View
49
Download
5
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Theological Journal of the World Communion of Reformed Churches
Citation preview
Contents
The Catholic Presbyterian (1879-1883) The Quarterly Register(1886-1936) The Presbyterian Register (1937-1948) ThePresbyterian World (1949-1955) The Reformed and PresbyterianWorld (1956-1970) Reformed World (1971)
Volume 55 (1)March 2005
EditorOdair Pedroso Mateus
Reformed World is published quarterly by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches150, route de Ferney, PO Box 2100 - 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
www.warc.ch
President Rev. Dr. Clifton KirkpatrickVice-Presidents Mr. Helis H. Barraza Díaz, Rev. Dr. Henriette Hutabarat-Lebang,
Rev. Dr. Gottfried W. Locher, Mrs. Marcelle Orange-Mafi,Rev. Dr. Ofelia Ortega, Rev. Prof. Lilia Rafalimanana
Geneva Secretariat Rev. Dr. Setri Nyomi - General SecretaryMs. Yueh-Wen Lu - YouthRev. Patricia Sheerattan-Bisnauth - Partnership of Women and MenMs. Jet den Hollander - John Knox-WARC Mission in Unity ProjectMrs. Renate Herdrich - FinancesMr. John Asling - CommunicationsRev. Dr. Seong-Won Park - Cooperation and WitnessRev. Dr. Odair Pedroso Mateus - Theology
© Copyright by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, Geneva. Except where otherwise stated,the writers of articles are alone responsible for the opinions expressed.No article may be reproduced in whole or in part without permission.Layout: emblema idéias visuais São Paulo Brasil emblemaideias@aol.com
Editorial..………………………………………………………………………………......The Economic and Social Witness of Calvin for Christian Life Today ....................….The Oriental Orthodox-Reformed International Dialogue ..........................................The Adventist-Reformed International Dialogue ...............……………………….…..The African Independent Churches-Reformed Dialogue ...............………………......Towards an Alliance of Protestant Churches? The Confessional and theEcumenical in the WARC Constitutions (I), Odair Pedroso Mateus ...........……….....Pilate, the Empire, and the Confession of the Church, Lukas Vischer ........................
0103082838
5571
1
Editorial
The refugees and the pastor - They were thousands fleeing persecution because of
their faith. One of them was a widow “still stunned by the murder of her husband and
anxious about providing for their three small children”. The pastor not only prayed for
them and offered them the strong hand of solidarity. He also wrote letters and made a long
journey to seek diplomatic intercession for them. They were French Protestants. He was
John Calvin. As churches around the world prepare themselves to celebrate the 500th
anniversary of Calvin’s birth in 2009, an international consultation on Calvin’s economic
and social witness, held in Geneva late in 2004, urges the Reformed family to rediscover
Calvin beyond the tenacious stereotypes of Calvin. The statement adopted at that
consultation is published in the present issue.
Break the wall! - The Scottish theologian William Blaikie wrote about the Alliance in
1884 that “if we get our hearts large enough to embrace all our Presbyterian brethren, the
proofs of enlargement will go on, and we shall begin to long earnestly for wider fellowship”.
Blaikie would probably be surprised to learn that more than one century later the Alliance
would be not only alive and active but also fully committed to the spiritual and ecumenical
vision of seeking “wider fellowship” that he had put forward. In the past thirty-five years
WARC has been involved in ecumenical dialogue with a wide range of Christian churches
and Christian world communions. This issue of Reformed World includes the reports of
several years of theological and ecumenical conversations that the Alliance has had with
the Oriental family of Orthodox Churches, with the Organisation of African Independent
Churches as well as with the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Christianity in the African
context, the service of women in the church as well as the mission of Reformation churches
in a world of widespread injustice and environmental destruction are some of the themes
addressed by these ecumenical conversations.
2
Crossing ten seas - Blaikie’s words about the Alliance’s ecumenical vision and
engagement are quoted at the beginning of the article “Towards an Alliance of Protestant
Churches? The Confessional and the Ecumenical in the WARC Constitutions (I)”. At a time
when the ecumenical goals as well as the structural means to achieve them clearly suffer
from a limited degree of consensus within organised ecumenism, different Christian families
recognise the need to contribute towards a new ecumenical spring. The old questions of
the ecumenical self-understanding of the Christian world communions and that of the
relations between them and the organised forms of the ecumenical movement thus
appear in a new light. The article published in this issue of Reformed World attempts to
contribute to this discussion by taking the détour of history. It addresses to the 1875
constitution of the Alliance of Presbyterian Churches the issue of the interplay between
confessionality and ecumenicity.
Pilate and Iraq - “At that time there were some present who told him about the
Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices…” At the closing worship of
the Calvin conference which I mentioned at the beginning of this editorial, Lukas Vischer,
the well-known Reformed theologian and ecumenist, reflected on Luke 13.1-5. He concluded
his meditation by challenging us to overcome our indifference to the demolition of
Palestinian houses or to the bombs falling on the population of Fallujah in Iraq.
Odair Pedroso Mateus
3
The Economic and Social Witness ofCalvin for Christian Life Today
Laity and pastors, women and men, scholars from north and south, east andwest, gathered for a consultation of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, theJohn Knox International Reformed Center, and the Faculty of Theology of theUniversity of Geneva, which took place in Geneva from 3 to 6 November 2004. Thepurpose was to rediscover Calvin’s witness for the commitment of Reformed Christiansin the economic and social realities of our time.
The pastor, an exile and resident alien,
reached out to offer the strong hand of
fellowship to a flock of refugees. This group
spoke a language he knew, others later
would speak different ones, but all shared
the condition of having been uprooted from
home and everything familiar. The young
man remembered that from his own
experience. Thankful to have been received
into this community, these new exiles asked
for prayers for the friends they had left far
away, and help for themselves, in the name
of the one Lord Jesus Christ and His gospel.
Sometimes refugees might be able to bring
with them the means to set up a new life,
but not this group. Some of these were able
and willing to work but needed jobs. Others
brought little more than their faith and their
shattered lives: a widow still stunned by the
murder of her husband and anxious about
providing for their three small children, a
man who had been crippled by torture
wondering if he could bear to be dependent
even on these generous unknown
neighbours.
The pastor’s name was John Calvin. Many
prayers were already being offered; the new
names of these refugees from Provence
would be added to the intercessions. Calvin
himself wrote letters and made a long
journey to seek diplomatic intercession for
those still being persecuted. Meanwhile the
varied circumstances of each refugee would
be taken into account. The able-bodied
would be introduced to the appropriate
authorities so they could seek residence and
work and permission to establish
themselves. Those in need would be given
the practical resources to begin a new life,
with dignity, and education for the future if
they could not return home.
This scene would be repeated many
times over the years. The languages would
change, the varied cultures and nationalities
would multiply, but the network of solidarity
in faith and in mutual communication in
social and material ways would grow and
spread. Refugees would worship, live, and
work in Geneva, or would be helped on their
way; some would return home, others would
4
come. Visitors and students and citizens
crossed paths, built ties of friendship,
fellowship, common purpose – across the
bounds of geography and rank, of political
situation, of wealth and poverty, of custom
and gender.
This picture of Calvin may come as a
surprise to the twenty-first century, but
the members of our consultation believe
that Calv in has been of ten
misrepresented. We believe that the
rediscovery of Calvin has something
relevant to contribute to the witness of
Reformed people and churches today with
regard to social and economic issues.
Calvin was certainly no stranger to
challenges in these aspects of life, but he
met them with a biblical vision of the
spiritual and practical coherence of God’s
world. Calvin did not compartmentalize
any dimension of human life or separate
it from al l the others . He was ful ly
convinced that both earthly life and the
life to come were created and redeemed
by God. Every aspect of life, therefore, is
integrated with every other, and every
person truly l ives only in koinonia ,
fellowship, solidarity, with all the rest of
God’s creation.
One might ask whether this picture of
Calvin is justified. Current opinion claims
that “everyone knows that Calvin is the
father of capitalism”… but was he really?
This “Weber thes is” i tse l f i s of ten
misunderstood; careful readers of the
sociologist point out that Weber claimed
that some Calvinists were responsible for
“the spirit” of capitalism. In fact, since the
sources of Calvinism which Weber studied
come from the 17th and 18th centuries,
and one of his examples is Benjamin
Franklin (!), it is obvious that his “spirit of
capitalism” is related to some strands of
later Calv inism and does not have
anything to do with Calvin himself. On
the other hand, many heirs of Calvin have
found in this heritage an inspiration for
liberation and devotion to justice and the
common good – at whatever cost.
It remains clear that in public opinion
and often even in the churches, Calvin is
certainly misunderstood. This is not
surprising since, like every historical figure
who has made a decisive impact, Calvin
has been adapted and appropriated in
many ways . Calv inism is a dynamic
tradition, prizing its self-critical creed
(ecclesia reformata semper reformanda
secundum verbum Dei), though honest
followers of Calvin are among the first to
admit that they have not always lived up
to this goal. Over time Calvinists have
developed some aspects of Calvin’s
teaching or practice, neglected others, and
reinterpreted still more. Selective memory
inevitably distorts. And in some cases there
has been deliberate distortion of Calvin’s
teaching. Deliberate or at least practical
denial of Calvin’s inconvenient insistence
that Christians must do for their neighbours
what they would have their neighbours do
for them, even to the point of expending
their lives, honour, and possessions.
Deliberate or practical denial of Calvin’s clear
5
demand that the reckoning of sin and active
repentance begins with ourselves. No doubt
Calvin, like the originator of any historical
movement, would be utterly amazed by
many of the things ascribed to him today
Today. When the world is so different.
When Christians and churches are
challenged in countless and varied ways.
Economic injustice is evident on every hand.
The global market appears to be the one
law of commercial exchange – a kind of
hegemonic control once associated with
political empires. Rampant consumerism
fuels a life of ease for those at the top who
profit from the limitless growth, while debt
crushes the vast majority. The means of
production are subordinated to the
unregulated accumulation of wealth. Even
if that makes human beings cogs in an
economic machine. Even if it means natural
resources are appropriated by a minority or
altered beyond all recognition. Even if that
abuse of power and natural wealth reduces
already marginal populations (especially
women, children, the elderly) to abject
poverty. Even if the next generations
(including the grandchildren of those who
now conspicuously use more than their fair
share) may come into a world which can no
longer sustain life in any worthwhile form.
Destruction leads to violence, conditions of
violence multiply conflicts. In the midst of
this Christians and churches themselves
are divided: Christians divided within
themselves and over against each other,
divisive struggle within and between
churches or communities of faith. What is
right? What is my mission, our mission? Can
we speak of “our” at all?
As we anticipate the five hundredth
anniversary of Calvin’s birth in 2009, the
findings of this consultation challenge
Reformed people and all churches to
reconsider whether Calvin might offer
some insights into new or better ways to
view social and economic issues. We are
prompted to speak at this t ime by
considering the various writings of André
Biéler which have been concerned with
rediscovering Calvin for our day. We
celebrate the work of Prof. Biéler, who has
acted in accord with what he has studied,
and the forthcoming (2005) English
translation of his book, “Calvin’s Economic
and Social Thought” (first published in
1959). We believe that rediscovering
Calvin can help members of the World
Alliance of Reformed Churches to take up
the challenge of the 2004 Accra general
council which, in the face of the financial
and economic powers, called churches to
covenant on matters of economic injustice
and environmental destruction. In Accra,
in addition to confessing the guilt of those
of us who benefit from complicity in these
systems of destruction, we affirmed “that
God is a God of justice… and in a special
way the God of the destitute, the poor,
the exploited, the wronged, and the
abused”. We rejected “any ideology or
economic regime that puts profits before
people, does not care for all creation, and
privatizes those gifts of God meant for all”.
Calvin was absolutely convinced that
6
“the earth is the Lord’s” and that this earth
is a marvellous abundance of gifts entrusted
to human beings for their delight and their
use. “Entrusted” means that everything,
whether natural resource or human ability,
is held in trust. Material things are not
personal possessions but means to serve
the common good; individual talents of mind
or physical skill or artistic creation find their
right purpose in mutual support within the
whole society. The Creator intended every
human being to know that because she or
he is a member of the global human family
by birth, each one must recognize every
other person as his or her “own flesh and
bone”. Human society is held together by
the diversity of individual gifts and varied
vocations, since no one can be truly human
alone and everyone needs what others
bring to the common table. Living together
in justice and peace requires that everyone
accept communal limitations and training
or discipline; living together in harmony and
grace requires self-discipline and respect for
others.
Life together is intended to be the arena
in which sinful and broken people are
restored, to reflect clearly the image of God,
to conform to the likeness of Jesus Christ; it
is to be the place where the earth and the
oikoumene , the human family, are
transformed into what they were meant to
be. In faith, Calvin the biblical preacher
affirms that this process cannot fail; in
practice, Calvin the realist recognizes that
the process is begun but not fully visible.
However, by the power of the Holy Spirit,
this process of re-creation is also a task
committed to the people of God, who are
challenged by seeing how much there is to
do, who find strength and energy because
they know that they are never alone: they
always work with God and with each other.
Daily working towards the renewal of all
life is each Christian’s calling, responsibility,
and privilege. However, for Calvin, working
together to renew the social and economic
world is also the common responsibility of
the church as church, both in local situations
and international contexts, acting both with
those of the same confession and with all
followers of the gospel – the ecumenical
church. The rediscovered Calvin is a person
working with other church and civil leaders.
Eminently practical, Calvin knew that “what
is everyone’s job is no one’s job”, which is
one compelling reason to have specific
offices leading the church or community to
be actively engaged. Each office or “standing
committee” also provides a structure for
ecumenical cooperation, across national and
cultural and geographic lines. Calvin’s
teaching on the ministries of the church
placed great emphasis on the corporate
character of leadership and introduced “lay”
church offices alongside “clerical” ones.
Pastors proclaim and explain God’s gospel
and law, they encourage those committed
to their care, they challenge them to be
faithful children of God and responsible
stewards. Lay elders and pastors together
train and reprove those who harm each
other, and reconcile those who repent. Lay
deacons lead the church in corporate
7
Names and origin of all invited participants
response to the situation of the poor and
afflicted, caring for each according to her or
his need, with cheerful assistance and
respectful care. Teachers are charged with
educating all God’s people, contributing
significantly to the international character
of Christian social and ethical consciousness
– as Calvin’s own example demonstrates:
besides refugees, many students came to
Geneva and returned home to build a
network of ecumenical leaders across
Europe.
Every Christian is expected to learn God’s
will and teach it to others according to her
or his vocation. Every Christian is
responsible for mutual reproof and
forgiveness and reconciliation in her or his
own place. All Christians are obligated to
serve the poor, needy, and afflicted –
recognizing that these brothers and sisters
are their equals in God’s sight, they embody
Christ. All Christians are also part of the
larger church, and the church as church is
called to fulfil these ministries and so it
establishes structures of leadership to
enable corporate witness. In the present
day, churches and Christians are invited to
take seriously the corporate and personal
character of their commitment to social and
economic justice, finding for themselves the
right forms to insure that the common calling
to love the neighbour as oneself actually is
implemented. “Who will do it?” is not a
rhetorical question!
Who has the energy or vision to respond
to the needs of this day? We believe that
the rediscovered Calvin can offer some
suggestions for both vision and resources.
Calvin was deeply and personally convinced
that stewardship of all earthly gifts for the
common good, and justice and love in all
human relationships, are not optional for
any human being. Addressing Christians, he
insisted that love for neighbours – “all people
who dwell on earth” – is often the clearest
evidence for the true worship of God, and
the Spirit of God is the source of power for
working towards life abundant for all God’s
creation.
Bishop Gusztáv Bölcskei, HungaryProf. Dr. James D. Bratt, USAProf. Dr. Eberhard Busch, Germany/SwitzerlandProf. Dr. François Dermange, SwitzerlandProf. Dr. Edward Dommen, SwitzerlandProf. Dr. Jane Dempsey Douglass, USAProf. Dr. Margit Ernst, GermanyRev. Prof. Eduardo Galasso Faria, BrazilProf. Dr. Robert M. Kingdon, USADr. Odair Pedroso Mateus, Brazil
Prof. Dr. Dennis McCann, USAProf. Dr. Elsie McKee, USAProf. Dr. Peter Opitz, SwitzerlandProf. Dr. Seong-Won Park, KoreaProf. Dr. Dirk Smit, Republic of SouthAfricaProf. Dr. Christoph Stückelberger,SwitzerlandRev. Dr. Jean-Pierre Thévenaz,SwitzerlandProf. Dr. Lukas Vischer, Switzerland
8
Report of the International TheologicalDialogue between the OrientalOrthodox Family of Churchesand the World Alliance of ReformedChurches (1993-2001)
Adopted at theArmenian Catholicosate of Cilicia in Antelias, LebanonJanuary 23-28, 2001
I. INTRODUCTION1.Impelled by the prayer of our Lord “that
all may be one” (Jn 17.21) and helped by the
Holy Spirit, we, the participants in the
Oriental Orthodox-Reformed dialogue, seek
to understand each other’s traditions and
grow together towards holistic Christian
fellowship and visible unity.
2.Reformed Churches and the Oriental
Orthodox family of Churches live side by
side in several countries. However, decades
of separate existence have caused them to
drift apart , resulting in little or no
relationship between the Churches. In
general, biases about each other have kept
the contact between these two
communions to a minimum in spite of the
inherited Christian faith expressed in the
Nicene Creed.
3.The Oriental Orthodox Churches are
living Christian communities in Egypt, Syria,
Armenia, Lebanon, Ethiopia, India and
Eritrea, and in lands of immigration. They
are ancient Apostolic Traditional Churches
in the East which believe in the Creed
composed at the Holy Ecumenical Council
at Nicea in 325, and completed at the Second
Holy Ecumenical Council at Constantinople
in 381. They also follow the teaching of the
Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in 431.
As such they believe in the Holy Trinity and
in the divine incarnation of the Son of God.
They follow the teaching of St. Cyril of
Alexandria about one incarnate nature of
the Word of God. They reject both the
teaching of Nestorius and Eutyches. The one
incarnate nature of Jesus Christ to them
does not mean that the humanity of Jesus
Christ was absorbed in His divinity and thus
ceased to exist, but that they were united
without separation and without change and
continued to exist in the union.
4.During and after the Council of
Chalcedon in 451, the Oriental Orthodox
9
Churches formed a family of Churches since
they did not accept the condemnation at
this Council of their Saint Dioscorus, the
successor of St. Cyril of Alexandria, and due
to difference in expressing the mystery of
incarnation of the Son of God. Now the
misunderstanding that happened during the
Council of Chalcedon is being removed and
Christological agreements are being
reached among Chalcedonian and non-
Chalcedonian Churches.
5.The World Alliance of Reformed
Churches has been involved for about four
decades in bilateral theological dialogues
with several other world Christian
communions.1 In 1992 the World Alliance
of Reformed Churches evaluated the results
of bilateral dialogues and reaffirmed the
significance of such dialogues for the future
relationship of Christian Churches in the
world.
6.The Oriental Orthodox family of
Churches has been in recent years in
theological dialogue with the Eastern
Orthodox family of Churches, the Roman
Catholic Church, the Lutheran and Anglican
Churches. The unofficial dialogue with the
Eastern Orthodox started in 1964 and
became official in 1985.
7.Informal conversations and contacts
among the Reformed and Oriental
Orthodox Churches during earlier
ecumenical gatherings eventually paved the
way for officially organising such dialogues
between these two Christian communions.
Unlike the Reformed Churches, which have
the World Alliance of Reformed Churches
as a structure to promote international
fellowship, the autocephalous Oriental
Orthodox Churches participating in this
dialogue (namely, the Coptic Orthodox
Church, the Syrian Orthodox Church of
Antioch, the Armenian Apostolic Church
[Catholicosate of All Armenians in Holy
Etchmiadzin and Catholicosate of Cilicia in
Antelias], the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo
Church and the Malankara Orthodox Syrian
Church) do not have such a central structure,
hence the decision to engage in
conversations with the Reformed Christians
had to be agreed to by each of the Oriental
Orthodox Churches. After an informal
assurance that these Churches were open
to dialogue with the Reformed family, a
formal letter of invitation was sent out by
the General Secretary of the World Alliance
of Reformed Churches to the Head of each
of the Churches in November 1991. In his
letter the General Secretary indicated that
Reformed Christians were engaged in
several other bilateral dialogues and that
they were committed to work for Christian
unity.
8.Such contacts and conversations led
to a first meeting on 27 August 1992 among
a group of authorised representatives of the
Oriental Orthodox Churches and
representatives of the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches at the Ecumenical
Centre, Geneva, Switzerland, on the
occasion of the Central Committee meeting
of the World Council of Churches. This
meeting was co-chaired by His Holiness
Pope Shenouda III, Pope of Alexandria and
10
Patriarch of the See of St. Mark, and Dr.
Milan Opocenský, then General Secretary
of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches.
9.The representatives of both families
were of the opinion that they and their
respective Churches were enthusiastic about
the possibility of engaging in dialogue and
were committed to pursuing it with all
sincerity and prayer so that these two
families could move towards greater
Christian fellowship. An invitation graciously
extended by His Holiness Pope Shenouda
III to hold the first meeting at Anba Bishoy
Monastery, Wadi-EI-Natroun, Egypt, from 2
to 5 May 1993 was accepted, and the meeting
was held accordingly.
10.Subsequent meetings were held at
“Kerk en Wereld”, Driebergen, The
Netherlands from 10 to 15 September 1994,
at the invitation of the Netherlands
Reformed Church; at the Sophia Centre,
Orthodox Theological Seminary, Kottayam,
India from 10 to 15 January 1997, at the
invitation of His Holiness the Catholicos
Moran Mar Baselios Mar Thoma Matthews
II of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church;
and at Union Theological Seminary and the
Presbyterian School of Christian Education,
Richmond, Virginia, USA from 10 to 15
January 1998, at the invitation of the
Presbyterian Church (USA) and UTS/PSCE;
at St. Ephrem Syrian Orthodox Seminary,
Ma’arat Saydnaya, Syria from 10 to 15
January 1999, at the invitation of His
Holiness Moran Mar Ignatius Zakka I, Syrian
Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and all the
East, at the Carberry Tower Conference
Centre, Musselburgh, Scotland from 11 to
15 January 2000, at the invitation of the
Church of Scotland, and at the Armenian
Catholicosate of Cilicia, Antelias, Lebanon
from 23 to 28 January 2001, at the invitation
of His Holiness Catholicos Aram I, where
this report was presented and discussed and
then submitted for consideration, as the
result of the seven sessions of the dialogue,
to the Churches represented on both sides
of the dialogue. During these conversations
both families were informed and challenged
in the process of mutual understanding and
listening to each other.
11.The Oriental Orthodox Churches,
living in the Eastern tradition, and the
Reformed Churches, originating from the
Western Latin tradition, have inherited
different doctrinal approaches to the mystery
of God, accompanied by differences and
some misunderstandings of each other’s
positions. Therefore, the objective of the
dialogue has been to create an atmosphere
of openness and sincerity in order to
facilitate our witness to the Lord Jesus
Christ, in accordance with the Apostolic
Faith in the face of contemporary realities.
So the dialogue started by dealing with the
understanding of Scripture and Tradition in
each other’s Churches. But such a search
was connected to the mission and ministry
of the Church today. Needless to say, the
progress has been slow, but also productive.
12.One of the highlights of these
dialogues has been the adoption, at the
session in Driebergen, The Netherlands, on
13 September 1994, of the Agreed
11
Statement on Christology emerging from
the biblical teaching and the patristic roots
to which both the partners in dialogue owe
their allegiance. This statement is
reproduced below:
II. AGREED STATEMENT ONCHRISTOLOGYIntroduction
13.In our search for a common
understanding of differences in Christology
that have existed between us, we have
thought it appropriate to focus upon the
Formula of Union, AD 433. This formula
represents an agreement reached by
Antioch and Alexandria following the Third
Ecumenical Council in 431, and as such,
provides a common point of departure for
both parties. We find the interpretations in
this agreement to be in accord with the
Christological doctrines in both of our
traditions
Agreed Statement14. “We confess our Lord Jesus Christ,
the only-begotten Son of God, perfect in
divinity and perfect in humanity consisting
of a rational soul and a body, begotten of
the Father before the ages according to His
divinity, the Same, in fullness of time, for us
and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary,
according to His humanity; the Same,
consubstantial with the Father, according
to His divinity. For a union had been made
of two natures. For this cause we confess
one Christ, one Son, one Lord.
15. “In accordance with this sense of the
unconfused union, we confess the holy Virgin
to be Theotokos, because God the Word
became incarnate and was made human,
and from the very conception united to
Himself the temple taken from her. As to
the expressions concerning the Lord in the
Gospels and Epistles, we are aware that
theologians understand some as common,
as relating to one Person, and others they
distinguish, as relating to two natures,
explaining those that befit the divine nature
according to the divinity of Christ, and those
of a humble sort according to His humanity.”
[Based on the Formula of Union, AD 433]
16.The four adverbs used to qualify the
mystery of the hypostatic union belong to
our common Christological tradition:
“without commingling” (or confusion)
(asyngchytos), “without change” (atreptos),
“without separation” (achoristos),and
“without division” (adiairetos). Those among
us who speak of two natures in Christ are
justified in doing so since they do not
thereby deny their inseparable, indivisible
union; similarly, those among us who speak
of one united divine-human nature in Christ
are justified in doing so since they do not
thereby deny the continuing dynamic
presence in Christ of the divine and the
human, without change, without confusion.
17.Both sides agree in rejecting the
teaching which separates or divides the
human nature, both soul and body in Christ,
from His divine nature or reduces the union
of the natures to the level of conjoining.
Both sides also agree in rejecting the
teaching which confuses the human nature
12
III.1 Tradition and Holy Scripture22.The understanding of Tradition and
Holy Scripture by the two families was
extensively discussed during the first, second
and third sessions of the dialogue.
Oriental Orthodox View23.The Oriental Orthodox distinguish
the Tradition of the entire Church regarding
matters of faith from local traditions of the
various Churches. They understand both
Tradition and Holy Scripture as constituting
one reality emerging from the continuing
life of the Church. Tradition must be
essentially in agreement with the intention
of Holy Scripture, and the authority of the
in Christ with the divine nature so that the
former is absorbed in the latter and thus
ceases to exist.
18.The perfect union of divinity and of
humanity in the incarnate Word is
essential for the salvation of the human
race. “For God so loved the world, that he
gave his only Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but
have everlasting life” (Jn 3.16 KJV).
Conclusion19. In of fer ing this statement , we
recognise the mystery of God’s act in Christ
and seek to express that we have shared
the same authentic Christological faith
in the one incarnate Lord.
20.We submit this statement to the
authorities of the Oriental Orthodox
Churches and to the Executive Committee
of the World Al l iance of Reformed
Churches for their consideration and
action.
Signatures of Co-Chairmen onbehalf of the representatives ofthe two Church families:His Grace Metropolitan Bishoy
General Secretary of the Holy Synod of
the Coptic Orthodox Church
The Rev. Dr. Milan Opocenský
General Secretary of the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches
III.CONVERGENCES ANDDIVERGENCES ON TRADITIONAND HOLY SCRIPTURE,THEOLOGY, CHURCH ANDMISSION, PRIESTHOOD/MINISTRY AND SACRAMENTS
21.The particularity of the various
dialogue sessions has been retained in the
presentation of the third part of this report.
This third part is organised on the basis of
the themes addressed during these
sessions. Thirty papers were presented,
commented upon, discussed and analysed.
Despite a variety of differences in the views
of the two sides, areas of convergence have
emerged.
13
fathers of the Church is recognised from
their acceptance by the Church as a whole.
Reformed View24.While the Reformed Churches respect
the position of the Oriental Orthodox
Churches, they affirm the normative
character of Holy Scripture, which itself
embodies the “Tradition”, in the sense of
what was received and handed down by the
Apostles (Apostolic testimony). The
Reformed Churches affirm a critical distance
of Holy Scripture in relation to “traditions”,
in the sense of teachings, practices, customs
and interpretations of or alongside the one
scriptural Tradition. Hence, the Church must
always examine and reform its traditions in
the light of Holy Scripture.
Areas of Emerging Convergence25.Both sides acknowledge the deep
relationship between the early traditions
(the total life) of the Church, as guided by
the Holy Spirit, and the emergence of Holy
Scripture. The incarnate Word of God is both
the source and the judge of the Tradition
and the Holy Scripture of the Church which
bear witness to Him.
26.Both sides agreed on the normative
function of Holy Scripture for the life of the
Church. The Word incarnate makes use of
human means, including human language
and culture. So Holy Scripture and its correct
interpretation, guided by Tradition,
witnesses to the Word of God in our different
contexts.
27. Areas that Need Further Clarification
• Concepts of history and revelation, with
special attention to the 18th and 19th
centuries historical-critical Bible Study in
the Reformed understanding
• Methods of interpreting Holy Scripture
and evaluating Tradition
• How our historical contexts affect our
understanding of Holy Scripture
• The question of canonical books in our
respective traditions
• Understanding of the Holy Scripture:
its authority and its inspiration
III.2 The Role of the Theologian inthe Christian Community
28.The role and function of theology and
the theologian in the community was
discussed at the third session. The two
families affirm that
• Almighty God’s Eternal Divine Essence
cannot be comprehended. Human reason
can approach God only when illumined by
the Holy Spirit, through prayers and Holy
Scripture.
• Theology is not only an act of thinking
but should be practically related to life and
to our salvation.
• A Christian theologian is one who is
rooted in the faith community and nurtured
by it.
• Theologians are called upon to express
the beauty and splendour of the divine
presence in their theological work. Story and
poetry, music and iconography, art and
architecture, rites and rituals have been
used in various Christian traditions precisely
14
to bring out this aesthetic dimension of
theology.
• Our ultimate goal to reach a common
theological understanding which is rooted
in our Lord Jesus Christ, is based on the
Holy Scriptures, and is related to the needs
and sufferings of humanity at large.
III.3 The Nature of the Church andher Mission
29.The nature of the Church and her
Mission were among the themes discussed
in the first and the fourth sessions. The
Oriental Orthodox and the Reformed
participants prepared statements
expressing their views regarding this topic.
The Oriental Orthodox View30.Regarding the Church, the Oriental
Orthodox affirm that the Church is built on
the foundation of the apostles and prophets,
and Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone.
We believe in One, Holy, Catholic, and
Apostolic Church. Many names have been
given to the Church to describe her nature
and mission. Some of these names are:
• The people of God (1 Pet 2.9)
• The mother of the believers (Gal 4.31)
• The body of Christ (l Cor 12.27)
·• The new creation in Christ (2 Cor 5.17)
• The bride of Christ (Rev 19.7; Mt 9.14-
15)
• The dwelling place of Christ (Eph 2.21)
• The house of faith and salvation (2 Pet
3.20-21)
• The community of love and joy (I Jn
3.14,16; 4.7,8)
• The communion of saints (Heb 12.1)
• The temple of the Holy Spirit (2 Cor
6.19)
• The Church of the first-born (Heb 12.23)
• The Icon of Heaven (Heb 8.5-6)
31.Unity is a natural characteristic of the
Church which reflects her unity with the
Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
There is one Body, one Spirit, one Lord,
one Faith, and one Baptism.
32.Unity in Christ harmonises the
diverse gifts of the Holy Spirit in our different
contexts. The continuity of the Church in
Christ is maintained and guided by the Holy
Spirit through the Holy Tradition and the
Apostolic Succession. The renewal of the
Church is a constant growth and joy in this
new life.
33.Regarding mission, the Oriental
Orthodox affirm that the Church, as the
living Body of Christ, constantly called
together and renewed by the Holy Spirit,
worships the Triune God on behalf of all
God’s creation. This is mission in its totality.
The Good News (Gospel) of Jesus Christ
crucified and risen is the heart of the
worshipping community. The Church
announces the Gospel of life in diverse ways,
always respecting the norm of God’s love
and compassion for the world. Proclamation
of the Word of God is directed to bring about
and foster the signs of the Rule of God in
human history. The Good News of the
redeeming sacrifice of Jesus Christ is
proclaimed with the aim of bringing
salvation to those who believe in Him and
are baptised in the name of the Holy Trinity.
15
The Church’s prayer and pastoral care,
struggle for justice and search for
communion are all vital expressions of her
participation in the mission of Jesus Christ,
her Lord and Saviour. This redeeming
mission calls upon members of the Body of
Christ, to refrain from all forms of aggression
and cultural domination in the name of
Christ, and instead, to encourage healing
and forgiveness, justice and human dignity,
peace and mutual respect among all the
peoples on earth. Our freedom in Christ as
children of God enjoins us to be
compassionately open to all human
initiatives for realising God’s will for the
created world. The ultimate form of the
Church’s mission is to carry the whole
creation in all its brokenness and misery
before the transforming presence of the
Triune God in a perpetual act of praise and
thanksgiving.
Reformed View34.According to the Reformed tradition
the Church is called together by Jesus Christ
to be His body in the world through worship,
service and witness. Together with believers
through the ages, the Reformed confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, and in Him is their hope
and peace. United by the Spirit to the risen
Christ, our participation in the mission of
the Triune God flows out in service and
witness to the world. Confessing the lordship
of Jesus Christ over the Church and the
whole world, we affirm that we are called
not for our benefit alone but for mission
and service in the ministry of reconciliation.
In response to that call we participate in
the mission of the Triune God, through
which God is at work redeeming and
perfecting the whole of creation. As we grow
into the likeness of the Triune God, we are
conscious that we are called to grow in
fellowship with those who confess the name
of Christ, and also to join and welcome those
of other faiths and worldviews who work in
God’s mission. In order to communicate the
Christian faith, we have the task of
translating the message in different cultural
contexts, in ways which are both appropriate
and authentic. This is an on-going task
which involves both teaching and listening,
a task done in obedience to Christ who draws
everything together in Him.
35.We are aware that we have sinned
and fallen short of all that God calls us to do
and to be. However, recognising the power
of God’s forgiveness, and confident that God
will reconcile all things in heaven and earth,
we press on in hope towards the goal where
every tear will be wiped from every eye and
God will be all in all (Rev 21.4; 1 Cor 15.28).
Areas of Emerging Convergence36.Both sides agree in acknowledging
that the Church has an existence that
transcends any attempt to describe it in
purely historical or sociological terms.
Biblical teachings, and titles and images of
the Church contained therein, testify to the
Church’s origin in the eternal purpose of
God. Participating in the mission of Christ,
the Church announces the Gospel of life for
the healing and redemption of all humanity.
16
III.4 Priesthood/Ministry37. The fifth session of the dialogue was
devoted to discussion of priesthood/ministry.
It included papers and discussion on the
understanding of this topic as well as the
identification of points of agreement and
disagreement on this matter.
The Oriental Orthodox Understanding38.The Oriental Orthodox Churches
understand priesthood to be one of the seven
sacraments of the Church. It is a divine order
and calling instituted by the Lord Jesus
Christ when He ordained His twelve
Apostles: “Then Jesus said to them again:
Peace be with you! As the Father has sent
Me, I also send you. And when He had said
this, He breathed on them, and said to them,
receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins
of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the
sins of any, they are retained” (John 20.21-
23). Also, during the Last Supper the Lord
Jesus Christ gave His Body and Blood to the
Apostles and ordered them “do this in
remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11.24). This
divine command of celebrating the Holy
Eucharist with bread and wine links our
priesthood to the Priesthood of Melchizedek
through Christ who is the High Priest forever
after the order of Melchizedek (Heb 6.20).
39.Priesthood in the Old Testament –
The early Patriarchs such as Noah,
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob offered sacrifices
as the priests of the Lord. Their priesthood
was exercised in a clear way. This same
priesthood of the Old Testament was
developed in an organised way through the
Mosaic priesthood. It begins with the divine
orders revealed to Moses after which he
organised the priesthood of Aaron. Aaron’s
descendents were chosen from among the
male Levites to serve as priests.
40.Priesthood in the New Testament –
In the New Testament priesthood was not
cancelled but changed from the Levites
priesthood to the priesthood after the order
of Melchizedek: “For when there is a change
of the priesthood, there must be also a
change of the law” (Heb 7.12).
41.The Lord chose a special group of
believers. He ordained them and called them
His Apostles (Luke 6.13, John 15.16). He
entrusted to them the responsibility of
leading His Church. He appointed them to
tend to His flock, leading them into the path
of truth and salvation (Matthew 28.20). He
gave them the power to hold and absolve
sins (Matthew 18.18), and to administer the
sacraments for the believers.
42.The Apostles in turn gave these gifts
to their successors, the bishops, by the laying
on of hands (Acts 20.28). They charged them
to instruct and teach the faithful and to
ordain presbyters and deacons: “For this
reason I left you in Crete, that you should
set in order the things that are lacking, and
appoint elders in every city as I commanded
you” (Titus 1.5). See also 1 Tim 6.2.
43 .The Apost les understood
themselves to be priests, and as such,
ministers of the sacraments of God: “To
be a minister of Christ Jesus to the
Gent i les wi th the pr iest ly duty of
proclaiming the Gospel of God, so that the
17
Genti les might become an of fer ing
acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy
Spirit” (Rom 15.16).
44.The covenant of the New Testament
is based on the sacrificial death of Jesus
Christ on the Cross, not as separate from
the Holy Eucharist, but indeed shown and
expressed in the Holy Eucharist. The Lord
Jesus Christ said regarding the Eucharistic
cup: “This cup is the New Testament in
my blood” (Luke 22.20 and 1 Cor 11.25).
St. Paul also writes the following: “For as
often as you eat this bread, and drink this
cup, you do show the Lord’s death till He
comes” (1 Cor 11.26).
45.If Jesus Christ is the High Priest after
the order of Malchizedek, who used bread
and wine for his offering, i t fol lows
necessarily that the priesthood of the New
Testament is an office to celebrate the
Holy Eucharist by offering bread and wine.
This Eucharistic offering is not a repetition
of the sacrifice of the Cross, but is the
sacrifice of the Cross present in the Church
everywhere and in all generations, beyond
time and space limitations.
46.The Lord Jesus Christ commanded
His Apostles: “Go and make disciples of
all nations, baptising them in the name
of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Spirit” (Mat 28.19). The Apostles were
able to ordain baptised believers as
bishops, priests and deacons even out of
Gent i les wi thout being necessar i ly
descendents of the people of Israel. This
was prophetically mentioned in the Old
Testament: “And they shall declare my
glory among the Gentiles. And they shall
bring all your brethren for an offering unto
the Lord out of all nations. …And I will also
take of them for priests and levites, says the
Lord” (Isaiah 66.19-21).
47.Spiritual Priesthood – Any believer
in Christ can offer up spiritual sacrifices to
God. This applies to both Old Testament
and New Testament, as is written: “Let my
prayer be set forth before You as incense;
and the lifting up of my hands as the evening
sacrifice” (Ps 141.2) and “By Him therefore,
let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God
continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving
thanks to His name” (Heb 13.15). But this
does not mean that those who are offering
spiritual sacrifices, like praying and praising
the Lord and helping the poor, are official
priests offering the Eucharistic sacrifice and
ministering in the Church.
48.A Kingdom of Priests – It was equally
mentioned in the Old Testament and the
New Testament that the people of God are
a kingdom of priests: “And you shall be unto
me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation”
(Exodus 19.6) and “But you are a chosen
generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation,
a peculiar people” (1 Peter 2.9). This does
not imply at all that the whole people of
God are officially priests serving the altar in
the Church.
49.In view of the last two points we can
understand (1 Peter 2.5): “You also, as living
stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy
priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices
acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.”
50.Threefold Priesthood – While we
18
acknowledge the spiritual priesthood of all
believers in Christ, three ranks of priesthood
– Episcopos, Presbyter and Deacon – were
instituted in the Holy Church through the
power of the Holy Spirit (1 Tim 3.5; Titus 1.5;
Acts 6.5-6).
51.The Role of Laity – The participation
and involvement of the faithful in the whole
liturgical and sacramental life of the Church
is very important and this is always affirmed
throughout the life and witness of the
Church.
52.The Dual Role of the Priesthood: In
offering the Holy Eucharist the priest acts
as the representative of the whole creation.
The priest represents the people of the
Church in front of God and represents God
in front of the people and he performs his
service by the power of the Holy Spirit.
53.Laying on of Hands and Apostolic
Succession : Laying on of hands was
practised by the Apostles for different
purposes. It is not used only for ordination,
but for many other purposes: for blessing
the people as Jesus has done with the
children (Mat. 19.13), for healing the sick
(Mark 15.18), for confirmation (Acts 8.15-17)
and for ordination (Acts 6.6; Acts 13.3; 1 Tim
4.14; 1 Tim 5.22).
54.The authority of laying on of hands
for ordination, consecration and
confirmation was confined to the Apostles
so that Philip, the ordained deacon and
preacher, after baptising the people of
Samaria could not lay hands on them to
grant them the gift of the Holy Spirit, and
the Church sent the Apostles St. Peter and
St. John especially to Samaria to pray and
lay hands upon the people in order to receive
the Holy Spirit (Acts 6.5; 8.5, 12, 14-17). The
Apostles passed on the authority of laying
on of hands to some of the presbyters whom
they have ordained by making them bishops
who were able to ordain presbyters (1 Tim
5.22; Titus 1.5).
55.This Apostolic succession remained
unbroken in the Church as the Lord has
promised: “You did not choose me, but I
chose you and appointed you to go and bear
fruit – fruit that will last” (John 15.16).
56.Service of Women in the Church –
Women are honoured in the Church and
can become saints who are venerated at all
levels. St. Mary is the most venerated saint
in the Church, but she was not a priest
serving the altar. They can serve as
deaconesses without having a priestly order.
They do not serve in the sanctuary or officiate
at the sacraments of the Church, but they
can help the bishop and the priest in many
pastoral offices. Women can be prophets,
but cannot be priests or teachers of the
Church.
57.The Church is following the teachings
of the Holy Scriptures which declare that
the man is the head of the woman although
they are equal in nature: “Now I want you to
realise that the head of every man is Christ,
and the head of the woman is man, and the
head of Christ is God” (1 Cor 11.3; see also
Eph 5.22, 23, 32). Also, the Holy Scriptures
tell us that women are not allowed to teach
men or have authority over them (1 Tim
2.11, 15; 1 Cor 14.33, 34-38).There were no
19
women priests in the Old Testament either.
The icon of Christ and the Church can be
seen in the relation of man and woman in
the Church.
The Reformed Understanding58.The Reformed understanding of
ministry begins with the ministry of the
whole people of God who, as the body of
Christ, continue Christ’s ministry to the
world. This ministry, empowered by the Holy
Spirit , follows the pattern of Christ’s
threefold ministry of prophet, priest and king
through the proclamation of the faith, the
practice of Christian love and the search for
justice and peace in the world. This ministry
is the privilege and responsibility of every
believer by virtue of their baptism into Christ.
In this context the Reformed tradition
speaks of the “priesthood of all believers”.
In addition to the general priesthood of all
believers the Reformed tradition also
maintains a ministry of elders. Elders are
chosen and appointed from the
congregation to form a conciliar body that is
responsible for spiritual discipline, the
exercise of public worship and the
governance of the life of the Church.
59.The Reformed tradition also
maintains a particular ministry of the Word
and Sacrament. This ministry is bestowed
on those who the Church recognises as
being called and empowered by God to be
set apart to this function. The minister of
Word and Sacrament is an elder with a
particular responsibility for teaching and the
celebration of the sacraments. There is
equality between teaching elders (Ministers
of Word and Sacrament) and the ruling
elders. The ministry of Word and Sacrament
is vital for the upbuilding of the Church and
the edification of God’s people. The
importance of this ministry can be
demonstrated by reference to the traditional
Reformed criteria for the recognition of a
true Church, namely a Church exists
wherever the Word of God is faithfully
preached and heard and the sacraments
administered according to the Word of God.2
60.Admittance to the ministry of Word
and Sacrament follows the preparation of
the candidate through a programme of
theological training and examination by the
Church. Ordination to the ministry of Word
and Sacrament requires the call of God’s
people and is administered by a prayer of
invocation of the Holy Spirit and the laying
on of hands by elders of the Church. In this
unrepeatable act of ordination the ministry
is formally entrusted to the ordinand and
the ordinand vows to be faithful to God in
their practice of ministry. Most Reformed
Churches ordain both women and men to
the ministry of Word and Sacrament. On
the basis of their one baptism and their
participation in the priesthood of all
believers women and men are called by the
Holy Spirit to the ordained ministry.
61.The Reformed tradition regards the
institutional expression of ministry as
belonging to the bene esse of the life of the
church rather than the esse. As such the
precise organisation and pattern of ministry
is in principle revisable as the church
20
responds, under the direction and guidance
of the Holy Spirit and in faithfulness to the
Scriptures, to changing historical
circumstances. Generally speaking, member
churches of the Reformed family do not have
a personal episcopate. The exercise of
episcope is vested in communal and conciliar
bodies where ruling elders and teaching
elders are represented on equal basis. The
Reformed tradition believes itself to be in
continuity with the faith of the Apostles as
evidenced by its proclamation of the Gospel,
its celebration of the sacraments, its
acceptance of the creeds and its service to
the world.
62. Points of Agreement
• Both Traditions acknowledge that the
Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation of all
ministry in the Church.
• The celebrant of the sacraments in the
Church should be an ordained priest/
minister who should have a special gift
through the power of the Holy Spirit.
• Baptism and Eucharist are accepted
sacraments in each tradition in spite of the
difference in understanding of the essence
and implications of these sacraments.
These differences require further discussion.
• Spiritual/Universal priesthood (as
distinct from official ordained priesthood in
the Oriental Orthodox understanding) is
granted to all who believe in Christ, including
men and women.
• Conciliarity of the Church and conciliar
forms of government are expressed and
practised in both traditions.
Points of Disagreement
63.Oriental Orthodox View
• The concept of priesthood in the
Oriental Orthodox differs from the Reformed
tradition. The Oriental Orthodox believe in
a clear distinction between the official
priesthood and the spiritual priesthood of
all believers in Christ in both the Old
Testament and the New Testament.
• The unbroken Apostolic Succession
by the laying on of hands is essential for
the continuity of priestly ministry in the
Church.
• The bishop is the successor of the
Apostles. Only the bishop is entitled to
perform ordination by the laying on of
hands.
• Three ranks of priesthood, namely
bishop, priest and deacon, are clear and
distinct in the Oriental Orthodox tradition
from the beginning of the early Church.
• In order that the Lord Jesus Christ
should be believed as the High Priest after
the order of Melchizedek, it fol lows
necessarily that there should be also
priests in the Church offering the Eucharist
using bread and wine.
• The priestly offering of the Eucharist
makes the sacrifice of the Cross present
everywhere and in every generation
beyond space and time limitations, and
as such is not understood as a repetition
of the sacrifice of the Lord on the Cross.
• The following seven sacraments are
recognised and practised in the life of the
Church: Bapt ism, Conf irmat ion,
Repentance and Confess ion , Holy
21
Eucharist, Matrimony, Anointing the Sick
and Priesthood.
• The ordination of women to priestly
ministry is unacceptable based on the
teachings of the Holy Scriptures.
Reformed View64. I t is a common Reformed
understanding that a uniform church order
which is universally applicable in all times
and all places cannot be found in the New
Testament. The Reformed understanding
of Holy Scripture does not necessarily
suggest the practice of a hierarchical
pattern of ministry . The Reformed
Churches assert that they are in
continuity with the succession of Apostolic
fa i th . The uninterrupted episcopal
succession does not in itself guarantee
the pure proclamation of the Gospel and
the proper administrat ion of the
sacraments.
65.In relation to the ministry of Word
and Sacrament, Reformed Churches
affirm that the ordained minister does not
differ from any other believer except in
function. The ordained minister does not
possess a distinct character or “imprint”.
The ordained ministry belongs to the
wellbeing of the Church (bene esse). Since
the priestly ministry has been fulfilled by
Christ, a minister of a Reformed Church
does not perform any special priestly
function. The Reformed tradition asserts
that the power to ordain is not vested in
an individual person or office but belongs
communally to the Church. The call of God,
adequate ministerial formation and the
invocation of the Holy Spirit are the
indispensable prerequisites for ordination.
The act of ordination does not simply
depend on the “laying on of hands”.
66.Most Reformed Churches do not
agree that the ordained ministry is
withheld from women. According to the
Reformed understanding there are no
biblical or theological reasons for denying
ordination to women.
III.5 Sacraments67.The last two sessions of the Oriental
Orthodox-Reformed dialogue discussed
extensively the doctrine, number and
practice of the sacraments in the two
famil ies . Variat ions and di f ferences
between the two traditions concerning the
nature and number of the sacraments were
openly expressed.
Oriental Orthodox View68.The Oriental Orthodox family of
Churches believes in seven sacraments:
namely , Bapt ism, Chrismat ion,
Repentance and Confession, Eucharist,
Priesthood, Marriage (Matrimony) and
Unction of the sick.
69 .A sacrament performed by a
canonically ordained priest in a concrete
form of a special material is an unseen
work of the Holy Spirit.
70.The role of the Holy Spirit in the
sacraments is essential because the gifts
of God are “from the Father through the
Son by the Holy Spirit”. (Saint Athanasius
22
wrote: “The Father does all things through
the Word in the Holy Spirit” First Letter
to Serapion, Chapter 28, “Concerning the
Holy Spirit”, Shapland p.134/135.)
71.The minister of the sacrament is the
steward of God as is written by St. Paul: “Let
a man so consider us, as servants of Christ
and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1
Cor 4.1), “For a bishop must be blameless,
as a steward of God” (Tit 1.7).
72.In the Oriental Orthodox
presentations, the role of the Holy Spirit in
the seven sacraments was clarified based
on the Holy Scripture. Therefore, the role of
the Holy Spirit cannot be divided from the
sacraments.
73.The sacraments of the Church are
experienced as a life that one lives inside
the Church and not as something that one
just hears about. One tastes its efficacy and
experiences its effect in his life, and the
more he experiences such effect the more
his belief in it increases.
Reformed View74.The two sacraments administered by
the Reformed Churches, Baptism and the
Eucharist, are always celebrated in the
context of worship. A major difference
between the two families is in the number
of sacraments observed. Although the
Reformed tradition does not recognise
marriage, ordination, confirmation,
confession and unction as sacraments, their
importance as religious ordinances is not
ignored. for example, our worship books
contain several different orders of worship
such as Morning Prayer, Sunday public
worship (including confession and
Eucharist), baptism, wedding, memorial
service, ordination, installation, healing, and
confirmation. These rich and varied liturgical
practices show that we have these rites in
common with the Oriental Orthodox family.
From the perspective of our lay people or
members, these ceremonies are very
important.
75.For the Reformed family of Churches,
two of these practices are dominical
sacraments, namely Baptism and Eucharist.
Based on the teaching of Our Lord Jesus
Christ (Matthew 26.26-28; 28.18-20), we
regard them as means of grace made
available by God to all people through the
Church. While affirming that Baptism and
the Eucharist are essential, we do not limit
God’s grace to these means. God’s power to
save is in God’s hands alone.
76.In which way are the sacraments
means of salvation? We understand grace
to be communicated by God, not in any
automatic way. We do not believe there is
anything mechanical about the process of
God’s salvation. In the final analysis, it is
God’s grace rather than human action and
it is normally a lifelong commitment.
77.Word and Sacrament are very closely
linked in the Reformed tradition: “It is the
efficacy of the Word that is brought to light
in a sacrament, for a sacrament is a
proclamation of the Gospel – different in
form, but not in function, from the preaching
of the word”.3
78.Reformed liturgies were developed in
23
the XVI century when the protestant
Reformers, confronted with worship
practices they considered unacceptable,
went back to the original sources of
Scriptures and worship practices of the early
Church. Over the centuries, there have been
renewed attempts to re-appropriate the
biblical meaning of worship. Such changes
are implemented by the highest synodal
levels of our churches. They involve lengthy
consultations with theological experts and
church members.
79.Reformed Churches regarded the full
participation of lay people as essential to
both sacraments. The administration
always includes lay and clergy participation.
They are in fact corporate acts of the
congregation. For instance, Baptism liturgies
commit parents and the congregation
equally to the Christian nurture and
development of a child. Lay people
participate together with the ministers in
the preparation for the sacraments. In the
Eucharist, this includes prayer, confession
and proclamation.
Emerging Convergence80.While differing on many points
concerning the number and nature of the
sacraments, both families affirm that the
sacraments are the gracious gifts of God for
nourishing and maintaining the life of the
Church and for strengthening her union with
Christ.
IV. CONCLUSION81.Our seven sessions of dialogue have
been only the beginning of a process of
acquaintance and mutual knowledge
between two Christian traditions that have
never officially engaged in dialogue with
each other before. Centuries of separation
and minimal or non-interaction on the
ecclesiastical, theological and spiritual levels
– but also on the cultural level – have made
our dialogue both exciting and slow. Exciting,
because we felt that we were breaking new
ground by simply getting to know each other
and how we understand and express our
Christian and ecclesial identities. Slow,
because we realised that we needed to catch
up with each other on many levels and
required much more time together to bear
lasting fruit in our encounters. Nevertheless,
the results we did achieve were quite
significant and certainly historic, e.g., the
Agreement on Christology that resolved a
centuries-old theological controversy. We
realise that there are many areas of
theological difference which still exist and
need further dialogue.
82.The Oriental Orthodox-Reformed
dialogue has already given the opportunity
to discuss issues of mutual concern. None
can foresee the results clearly today. Any
activity intending church unity is an answer
to the call of Jesus Christ that churches
exhibit Christian unity in order to bear
witness to His mission in the world. Who
knows how the Holy Spirit has led this
dialogue in planting unity among the
Reformed and the Oriental Orthodox
families of churches in generations to come?
Hope for Christian unity is both present and
24
future. We pray that God may use us for the
fulfilment of this hope.
83.We submit this Report to the
authorities of the Oriental Orthodox
Churches and to the Executive
Committee of the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches for their
consideration and action.
APPENDIXList of papers presented
First SessionAnba Bishoy Monastery, Wadi-ElNatroun (Egypt) 2-5 May 1993
Introduction to the Oriental Orthodox
Churches, Bishop Matta Roham Mar
Eustathius; The main characteristics of the
Reformed Churches, Dr. Karel Blei; Oriental
Orthodox view of tradition and scripture,
Pope Shenouda III; A Reformed view on
tradition and Scripture, Dr. Silke-Petra
Bergjan; The nature and the mission of the
Church: an Oriental Orthodox view, Prof.
Dr. Kondothra M. George; The nature and
the mission of the Church: a Reformed view,
Dr. Samuel Habib.
Second SessionDriebergen (The Netherlands)10-15 September 1994
Christological controversies of the fourth
and fifth centuries, Prof. Dr. George Sabra; A
survey of the recent bilateral agreements
between the Oriental (non-Chalcedonian)
Orthodox Churches and the Eastern
Orthodox Church and other Christian
communions, Metropolitan Bishoy; The
bilateral agreements between the Oriental
Orthodox and the Eastern Orthodox: a
Reformed response, Dr. Silke-Petra Bergjan;
Tradition and its role in the Syrian Orthodox
Church, Bishop Matta Roham Mar
Eustathius; Holy Scripture and tradition: a
Reformed perspective, Prof. Dr. Rebecca
Weaver; Holy Scripture: its use and misuse
from an Oriental Orthodox perspective, Prof.
Dr. Kondothra M. George; The use and abuse
of the Scriptures in relation to mission,
evangelism and proselytism from a
Reformed perspective, Prof. Dr. Peter
McEnhill.
Third SessionSophia Centre, Kottayam (India)10-15 January 1997
Theology and Theologian: their Function
and Authority in the Orthodox Church, Prof.
Dr. Kondothra M. George; The Beauty and
Service of Theology, Dr. Milan Opocenský; A
25
Brief History of the Reformed Churches in
India, Dr. Franklyn J. Balasundaram; Holy
Scripture, its authority and its inspiration,
Dr. Karel Blei.
Fourth SessionRichmond, Virginia (USA)9-16 January 1998
Mission: An Oriental Orthodox
Perspective, Prof. Dr. Kondothra M. George;
The Nature of the Church from a Reformed
Perspective, Dr. Christopher B. Kaiser; Some
Key Issues in Contemporary Mission Debate,
Dr. H. S. Wilson.
Fifth SessionSt. Ephrem Syrian Orthodox Seminary,Ma’arat Saydnaya (Syria)10-15 January 1999
The Understanding of Ministry in the
Reformed Tradition, Prof. Dr. Peter McEnhill;
Ministry in the Orthodox Tradition, His Grace
Archbishop Aphrem Karim Mar Cyril; The
Link between Priesthood and Eucharist in
the New Testament, Metropolitan Bishoy.
Sixth SessionMusselburgh, Scotland11-16 January 2000
Introduction to the Sacraments of the
Church, Metropolitan Bishoy; The Mystery/
Sacrament of Baptism,Very Rev. Nareg
Alemezian; Introduction to the Sacrament
of Holy Liturgy/Eucharist, Geevarghese Mar
Coorilos; An Interrogation of the
Sacraments of Baptism and Eucharist, Prof.
Dr. J. Jayakiran Sebastian; The Reformed
Understanding of the Sacraments, Prof. Dr.
George Sabra.
Seventh SessionCatholicosate of Cilicia in Antelias,Beirut (Lebanon) – 23-28 January 2001Introduction to the Sacraments: an
Oriental Orthodox Perspective,
Metropolitan Yohanna Ibrahim Mar
Gregorios.
Participants1. Oriental Orthodox
In the 1992 planning meeting
His Holiness Pope Shenouda III (Co-
chair), Patriarch of Alexandria, Coptic
Orthodox Church
His Grace Archbishop Aram Keshishian,
Armenian Apostolic Church
Prof. Dr. Kondothra M. George ,
Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
His Grace Metropolitan Yohanna
Ibrahim Mar Gregorios, Syrian Orthodox
Church
His Grace Archbishop Timotheos,
Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
In the dialogue sessions held between1993 and 2001
His Holiness Pope Shenouda III (Co-
chair), Patriarch of Alexandria, Coptic
Orthodox Church [1993, 1994]
His Grace Metropolitan Bishoy (Co-chair
from 1997), Coptic Orthodox Church [1993,
1994, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001]
Very Rev. Father Nareg Alemezian ,
Armenian Apostolic Church [1999, 2000,
2001]
26
His Grace Bishop Vicken Aykazian,
Armenian Apostolic Church [1993, 1997,
1998]
His Grace Bishop Dirayr Panossian,
Armenian Apostolic Church [1997, 1998,
1999, 2000, 2001]
His Grace Bishop Moussa, Coptic
Orthodox Church [1993, 1994, 1997]
His Grace Bishop Serapion, Coptic
Orthodox Church [1993]
His Grace Bishop Youssef , Coptic
Orthodox Church [1998]
His Grace Bishop Antony , Coptic
Orthodox Church [2000]
His Grace Archbishop Abuna Kerlos,
Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
[2000]
Rev. Seife Selassie Yohannes, Ethiopian
Orthodox Tewahedo Church [1994, 2000]
His Grace Geevarghese Mar Coorilos,
Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church [1993,
1994, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001]
Prof. Dr. Kondothra M. George, Malankara
Orthodox Syrian Church [1993, 1994, 1997,
1998]
His Eminence Metropolitan Philipos Mar
Eusebius, Malankara Orthodox Syrian
Church [invited 1997]
Mr. P. C. Abraham, Malankara Orthodox
Syrian Church [invited 1997]
Mrs. P. Lukose, Malankara Orthodox
Syrian Church [invited 1997]
Father John Mathews, Malankara
Orthodox Syrian Church [invited 1997]
Father John Thomas, Malankara
Orthodox Syrian Church [invited 1997]
His Grace Archbishop Yohanna Ibrahim Mar
Gregorios, Syrian Orthodox Church [1998,
1999, 2000]
His Grace Archbishop Aphrem Karim
Mar Cyril, Syrian Orthodox Church [1998,
1999, 2000]
His Grace Bishop Matta Roham Mar
Eustathius, Syrian Orthodox Church [1993,
1994, 1999]
2. ReformedIn the 1992 planning meeting
Dr. Milan Opocenský (Co-chair) ,
Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren
Dr. Silke-Petra Bergjan, Evangelical-
Reformed Church, Germany
WARC Staff: Dr. H. S. Wilson, Church of
South India
In the dialogue sessions held between1993 and 2001
Dr. Milan Opocenský (Co-chair) ,
Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren [1993,
1994, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000]
Dr. Jana Opocenská, Evangelical Church
of Czech Brethren [1993]
Dr. Silke-Petra Bergjan, Evangelical-
Reformed Church, Germany [1993, 1994,
1999, 2000]
Rev. Dr. Karel Blei, The Netherlands
Reformed Church [1993, 1994, 1997]
Dr. Samuel Habib, Synod of the Nile of
the Evangelical Church, Egypt [1993]
Rev. Dr. Abdel Masih Istafanous, Synod
of the Nile of the Evangelical Church, Egypt
[1993]
Dr. Christopher Kaiser, Reformed Church
27
1 Roman Catholic-Reformed (since 1970), Lutheran-Reformed (since 1970), Baptist-Reformed(1973-1977), Anglican-Reformed (1981-1984), Mennonite-Reformed (1984), Disciples of Christ-Reformed (1984), Prague Consultations on the First, Radical and Second Reformations(since 1986), Methodist-Reformed (1987), Orthodox-Reformed (since 1988), Pentecostal-Reformed (1996-2000), African Instituted Churches-Reformed (since 1999), Adventist-Reformed (2001).2 The Augsburg Confession (1530) article 7; The Geneva Confession (1536) article 18; TheFirst Helvetic Confession (1536) article 14; The Confession of Faith Used in the EnglishCongregation at Geneva (1556) article 4; The French Confession (1559) article XXVIII; TheScottish Confession (1560) chapter XVIII; The Belgic Confession (1561) article 29; TheSecond Helvetic Confession (1566) chapter XVII.3 Brian A. Gerrish, Grace and Gratitude – The Eucharistic Theology of John Calvin, Edinburgh,T & T Clark, 1998, p.108.
Notes
in America [1994, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,
Co-chair 2001]
Prof. Dr. Peter McEnhill, Church of
Scotland, U.K. [1994, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,
2001]
Prof. Dr. George Sabra, National
Evangelical Synod of Syria and Lebanon
[1993, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2001]
Prof. Dr. J. Jayakiran Sebastian, Church
of South India [1993, 1994, 1997, 1998, 2000,
2001]
Dr. Eugene Turner, Presbyterian Church
(USA) [1993, 1994, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000,
2001]
Dr. Harold Vogelaar, Reformed Church in
America [1993]
Prof. Dr. Rebecca Weaver, Presbyterian
Church (USA) [1993, 1994, 1997, 1998, 1999]
Rev. Emile Zaki, Synod of the Nile of the
Evangelical Church, Egypt [1997, 2000]
Prof. Dr. H. S. Wilson [1999], Wartburg
Theological Seminary, USA
Consultant: Dr. Franklyn Balasundaram,
Church of South India [1997]
Visitors: Rev. Dr. C. S. Calian, Presbyterian
Church (USA) [1998]
Rev. Dr. Victor Makari, Presbyterian
Church (USA) [1998]
WARC Staff: Dr. H. S. Wilson, Church of
South India [1993, 1994, 1997, 1998]
Dr. Odair Pedroso Mateus, Independent
Presbyterian Church of Brazil [2000, 2001]
28
Report of the International TheologicalDialogue between the Seventh-dayAdventist Church and the WorldAlliance of Reformed Churches
Jongny sur Vevey, Switzerland, 1-7 April 2001
I. Preamble1.This document is a record of the
dialogue between representatives of the
General Conference of Seventh-day
Adventists and the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches held at Jongny sur Vevey,
Switzerland, 1-7 April 2001. The theme of
this dialogue was “The Church in the Setting
of the Reformation Heritage: its Mission in
a World of Widespread Injustice and
Ecological Destruction”.
2.Over many years frequent contact has
been made between representatives of the
two bodies at annual meetings of
Secretaries of Christian World Communions.
In addition, an exploratory meeting between
representatives of the two families was held
in Geneva, 28-29 November 1999. The
present dialogue arises from these contacts,
inspired by a desire to increase mutual
understanding, remove false stereotypes,
and on the basis of many commonly-held
beliefs, to address the question how we may
jointly respond to the claims of justice and
equity in a threatened, divided and broken
world.
3.We see the present discussion as part
of a wider programme of conversations in
which each party has separately been
engaged. On the Reformed side these
include dialogues with Classical Pentecostal
Churches and Leaders, the Roman Catholic
Church, the Organisation of African
Instituted Churches and the Oriental and
Eastern Orthodox Churches. On the
Adventist side, while the conversations have
been fewer and more recent, they have
included discussions with the Lutherans,
Orthodox, and the World Evangelical
Fellowship.
4.The churches of the Reformed tradition,
while rooted in Scripture, owe their more
immediate origins to the Swiss/French wing
of the Reformation. Their doctrines and
polity were fashioned by a variety of
theologians and, from the outset, were
29
subject to development, not least in relation
to the diverse socio-political environments
into which they moved. The family comprises
churches which espouse presbyterial or
congregational church order, together with
a number of united churches in which the
two polities have been blended (in some
cases with transconfessional ingredients as
well). Through colonisation and the modern
missionary movement, the Reformed have
spread to many parts of the world where
they have adapted themselves in various
ways to cultural and social contexts. The
World Alliance of Reformed Churches
(Presbyterian and Congregational), which
represents some 75 million members and
214 churches in 106 countries, was formed
in 1970 as a result of the coming together of
the World Presbyterian Alliance (1875) and
the International Congregational Council
(1891).
5.The Seventh-day Adventist Church is
a Scripture-based, Christ-centred church,
which was organised in 1863. It emerged
from the mid-century movement which
looked for the imminent return of Christ.
From a small beginning (3,500 members
when organised) the Church has now spread
to over 200 countries and has (in 2001) a
baptised membership of more than 12
million, representing a total Adventist
community of over 25 million people. The
Church is especially strong in some Latin
American countries, Africa, and the Far East.
Adventists operate a school system of some
6,000 institutions from primary to university
levels, comprising one million students, as
well as a large network of health institutions.
It is also well known for its Adventist
Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), and
organised support for religious liberty.
6.From the above brief descriptions it will
clearly be seen that the two communions
represented in this dialogue embrace people
of diverse cultural, linguistic, and national
origins. It should further be noted that the
preponderance of their members now reside
in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and
Australasia.
7.Every inter-church conversation has its
own ethos and agenda, specific to the parties
involved. Happily, Adventist-Reformed
relations have not been blighted by
anathemas, though they have been
inhibited by misunderstandings. In this
dialogue we sought to face and dispel some
of these, and to articulate the common
doctrinal ground on which we stand; and
this with a view to proclaiming the eternal
Gospel in today’s needy world.
II. Common Ground8.The Adventists and the Reformed
acknowledge as brothers and sisters all who
confess Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord.
Among the many features we hold in
common are the following:
We accept the Bible as the rule of faith
and practice, the supreme witness to God’s
saving grace in Christ.
We believe in the triune God.
We believe that God became truly human
in Jesus Christ.
We believe that through the life, death,
30
and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God
reconciles the whole created order to
himself. By the work of Christ, God’s holiness
is honoured and our sins forgiven.
We believe that God calls all people to a
new and better life.
We believe that as followers of Jesus
Christ we are called to proclaim the Gospel
of salvation to all people.
We believe that Christ calls us to work to
bring hope, healing, and deliverance from
spiritual and economic poverty.
We believe we stand in the succession
of those who, through the ages, have
faithfully proclaimed the Gospel of Christ.
We believe that the Lord’s Supper is
integral to the church’s worship and witness.
We acknowledge our debt to the
Reformation with its biblical emphasis upon
salvation by grace alone (sola gratia) through
faith alone (sola fide) in Christ alone (solus
Christus).
We welcome conversations with other
Christian churches concerning doctrine and
mission.
III. Mutual Misunderstandings andClarifications
9.Despite the considerable degree of
common ground, the Reformed and the
Adventists have frequently misunderstood
one another and viewed each other with
suspicion. The mutual clarifications specified
below should help to clear the path to further
Adventist-Reformed mutual reflection. What
is clear is that both families have
experienced a degree of doctrinal
development as they have sought to bear
witness to the Gospel in ever-changing,
diverse socio-intellectual environments.
Adventist Clarifications10.Adventists have grown in their
understanding and articulation of doctrine.
Therefore, some expressions of their
teachings found in earlier publications do
not accurately represent their present
positions. However, some criticisms levelled
against them derive from misinformation
and have never been true. In each of the
following paragraphs, we express a
frequently-asked question (“Q”) followed by
a brief Adventist reply (“A”).
11.Q: Do Adventists set dates for the
second coming of Jesus?
A: The Seventh-day Adventist Church
was organised in 1863, and has never set
such dates. It has officially and publicly
rejected all such practices, as with attempts
to attach significance to the year 2000.
Occasionally, an Adventist preacher or
writer may have set or implied dates for the
second Advent, but they have acted without
official endorsement or authority.
12.Q: Do Adventists believe in Christ’s
complete atonement on the cross?
A: Adventists believe that the death of
Christ on the cross provided the once-for-all
atonement for sins, all-sufficient in its
efficacy. Their distinctive view of the high
priestly ministry of Christ in the heavenly
sanctuary teaches that he is applying the
ongoing benefits of his atonement, not
adding any value to it.
31
13.Q: Are Adventists legalists?
A: Adventists hold to the Reformation
principle of grace alone, faith alone and
Christ alone. They teach and preach that
as saved people the Lord calls all Christians
to holy living. This includes obedience to
the Ten Commandments, with Sabbath
observance; however, they understand
obedience to be the result, not the ground,
of salvation.
14.Q: Do Adventists add to the canon of
Scripture?
A: Adventists believe that the biblical
gift of prophecy was manifested in the life
and ministry of Ellen G. White. They
regard her writings highly as providing
ongoing counsel, devotional material, and
biblical reflection. However, they hold
firmly to the principle of sola scriptura,
teaching that the Bible is the rule of faith
and practice that tests all other writings,
including those by Ellen White.
15.Q: Do Adventists believe that they
are the only ones who will be saved?
A : No . Further , a l though they
understand themselves to be given a
particular mission, this is within the larger
context of God’s activity through many
agencies. Their Working Policy states: “We
recognise every agency that lifts up Christ
before man as a part of the divine plan for
the evangelisation of the world” (O100).
16.Q: Do Adventists neglect the social
implications of the Gospel?
A : Advent is ts have always been
engaged in social betterment as part of
their understanding of the Gospel. They
have been reluctant, however, to engage
politically in challenging societal structures.
Reformed Clarifications17.Understandably, the Adventists raised
the question of predestination. In some
cases the perplexity arises because
“predestination” is mistakenly confused with
“determinism”. The biblical doctrine of
predestination arises from Paul’s grateful,
retrospective confession that his standing
before God was not of his own doing, but
resulted from God’s gracious, prior call.
“Predestination” is thus a religious term
which is not to be elided with “determinism”
(as the latter term appears in, for example,
moral philosophy, where Reformed
participants may be found on both sides of
the determinist-libertarian debate).
18.As to the perplexity caused by “double
predestination,” it must be admitted that
this doctrine has given rise to a view of God
as determining the eternal fate of individuals
from the foundation of the world in
accordance with his “inscrutable will,” with
some destined for heaven, others for hell. It
should be remembered that Calvin and
others did not place election to salvation
on an equal footing with “preterition”
(“passing by”). Subsequently, there was a
hardening of this position whereby a
relentless logic was ill-advisedly applied to a
religious doctrine, to the extent that in some
circles mission was inhibited because the
free offer of the Gospel was proscribed. Under
the influence of the Evangelical Revival,
further modifications were made, to the
32
extent that some Reformed Christians can
nowadays not only envisage a
rapprochement with Arminians, but can
happily live with them in united churches.
There is thus a broad consensus to the effect
that God’s electing grace is not to be
construed fatalistically, but in the context of
God’s undiscriminating love whereby all are
called to salvation, to which call they may
make their own, enabled, response.
19.It became clear to the participants in
the Reformed-Methodist dialogue that the
historic dispute over Calvinism and
Arminianism need not be church-dividing.
This conclusion resulted from the
recognition that while Calvinists were
seeking to honour God’s sovereignty in
salvation, Arminians were no less concerned
to uphold human responsibility before God.
20.Adventists have queried the apparent
relative lack of interest in eschatology
(construed as the “doctrine of the last
things”) in Reformed theologies. While
Reformed theologians have, down the
centuries, written widely on this theme, it is
true to say that on the whole they have not,
traditionally , majored on it ; nor has
eschatology been central in the piety of
Reformed Christians. It may even be that
distaste for more excitable millenarian
claims has constituted an inhibiting factor
in this connection. Nevertheless,
eschatology is not to be played down – least
of all in the present dialogue in which we
are pondering our witness in relation to God’s
new heaven and earth.
21.Some Adventists challenge Reformed
Churches in certain regions to examine, and
where necessary to adjust, the balance of
Gospel proclamation and socio-ethical
witness, the latter being perceived as taking
precedence over the former instead of being
informed by it. While there are some
grounds for this challenge (which have been
shared for a long time by many Reformed
Churches), the Reformed respond by
underlining their conviction that since
salvation concerns the whole person, in the
whole of society, the proclamation of the
Word cannot be divorced from the practical
outworking of it in terms of the ideals of the
Kingdom of God.
IV. Mission22.As representatives of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church and the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches, we are called to bear
witness to the Gospel in a world
characterised by a diverse set of
opportunities, challenges, and problems.
Among the problems, we identify the
following: social and economic injustices;
ecological destruction; and racial, ethnic,
gender, and religious discrimination. We are
deeply aware that we have contributed both
directly and indirectly to these conditions.
We believe the Gospel compels us to
respond imaginatively and creatively to
these concerns both at a local and global
level.
23.We recognise that often there is a real
and serious danger that is created by our
tendency to dogmatise our perceptions of
what God would have us do and be in the
33
world in terms of certain experiences or
doctrinal positions. We realise the urgent
need for our theologies to go beyond
simplistic dichotomies of dividing human
experience into secular and spiritual; soul
and body; black and white; male and female;
rich and poor.
24.These dualities often manifest
themselves in setting one against the other
or glorifying one at the cost of vilifying the
other. For example, we have lived as though
nature has to be exploited because it is
material and temporal. This is the line of
thought that has resulted in a sharp divide
in the church’s participation in justice and
the mission of God in the world. The
Advent is t and the Reformed
representatives concur that such divides
are not justifiable, either on the basis of
biblical faith or our traditions. We have
found that the whole of life is a gift of God
that is to be enjoyed and nurtured through
fai thful s tewardship . Therefore , we
reaffirm our commitment to joining with
God and one another in the ministry of
reconciliation.
25.Our approach to the following issues
is grounded in our grateful response to
the grace of God who creates us, redeems
us, and calls us to stewardship. We seek
to embrace God’s mission in creative,
redemptive, and faithful obedience to our
call to discipleship. We engage these
matters not with the presumption that
there can be simple resolution to the
injustices that surround us, but with the
deep desire to be in solidarity with the
marginalised and hurting. We learn this
commitment from the incarnation itself;
God’s very entrance into and solidarity with
the human condition in the person of
Jesus Christ.
Socio-Economic Injustice26.We have become more aware of the
socio-economic challenges that face many
of our communities, particularly in the
southern hemisphere . The global
economy, dominated by multi-national
corporat ions and inst i tut ions that
reinforce the indebtedness of developing
nations to developed nations, exacerbates
the economic and socia l hardship
exper ienced by the major i ty of the
inhabitants of the world . This
phenomenon is manifest in the following
tragedies, among others:
27.Poverty - We acknowledge the
widespread poverty in the world, which is
manifest in the lack of access to basic
necessities (e.g., food, housing, water,
clothing) needed for sustaining a dignified
human existence. These consequences of
poverty are so egregious that the church
needs to become more assertive in
confronting these injustices. As Adventists
and members of the World Alliance, we
acknowledge that we are not as proactive
as we should be in addressing these
concerns. We see an urgent need and invite
our churches to work both individually and,
wherever possible, together in alleviating
and minimising the effects of this malady.
34
28. HIV/AIDS We painfully note the
devastating effects of HIV/AIDS in all parts
of the world, particularly in Asia and Sub-
Saharan Africa. This tidal wave of suffering
and death, the loss of income, the burden of
orphan care, the loss of hope, the
desperation inflicting both individuals and
communities, and the accompanying social
stigma that threatens the dignity of the
individual, make it diff icult in many
instances to deal realistically with the crisis.
29.Compounding the difficulty are the
self-serving financial policies and
insensitivity of international pharmaceutical
companies that prevent many in developing
nations from gaining access to and benefit
from the available medications that would
reduce human suffering and prolong life.
30.There is need for our churches to
address the disturbing issues related to this
epidemic in their theological, ethical, and
pastoral dimensions, and this with a view
to facilitating the whole church’s pastoral
care of the infected and the affected. This
will include working to influence behavioural
changes and responsible lifestyles and
grappling with the issue of how our two
communions can cooperate in dealing with
this issue as we proclaim the Gospel.
31. Violence - The ugly head of violence
rises everywhere – especially against women,
children, and other vulnerable communities.
Dictatorships; militarism; racism;
industrialisation that pushes people off their
land; and racist violence against groups like
the Dalits , blacks, and indigenous
communities are responsible for a large
share of the wave of ongoing misery of
countless multitudes. In addition, many
structural adjustment programmes imposed
on indebted developing countries have
adverse effects upon human and peoples’
rights. Such violence and discrimination
brutalise and dehumanise people made in
the image of God.
Ecological Destruction32.In recent years there has been a global
raising of consciousness to the ways in which
human beings, particularly from affluent
societies in the northern hemisphere, have
contributed to the destruction of the
environment. Manifestations of this
destruction include reduction of valuable
biomass (e.g., deforestation, over-harvesting
of marine life, and overgrazing),
compromises in maintaining eco-diversity
balance (e.g., acid rain and use of fossil fuels),
and global warming.
33. As Christian believers, we are called
to respond to these crises by engaging in
the work of healing and reconciliation. The
doctrine of creation shapes our
understanding of Christian mission in
relation to environmental degradation. We
view the world as God’s good creation; a
theatre of God’s grace; a gift to be enjoyed
and nurtured by God’s creatures. Sabbath
rest may well be a reminder both of God’s
providential care of the earth and our
responsibility to serve as its creative
stewards.
34.In the light of the doctrine of creation,
we exhort ourselves and other Christians to
35
repent of the sinful ways in which we have
exploited the environment and modify our
behaviour accordingly. Positive practical
steps that Christians can take on a local
level to address these concerns include:
recycling, conserving energy, buying
ecologically-friendly products, and supporting
local conservation groups. Our discussions
emphasised that Christians also need to
think with global and systemic perspective
about their mission. In agreement with a
report submitted to the World Council of
Churches Central Committee in 2001
(Document PRII 3), we call Christians from
industrialised countries to recognise that
they carry “major moral responsibility for
precipitating climate change and therefore
must exercise leadership that results in real
action to reduce the causes”. In addition, we
hold that Christians be aware of the
relationship of multinational corporations
to ecological destruction and refuse to
condone business endeavours that benefit
industrialised countries to the detriment of
developing nations.
Prejudices35.We recognise that prejudices still
persist in many of our societies, including
faith-based communities. Wherever they
exist, these prejudices constitute a denial of
the Gospel. In this section we focus on issues
of religious freedom and gender which
impinge on the holistic proclamation of the
Gospel.
36. Religious Freedom - We recognise
that religious freedom is a gift of God and a
fundamental freedom that should be
promoted and protected.
37.We are concerned by the increasing
violations of religious freedom in several
parts of the world leading to an increase of
intolerance and conflict.
38.We encourage cooperation between
our communions: (a) in defending and
promoting religious freedom through
international agencies, governments, and
churches; (b) in organising conferences and
symposia to discuss religious freedom issues;
and (c) in sharing information and joining
in common projects and prayers for those
who are persecuted.
39. Gender Biases - Women experience
discrimination, oppression and exploitation
in many forms. We believe the church needs
to continue combating gender
discrimination. The doctrine of creation
teaches that men and women are equally
created in the image of God; in the
household of faith we are all one in Christ.
This theological affirmation needs to be
supported by concrete action first in local
contexts and then in networking with others
from multiple contexts who are also
advocates of women and women’s concerns.
40.Women constitute a vital and dynamic
force within the church. They keep the
church active by their numerous
contributions. But in many contexts they
are excluded from leadership roles and
decision-making bodies. The New
Testament, by contrast , teaches that
women are equal recipients of the gifts of
the Holy Spirit and should therefore exercise
36
leadership roles in the church’s ministry.
Reformed representatives emphasise that
this includes the ordination of women to
the ministry of Word and Sacrament, whilst
admitting that the mere fact of the church’s
having this commitment does not imply that
all gender-equality issues have been
resolved. While it is true that, because of
differences in biblical interpretation,
Adventists do not at present ordain women
to the ministerial office, women are
occupying increasingly significant leadership
roles, including service as local pastors.
41.In the course of our discussions we
highlighted the need for: (a) ongoing
interpretation of Scriptures pertaining to
gender equality; (b) raised consciousness of
social evils including prostitution in relation
to tourism, sati (an Indian term for widow-
burning), dowry, female infanticide, female
sterilisation, job discrimination; and (c)
increased understanding of the particular
ways in which gender discrimination is
manifest, depending on the particular
context.
V. Conclusion42.We are happy to conclude that our
conversation has been productive in a
number of directions. We have affirmed the
common doctrinal ground on which we
stand, and we have specified some of the
ways in which our teachings have developed
over time. We have sought to dispel mutual
misunderstandings concerning doctrine. We
have eschewed the sectarian spirit, and have
not questioned one another’s status as
Christians. Recognising that the Gospel of
God’s grace concerns the whole of life and
the whole of society, we have turned our
minds to some of the burning issues of the
day. We invite our constituencies to redouble
their efforts to work for justice, the
eradication of poverty, and the preservation
and right stewardship of the created order.
43.In many ways, this conversation was
a learning process for both parties. The
Adventists made clear their indebtedness
to the historic creeds of the church, and to
the Reformation heritage, while the
Reformed were impressed by the
considerable efforts made by Adventists in
education, health, and the cause of religious
freedom. It appeared that while the
Adventists might do well to reflect further
upon socio-political involvement grounded
in the Gospel, the Reformed might in some
quarters question the relative weight they
give to evangelism and social witness.
44.In the course of our discussions, it
became clear that there is scope for a greater
degree of clarification on doctrinal and
ethical issues than we have yet achieved.
The following topics have emerged as
candidates for future consideration, should
the sponsoring bodies decide that further
Reformed/Adventist dialogue should take
place: the interpretation of the Bible; the
Sabbath; law and grace; eschatology; the
concept of the “remnant”; the question of
church discipline and holy living in relation
to secularised societies; the relation of Ellen
G. White’s writings to the Scriptures; the
meaning and implications of “double
37
predestination”; questions concerning
worship and polity; the contributions of
liberation theologies; and the meaning and
significance of Christ’s “high priestly
ministry”.
45.We have every hope that, were such
matters to be pursued, considerable
convergence might be revealed. This would
lead to increased mutual understanding and
acknowledgement of our communions as
authentic members of the one church of
the Lord Jesus Christ.
APPENDIXList of papers presented
Seventh-day Adventists: A Profile,
William G. Johnsson, Adventist ; The
Apocalypse: God’s Answer to the Human Cry
for Ultimate Justice, Roy Adams, Adventist;
Keepers of the Garden: Christians and the
Environment: An Adventist Perspective,
John T. Baldwin, Adventist; Seventh-day
Adventists and Religious Freedom – An
Aspect of Justice, John Graz, Adventist;
Protestant Theological Heritage in Seventh-
day Adventism, Hans K. LaRondelle,
Adventist; The Challenges of the Post-Cold
War for Protestant Christianity in Latin
America, Arturo Piedra, Reformed; Church
Concerns from the Southern Africa
Perspective: A Presentation to the Adventist-
Reformed Dialogue, Rupert Hambira,
Reformed; Reformed Ecclesiology, Alan Sell,
Reformed; Women’s Concerns from a Dalit
Perspective, Nalini Arles, Reformed; The
Doctrine of Forgiveness and Its Implications
for Justice: A Reformed, Feminist, North
American Perspective, Cynthia Rigby,
Reformed.
Participants
7th Day Adventist Participants: Dr. Bert
Beach (Co-chair), Dr. Roy Adams, Dr. Niels-
Eric Andreasen, Professor John Baldwin, Dr.
John Graz, Dr. William Johnsson, Professor
Hans La Rondelle, Dr. George Reid, Dr. Angel
Rodríguez
Apologies: Dr. Jean-Claude Verrechia
Reformed Participants : Prof. Dr.
Cynthia Rigby (Co-chair), Prof. Dr. Nalini
Arles, Rev. Rupert Hambira, Dr. Arturo Piedra,
Dr. Alan Sell, Dr. Setri Nyomi
Apologies: Prof. Dr. Beatriz Melano
WARC Staff: Ms. Margaret Owen, Dr.
Odair Pedroso Mateus
38
Christianity in the African Context
The Report of the International Theological Dialoguebetween the Organisation of African Instituted Churchesand the World Alliance of Reformed Churches(1998–2002)
Adopted in Mbagathi, near Nairobi, Kenya, 9-14 February 2002
INTRODUCTION
Dialogue between two Christianfamilies
1. This document is the record of a
significant breakthrough in ecumenical
dialogue. It is a report of a series of three
meetings between the Reformed Churches,
represented by the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches (WARC), Geneva, and
the African Independent or Instituted
Churches (AICs), represented by the
Organisation of African Instituted Churches,
Nairobi. To our knowledge, it is the first time
the African Independent Churches have
been involved in a dialogue with another
Christian world communion. During this
process, members of churches that
separated from churches of the Reformed
family within living memory have been
meeting with representatives of the
churches from which they separated.
The Beginnings of the Church in Africa2. According to tradition, the history of
the church in Africa began with the
preaching of the gospel to the Ethiopian
eunuch, and with the arrival of the
Evangelist St. Mark in Alexandria in AD 42.
St. Mark was the founder of the Coptic
Orthodox Church of Egypt, which formally
separated from the other churches at the
time of the Council of Chalcedon, and has
retained many of its traditions and original
liturgy until the present day. The Copts took
the gospel to the Nubians and Ethiopians,
and beyond Africa, as far as Ireland. In other
parts of North Africa, the Christian faith was
planted and nourished by the Latin church.
After the Muslim conquests of the 7th
century, when much of the North African
church was destroyed, and the Coptic
Church itself fell under the hegemony of
Muslim overlords, the Christian faith endured
on the continent mainly in the Coptic and
Ethiopian Orthodox Churches. The next
significant and enduring missionary
expansion of the church was brought about
by European and North American Protestant
and Catholic missionaries of the 19th and
20th centuries. From the 1870s onwards, this
missionary expansion became inextricably
entwined with European colonial expansion
and the “Scramble for Africa”. Thus, the
39
gospel presented by European missionaries
was not only heavily influenced by European
culture (individualistic, materialist and
capitalist) but became for the African convert
a way of entry into the new colonial systems
with their exploitative economies and racist
assumptions. It was in this frequently highly
oppressive context that the African
Independent Church movement was born.
African Independent Churches – a newChristian phenomenon
3. AICs are known by various names, of
which African Independent and African
Instituted Churches are the most common.
The term “instituted” was first used in the
title of OAIC simply to obtain Kenyan
government approval for its registration. Its
use did not mean that AICs wanted to lose
the older term “independent”, and both
terms are generally acceptable to the
constituency.
4. Although AICs are now very widely
spread in Sub-Saharan Africa, originally
they were focused in South Afr ica ,
Zimbabwe, Malawi, Kenya, the Congo
basin, Nigeria, and along the West African
coast between Côte d ’ Ivoire and
Cameroon. Three factors led to the
creation of a new form of Christian faith
in these areas:
– the intensity of cultural conflict
between the European colonisers and
their associated miss ions , and the
indigenous cultures;
– the degree of political and economic
oppression in East and Southern Africa
resulting in the seizure of lands and the
displacement of African peoples;
– the extent of christianisation. AICs
did not usually emerge until people had
the Bible in their own mother tongues,
and were able to challenge or “correct”
mission church interpretations of the
Scriptures.
Thus AICs were born out of prophetic
attempts by African peoples to interpret
their oppress ive s i tuat ions , to f ind
meaning, to create space for themselves,
and often to fight for freedom.
5. From a sociological perspective, AICs
can be seen as examples of the new religious
movements (NRMs) which arose out of the
impact of European culture and Christianity
upon African cultures that were less powerful
politically, militarily, and economically. AICs
stand at one end of a spectrum of NRMs
which ranges from the movements very
close to the African religious heritage at one
end to fully Christian churches at the other.
Other NRMs use the name “church” but are
less than fully Christians, and may not even
wish to be called Christian. Theologically,
however, the term New Religious Movement
does not do justice to the AICs. The OAIC
constitution restricts membership to:
Any African founded church which
believes in Jesus Christ as Saviour, the Holy
Trinity (the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit as one God) and Christian Doctrine
as founded in the Holy Bible (Old Testament
and New Testament).
6. OAIC groups its members into three
categories:
40
– Nationalist churches (also known as
Ethiopian and African Churches). These are
churches that seceded from the mission
churches during the colonial era (beginning
in 1844 in South Africa and in 1891 in
Nigeria) over issues of leadership and a
desire that Africans should control the
church and its teachings on cultural
practices. They often saw the fight against
colonialism as one of the legitimate goals of
the church, and were influenced by the
Marcus Garvey movement, which sought to
unite Africans of the continent and of the
diaspora to work for the liberation of Africa
and the dignity of African peoples. In liturgy
and doctrine nationalist churches have
retained much from the Western or
historical churches. They often looked to
Ethiopia as a symbol of African resistance
to and independence from colonialism, and
referred to Ps 68.31 as a prophecy for
themselves.
– Spiritual churches (also known as
Zionist, Apostolic, and Aladura churches).
These churches (dating from 1910 onwards
in Southern Africa, and 1920 onwards in
West and Eastern Africa) are sometimes
referred to as “prophet-healing” churches,
because of the centrality of the charismatic
gifts in their worship and ministry (prophecy,
interpretation of dreams, healing, and prayer
for protection against evil). Their liturgies
are more informal, and there is greater use
of forms borrowed from African tradition.
Especially in Southern Africa, these churches
look to Zion as the symbol of a heaven.
– African Pentecostal churches. These
are African founded Pentecostal style
churches that have arisen since the mid-
1960s. Though the stimulus to their
foundation has frequently been the
evangelistic missions and training
conventions associated with Western
Pentecostals (and as a result, there is some
dispute whether these churches are fully
African), a number of them (those that give
a positive value to African culture) have
found a home in OAIC. There are tensions
between these churches and the spiritual
churches which relate more to styles of
worship than to essential differences over
doctrine.
The Organisation of African InstitutedChurches
7. The Organisation of African Instituted
Churches was begun in Cairo in 1978, as a
loose association of AICs, in order to express
and to address their needs and concerns,
among which theological education was the
most urgent. At its 2nd General Assembly in
Nairobi in 1982, a constitution was drawn
up and the international headquarters set
up in Nairobi. The 3rd General Assembly,
which took place in Limuru in August 1997,
emphasised the empowerment of the seven
OAIC regions. These are: Eastern Africa,
Southern Africa, Democratic Republic of
Congo, Nigeria, Francophone West Africa,
Anglophone West Africa, and Madagascar.
Some of these regions are composed of
national chapters. The regions send three
delegates to the General Assembly, and
their regional chairpersons form the OAIC
41
Executive Committee, which appoints the
General Secretary, and through him
oversees the running of the programmes.
These programmes currently are:
Theological Education by Extension,
Programme for Participatory Development,
Women’s Department, Research and
Communication, and HIV/AIDS.
8. The total AIC constituency has been
conservatively estimated at 60 million, and
of this number some 15–20 million people
are members of OAIC affiliated churches.
The Reformed Churches9. The Reformed family is the portion of
Christian churches that recognise their
most immediate origins primarily in the
Swiss wing of the Reformation movement
that culminated in the 16th century.
Reformed Churches share a set of
doctr inal emphases – such as the
Sovereignty of God, the Lordship of Christ
in the church and the world and the
affirmation of the Scriptures of the Old
and the New Testament as authority in
matters of faith and church discipline – as
wel l as church orders known as
Presbyterian (from the Greek word for
“elder”) or Congregational. There are more
than 750 Christ ian churches that
recognise themselves as part of the
Reformed family. The World Alliance of
Reformed Churches (WARC) in its current
form is the result of the merger in 1970
between the World Presbyterian Alliance
(founded in 1875) and the International
Congregational Council (founded in 1891).
The World Alliance of Reformed Churches
represents some 75 million Reformed
Christians, gathered in 218 churches in
107 countries.
10. Most African Reformed Churches
began as a result of 19th century missionary
activities, mainly from Western Europe.
The only community that pre-dates this
is the Dutch Reformed Church of South
Africa which came with the migratory wave
from the Netherlands a couple of centuries
earlier. They then began spreading through
Southern Africa. Reformed Churches
(Presbyterian, Reformed, Congregational,
Evangelical and United) can be found all
over Africa (including Egypt). However, most
of them are found in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Many of the nineteenth century
missionaries did not understand African
culture and therefore condemned most
elements of African culture as pagan – to be
discarded. One needs to recall the fact that
the 19th century was also the time when
colonisation was taking place and a good
number of the missionary bodies enjoyed
the protection of the colonial powers.
Therefore, many indigenous Africans
identified the missionaries with the colonial
powers. One needs to credit these
missionaries with a number of things. They
brought with them the gospel, schools,
hospitals and agricultural innovations. Many
of them sacrificed their lives for the sake of
the gospel. Today, the Reformed Churches
in Africa are increasingly living out the gospel
within their cultural contexts and many of
42
them are at the forefront of prophetic
action in their nations.
Planning of the dialogue11.At a preparatory meeting held at the
Methodist Guest House in Nairobi from 2-
3 June 1998, the two families of churches
defined the dialogue themes. These were:
Unity – the meeting expressed an
overriding concern for the lack of unity on
the African continent, which threatens
the survival of its peoples. These divisions
are ethnic , denominat ional (wi th a
proliferating number of new churches),
and political, and had sometimes led to
war and genocide. It was felt that in
handl ing this issue , the theme of
reconciliation would be more positive and
productive.
Gospel and culture – Both Reformed
Churches and AICs are struggling to define
their identity as Christians in Africa, both
in relation to “culture” narrowly defined,
and also in relation to the global, and
socio-political contexts in which our
churches are set, and to which we are called
to proclaim the gospel.
Women – The role of women in the
church and church ministries is of great
concern to both families of churches.
12. It was decided that the process
could best be focused and guided under
the overall theme of Christianity in the
African Context, and then broken down
into three sub-headings, each of which
would form the focus for a dialogue
meeting:
African Christian Identity
Reconciling identities – learning from
and challenging each other
Towards our common witness.
The Nature of the Process13.Given the lack of formally articulated
and published theologies among the AICs,
the following tasks emerged as necessary if
the dialogue was to succeed:
- Participants were challenged to develop
a dialogue process concentrating initially on
building trust, relationships and mutual
respect as the necessary prerequisites for
eliciting AIC and Reformed perceptions and
accounts of their practices and beliefs;
- Participants were faced with bridging
the gap between formal presentations of
theology (a Reformed strength) and receiving
testimony of firsthand experiences of faith,
worship and life (the chief theological
resource of the AICs);
- Participants uncovered the shared
African roots of much grassroots Christian
faith and practice among both Reformed
and AIC participants, and were challenged
to value these sources for theologising
appropriately, but not uncritically.
I. AFRICAN CHRISTIAN IDENTITY14.During the first meeting in Kigali (13-
19 October 1999), during which we were
hosted by the Presbyterian Church in
Rwanda, agreement on the practical
challenges the African church faces formed
the most significant part of our search for a
common African Christian identity. AIC and
43
Reformed participants reached substantial
agreement on the crisis facing the African
continent and her people, and the way in
which the Church was called to respond. As
a prelude to this, a simple agreement was
reached on our common faith. Both these
agreements are summarised in
The Kigali StatementAffirmations
15.We have come together from two
Christian families, the Reformed Churches
and the African Instituted Churches, and
rejoice in the spirit of unity, knowing that
we share a common ministry. We meet in
Kigali, Rwanda, and have been deeply
moved by accounts of the 1994 killings in
this nation and by our visits to some of the
sites of genocide. We have been much
encouraged by our Rwandan brothers and
sisters as they seek reconciliation and the
reconstruction of their country. Their
example has been an inspiration to us as
we ourselves seek to understand each other
better and to overcome our own suspicions
and spirit of disunity. We lament our past
histories of division and hatred and resolve
to continue to meet together in dialogue,
seeking opportunities and means of
common action.
16.We affirm a common faith
– in the Triune God,
– in the lordship of Jesus Christ as God
incarnate and crucified, who identifies with
us in our suffering,
– in the Holy Spirit and his transforming
power in our lives.
17.We affirm that the Holy Scriptures are
for both of our families a yardstick for
Christian faith and life, while recognising
that there may be differences in our
interpretations. We affirm that African
Christians have an identity that is both
African and Christian, and that our faith
calls us to witness and act in the social and
political realities of our world. As
representatives of the world church, and as
leaders of churches in Africa, we confess
the complicity of ourselves and our churches
in the economic and political injustices that
have impoverished and dis-empowered the
people of this continent. We acknowledge
that we have failed to speak prophetically
when called to do so, and that we have shown
a blatant disregard for the environment.
Challenges and actions18.We have shared together our deep
concerns about the present tragic situation
of Africa, to which the following factors have
contributed. We have agreed to do all we
can as church leaders to assist our people
to reconstruct our continent, and are
committed to the following actions for
ourselves, our churches, and our people.
19.We are distressed by division and
disunity in the church and society. We will
use our pulpits and our churches to promote
greater tolerance and understanding of
different groups and persuasions, and to
encourage a spirit of openness that will
enable people to express themselves and
accommodate diversity. As part of this
process we will take steps to initiate dialogue
44
at the local level between our two church
families. We acknowledge a need to return
to African models of reconciliation and of
establishing and maintaining unity. As
church members and leaders, we need to
engage actively with society and its needs
and problems in order to enable people to
identify, prioritise, and find solutions to their
own needs, and not just those of our
churches.
20.For centuries the human and material
resources of our continent have been
exploited by others. Knowing that it is this
exploitation that has increased poverty and
unemployment in Africa, we have a duty to
educate the members of our churches and
local communities on the nature of the global
and local processes involved. We will work
with other churches and agencies to reduce
our dependency on foreign models and
solutions for these problems. In the face of
widespread corruption and lack of
accountability, we need to strengthen
governance in our nations and institutions.
We will therefore educate our people so as
to form a strong and well-informed civil
society. We will act to provide more
information to the members of our
churches, and train them to use this
information in order to strengthen
governance in our churches as well as in
society. We will conduct programmes for
sensitising church and community
members, through such means as the
distribution of literature and through
national and local forums, with the aim of
empowering people to take initiatives
themselves and to participate more actively
in civil society.
21.We acknowledge that our own
churches do not adequately model the
democratic structures we are urging on the
state. This is true of “family churches” among
the AICs as well as of the more bureaucratic
structures of the Reformed Churches. We
will be more courageous in confronting
issues of corruption and misuse of power in
government. The process of encouraging
participation will also require some of us to
change our attitudes as leaders, and to
reduce our use of Scripture or the Holy Spirit
to enforce our decisions upon others. We
will work to reduce attitudes and habits of
dependency among our church members.
22.The Western models of development
we are using in Africa are not sustainable.
As a result, our environment has been
exploited, spoilt and degraded, and our own
societies have become polarised between
rich and poor. We have accepted the
dumping of toxic wastes. We will educate
our churches and communities to take
responsibility for protecting and improving
the environment. This is something every
member can share in, through such
grassroots activities as tree planting and the
cleaning up of our cities and villages.
23.As Christians we recognise the God-
given dignity of human beings and the
sacredness of life. In this regard, therefore,
we oppose military regimes whose power is
based on violence rather than the will of
the people expressed through the ballot box.
Working with the media, we will act to
45
expose arms dealers and their customers,
and we will cooperate with our partners in
the North to advocate a shift from arms
production to socially beneficial industries.
We will continue to advocate against the
ready supply of i l legal arms in our
countries, and the lack of discipline and
professionalism in our security forces,
while recognising that these problems are
int imately re lated to our decl ining
economies and increasing poverty. We will
also encourage our governments and
especially our own churches to continue
to show hospitality to refugees, giving
thanks for the self-sacrificing generosity
in this area of many of our local
congregations.
24 .We wi l l work to strengthen
democratic values and institutions, and
to research and develop models of
democracy appropriate to African society,
which can enable people of all ethnic
groups and pol i t ical and rel ig ious
persuasions to participate in decision-
making at all levels of church and state.
We recognise that this will require a
change in our own methods of working,
away from concentration on seminars for
leaders towards more exchange visits, in
order to build relationships between
people and communities across Africa, and
to expose our members to other cultures
and ways of working together.
25.We commit ourselves to promote the
full participation of women at all levels in
our church structures, and to work to
expose oppress ive tendencies and
traditions, so that our churches can
become exemplary models for the
empowerment of women in the wider
society.
26.Children are both the present and
the future of our churches and societies.
Yet they are exploited as child labour, as
child soldiers, and as child prostitutes.
Others are heads of families at a very young
age or are forced to live and sleep on the
streets. For their protection and better
upbringing, we commit our churches to the
task of sensitising our members and
communities about HIV/AIDS,
unemployment, landlessness, Structural
Adjustment Programmes and other issues
which affect the lives of our children. We
will advocate against all those practices
which put children at risk, and we will train
our own members in responsible
parenthood.
27.Social forces in contemporary Africa
threaten to destroy family life. We commit
our churches to the promotion of family life
education programmes. Education about
changing attitudes to the care of the old,
sensitisation to HIV/AIDS, and education
on the home care and support of People
With Aids, and on the importance of chastity
before marriage and faithfulness in marriage
should all be priorities in such programmes.
28.Extreme poverty contributes to rising
levels of drug abuse and drug trafficking. This
is true not only of the hard drugs but also of
cannabis and of alcohol, in which the use of
poisonous additives is of particular concern
in some of our countries. As church leaders
46
we will act to expose the trade, create
awareness of the dangers of addiction, and
support efforts to counteract its spread.
29.The process of globalisation and the
speeding up of communications affect our
continent in various ways. Because
globalisation is driven by market forces and
is largely directed by Transnational
Corporations which are beyond the control
of national states, it threatens to destroy
local values, traditions, and self-reliance.
This can be seen most clearly in the impact
of the mass media on our people. To counter
its ill-effects we need as church leaders to
strengthen our sense of identity, and to
encourage people to be proud of their roots
in church and community. Furthermore, we
need to sensitise our members and those
of our communities to globalisation and its
effects, so that people can participate in the
process, becoming agents of change
themselves and not simply victims. Because
globalisation benefits those who have access
to global networks, and is dependent on
expensive technology, it threatens to
marginalise the poor of Africa even further.
Our churches must engage in research, and
in networking with sympathetic partners in
order to be effective advocates against the
ill-effects of globalisation, and to prevent our
people from being overwhelmed by
processes which may otherwise be beyond
their understanding or control.
30.In both our church families, we
acknowledge a deficit in the area of
contextualised theology. This deficit has
contributed to the deep identity crisis felt
by many of us as African Christians. The
Reformed Churches have much to learn here
from the inculturation of the gospel in the
AICs, but both our church families lack well-
articulated and contextualised theologies for
contemporary Africa. We will therefore work
to encourage a writing culture in our
churches, and to promote further reflection
on the encounter between gospel and
culture. An aspect of this encounter is the
issue of polygamous marriages. We are agreed
that the Christian ideal of marriage is faithful
monogamy, but we recognise that some
African churches need time to work out the
theological and pastoral implications of this
principle. We believe that churches should
not be discriminated against on this and
other pastoral issues which their leaders
are seeking to handle with sensitivity among
their members.
31.We are concerned about the spread
of false teachings on our continent (including
the so-called “prosperity gospel”), many of
them coming from abroad. Our church
members have become consumers of many
different theologies which are not relevant
to African realities. These have contributed
to divisions in our churches, and to
theological confusion. To counter this
challenge, we commit our churches to
encourage more study and teaching of the
Bible, and to the promotion of theological
education programmes which can reach all
levels of church membership.
32.We acknowledge that our churches
have often failed to obey the Great
Commission, and have been preoccupied
47
with maintaining already existing churches
in areas where the gospel took root long
ago. We commit ourselves to reach out to
where the gospel has not yet been heard,
and where churches have not yet been
planted.
33.Many of our churches lack a strong
financial base. As church leaders, we are
called to increase the participation of our
members in church activities, so that they
become “owners” rather than “followers”.
We will encourage investment in church-
owned income generating projects. We will
promote stronger biblical teaching on giving,
stewardship, and accountability in our
churches. We acknowledge that our
behaviour and practice as leaders in this
area has not always been above reproach,
and we commit ourselves to greater
transparency, integrity, and accountability.
34.Concrete actions:
1. We have agreed to meet together again
in 2000 at a venue to be arranged by the
OAIC in consultation with WARC.
2. We will distribute this statement to
the member churches in Africa of our
respective constituencies.
3. We will encourage our member
churches to engage in dialogue and in work
together at the local level, with feedback to
our respective organisations.
4. We will invite representatives of our
partners in this dialogue to attend
significant meetings of our organisations
and churches on the African continent.
35.We encourage our member
churches in Africa to engage in local
dialogue and action arising from this
statement, and invite them to respond
with comments, suggestions, and reports
to the Department of Theology of the
World Alliance of Reformed Churches,
P.O. Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2,
Switzerland or to the General Secretary
of the Organisation of African Instituted
Churches, P.O. Box 21736, Nairobi,
Kenya.
OAIC Representatives: Baba Aladura Dr.
G.I.M. Otubu, Co-Chair, Archbishop John
Mweresa Kivuli, Father Michael A. Ng’ong’a,
Rev. Thomas Oduro, Mr. John Padwick, Ms.
Olga Ratovonarivo, Archbishop Njeru
Wambugu
WARC Representatives: Rev. Dr. André
Karamaga, Co-Chair, Rev. Dr. Peter Bisem,
Rev. Dr. Gregg Mast, Rev. Muthoni Ruth
Ngaari, Rev. Dr. Setri Nyomi, Ms. Margaret
Owen
II. RECONCILING IDENTITIES36.Participants in the second dialogue
session were hosted by the Eternal Sacred
Order of the Cherubim and Seraphim, and
by its sister churches in OAIC Nigeria. In
this meeting, held in Lagos, Nigeria, 4-7
March 2001, they sought to address
themselves to the two issues of the place
and ministry of the Holy Spirit, and the role
of education (both secular and theological)
in the two families of churches. These were
approached from the standpoint of the
theme of the meeting , Reconciling
Identities, which formed the subject of the
two introductory papers from both families.
48
The summary of the Lagos meeting appears
in the following document:
The Lagos CommuniquéAddressing our common problems
37.We, the representatives of two
Christian families, the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches (WARC) and the
Organisation of African Instituted Churches
(OAIC), have met together in Lagos, Nigeria,
as the guests of OAIC Nigeria. Our theme
has been Reconciling identities: learning
from and challenging each other (the
prophetic role of the church, the free
movement of the Holy Spirit).
38.We have heard from our Nigerian
hosts the challenges they face as Christians
as sharia law is enforced in certain states in
this country, and we affirm a common desire
to work towards relations with our Muslim
brothers and sisters that will permit the full
practice of both faiths. In this connection,
we are agreed that killing people in the
name of God is foreign to African tradition
and can never be justified.
39.Building on our previous meetings in
Nairobi, Kenya in 1998, and Kigali, Rwanda
in 1999, we celebrate our continuing growth
towards mutual understanding and unity in
the Christian faith, and our common desire
to address the continuing crisis on our
continent. In this connection, we affirm the
Kigali Statement of 1999 as presenting an
analysis that continues to be relevant of
the problems and challenges facing Africa.
We commend it again to our member
churches, together with its
recommendations for action. We note with
regret the lack of response to the statement,
and commit ourselves to ensure its wider
circulation among our respective
constituencies.
Moving towards reconciliation of ouridentities
40. In this meeting in Lagos we have
further identified beliefs and standpoints
that we share in common:
– Both our families are committed to
practising the Christian faith in its Trinitarian
fullness, although with different emphases.
– Our continent has a profound
spirituality and a belief in mysticism that is
deeply rooted in our traditional cultures, and
we share a commitment to developing and
practising a Christian faith that addresses
these spiritual realities. We acknowledge the
long experience of the African Instituted
Churches (AICs), and the increasing
involvement of the Reformed Churches, in
this ministry. In the difficult matter of
discerning the spirits , we affirm two
principles common to our families: that we
test the spirits against the word of Scripture,
and that we do so in the context of the
praying community (the local and universal
church).
– Our families show a common concern
for providing appropriate education at all
levels and for all members of our churches,
an education that must have its roots in
African culture and values. With regard to
training our ministers and others who serve
the church, we recognise the importance of:
49
– providing theological education in an
ecumenical context
– providing a theological education that
will enable our ministers and workers to
engage with social issues of the day, for
example, with issues of governance and HIV/
AIDS
To this end, we commit ourselves to
sharing resources, financial, intellectual, and
spiritual.
– We celebrate the diversity of our
peoples as God-given, and we recognise the
right of every person to self-respect and
human dignity. For this reason we affirm
again the necessity of encouraging full
participation in decision-making in church
and society as we seek to empower our
peoples to address the crises that surround
them on this continent. As we engage with
the fullness of African diversity we do so
from an understanding of our identity as
open and inclusive. We draw from the model
of the incarnation a willingness to take risks
in order to achieve a new identity
characterised by integration and the
harmonisation of differences. It is in this
spirit that we are committed to our
continuing dialogue. As we move towards
unity in the church we seek the unity of
humankind.
Moving ahead41.We have agreed to meet again for the
final consultation of this present dialogue
in Nairobi in 2002, in order to decide concrete
steps that we can take together as part of
our common witness on this continent. As
a preliminary step we will address the gaps
in our conversations (e.g., the interpretation
of the Bible, the role of the sacraments, and
the ministry of women).
Signed:Rev. Dr. André Karamaga, Vice
President of WARC, Co-chair of the
Dialogue
His Eminence Baba Aladura
Dr. G.I.M. Otubu, International
Chairman of OAIC, Co-chair of the
Dialogue
Rev. Dr. Setri Nyomi, General
Secretary-WARC
Most Rev. Njeru Wambugu, General
Secretary-OAIC
7th March 2001 – Lagos, Nigeria
III. MOVING TOWARDSCOMMON WITNESS
42.The third meeting was held in
Mbagathi, Nairobi, Kenya (9-14 February
2002) and participants were hosted by the
Presbyterian Church of East Africa. Members
of the dialogue worshipped in churches of
both families. They dealt with issues of
biblical interpretation, sacraments, the role
of women in the church and the future of
50
this dialogue. They stated together the
following:
Hermeneutics43.We are agreed in both our families
that Scripture is central to the life and work
of the church. The Scriptures can only be
properly interpreted within the hermeneutic
community, which is not just local or oral,
but denominational, ecumenical, and global.
AICs have particularly emphasised
hermeneutical dialogue with the local
community of the faithful, in which the
congregation responds to the preachers with
hymns and interjections which strengthen
the preacher and push the argument a
stage further. Indeed, both Reformed and
AIC traditions emphasise the importance
of music and hymns in the hermeneutic
process. The Reformed hermeneutic in
addition has particularly emphasised the
global, and intergenerational community of
biblical commentaries, and written
theologies.
44.We recognise and celebrate certain,
especially African, emphases in the
hermeneutic process. Among these are a
commitment to oral tradition and an
interpretation which builds on and relates
to the shared stories, proverbs, and
memories of the community; an emphasis
on God’s word to the community rather than
just to the individual; an understanding that
all in life is sacred (with no division between
sacred and secular); and a deep reliance on
the role of and assistance from the Holy
Spirit. Both families of churches agree that
our hermeneutic must address itself both
to the local situation and, at the same time,
be aware of and be responsible to the global
hermeneutic community. A closed
hermeneutic community cannot in the long
run remain faithful to the Gospel.
Sacraments45.We agree that the sacraments of
baptism and the Eucharist are grounded in
Scripture and are commended to the church
for its spiritual growth. Baptism signifies the
entrance of the believer into the community
of faith, and his/her engrafting into the body
of Christ. In communion, the faithful are fed
with Christ himself. The experience of
receiving Christ in the sacraments is made
possible by the powerful and mysterious
action of the Holy Spirit.
46.Some of the AICs have affirmed as
many as seven sacraments: baptism,
chrismation (confirmation), Eucharist,
marriage, confession, ordination, and holy
unction (anointing of the sick). Other AICs
are non-sacramental in tradition, although
they would say that they celebrate the
sacraments spiritually. Some of them
believe that, as the bread and wine are set
aside as food for God’s people, so God’s holy
people are themselves set aside as God’s
sacrament and gift to the world.
The role of women in the church47.Both communities acknowledge and
celebrate the gifts of the Holy Spirit to both
women and men. We acknowledge that for
cultural and historical reasons, women have
51
not been allowed to develop and share
these gifts adequately in the service of the
wider Christian community. In many parts
of Africa issues of purity and impurity deeply
influence and limit the role of women in
the church. This affects both the Reformed
and the African Independent Church
families. Also, structural inequalities within
the church often limit women’s ministries.
Sometimes these inequalities are seen in
segregated and subordinate structures, often
mistakenly called “parallel structures”, of
women’s ministries or women’s
departments. Although these women’s
ministries and departments can and do play
a significant role in the lives of women and
men, and can help in raising their awareness,
we are agreed that women must not be
limited to these ministries. The church must
remove restrictions on the ministries of
women, and the lack of women’s
participation in the higher decision-making
structures. It must find ways of dealing with
its procedures (such as holding meetings
only in the evenings), which effectively
prevent women from playing a full role. It
must also seek to understand, to challenge,
and to motivate communities and
congregations to change those of their
traditions and perceptions which prevent
them from welcoming an integrated model
of equal partnership in the ministry of
women and men.
The way forward48.We recognise that some of the AICs
separated historically from member
churches of WARC in a process of
polarisation in which the positions of the
two sides became deeply entrenched. We
acknowledge that ill-feelings and bitterness
continue to exist between some of our
members until the present day. We
recommend that in the countries where this
is the case leaders of the churches
concerned meet to discuss the
reconciliation of memories, and to consider
how best to come together again in mutual
repentance, in order to strengthen our
common witness to the one Christ. In other
situations, although bitter historical
memories may not be present, prejudice and
the lack of a spirit of common fellowship in
the ministry may be present. Sometimes
this prejudice is characterised by attitudes
of rejection of the other based on false
conceptions such as, “lacking education”,
“backward”, “lacking the Holy Spirit”,
“colonial churches”. We commit ourselves
to working much more strongly for mutual
understanding and ecumenism, and we urge
the leaders of the churches in our respective
communities to work and act together to
remove the misconceptions and prejudice,
to build trust and share fully in joint Christian
witness. In the crises that affect our
continent, for the survival of our own people,
we cannot afford disunity.
49.We recognise the dangers of training
AIC students at colleges of the other
Christian world communions and
denominations, because they can easily be
lost from the AICs to the denomination of
the college. In this context, there is a need
52
to explore how Reformed Church theological
institutions can be used for the training of
AIC students, and how these institutions
can be made more hospitable to AIC
students, in order to build them up in their
ministry in their own churches rather than
purely in the context of the Reformed
ministry. In this context, also, we consider
that initially, support should be given to the
OAIC Theological Education by Extension
programme, and its attempts to revise its
curriculum, and to obtain proper academic
accreditation for its courses. In association
with the Conference of African Theological
Institutions, the Reformed Churches in Africa
should consider encouraging some of their
lecturers to cooperate in the process.
Further, and as a long-term goal, we
recognise the need for an increased number
of further degree- level theological
institutions run by and for AICs.
50.As a dialogue, we endorse the
aspirations of the AIC community to come
up with their own written theological
material. We consider that an appropriate
first step would be for AIC theologians to
discuss the theological issues and logistics
required in a continental-level workshop,
and we commit ourselves in our various
capacities to exploring how this can be
made possible.
51.In view of the great measure of
progress we have achieved in this dialogue
at the international level, we urge our
member churches over the next three
years to engage in a process of dialogue
between our two families at national
levels. We will collect and record the
progress made, and report back to our
respect ive organisat ions , wi th the
possibility of resuming the dialogue at
international level at another date.
APPENDIXList of papers presented
First SessionPresbyterian Church in Rwanda, Kigali,Rwanda – 11-19 October 1999
Theme: African Christian Identity
The political, economic realities of
Africa, Prophetess Dr. J. E. Ahme; African
Christ ian identity , Archbishop John
Mweresa Kivuli; Marriage as in the African
context, as repeated by the Scripture,
Baba Aladura Dr. G.I.M. Otubu; African
Christian identity, Rev. Thomas Oduro;
Towards an African Christian identity: the
potential contribution of the African
Independent Churches in an era of
globalisation, Mr. John Padwick; The
political and economical realities of Africa,
Rev. Dr. André Karamaga; Christianity in
the African context, Rev. Dr. Setri Nyomi;
An introduction and brief history of the
53
Organisat ion of Afr ican Instituted
Churches, Archbishop Njeru Wambugu.
Second SessionThe Eternal Sacred Order of Cherubim& Seraphim, Lagos, Nigeria4-7 March 2001
Theme: Reconciling identities: learning
from each other (The prophetic role of the
church, the free movement of the Holy Spirit)
Africa in Crisis: The practical prophetic
role of the Church, Rev. Dr. Peter Bisem;
The experience of the Holy Spirit in worship,
Rev. Ruth Ngaari; African Independent
Churches: their role and strategies of
education, Rev. Thomas Oduro; Reconciling
Identities: learning from each other, Dr.
André Karamaga.
Third SessionThe Kenya College of CommunicationTechnology (KCCT)Conference Centre, Mbagathi, Nairobi,Kenya – 9-14 February 2002
Theme: Towards our Common Witness
The Role of Sacraments in the Church,
Rev. Fr Michael R.A. Ng’ong’a; Spontaneous
Hymnodal Hermeneutics: An Analysis of an
AIC Hermeneutic, Rev. Thomas Oduru;
Reformed Tradition and the Ministry of
Women, Dr. Bukelwa Hans; Summary paper
of the last three dialogues, Mr. John Padwick/
Rev. Ruth Ngaari; Report of the Dialogue
between the OAIC and Reformed Churches,
Mr. John Padwick/Rev. Ruth Ngaari.
Portions of this document were
developed over the period of four years from
1999-2002. The drafters and editors of the
final report are indicated with an asterisk
(*). Those who chaired the meetings are
indicated with a (c) or acting co-chair with
(ac), while those who presented papers are
indicated with a (P) following the year in
which they made their presentation, staff
are indicated with (s) and absent with (a).
Participants who were part of the original
exploratory committee are noted with
attendance in 1998.
OAIC Participants: Dr. (Mrs.) Justina
Ahme (Nigeria, 1999 P, 2001, 2002);
Archbishop John Mweresa Kivuli (Kenya,
1999 P, 2001, 2002); Father Michael A.
Ng’ong’a (Kenya, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002 P);
Rev. Thomas Oduro (Ghana, 1999 P, 2001 P,
2002 P); Baba Aladura Dr. G.I.M. Otubu
(Nigeria, c 1998, c 1999 P, c 2001, c 2002);
*Mr. John Padwick (England/Kenya, 1998,
1999 P, 2001, 2002 P); Mrs. Olga Ratovonarivo
(Madagascar, 1999, 2001, 2002); Archbishop
Njeru Wambugu (Kenya, 1998, c 1999 P, c
2001, c 2002).
Reformed Participants: Rev. Dr. Peter
Bisem (Kenya, 1999, a 2001 P); Dr. Bukelwa
Hans (South Africa, 1999, 2001, 2002 P); Prof.
Pieter Holtrop (The Netherlands, 1998); Rev.
Dr. André Karamaga (Rwanda, 1998, c 1999
P, a 2001 P, a 2002); Rev. Dr. Gregg Mast
(USA, 1999, 2001, 2002); *Dr. Odair Pedroso
Mateus (Brazil/Switzerland, a 2001, 2002);
*Rev. Ruth Ngaari (Kenya/USA, 1998, 1999,
2001 P, 2002); Rev. Dr. Setri Nyomi (Ghana/
Switzerland, 1998, 1999 P, s 2001, s ac 2002);
54
Ms. Margaret Owen (England/Switzerland,
s 1999); Rev. Dr. E. B. Udoh (Nigeria, a 1999,
a 2001, a 2002); Dr. H. S. Wilson (India/
Switzerland, s 1998 Geneva, Switzerland).
Visitors from the OAIC – 2002: Mr. Nicta
Lubaale, Rev. John Gichimy, Rev. Daniel
Oguso
Visitors from the Presbyterian Church
of East Africa – 2002: Rt Rev. Dr. Jesse
Kamau, Very Rev. Dr. George Wanjau, Rev.
Patrick M. Rukenya, Rev. Dr. Lawrence
Mbagara, Rev. John K. Mwinchia, Rev.
Johnson K. Mwangi, Mr. Francis Kihiko, Mr.
Elijah Karimi, Rev. Dr. Godfrey Ngumi
55
Towards an Alliance of ProtestantChurches?The Confessional and the Ecumenicalin the WARC Constitutions (I)
Odair Pedroso Mateus
By creating in 1875 an Alliance of churches whose faith was “in harmony withthe consensus of the Reformed confessions” and whose order was generallydetermined by the “Presbyterian principles”, the founders of WARC were also seekingto promote that unity of the Reformation family which led Calvin, in response to theAnglican Archbishop Cranmer, to declare that he was ready to cross ten seas tobring it forth.
A confession which would intensify Presbyterianism and loosen the ties whichunite us to the other branches of Christ’s kingdom I would regard as a calamity. (…)We want a declaration of union, not a platform of disunion. Much as we esteemdoctrinal unity, there is a higher unity, the unity of spiritual life, the unity of faith,the unity of love which binds us to Christ, and to all who love him, of whateverdenomination or creed.
Swiss-American theologian Philip Schaffat the Alliance’s first general council, Edinburgh, 1877
If we get our hearts large enough to embrace all our Presbyterian brethren, theproofs of enlargement will go on, and we shall begin to long earnestly for widerfellowship. I, for my part, never desired that this Alliance should end, as it were,with itself: but rather that it should be a step towards an Alliance that one daywould have a vastly larger constituency, and that would form a more importantcontribution than we can make toward the swifter fulfilment of our Saviour’s prayer– “That they all may be one”.
William Blaikie,founder, secretary, then President of the Alliance,
at the Belfast general council, 1884
56
The purpose of this article – hopefully
the first of a series of three – is to attempt a
description of the interplay between what
is confessional and what is ecumenical in
some of the foundational expressions of the
World Alliance of Reformed Churches’ self-
understanding as an institution that gathers
churches sharing special bonds of
communion, briefly what one calls in today’s
ecumenical language a Christian world
communion.
My attempt is not primarily
historiographic. I am not deploying here a
set of agreed procedures in order to make
sense of the past. Nor is it exhaustive. What
I have just called “the foundational
expressions” of the Alliance includes, for
instance, documents from the International
Congregational Council which I have not
dealt with in preparation for this enquiry.
My attempt is inspired and shaped by the
question of the present and future of the
ecumenical movement in general and the
role that the World Alliance of Reformed
Churches, known as one of the Christian
world communions, might play in it in
particular.
One of the questions which translates
the concern just ment ioned is the
following: How has the Alliance articulated
at crucial points of its history those
particular bonds of communion that
supposedly constitute its institutional
specificity with the call to the discipline
of Christian communion, with the call to
transform tradi t ional confess ional
boundaries into gates of exchange of
spiritual gi fts? I am addressing this
question to three constitutions adopted
success ive ly when the Presbyter ian
Alliance was created in 1875, when it
reorganised itself following World War II
and the creation of the World Council of
Churches, in 1954, and when it merged
with the International Congregational
Council in 1970.
I am aware of the fact that this is a
quest ion widely debated within the
ecumenical movement in the 1950s and
1960s and that ecumenical theology has
come to terms with it by rejecting, for
instance, the opposition between organic
unity and reconciled diversity.1 However,
the perception, arguable as it might be,
that a certain neo-confessionalisation of
the ecumenical space might be one of the
const i tut ive e lements of the future
ecumenical configuration suggests that, at
least for the World Alliance of Reformed
Churches, this should be dealt with as a
question of the future rather than a
question of the past.
1 Cf.: H. Fey, “Confessional Families and the Ecumenical Movement”. H. Fey (ed.), The Ecumenical Advance - A Historyof the Ecumenical Movement, Geneva, WCC, 1986 (2nd ed.), pp.124-130; O. P. Mateus, “The Alliance, the Christianworld communions and the ecumenical movement (1948-1957). Reformed World, 54(2), June 2004, p.91-106; Y.Ishida, H. Meyer, E. Perret (eds), The History and Theological Concerns of World Confessional Families, Geneva, LWF,1979, 80 pp.
57
How does the Alliance understand
itself in 1875? What makes churches
eligible for membership in the Alliance
and points, therefore, to its confessional
and institutional specificity? Are there
elements and impulses that intentionally
point to Christian fellowship over and
above the Alliance’s confessional and
institutional specificity? In what follows,
these three questions will be addressed
to the Alliance’s first constitution.
I. The Constitution of 1875The first constitution of the Alliance was
adopted by representatives of twenty-one
churches from Britain, United States and
Western Europe who gathered in London
in July 1875 to found “The Alliance of
Reformed Churches throughout the World
holding the Presbyterian System”. It drew
to a large extent on the results of preparatory
discussions held in Edinburgh and New York,
November and early December 1874.
In an age in which Protestantism had
just become a worldwide phenomenon –
thanks particularly to the British colonial
empire and the related unparalleled
missionary expansion that marked the 19th
century – the Presbyterians from the heart
of the Empire were unsurprisingly among
the first ones to conceive and carry out the
idea of what they then called a “Pan-
Presbyterian Council” or an “ecumenical
council” (in the geographic sense) in order
to exhibit their “substantial unity” and
promote “harmony of action” in mission.2
Mission, Reformed unity, and mission in
Reformed unity, let us not forget it, were
among the main factors leading to the
creation of the first Protestant Christian
world communion.
In two rather long sentences, the
Preamble of the first constitution of the
new Alliance sets first of all the case for
its existence. Churches “holding the
Reformed fa i th , and organised on
Presbyterian principles”3 are found under
different names in different parts of the
world. Though they have wished for a long
time “to maintain close relations”, these
churches are at present united “by no
visible bond”. In God’s providence, the time
seems to have come when they may more
fully “manifest their essential oneness,
have closer communion with each other,
and promote great causes by joint action”.4
The Presbyterian Alliance is formed “to
meet in general council from time to time”
in order “to confer upon matters of
common interest”, and “to further the ends
for which the Church has been
2 William G. Blaikie, “Introductory Narrative”. Report of Proceedings of the First General Presbyterian CouncilConvened at Edinburgh, July 1877– With Relative Documents Bearing on the Affairs of the Council, and the State ofthe Presbyterian Churches Throughout the World. Edinburgh, Thomas and Archibald Constable, 1877, p.1-13.3 Report of Proceedings of the First General Presbyterian Council Convened at Edinburgh, July 1877 – With RelativeDocuments Bearing on the Affairs of the Council, and the State of the Presbyterian Churches Throughout the World.Edinburgh, Thomas and Archibald Constable, 1877, p.9. Infra: Edinburgh 1877.4 Edinburgh 1877, Preamble.
58
constituted by her Divine Lord and King”.5
The second long sentence of the
Preamble states that the formation of the
Presbyterian Alliance is not to be seen in
opposition to other forms of inter-church
cooperation. It should not affect “fraternal
relations” with other Christian churches. On
the contrary, the members of the new
Alliance are ready to join with other
churches “in Christian fellowship, and in
advancing the cause of the Redeemer”.6
They are ready to do so on the basis of “the
general principle maintained and taught in
the Reformed Confessions”, namely that the
Church of God on earth, “though composed
of many members, is one body in the
communion of the Holy Ghost, of which body
Christ is the supreme Head, and the
Scriptures alone are the infallible law”.7
The four articles of the first constitution
deal successively with the official name of
the Alliance, eligibility for membership, the
general council, and the requirements to
change the constitution. Let us turn to the
second and third articles. Unlike the World
Evangelical Alliance, founded in 1846 on an
individual membership basis, the new
Presbyterian Alliance is a fellowship of
churches, what we call today a Christian
world communion. Which denominations
are then entitled to apply for membership?
According to the second article, “any Church
organised on Presbyterian principles which
holds the supreme authority of the
Scriptures of the Old and the New
Testaments in matters of faith and morals,
and whose creed is in harmony with the
consensus of the Reformed Confessions”.8
In order to manifest their “essential
oneness”, have “closer communion with
each other”, and “promote great causes by
joint action”, the Alliance’s member
churches will “meet in general council from
time to time”. The general council, which
will meet once every three years, shall
consist as far as practicable of “an equal
number of ministers and elders” according
to regulations that will take into account
the number of congregations in the member
churches. The general council will have
power “to decide upon” membership
applications and “to entertain and consider
topics” of interest to the constituency.9
However, it shall not “interfere with the
existing creed or constitution of any Church
in the Alliance, or with its internal order or
external relations”.10
The aims of the general council include
considering questions of general interest to
the Presbyterian community, seeking the
welfare of the Churches, especially such as
are weak or persecuted, gathering and
5 Edinburgh 1877, Preamble.6 Edinburgh 1877, Preamble.7 Edinburgh 1877, Preamble.8 Edinburgh 1877, Article II.9 Edinburgh 1877, Article III.3.10 Edinburgh 1877, Article III.3.
59
disseminating “information concerning the
Kingdom of Christ throughout the world”,
commending the Presbyterian system “as
Scriptural, and as combining simplicity,
efficiency, and adaptation to all times and
conditions” and entertaining all subjects
“directly connected with the work of
Evangelisation”, including “the best
methods of opposing infidelity and
Romanism”.11
II. Confessional identity in the1875 Constitution
What is specific or distinctive about the
newly created organisation called Alliance
of Presbyterian churches? The answer to
this question, which is the question about
the profile of the Alliance as an institution,
is provided by what the denominations
which have founded the Alliance hold
specifically in common, in short, by what
entitle certain Christian churches rather
than others to apply for membership.
According to article II this is a question of
harmony on matters of Faith and Order:
the Scr iptures , f i rs t of a l l , and the
Reformed confessions, on the one hand,
and the Presbyterian system or the
Presbyterian principles on the other hand.
It is important to note, however, that
what seems to be crystal clear as a
principle, namely that the Presbyterian
system and the Reformed confessions are
to identify the churches el igible for
membership and therefore to make the
Alliance institutionally distinctive as a
Christian world communion, proves to be
a more complex issue in the actual
practice of the Alliance’s member churches.
The Presbyterian system – This can be
seen first of all in connection with the
Presbyterian system.12 It is well known that
in matters of eldership Calvin was not a
Presbyterian. In the absence of indisputable
biblical evidence and significant historical
precedent, the understanding and practice
of this constitutive element of the Reformed
polity and tradition gave rise, between the
Reformation and the late 19th century, to
growing differences among continental
Reformed churches and those influenced
by the Scottish Second Book of Discipline
of 1578 or, later on, by the 1831 Samuel
Miller’s An Essay, on the Warrant, Nature
and Duties of the Office of Ruling Elder, in
the Presbyterian Church to give but one
example.
The first general council – Edinburgh
1877 – dedicated no less than three full
sessions (nine papers altogether!) to
Presbyterian principles in general and to
eldership in particular.13 The second general
11 Edinburgh 1877, Article III.4.12 For an overview of what follows see: T. F. Torrance, The Eldership in the Reformed Church, Edinburgh, The HandselPress, 1984, 16 pp; L. Vischer, “The Office of the Elders”, in L. Vischer (ed.), The Ministry of the Elders in the ReformedChurch, Bern, Evangelische Arbeitsstelle Oekumene Schweiz, 1992, pp.9-95; L. Vischer (ed.), Elders in the ReformedChurches Today, Geneva, WARC, 1991.13 Edinburgh 1877, pp.52-86, 98-123. Papers by John Cairns, A. A. Hodge, S. Robinson, Samuel Prime, Eells, Lord
60
council – Philadelphia 1880 – continued the
discussion14 which resulted in the
appointment of a committee that reported
to the third one, held in Belfast in 1884.15
Following a survey on the understanding
and practice of the eldership among the
Alliance’s member churches, the committee
concluded that “touching the office and
functions of the Eldership, at least three
distinct theories are entertained”. According
to the first, “while the New Testament
recognises but one order of Presbyters, in it
there are two degrees or classes, known as
Teaching Elders and Ruling Elders”. For the
second theory, “there is no warrant in
Scripture for the office of the eldership as it
exists in the Presbyterian Church”. The third
one contends that “the modern elder is
intended to be, and should be, recognized
as a copy of the Scriptural ‘Presbyter’”. The
practice “generally followed” by Presbyterian
churches of the present time “is in
accordance with the first-named theory”.16
It is, therefore, clear that when the
founders of the Alliance refer to
“Presbyterian principles” or to “the
Presbyterian system” as a condition of
eligibility for admission and therefore as a
constitutive element of the Alliance’s
institutional identity, they are speaking of a
polity concept, of a broad polity concept,
rather than of a polity model, of a specific
normative polity model.
The Consensus of the Reformed
Confessions – The second evidence of the
complexity of the confessional/institutional
identity issue comes from the reference to
the Reformed Confessions as a condition of
eligibility for admission into the Alliance.
It was expected, when the 1875
constitution was written and adopted, that
it would be possible for the founding member
churches to reach an agreement on the
consensus of the Reformed confessions
soon. It is obviously desirable, says William
Blaikie as he addresses the 1877 council on
its aims and spirit , “that at the very
commencement it should be made plain
what that consensus is. This is the object of
the first meeting, to be held to-morrow
forenoon”.17 Philip Schaff, the well-known
author of Creeds of Christendom, adds the
following day that this subject “will have to
be settled sooner or later”.18 The consensus
would then be the standard, the doctrinal
basis, whereby the Alliance would determine
whether the creed of an applicant church
made it eligible for admission.
Moncreiff, Lee, W. Moore, and Harper.14 Report of Proceedings of the Second General Council of the Presbyterian Alliance, Convened at Philadelphia,September, 1880, Philadelphia (USA), Presbyterian Journal Company and J. C. McCurdy & Co., 1880, p.148-157, 165-176, 213-223, 257.15 Alliance of the Reformed Churches holding the Presbyterian System, Minutes and Proceedings of the Third GeneralCouncil, Belfast, 1884, Belfast, Assembly’s Offices, 1884, Appendix, p.131-136.16 Belfast 1884, Appendix, pp.131-132.17 Edinburgh 1877, p.21.18Edinburgh 1877, p.36.
61
The first general council dedicates just
one session to the future doctrinal basis of
the Alliance. Schaff himself delivers the
keynote speech. He recalls Archbishop
Cranmer’s proposal, made in 1552, of a
Reformed Consensus “while the Council of
Trent was framing its decrees against the
doctrines of the Reformation”; he reviews
the symbols of the 16th and 17th century
by dividing them into ante-Calvinistic or
Zwinglian, Calvinistic, and post-Calvinistic.
He then argues for the harmony of the
Reformed confessions. They present “the
same system of Christian doctrine”, they
are “variations of one theme”. There is fully
“as much harmony between them as
between the six symbolical books of the
Lutheran Church, or between the
Tridentine and Vatican decrees of Rome”.19
The difference between them “is confined
to minor details, and to the extent to which
the Augustinian and Calvinistic principles
are carried out”. They are “protestant in
bibliology, oecumenical or old Catholic in
theology and Christology, Augustinian in
anthropology and the doctrine of
predestination, evangelical in soteriology,
Calv inist ic in eccles iology and
sacramentology , and ant i -papal in
eschatology”.20
According to Schaff a consensus can
be formulated in three ways. By a “mere
list of doctrines, or an index of the chief
heads of doctrine on which agreement is
desired” , something s imi lar to the
doctrinal basis of the 1846-founded
Evangelical All iance; by a historical
statement , a “br ief summary of the
common doctrines of the old confessions,
without additions or changes”, or by “a
new oecumenical Reformed Confession”.
Schaf f advocates the third way , a
consensus “freely reproduced and adapted
to the present state of the Church”, in the
sense that it would be “the creed of the
Reformation translated into the theology
of the nineteenth century, with a protest
against modern inf idel i ty and
rationalism”. This would be “a work for
our age, such as Cranmer invited the
Reformers to prepare for their age”, and
“a testimony of the living faith of the
Church”. It would afford “an excellent
opportunity to simplify and popularise the
Reformed system of doctrine, to utter a
protest against the peculiar errors and
dangers of our age, and to exhibit the
fraternal attitude of this Alliance to the
other evangelical Churches. It ought to be
truly evangelical-catholic in spirit”.21
The agenda of the first general council
seems, however, to favour a consensus
which results from the summary of the
common doctrines. A paper by William
19 P. Schaff, “The Consensus of the Reformed Confessions”, Edinburgh 1877, p.26-27.20 P. Schaff, Edinburgh 1877, p.27.21 P. Schaff, Edinburgh 1877, p.27.
62
Kraft, who at that time teaches church
history in Bonn, Germany, contends that
such a consensus is possible first of all
because the Reformed confess ions
“unanimously adopted the traditional
doctrine of the ancient Church”, secondly
because “they all wholly rejected the
corrupt doctrines which arose under the
legal yoke of the Middle Ages”, and thirdly
because “they presented their peculiar
doctrinal views independently, deriving
them from the Holy Scriptures”. After a
brief description of the three main groups
of Reformed confessions, Kraft goes on to
present his own attempt at a consensus:
a confession in 31 articles, each of them
followed by the passages from the classical
confess ions used as “documentary
proofs”.22 To Kraft’s argument, Alexander
Mitchell, from Saint Andrews, Scotland, adds
the evidence of “The Harmony between the
Bibliology of the Westminster Confession
and that of the earlier Reformed
Confessions” by proposing a table exhibiting
“in detail the coincidences in thought and
expression” between them.23
I will bring the debate that follows to its
most elementary expression. Principal
Brown welcomes these expressions of the
harmony of the Reformed confessions
because they put to shame “the calumny of
the Church of Rome” who says that “the
Reformed Churches are divided into as many
distinct and conflicting religions as there
are sects among them”. For Brown the
oneness in substance of the Reformed
churches is “infinitely more valuable than
the enforced oneness of a Church that is a
despotism, and which bears down all
individual, free investigation into the Word
of God”. These expressions of the harmony
of the confessions should, however, serve
the practical purpose of projecting these
great principles “into society and the world,
considering that they were the salt of the
earth as a Christian Church”. Professor
Candlish underlines the fact that in the
early history of the Reformation the
churches had “consciousness and feeling
(…) of the agreement of their Confessions
and of their being one”. This consciousness
needs now to be revived. It might be a work
worthy of the council, he thinks, “to have a
return, through a Committee, of the
Confessions used by different Churches, and
might be the means, perhaps, of restoring
in some degree that feeling and
consciousness of the harmony of the
Reformed Confessions that once existed”.
The harmony “should be seen and felt as a
living power and a living sympathy, building
together all the Churches upon the common
ground of the great doctrines of the
Reformation”. Marshall Lang reacts against
22 W. Kraft, “The Consensus of the Reformed Confessions”, Edinburgh 1877, pp.41-48.23 A. Mitchell, “The Harmony between the Bibliology of the Westminster Confession and that of the Earlier ReformedConfessions”, Edinburgh 1877, pp.48, 371-377.
63
Schaff’s suggestion that, in Lang’s words,
“every age must produce its own theology”,
that “every age has its peculiar form of
expressing the one eternal truth” because
this seems to be a rejection of the decisions
of the 16th century “as absolutely binding
upon all times in the precise form in which
they were given”.
Elder Taylor Innes has a strong feeling
that “the Council and Alliance should be
very cautious in the whole matter of
dealing with this complicate and very
delicate and difficult question of creeds”.
He wonders whether it is desirable to give
“any opinion upon the general question
of a creed…” and proposes a motion to
appoint a committee in charge of a survey
on the existing creeds or confessions as
well as on formulas of subscription adopted
by the member churches, and the extent
to which individual adherence is required
from ministers, elders or other office-
bearers.24 The motion by Taylor Innes has
the support of those, like Principal Tulloch,
who think that one cannot “draw up a
new creed or even formulate the
consensus of old creeds” without full
informat ion about the confess ions
adopted by the member churches, and of
those, like Dr. Begg, who entirely disagree
with Schaff’s idea that “every age has its
own theology”. No consensus on the
consensus is achieved in 1877.
Chaired by the same Philip Schaff, the
Committee on Creeds and Confessions,
appointed in 1877, submits to the following
general council, held in Philadelphia, USA,
in 1880 a comprehensive report including
detailed information about churches in 13
countries from the British Islands, North
America, continental Europe, Australia and
New Zealand.25 The report recommends, in
the words of Schaff, that a committee be
appointed “to prepare a summary of the
creeds and confessions upon which the
Council is professedly based. By such
information we may be able to know what
the complexity of the body itself is…”26
A new committee, “of divines from the
various branches of the Reformed or
Presbyterian Churches embraced with this
Alliance” is then appointed in order to
consider, more modestly this time, just “the
desirableness of defining the consensus of
the Reformed Confession as required by our
Constitution…”.27 It works in three sections:
American, British, and Continental
European. The members of the sections are
required to answer the following question:
“Do you think it desirable that the
‘Consensus of the Reformed Confessions’
as mentioned in the Constitution of the
24 Edinburgh 1877, p.51.25 Report of Proceedings of the Second General Council of the Presbyterian Alliance, convened at Philadelphia,September 1880. Philadelphia, Presbyterian Journal and J. C. McCurdy & Co., 1880, pp.259-262, 379-395, 497-499,965-1123.26 Philadelphia 1880, p.262.27 Philadelphia 1880, p.497.
64
Alliance, be defined, and in what sense and
to what extent?” The American section,
whose members include A. A. Hodge and
Philip Schaff, is “in favour of formulating the
Consensus of the Reformed Confessions, in
the received historic sense of those
Confessions, and to the extent of including
all the doctrines common to the symbolical
books of the Reformed Churches”.28 For the
British, including W. Blaikie, “it is scarcely
possible to formulate such a Consensus as
will determine all cases which may arise, or
prove helpful to the Alliance in regard to
the admission of Churches”.29
Among the Continental Europeans “the
reasons for and against a Consensus nearly
balance each other”, in the words of Jean
Monod. The Germans go as far as submitting,
on behalf of the Rhenish Synod, the draft of
a confession taken from the Luther and
the Heidelberg catechisms. For some
pastors from Neuchâtel, a confession of faith
is “needful to the Presbyterian Alliance” as
a witness to Christian truth and as a way of
making known to churches seeking
membership “the terms of their admission”
whereas for others it might disguise
theological differences or lead to separation:
“Thus, in seeking to consolidate our work
we have put it in peril”. The Waldensians
affirm the desirableness of a consensus
“which should not involve the abandonment
of particular Confessions”. The French, non-
officially, approve and encourage “all the
labours which have tended to throw light
on the characteristics of Presbyterianism,
both as regards Church doctrine and
organisation…”, provided that the aim is
not “to impose on the Churches a new
symbol”. According to Van Osterzee, from
Utrecht, now that the Alliance exists
without the consensus, founded “on the
purely formal pr inciple of
Presbyterianism”, “there is reason to fear
that the efforts to formulate a Consensus,
and the debates which such a procedure
would entail, might lead to a dissension
fatal to the Alliance itself.” Placing himself
“ in the point of view of our French
Protestant Churches”, Théodore Monod,
the author of the Continental European
report, “would not vote at this time for the
framing of a doctr inal basis to the
Presbyterian Alliance.”30
These rather different views, added to
the optimism of the Americans and the
scepticism of the British, lead the second
consensus committee, reporting at Belfast
in 1884, to conclude that “it is not
indispensable to the Alliance, as an
organization, that the Consensus should
at present be further defined”. While “there
are advantages which the defining of the
Consensus would secure, as working out
28 Alliance of the Reformed Churches holding the Presbyterian System. Minutes and Proceedings of the Third GeneralCouncil, Belfast, 1884. Belfast, Assembly’s Offices, 1884, p.32.29 Belfast 1884, p.32.30 Belfast 1884, p.33-34.
65
the ends for which the organization
exists” , i t i s recognised that “ the
advantages which might arise from a
satisfactory definition of the Consensus
seem to the Committee, for the present,
outweighed by its risks and difficulties”.31
Absent from the agenda of the general
councils held in London 1889, Toronto
1992, Glasgow 1896, Washington 1899,
Liverpool 1904, New York 1909, Aberdeen
1913, and Pittsburgh 1921, the consensus
issue makes a somewhat predictable
comeback when the Alliance celebrates
its jubilee in Cardiff, Wales, 1925. Against
the advice of Karl Barth, who contributes
a substantial paper read in absentia, the
Cardiff general council requests the North
American and the European branches of
the Al l iance to once again appoint
committees “ to draw up a common
Statement of Faith to be presented to the
Council for consideration”.32
Once again, as in 1884, the Eastern
and the Western areas of the Alliance hold
different views. The Europeans generally
prefer “a declaration, within a paragraph”
which looks like “the first of the well-
known Art ic les Declaratory of the
Constitution of the Church of Scotland in
Matters Spiritual”,33 a statement “brief and
simple, religious and practical, affirmative
rather than expository , loyal to the
principles of the Reformation and to the
fundamental revelation of which Scripture
is the record”.34 A short declaration of faith
is then drafted to this effect. The North
Americans, however, object that “the form
submitted is in no distinctive sense a
Reformed instrument” and that no express
affirmation is made of “the virgin birth,
the substitutionary, sacrificial atonement,
and the bodily resurrection of our Lord”.35
The two committees recommend that the
1929 Boston general council “take no
further step in the matter”,36 but the
general council asks the Eastern and
Western sections of the Alliance “to
appoint Committees to continue the
consideration of the Cardiff plan, with a
view to drawing up a declaration of the
evangelical truths now held in common
by the constituent Churches of this
Alliance”.37 At the request of the North
American section, however, the activities
around the common statement of faith
were suspended in Belfast, 1933, “in view
31 Belfast 1884, p.35-36, 36-43.32 Proceedings of the Twelfth General Council of the Alliance of Reformed Churches holding the Presbyterian Systemheld at Cardiff 1925. Edinburgh, Office of the Alliance, 1926, p.145.33 Presbyterian Alliance, Eastern Section. Committee on Proposed Doctrinal Statement. 20th Jan., 1926. Geneva,Archives of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, HA 1.34 Report of Eastern Sub-Committee to meeting of the Eastern Section. Geneva, Archives of the World Alliance ofReformed Churches, HA 1.35 Letter from Dr. McNaugher in reply to the communication from the committee of the Eastern Section, 20th May1927, Geneva, Archives of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, HA 1.36 Proceedings of the Thirteenth General Council of the Alliance of Reformed Churches holding the PresbyterianSystem held at Boston, Massachusetts 1929. Edinburgh, Office of the Alliance, 1929, p.388.37 Boston 1929, p.85-87.
66
of union negotiat ions then pending
between various Churches in America”.38
None of the two specific conditions
meant to identify the churches eligible for
membership in the Alliance – the
Presbyterian system and the harmony with
the consensus of the Reformed confessions
– is thus specific enough to provide the
Alliance at the outset with a clear
institutional profile, with a clear
institutional identity as a future Christian
world communion. The term “Presbyterian
system” here also means “Reformed
system”… or perhaps systems. It includes
churches attached to teaching and ruling
eldership as well as churches alien to the
idea that those ordained to the ministry of
word and sacrament hold the same office
as that held by the “lay” members of a local
session, council or presbytery, themselves
also ordained for life. It includes also
Reformed churches with an episcopal-like
structure. It therefore refers broadly to
corporate decision-making and corporate
responsibility . The consensus of the
Reformed confessions not being agreed upon,
or even formulated, churches holding
particular or conflicting views on traditionally
essential tenets of the Reformed tradition
such as predestination remain entitled to
membership provided that they state that
their confession is nonetheless in harmony
with the consensus.
III. The Ecumenical Dimension ofthe 1875 Constitution
Is it possible to discern in the 1875
Constitution impulses or elements which
would be considered “pro-ecumenical” in our
days? I wish to contend that they do exist
and that they outweigh what a plain reading
of that document might suggest.
The first element has to do with the
ecclesial and theological culture shared by
the founding fathers of the Alliance and
authors of its first constitution. Three men
above all others, writes J. R. Fleming in 1925,
on the occasion of the Alliance’s jubilee,
“were pioneers in this adventure”:39 James
McCosh, William Garden Blaikie, and Philip
Schaff .40 McCosh is the president of
Princeton Theological Seminary. One of the
leaders of the Free Church evangelical
movement in Scotland, he is also a
philosopher concerned with the impact of
materialists, empiricists and Kantians on
religious beliefs. At the US Presbyterian
union assembly of 1870, he preaches a
sermon that gives a remarkable impulse to
the idea of a world alliance of Presbyterian
churches. Blaikie, who teaches apologetics
and pastoral theology at New College,
38 Proceedings of the Fourteenth General Council of the Alliance of Reformed Churches holding the PresbyterianSystem held at Belfast, Northern Ireland 1933. Edinburgh, Office of the Alliance, 1933, pp.187-188, 435.39 J. R. Fleming, The Founding and Achievements of the Alliance. Proceedings of the Twelfth General Council of theAlliance of Reformed Churches holding the Presbyterian System held at Cardiff 1925. Edinburgh, Office of theAlliance, 1926, p.41.40 We should add to Fleming’s list the names of John Hall and Duff.
67
Edinburgh (Scotland), is the one through
whom the vision will come true. He will be
secretary and later on President of the
Alliance.
Although he is certainly the most widely
known among them, Philip Schaff, whom I
have often quoted above, deserves a
reference albeit very brief at this point. Born
in Chur, Switzerland, in 1819, he studies
theology in Tübingen, Halle, and Berlin,
Germany. Under the influence of Hegelian
theologians such as Ferdinand Christian
Bauer and David Strauss, and particularly of
August Neander, Schleiermacher’s
“congenial pupil”, Schaff embraces church
history.
Instead of pursuing a promising academic
career in Berlin though, Schaff accepts the
call from the German Reformed Church in
America to take up teaching at its small
theological seminary in Mercersburg,
Pennsylvania, in 1844. His encounter with
John Nevin who, also under the influence of
Neander, breaks with Charles Hodge’s
Presbyterian Princeton and later leaves
Pittsburgh Seminary, marks the blossoming
of the so-called Mercersburg theology, a
solitary church-based theological
experiment of evangelical catholicity within
a US ecclesial and theological landscape
marked by Puritanism and revivalism.
From 1870 to his death in 1893 he
teaches church history, theological
encyclopedia, Christian symbolism, Hebrew,
and sacred literature at Union Theological
Seminary – a liberal split from conservative
Presbyterian Princeton – in New York. A
prolific author, he is also the founder of the
American Society of Church History and
contributes to the foundation of the Society
of Biblical Literature and the World’s
Parliament of Religions (1893).
Schaff was celebrated by the American
Society of Church History in 1988 not only
as a “Christian scholar” but also as an
“ecumenical prophet”.41 In his Hegelian
inspired Weltanschauung, today’s many
move dialectically towards the future One.
He distinguishes but does not separate
church and history. History is in progress.
History is developing. The church is an
organic unity. The members of the body,
by their union with Christ – a Calvinian
leitmotiv – join in an organic whole, an
organic unity. The history of the church is
the history of the pr inciple of l i fe ,
introduced by Christ into human nature.
History and therefore church history move
to the future organisation of the world as
the Kingdom of Christ in the pleroma. The
blurring of the clear-cut borders between
Cathol ic ism and Protestantism that
fol lows l ike a corol lary inevi tably
challenges a confessionalism in search of
self-perpetuation. The present ministry of
the future Kingdom requires the building
of bridges: between North America, Britain
and Europe,42 between separated
41 I am referring to George Shriver’s Philip Schaff – Christian Scholar and Ecumenical Prophet, Macon (Georgia, USA),1987.
68
evangel ical Christ ians , 43 between
Christianity and other religions.
Schaff, McCosh and Blaikie are all
familiar with Reformed church life on both
sides of the Atlantic as well as with the
experience of recent church divisions and
attempts at church reunion. Some of these
attempts are successful, like the 1870
reconciliation within the Northern
Presbyterian Church (USA), others not, like
the effort to unite the Free Presbyterian
Church and the United Presbyterian Church
in Scotland. The hearts of good men, writes
Fleming, “were sick of barren and bitter
controversy, and were turning towards some
possible basis of closer fellowship.”44 They
began to feel that the tendency to division
“was in danger to be carried to extremes,
that distinctive testimony – to part of the
truth – was not everything, that catholic
testimony – to the whole of the truth – was
a worthier ideal.”45
Schaff and Blaikie, Fleming goes on to
say in a reference to the Alliance and its
first constitution, “conceived and put into
practice a scheme of unity that would include
the Reformed Churches of the Continent”.
We are surprised today, he concludes, “at
the wisdom of those who, instead of
propounding a new doctrinal formula or
attempting to define rigidly a common
system of polity, were content to rear their
structure on the supreme authority of the
Holy Scripture in matters of faith, on
adherence to the consensus of the
Reformed confessions, and on a general
acknowledgement of Presbyterian
principles.”46
The second ecumenical dimension I wish
to underline has to do with the conciliar
idea of a fellowship of churches. The
founders of the Alliance are aware of
initiatives meant to bring together individual
believers from different denominations on
the basis of a set of commonly held
doctrinal affirmations, such as the 1846-
founded Evangelical Alliance, or in order
to respond to social and humanitarian
challenges such as the Red Cross or the
Young Men’s Christian Association and the
Young Women’s Christian Association.
However , the encounter between
Christianity and other religions in the
mission fields of Asia and Africa, the
pastoral or ministerial challenges raised
by the socia l consequences of the
industrial revolution as well as the cultural
expressions of the dissolution of the corpus
christianum seem to encourage them to
realise not only the importance of the
renewal of the v is ib le inst i tut ional
expressions of the koinonia based on
42 Schaff published his Amerika in German (Berlin, 1854) and coordinated the English translation of Herzog’sRealenzyclopädie.43 Schaff supports the work of the Evangelical Alliance formed in 1846.44 J. R. Fleming, op. cit., p.40-41.45 J. R. Fleming, op. cit., p.43.
69
God’s covenant but also the importance
for l i fe and miss ion of their l ived
fellowship made possible by their oneness
in Chris t and by their common
confessional memory.
This pioneering, modern expression of
confessional conciliarity is conceived as a
supranational prolongation of different
national Presbyterian structures, as an
international Presbyterian and Reformed
synod or world general assembly whose
aims, according to the longest article of
the f i rs t const i tut ion , include the
promotion of common reflection on faith,
inter-church solidarity and information,
the Presbyterian system, and church
mission, particularly “the best methods of
opposing infidelity and Romanism”. By
denying it any jurisdictional authority,
though, the founders of the Alliance
intend to be consistent with the urgent
need to respond to Reformed divisiveness
and isolation while, on the one hand,
recognising the autonomy of member
churches in matters of faith, order, and
relat ions , and, on the other hand,
remaining critical of what they call the
enforced, mechanical, external unity of
the Roman Catholic Church.47
My last note on the ecumenicity of the
1875 constitution has to do with its pan-
Protestant ism. The founders of the
Alliance, Schaff included as I have noted
above, are convinced that by bringing
together Reformed and Presbyterian
churches from different parts of the world
they are responding at the end of the 19th
century to Archbishop Cranmer’s call to
unity among Reformation churches, a call
for which Calvin had declared himself
ready to cross ten seas in order to put it
into practice. Schaff’s project for the
Alliance is an Aufhebung of past Reformed
divisions consubstantial to a critical
engagement with present modern
rationalism that is a sign and seal of the
future in which all will be one in the One.
The idea of an Alliance, Council, or
Confederation of Reformed churches,
writes Blaikie in the first line of his 1877
Introductory Narrative, “had a prominent
place in the minds of the Reformers, and
has seldom been overlooked by those
whose minds have been impressed with
the unity of the Church”. Seven years later,
addressing the Belfast general council on
“the extent and di f fus ion of the
Presbyterian Church, and the leading
features of its training and work” Blaikie
affirms that for his part he has never
desired that the Alliance “should end, as
it were, with itself”. On the contrary, he
concludes as an ecumenical visionary, “it
should be a step towards an Alliance that
one day would have a vast ly large
constituency, and that would form a more
46 J. R. Fleming, op. cit., p.41-42.47 Oswald Dykes, “Individual Freedom and Catholic Unity”. Alliance of the Reformed Churches holding the PresbyterianSystem – Minutes and Proceedings of the Fourth General Council – London 1888. London, Presbyterian AllianceOffice, 1889, p.9.
70
important contribution than we can make
toward the swift fulfilment of our Saviour’s
prayer – ‘That they all may be one’.”48
This understanding sheds some light on
the two parts of the preamble of the first
constitution. Reformed and Presbyterians
are coming together to “more fully manifest
their essential oneness”. But this should
not “change their fraternal relations with
other Churches”. Even more meaningful, it
is in order to ground the affirmation that
the Alliance intends to join with the other
Reformation churches “in Christian
fellowship, and in advancing the cause of
the Redeemer” that the preamble of the
constitution refers to the Paulinian image
of the one body with many members as a
“general principle maintained and taught
in the Reformed Confessions”.
ConclusionWhy not a Reformed Alliance formed
exclusively by churches which adopt the
Westminster standards – which are,
according to Philip Schaff “the most
important of the Reformed symbols, and
have shown the greatest vitality” – and order
themselves according to the functional
distinction between ruling and teaching
elders? Would it not provide the expression
of this fellowship with a clear confessional
and institutional profile? Would it not give
rise to a Christian world communion
committed to perpetuate Presbyterianism?
This is not the path chosen by the
founders of the Alliance nor is it the self-
understanding embodied in its first
constitution. Facing Reformed and
Reformation diversity in its faith and order
complexities, the first constitution chooses
to state its confessional and institutional
specificity in a way that not only enlarges
the Reformed tent but also shows its thin,
transparent fabric. Although the name of
the fellowship refers to the Presbyterian
“system” and its general council aims include
both to commend Presbyterian polity as
“Scriptural, and as combining simplicity,
efficiency, and adaptation to all times and
conditions” and to oppose “Romanism”,
eligibility for membership is formulated in
more inclusive terms of agreement with
Presbyterian “principles” and “harmony
with the consensus of the Reformed
Confessions” which, at the same time,
encourage the search for more visible
fellowship with those living under other
tents nearby.
48 W. Blaikie, “A Survey of the Whole Family of Presbyterian Churches: Their Training and their Work”. Alliance of theReformed Churches holding the Presbyterian System. Minutes and Proceedings of the Third General Council, Belfast,1884. Belfast, Assembly’s Offices, 1884, p.100.
71
Pilate, the Empire, and the Confessionof the Church
Lukas Vischer
“…was crucified under Pontius Pilate…” The name of the governor of theRoman Empire in Judea is mentioned in statements of faith - such as the so-calledApostles’ Creed - made by Christians who lived in areas under Roman domination.Was it mentioned just to establish the crucifixion in historical time? This is not all,argues the Reformed theologian Lukas Vischer in this biblical meditation. Bymentioning Pilate, the confession reminds us that there was a conflict “betweenthe message of love and the political power of the empire”.
Luke 13.1-5: “At that very time there
were some present who told him about the
Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled
with their sacrifices. He asked them, ‘Do
you think that because these Galileans
suffered in this way they were worse sinners
than all other Galileans? No, I tell you, but
unless you repent, you will all perish as they
did. Or those eighteen who were killed when
the tower of Siloam fell on them – do you
think they were worse offenders than all
the others living in Jerusalem? No, I tell you;
but unless you repent, you will all perish just
as they did.’”
Pontius Pi late , a governor in the
Roman Empire, had ordered a power play.
He had told his henchmen to kill a group
of Galileans who were bringing their
offerings to the Temple. The precise
circumstances are not given in the text.
Were these people acting suspiciously
somehow? In any case, their own blood
was mingled with that of the animals
which they were bringing as sacrifices to
God.
The figure of Pilate is familiar to us
from the Passion story. Jesus was brought
to him as an accused person. He tried to
keep from getting involved in the affair. The
Jesus movement was, in his eyes, an
“internal Jewish” matter, which should have
been brought to a Jewish court. But finally
he gave in and condemned Jesus to die on
the cross, which was the Roman way of
executing rebels. Pilate is portrayed as a
holder of power who is forced to exercise his
office and who finally, with some reason, is
able to “wash his hands of” Jesus’ blood.
From other sources we know that Pilate
could be harsh. A Roman knight of Samnite
72
descent (a southern Italian mountain tribe),
he had became Procurator of Judea in 26
AD. His way of discharging his office soon
earned him hatred. He was openly suspicious
of the Jewish religion. To make clear whose
word was law, he did not hesitate to use
provocation. Soon after taking office, he sent
Roman troops on the march, carrying the
image of the emperor which was particularly
objectionable to the Jews. In Caesarea he
had a temple built in honour of Emperor
Tiberius. He illegally took money from the
Jerusalem Temple treasury to finance a
water main, and when a group of Samaritans
carrying arms gathered at the foot of the
Gerizim in 36 AD, he had them seized
immediately; some were put to death on
the spot, some later. Shortly after this event,
he was recalled to Rome, and is said to have
committed suicide there. This news which
was brought to Jesus therefore fits very well
with Pilate’s overall image. He was a governor
who thought his power entitled him to take
drastic measures, and did not hesitate to
risk making himself unpopular.
And this is the governor whose name
has been repeated to this day in the creeds
of the Christian church: Jesus Christ –
crucifixus sub Pontio Pilato. In the gospel of
Matthew we are told that Pilate’s wife
intervened on behalf of Jesus: “Have nothing
to do with that innocent man, for today I
have suffered a great deal because of a dream
about him” (27.19). Legend tells us what she
had dreamed: she had heard voices calling,
crucified under Pontius Pilate , voices
swelling to a mighty chorus, repeating
together again and again, crucified under
Pontius Pilate . Thus she foresaw the
astonishing fact that her husband, a
governor in the Roman Empire, would have
a central place in the confession of the
Christian Church.
How are we to understand this? Many
people think the intention, at this point in
the creed, was simply to establish the
Crucifixion in historical time. Jesus’ death
took place at a specific moment, for reasons
verified by historical sources. But certainly
that is not all. The confession reminds us
that there was a conflict between Jesus and
Pilate, between the message of love and
the political power of the empire. Jesus
represents the kingdom of love, Pilate the
empire, to the extent that it is built upon
violence. Jesus refrains from offering any
resistance. Pilate bases himself on his power:
“Do you not know that I have power to
release you, and power to crucify you?” (Jn
19.10). The confession confronts the church
with this power. It tells us, like Jesus, you too
are confronted with empires built upon
violence. The church, as the witness to God’s
love in every age, must count on coming
into conflict with the destroying might of
imperialistic thinking.
But let us return to our text. The people
who brought the news of Pilate’s latest crime
to Jesus were no doubt expecting him to
take a position on it. What should we think
of the death of the Galileans? What will
Jesus say about this worsening situation? Is
there going to be an uprising? How will he
and his disciples react? Will he call on them
73
to resist? Or did these Galileans cross some
line that they should not have crossed? Were
they guilty, did they deserve to die?
Jesus makes no “comment on the
situation”, and he also makes no statement
on the relative guilt or innocence of the
Galileans. He is focusing on the people who
brought him the news. He tells them that it
is not a question of how this situation should
be evaluated. The question is rather, what
consequences does the criminal action of
the Roman governor have for your life? To
do justice to the worsening of the situation,
you have to make a decision.
No, I tell you; but unless yourepent, you will all perish just asthey did.
Evidently there are two ways of dealing
with this event. We can observe the event
and analyse it. We can comment on it. We
can discuss the guilt or innocence of the
Galileans, get excited about the violence of
those in power, consider whether our cup is
full and active resistance will break out. But
fundamentally, everything stays the same.
Commentators are still in the grip of this
world and its laws and machinations. They
are carried like driftwood with the stream of
events. And possibly they will indeed, like
the Galileans struck down by Pilate, also
become victims of the spiral of violence, and
will perish just as they did.
Jesus is looking in a different direction
from the outset. Acts of violence, like the
criminal act of Pilate, can also serve as a
sign to us that our life needs to change
direction. They can move us to turn back.
Jesus’ approach to imperialistic thinking goes
deeper. In his view, violence can only be
met with love. A community is forming
around him which does not reach for its
sword. Whether or not these persons are
guilty or innocent remains to be seen. In
any case they are no more guilty than any
other Galileans. The real issue is what will
be our witness. “Blessed are the meek, for
they will inherit the earth” (Mt 5.5). In the
turmoil of the times, Jesus calls for
repentance and conversion, opening our
eyes to God’s kingdom of love, which can
become reality here and now.
No, I tell you; but unless yourepent, you will all perish just asthey did.
This does not mean that, after we have
repented, we shall be safe from violence
and persecution. It does not mean that,
while “others” lose their lives, we shall
save our own skin. The whole emphasis is
on conversion as the way to the true life,
a life in love in the midst of the vicious
circles of this world. This new way is not
exempt from danger. Like Jesus himself,
his disciples will be exposed to persecution
and oppression. Perhaps they will even
die, but not just as they did, not like the
unfortunate Galileans. The disciples will
have become witnesses who stand head
and shoulders above the events.
As if to make his point clear, Jesus
reminds them of an accident which had
recently taken place. A tower by the pool
74
of Siloam had collapsed, burying eighteen
people under its ruins. This time there was
no crime – it was chance, an accident.
Perhaps there was some carelessness
involved. Perhaps the tower had not been
well designed. Today there would
immediately be calls for investigation by a
committee. But even if charges were brought
against somebody, it would not change the
fact that eighteen people unintentionally
lost their lives. Why were they the ones to
whom this accident happened? Why did
other people escape? Here as well, Jesus does
not enter into such questions. The degree
of these persons’ guilt or innocence does
not interest him, in this context. In any case
they were no more guilty than other persons,
and there was no moral reason why they
should die. What interests Jesus is whether
the “onlookers” hear, through this event,
God’s call to repentance.
No, I tell you; but unless yourepent, you will all perish just asthey did.
Who are we? Are we just observers of
the events which come one after the other?
Newspaper readers? Television watchers?
People who are well-informed about the
crimes and accidents which happen in our
world? Have you heard what just happened?
What do you think of that?
What happened today? Another house
in the Occupied Territories of Palestine was
levelled. Another suicide bombing in Israel.
The bombing of Fallujah; another series of
attacks on American convoys in Iraq, and
on Iraqi police stations. Another earthquake
under the sea, but less interesting than the
first tsunami, because it only killed hundreds
of people instead of thousands, and none of
them were tourists from rich countries.
And what is our answer?
75
Subscription Rates-2005
Reformed World1 year 13.50 18.00 8.002 years 25.50 34.00 15.003 years 36.50 49.00 21.50Update1 year 11.00 15.00 7.002 years 21.00 28.00 12.503 years 30.00 40.00 17.50
Combined subscription to Reformed World and Update1 year 23.00 31.00 14.002 years 43.50 58.00 26.003 years 62.00 83.00 37.00
Update is the quartely newsletter of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches.Published in English and French, it keeps its readers informed of developments in the life of
WARC and its churches. Please say which language you wish to receive.
US dollars Swiss francs £ sterling
Payment may also be made through our authorized agents in the followingcountries:
Back issues, books and other publications are available from:Word Alliance of Reformed Churches, 150 route de Ferney,PO Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland.Tel 0041 22 791 62 40 Fax 0041 22 791 65 05e-mail: warc@warc.ch web: www.warc.chPrices include mailing.
Editor: Odair Pedroso MateusPublished by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches150 route de Ferney, PO Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Payment may be made by cheque directly to the WARC officeor through our postal cheque account: 12-2890-9, Switzerland.Please mention Reformed World and/or Update, as appropriate.
Japan: Committee of Ecumenical Relations2-2 Yoshida, Kawagoe City 350-0807
New Zealand: Church Stores NZ Ltd., PO Box 11-1061Ellerslie, Auckland 1131
Recommended