 |
|
|
|
 |
|||
SELECTION OF DOCUMENTS |
|||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
From The Charismatic Renewal and Ecumenism, by Kilian McDonnell, OSB, (Ann Arbor: Servant, 1978), pp. 79-80, 95-105, 111-112: The Nondenominational and the Ecumenical A related question is that of the difference between nondenominational and ecumenical. Both describe how Protestants, Anglicans, Orthodox and Roman Catholics come together in meetings, prayer groups and covenant communities, and each of these groups can, in its proper way, be a fact of unity which the Spirit himself has created. In brief, nondenominational events are those in which persons come together across denominational lines on the basis of their common faith in Jesus as Lord, setting aside those areas in which there is disagreement between Protestants and Catholics. Nondenominational meetings are based solely on areas of agreement. Ecumenical events, on the other hand, are those in which persons come together across denominational lines on the basis both of their common faith in Jesus and of their lack of complete unity in faith. Both areas of agreement and disagreement typify the ecumenical meeting or event. Each of these two approaches should be evaluated positively and each as circumstances in which the one is to be preferred to the other. This is not to say that every person who is involved in some Protestant-Catholic activity must consciously decide whether that involvement is to be ecumenical or nondenominational. Most persons come together across denominational lines to share a common faith in Jesus who is Lord, to praise that Lordship and to give a common witness. They are together for a purpose on which they can agree without consciousness of the specific character of their gathering. In a real sense they do not come together specifically to further the purposes of the ecumenical movement, though these gatherings do advance the movement toward the unity of the churches. But that advance is a byproduct, a very real and desirable one, but a byproduct, nonetheless. One does not have in these gatherings a dialogue situation, clearly ecumenical, which exists when two or more churches come together in an official way with professionally competent theologians to study areas of agreement and disagreement. In this kind of dialogue ecumenism, the unity of the churches, is not a byproduct but the main purpose of the gathering. While it is not necessary that each participant be conscious of the specific character of every event, it should be clear in the minds of those who are involved in the planning. As a general norm, national, regional and local meetings should be ecumenical in character. Nonetheless, there are particular circumstances where such meetings might more properly be nondenominational. There might be specific meetings where careful planning would combine nondenominational and ecumenical elements. But the dominant character of the overall way in which Protestants, Anglicans, Orthodox and Roman Catholics relate to one another should be ecumenical rather than nondenominational. In prayer meetings, covenant communities and households there can be both nondenominational and ecumenical expressions of their common life. In order to avoid a vague churchless Christianity, there should be some visible (or audible) expression of what divides the churches. Leaders of ecumenical communities need to have great ecumenical sensitivity so that the members retain their religious identity. Persons, whether Protestant or Catholic, who do not have a truly ecumenical commitment and understanding should not be leaders. Catholic leaders no less than others should have an ecumenical attitude and should safeguard the integrity of Protestant members. Those who embrace an exclusively nondenominational stance should not assume leadership positions. Ecclesial Ambiguity of Ecumenical Groups At the theological level there is an ambiguity in the situation of ecumenical prayer groups and communities. The communion in the life from the Father to the Father, which is the primary fact of the Church's life, is not a matter of an abstract disembodied fellowship. An international group of ecumenists pointed to the pragmatic necessities implied here: "The communion with God which we receive by grace is always realized in the concrete form of Christ's Church." No concrete expression of communion is possible apart from the Church. Where two to three are gathered together in the name of Christ across denominational lines, a small community is formed: this smallest of communities has some ecclesial significance. Evidently it is related in some way to that people of God (1 Pet 2:9, 10), to the spouse (2 Co 11:2), to the flock of whom Christ is the Good Shepherd (Jn 10:11), and to that gathering which is the body of Christ (2 Co 12:12), the Church. Though related to and in some degree manifesting that manifold mystery of the Church, the local ecumenical prayer groups and communities by themselves are not the local Church. "The first Pentecostals as described in Acts were surely not just an enthusiastic prayer group but the community of the Risen Lord...Genuine Christianity was ecclesial from the beginning." This does not mean that they must be absorbed by the local parish. The parish is not the only permissible form of the local Church. One thinks immediately of convents and monasteries which certainly are "Church," though they are not the local parish, though their members may never attend the local parish. Ecumenical prayer groups and covenant communities do have an ecclesial (Church) character, yet they are not the local Church, partly because in the present discipline they cannot be Eucharistic communities, which convents and monasteries can. The communion in the life from the Father to the Father is realized in the concrete form of the Church which celebrates the Eucharist. One sees clearly the ambiguity of these ecumenical groups: They are ecclesial (have a relation to the mystery of the Church) but they are not the local Church partly because they cannot be Eucharistic. Unless the ambiguity of ecumenical communities is kept in mind, they will develop into another stream of Christianity, neither Orthodox, Protestant, Catholic, Anglican nor classical Pentecostal, but a vague enthusiastic melange of churchless Christianity. Rather than contribute to the unity of the churches, it would constitute another obstacle, another division within Christianity and would deprive the churches of the most important unitive force on the ecumenical scene today. Not all communities within the renewal have or should have broad ecumenical participation. Much will depend on circumstance. But where they exist they can be a witness to the credibility of the gospel. In addition, they fulfill the function of presenting the churches with new creative models for future ecumenical developments. This they do both in the manner in which they relate to one another under their common Lord, and in the mutual respect for each other's religious heritage. In a unique way they present models of Christians coming together in a communion of praise and thanksgiving. From Pastoral Suggestions (pp. 99-105): 4. In the most fervent communities, there is broad ecumenical sharing along a whole spectrum: faith in a common Lord, prayer, witness, living quarters, meals and finances. The children are often brought up in a deep personal knowledge of Jesus and a profound commitment of the Christian life but are wanting, for instance, in a knowledge of the sacraments. Some periods of instruction should be part of the yearly schedule in which Catholics can learn the full riches of their faith and develop a Catholic sense. The same initiation into their respective identities should be provided for Protestants, Anglicans and Orthodox. 5. There is nothing in the renewal that makes it necessarily sectarian. Yet it must be recognized that unless the full Catholic doctrine and experience are imparted to members of prayer groups and covenant communities, these may become isolated from the life of the Church and can become sectarian. Therefore, there should be occasions when teaching is given in these areas of the Catholic faith in which our separated brethren are not in agreement. This can be done in various ways, certain times during days of renewal or in workshops in regional conferences, or in days set aside in groups of households. The same opportunities should be given to Protestant members regarding the riches of their own faith. Expressing Ecumenicity Within Catholicity 19. In ecumenical prayer groups and covenant communities there should be community expression which articulates both the groups' Catholicity and their ecumenicity. Catholics take it for granted that these are not two unrelated streams. Rather, their ecumenicity is an expression of their Catholicity. Persons share prayer and witness, for instance, as expressions of their unity in Christ, of their ecumenicity. There should be community expressions of their dividedness. This can be painful for all concerned but unless this pain is faced and honored, all will become comfortable with the scandal of division and nothing will happen. Ecumenical pain should neither be dismissed nor ignored. To give expression to their lack of complete unity, the Catholic members could celebrate the Eucharist separately three or four times a year, not necessarily as a part of the weekly prayer meeting. (It is self understood that Catholics are attending Sunday Mass in their parishes.) The Orthodox, Lutheran and Anglican members could do the same. Further, occasionally the Catholics could have a communal penance service. When Catholics in the prayer group or covenant community predominate, especially when this is by a large percentage, all of this should be done in a non-threatening way. There would be less ecumenical tension if the Catholic leaders would demonstrate by their occasional attendance at weekday Mass that the Eucharistic life is simply a part of their mature Catholic faith. Unless there is this commitment, both to full Catholicity and to full ecumenicity, the communities will, perhaps quite unconsciously, develop into a vague nondenominational pattern. Pastoral Suggestions 20. Ecumenical groups can make a contribution to the unity of the Church and such groups should be evaluated positively. There may be circumstances which make it advisable that groups in certain areas be exclusively Protestant or exclusively Catholic. As long as such groups are not triumphantly sectarian, their non-ecumenical membership should not be immediately interpreted as being anti-ecumenical. 21. Groups which do not have mature leadership should not attempt to become ecumenical. Nor should every prayer group feel that it has a call to be an ecumenical covenant community. From the Epilogue (pp. 111-112): Two great styles of approaching the division of the churches exist, both necessary for ecumenical success. First, formal dialogues involving trained theologians attempt to resolve the important doctrinal differences so that the walls which divide and render full communion and fellowship impossible can be removed. The dialogue way begins with doctrine. No doubt should be raised as to the continuing importance of this style of ecumenical work. Another style, which the charismatic renewal and other groups in the Church represent, starts at the other end. They begin in love and sharing. On the basis of the communion they already share, they build fellowships of love and commitment. This is the family reconciliation spoken of earlier, where alienated brothers and sister reunite in love to the point where they are willing to lay down their lives for one another. This is no mere metaphor. The bond covers the whole spectrum of human relationships and is so deep that the remaining doctrinal differences are approached with a different perspective. In this style the depth of shared fellowship does not make doctrinal differences evaporate. But the profound sharing makes it possible to approach the doctrinal differences with a new theological and spiritual discernment. In this style one begins with a communion so sacrificial and self-forgetful that the truth of the gospel is more quickly grasped and the doctrinal barriers to full fellowship are more easily removed. One of the contributions of the charismatic renewal to the reunion of the churches is this ecumenism of family reconciliation which begins with fellowship in Christ. Only the unperceptive would dismiss this ecumenical force as ephemeral enthusiasm. On the contrary the charismatic renewal is the single most potent force for the ecumenical scene today. And it is here to stay. Both it and its ecumenical significance are permanent elements in the life of the Roman Catholic Church. Great hopes are entertained that the unity willed for the Church by the Lord will prevail and be realized. It is a hope, however, without illusions. Though what unites is greater than what divides, one is still faced with a situation in which there is both substantial unity and substantial disunity, a situation which is a scandal to the world to which the Church is sent. The Catholic charismatic renewal wishes to live at the center of that communion which is the Church, and desires to be a part of that impulse of the Spirit which removes the public scandal, restores the fullness of unity and leads all back to the Father. |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
