Ecumenism, the intra-Christian work for rapprochement, especially through dialogue, is a necessary part of the Christian faith. Christ prayed that Christians could and would be one. That unity is to be had out of love, not from force or compulsion. Ecumenism embraces that prayer by having Christians do what they can to have it realized. Sadly, it is not something Christians have understood for many centuries, indeed, for most of Christian history. For Christians quickly found themselves becoming divided against each other, fighting against each other for all kinds of reasons, some theological (and therefore, dogmatic), but some, indeed far more than they probably would like to admit, from social and political reasons. As a result, Christians have ended up fighting against each other, indeed, warring against each other, causing bloodshed in the name of Christ. They lost sight of what Christ wanted from them: Christians were meant to be the salt of the earth, to be peacemakers showing Christ’s love and grace with others. Instead of promoting peace, working to bring Christ’s salvific grace to the world, bringing together that which sin divided, they became focused on themselves, on their own particular divisions, thinking that their own particular take was not only superior to others, but due to that superiority, could and should force others to conform to their own ways. In the end, this created nationalistic divisions in Europe, divisions which served as the foundation for wars in Europe, wars which culminated in the two World Wars of the 20th century. Once Christian leaders saw how disastrous their division and hostility to each other has been, not only to Christianity, but to the world as a whole, they came to understand the need for ecumenical dialogue and engagement, for they realized it would help them stop their hostilities and finally work together as Christ wanted them to do.
When I became a Byzantine Catholic, I had an apologetical mindset in regards theology; I thought I could and should go out and prove to others the beliefs I had come to understand. I was especially interested in doing so with Protestants, as I was a former Protestant, and felt I had something to prove to them. Except for Catholic-Orthodox relations, ecumenism was the furthest thing from my mind. But it was because of the way I was able to embrace a level of ecumenism in connection with Orthodoxy (Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian alike), I found myself taking coursework in the field of ecumenical theology. Doing so allowed me to slowly open up to ecumenism as a whole. It certainly helped that one of my favorite 20th century theologians, Sergius Bulgakov, was involved with ecumenism.
To be sure, when I started studying ecumenical theology, I still had a more apologetical approach to it; that is, I was more interested in sharing (and proving) what I believed than I was in listening to others. But even then, I was beginning to change, as I understood ecumenism sought for Christian unity, sought to bring about the love Christians are meant to have with each other, and that meant, listening to people and what they had to say with a willingness to learn instead of simply trying to take apart their beliefs. The more I listened, the more I changed; I began to see ecumenism was more about the engagement, about listening to each other, trying to understand each other, instead of proving some theological point. The more Christians listen to each other, the more they begin to see that they have seriously misunderstood each other, the more they will be able to realize they have more in common than they do not. Once that commonality is found, once some level of agreement is discerned, ecumenism can go forward with Christians using that commonality to form the bonds they need to come together and become one. As long as Christians begin their discussions with each other on what they think divides them, instead of what unites them, they will continue being argumentative, unable to listen to each other. But if they begin with what they hold in common, their relationship with each other will change, as they will not come together to continue their hostility and debate with each other, but instead to build upon the foundation they have and use it to fully overcome their division from each other and become one as Christ wants them to be.
Certainly, ecumenical dialogues will have to explore the differences between Christians, but if the purpose of the encounter is to debate those differences, trying to prove to each other who is right, then those encounters will end with those differences being reified instead of overcome. For, as I have learned through my studies, the more people desire to come together, to share their faith with each other, to discern in the other what they have in common, the easier they find it is to love each other and overcome the misunderstanding and hostility which led to division within the Christian faith. This is why in the 20th century, Catholics, Orthodox and non-Chalcedonian Orthodox have come to Christological agreements: they saw the problem was the conventions they used, that is, the word choice used in Christological declarations, with communities understanding the words differently leading them to accept or reject such declarations based upon how their understanding of the words led them to interpret such declarations. They discovered, when they did not focus on the word choice, they were trying to say the same thing. Once I was able to appreciate this, I was able to appreciate Catholic (and Orthodox) dialogues with Protestants much better, for I found many times, the same issues were at play: not only were Christians speak at cross purposes, but centuries of hostility (and the embrace of apologetics for the means of teaching doctrine) kept them from seeing that they were often were trying to say the same things (though sometimes, with different emphasis).
Sadly, while theologians and officials from different ecclesiastical communities have come together and begun to listen to each other, getting to know and love each other better, this has not filtered throughout the communities they represent. The results of those dialogues, and the reasons for those results, are not being taught to the various Christian communities, and so, things remain as they were before those dialogues took place. Hostilities remain. Apologetics remains a main source of theological knowledge for many, as people try to understand their faith through the exploration of theological controversy, leading them to embrace the spirit of controversy themselves. We can see the end result of this as Christians, even within a particular ecclesiastical tradition, end up fighting each other, each trying to prove their own particular understanding of Christianity, and the way they want to express that understanding, is superior to all others and so must be embraced by all. Differences are not appreciated or allowed. In the end, though those who study and engage what is taught in apologetics might receive a level of theological knowledge, it is woefully deficient, and what is had is a pseudo-Christianity focused on conflict and division rather than the way of Christ, the way of love and unity.
I have not always appreciated this. Old habits are hard to break. Often, I have to fight against my own worst instincts. Ecumenism is not easy, as it requires us to be humble, to stop ourselves from becoming defensive or argumentative. But the more I explore ecumenism, and how it connects to the fundamentals of what Christ wanted for Christians, the more I see how important it is for myself, and of course, for all Christians. Many who are hostile to ecumenism say they think it promotes false unity, but in reality, they ignore the false divisions which they end up promoting. Ecumenists are not interested in creating a false unity, because they know it would not last. This is why they listen to each other and learn from each other, so that they can be transformed in the encounter; through that transformation, they hope they can eventually come together and worship together and realize their unity Christ. They know that to do this, they cannot ignore their differences, but they also know they cannot engage their differences in a hostile fashion. This is why they will seriously take up the same issues often engaged in apologetics, but they will not do so with the desire not to prove themselves superior to each other, but to better understand each other, to understand what others truly believe. Listening is key. Learning to listen requires humility, but also requires a desire to learn, to accept that those whom we engage have something to say, something of value, something which we need to know. Until Christians truly embrace this spirit, this willingness to learn from each other instead of seeking to debate and prove each other wrong, they will have failed to live out their faith, no matter how correct their dogmatic declarations might be.
*Personal Reflections And Speculations
Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!
N.B.: While I read comments to moderate them, I rarely respond to them. If I don’t respond to your comment directly, don’t assume I am unthankful for it. I appreciate it. But I want readers to feel free to ask questions, and hopefully, dialogue with each other. I have shared what I wanted to say, though some responses will get a brief reply by me, or, if I find it interesting and something I can engage fully, as the foundation for another post. I have had many posts inspired or improved upon thanks to my readers.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In