SFO International Council - Weekly edition
Volume: 3 - N. 44 - 1997 - November - I
From: CIOFS Bulletin, 1997, N. 3
(part 2)
Marianne Powell
Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue: four phases
The RC Church is not a member of the World Council of Churches, but our Church has worked with this body since a joint working group was established in 1965-66 to study how the contact between the Lutheran World Federation and the RC Church could best be continued and intensified. The result was a proper Study Commission of 14 members established in 1967 to study the theme of The Gospel and the Church. The Commission produced a joint document in 1972 with this title (also referred to as -"The Malta Report"-.
Within this rather broad theme far-reaching consensus was reached, not only on the theological understanding of the Gospel and its christological and soteriological centre, but also on some closely related and highly important points of doctrine, which until then had been controversial.
In the second phase of the dialogue it was decided to study specific questions of dogma that were church-dividing, and the second Commission produced two documents on The Eucharist (1978) and the Ministry in the Church (1981). At the same time as these documents were hammered out in dialogue and discussion, the dialogue phase produced some further documents: The joint statement in connection with the 450th anniversary of the Augsburg Confession (the foundational document of the Lutheran Church) 1980, and a document on Martin Luther ( Martin Luther - Witness of Jesus Christ ) on the 500th anniversary of his birth (1983). Further the two documents Ways to Fellowship (1980) and Unity Ahead (1984), which deal with the subject of how the visible unity could be realized concretely.
Since the two first phases had produced a wide consensus on important theological questions, it was decided that a third phase must deal with the consequences of the expressed consensus for church unity or church fellowship. Hence the third phase has dealt with the question of Church and the nature of its instrumentality in God's plan of salvation. This work was started in 1986 and completed in 1993 with the publication of the document Church and Justification (??)
Among the questions still outstanding for a fourth phase of dialogue are:
- The episcopal and the papal office
- Mariology and the saints
- Scripture and Tradition
- The number of sacraments.
Further, the churches need to discover if ethical questions can turn out to be church-dividing, such as for example views on homosexuality, abortion and birth control.
The method of the dialogue
As the documents of the dialogue show, wide consensus has been reached, even on thorny questions like the understanding of the Eucharist. The methodology has been to draw on modern biblical-exegetical research, and the two churches have acknowledged that many of the problems over which there has been confessional controversy were in fact heavily influenced by the historical situation. Hence the Commission has taken into consideration also the historical dimension, the historical nature of theology and of church structures. Owing to the nature of the Reformation, the two churches have defined themselves in relation to each other, and, as a result, Lutheran and RC positions have been largely petrified since the Reformation. Concepts and formulations were fixed, and as far as the RC Church is concerned they were not questioned or examined until the Council opened the door to proper biblical and theological research. Once the two churches allowed themselves to go beyond these petrified positions, surprising agreement emerged.
The Commission discovered the inadequacy of human words to describe the divine, and they found that often the same meaning was expressed in widely different ways as a result of this. However, the Commission has also introduced the term convergence, which appears to refer to something that is not quite consensus. The latest documents talk of -"growing consensus"-, -"increasing convergence"- or -"essential convergence"-, and the question is of course whether convergence is enough to overcome separation between churches. Will convergence legitimate communion between the two churches?
The members of the Commission make it clear that the aim of the dialogue is not unequivocal theological consensus. This would not be expected since within the individual church there is plurality. The time of churches characterized by all-inclusive theological consensus is over, they state, thus highlighting its conclusion that even the RC Church, which normally sees itself as one such institution, can no longer claim this identity.
Much convergence has been found regarding questions of faith, but though theologians say that remaining differences should no longer be church-dividing, there is still a long way to go. As pope John Paul's encyclica Ut unum sint and its aftermath have shown, the role of the pope will, as pope Paul VI had predicted, constitute the most difficult single issue. Pope John Paul in his encyclica invites the leaders and theologians of other Christian churches to consider in what way the pope in Rome can be at the service of all Christian churches. Theologians have reacted to this and have taken up the issue, as for example in an international seminar held at the Catholic Academy of Munich in January 1997. Surprisingly the representatives from all the churches present were prepared in principle to allow the bishop of Rome a prominent role, provided that the present understanding of the office, which to some extent is a result of history, is changed, and the practical leadership reformed. These are, however, very important provisos. Needless to say, while other churches might accept the Petrine ministry as a symbol and an instrument of pastoral unity, they cannot accept a pope as a universal juridical leader. The point of contact for further dialogue on this issue lies in the exact understanding of what is biblical in the role of the Petrine ministry, and what is historically determined. Thus, summing up, we may say that Lutherans and Roman Catholics may be one in the faith, but not in what we believe about the church and its authority, or about authority in the church.
The status of the dialogue
The ecumenical dialogue referred to in the documents above is considered official by the two churches in question, but nobody has ever stated what this means. Several times, however, it has been stated what it does not mean: The result of the dialogue is not binding. Now, it may seem like a contradiction to carry on an official dialogue, the findings of which are not binding, but that is how it is viewed by both parties.
The official nature of the dialogue does mean, however, that the churches in question as churches are on their way to communion; they have thrown themselves into the process of ecumenical dialogue. Secondly, the members of the Commission enjoy the trust of their respective churches: Though they do not speak on behalf of their church, they speak with the mind of their church. Thirdly, the results of the dialogue now must be considered by the respective churches and must be answered by the leadership of these churches.
If this seems a pathetically modest commitment, we must remember that we are talking about two churches one of which, within living memory, did not even acknowledge the other as church. Further, it is promising to see that what was planned as a dialogue on teaching and dogma within a relatively brief span of years has turned into a dialogue on unity. Sub specie aeternitatis (and the Catholic Church tends to view things from this perspective) the Lutheran-Roman Catholic ecumenical dialogue has really moved quite fast.
(to be continued)