between religion and the state, and on the democratic organisation of societies. The question now is whether this dialogue approach can be expanded to involve other countries and experiences in Europe and the Middle East.
IV.
What image of ecumenism do we look to in such reflections? Where is our ecumenical vision? Many people describe this vision in terms of a unity that lies before us, which we have to strive for and in view of which the division of Christianity is a "scandal". In this context they cite the plea in Jesus' high-priestly prayer, "that they all may be one" (John 17:21). Sometimes we forget that this is a prayer, so strongly do we believe that visible unity is the result of our human striving. Personally I would like to ask questions not just about the goal but equally about the grounds of our ecumenical ties. The hymn to unity in the Letter to the Ephesians sheds light on this issue: "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as you are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in all" (Ephesians 4:4-6).
This biblical article of faith testifies to an ecumenical reality that is given with our faith itself. The question to us then is whether we live up to this given reality or whether we fall short. Do we express this basis in the form of our church fellowship, are we recognisably guided by God's one Spirit, and are witnesses in our age to one hope? One Lord urges us to be one body. One faith commits us to being guided by one Spirit. One baptism makes us witnesses to one hope.
The extolling of unity in Ephesians culminates in the praise of the One God and Father. The church is one in confessing Christ, in one faith and one baptism. In its witness, service and hope the church provides the basis for praising the One God who fills the universe and holds it all together.
This Bible passage outlines an ecumenism of praise and thanksgiving to God. It does not begin with what is demanded of us ecumenically. Rather it reminds us of what has been ecumenically entrusted to us. It first tells us what we are ecumenically before it demands what we are to become ecumenically. We here encounter a splendid, impressive ecumenism of the indicative [a grammatical term for that which is, not that which could be]. Remembering what has been entrusted to us all, we hear the call to join together in the Body of Christ.
The choice of this image reminds us that belonging together ecumenically does not mean uniformity. The letter to the Ephesians does not define this unity as a standardised definition of office and its relationship to the community, nor does it expect worship to take the same form at every place. The ecumenical litmus test is whether different persons and groups are guided by the same spirit and testify to the same hope. They can only do so if they build on a firm foundation: if they are united in one baptism, share one faith and witness to one Lord, the crucified and risen Christ.
This is not about ecumenism from above, in which the oneness of God is projected onto the uniformity of the church. Rather, it is about ecumenism from below, which makes room for diversity but also trusts in the power of unity. From gratitude for the unity given in confessing Christ, we seek ways of bringing together our various gifts in order to witness to this unity together.
That is a dynamic understanding of unity, for which we have even had political equivalences in recent history. Twenty years after the peaceful change of system in Europe we gratefully confess that we were given a unity in diversity which we had for a long time hardly dared to hope for. Giving it shape is the great political challenge confronting us in Europe, a process to which we as churches want to contribute.
In such an ecumenical vision, diversity and unity, breadth and concentration can be connected with one another in fresh ways. The breadth of topics and networks need not be lost if we recall our common witness. Our different traditions need not fade, or lose their own character, if we together reveal the foundation on which we stand: one Lord, one faith, one baptism.
The unity of the churches does not need to be re-invented. This unity is the ground on which we stand. In my view, this change of perspective is the decisive step towards the ecumenical reorientation that we need today. It will help here if we see our diversity not as a threat to unity, but as an expression of it.
Ecumenical cooperation presupposes first of all that we constantly return to the common sources of our faith, since they constantly reinvigorate and refresh our faith and thereby also our common witness.
Ecumenical cooperation is, further, shown in the fact that ecumenical partners are bonded in mutual respect for their respective churches. As much as ecumenical cooperation relies on the loyalty of the stakeholders, it also relies on this mutual respect.
Ecumenical cooperation, finally, is expressed in tackling common tasks together. Our ecumenical togetherness must therefore prove itself in the way we respond to the major crises and challenges of our age. The irresponsible errors that led to the current economic crisis, the still imminent risk of a climate catastrophe and the continuing strife in many parts of the world call us to speak out together.
Shaping a just society that recognises overcoming poverty as its central responsibility, and moving towards a sustainable economy as a response to the threatened climate change - these are issues that deeply concern us all. They also involve a particular kind of ecumenical responsibility that our churches have focused on particularly in the last few years, e.g. in their joint position papers and statements. I propose that our churches continue and deepen this cooperation.
We sense how such diverse cultural shifts challenge us to adopt clear ethical orientation. In a process of social change new questions are being asked about ethical guidelines for marriage, the family, and sexuality. The beginning of human life is discussed as energetically as its end; progress in science and medicine go hand in hand with asking how people can at the same time be respected as persons. How can we succeed in remaining true to the witness of the gospel, giving answers that are convincing and provide guidance? It will help us if, from time to time, we confer with one another on these questions.
That will help us to remain loyal to our beliefs and to offer answers to our contemporaries that help them through the day and give hope going beyond our own lives. After all, that is our real job: witnessing to faith in Christ to our world so that it chooses peace and justice - so that it chooses life.
The joy we share in theology and our common responsibility in the governance of our churches have brought us together in a friendly personal relationship. It is good to know that our cooperation over the years has been sustained by the common faith of our churches and by our confession of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom our churches belong.
May God guide us with God's Holy Spirit and bless our churches.