Some thoughts on ecumenism

I was reading a article in the Calgary Herald today (for anyone who knows, my connection with Calgary runs deep) that featured an interview by Fr. Richard Rohr, talking about the “emerging Christianity”. Two things that he said got me thinking, with thinking soon leading to writing.

First, Fr. Rohr mentioned that Christians today are getting a better sense of what Jesus “was really saying to us”. Second, he focused on the need for ecumenical action. I admit I am not entirely sure, nor convinced, about Fr. Rohr’s first point though there is certainly good points that he brings up. He does a little bashing of theologians as historically being dominated by “white, over-educated males.” While bashing of things and people of academic standing has become something of a past-time in North America, where being too intelligent often seems to make someone a pariah (“you are educated, ergo you are not one of us, ergo you think yourself better than us and must be mocked and humiliated – d’uh! Did I say ‘ergo’ I meant, um, ‘yo’!), it does make one wonder if St. Thomas Aquinas would be considered one of those “white, over-educated males”, or St. Augustine, or Karl Barth ...

That aside, what did pique my interest is the question of the shape of the ecumenical action being discussed, in connection with the idea of knowing better what Jesus was “really saying to us” (okay, I admit, I have a lot of problem with this statement, but I’ll ignore most of those for the moment!). The concern is that we give up the search for Jesus for the good of common action. What do I mean by that?

Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the light.” Often times when Christians come together there seems such a focus on minimizing conflict, being uber-respectful of each other, and focusing on what we can do together, that we forget the need to constantly pursue our relationship with Christ. Our relationship, however, is not just a feeling or an experience, but like any real relationship also requires that we learn (know) the object of the relationship a little better. Jesus is truth, but that means we have to strive to know what is truth – and that there is truth, which means there is also false. Regardless of what we sometimes hear, Jesus is not all things to all people: that doesn’t make him universal; that makes our image of him an idol that we create through our own desires.

A true, valid and fruitful ecumenical movement must never neglect the need to continually talk about what is truth, the way, and the source of light, and that means sometimes saying flat out “I think you are wrong, because ...”. Perhaps it’s better to think of it in another way.

In my family, I often get into deep disagreements with my mother and one of my sisters. The disagreements can be heated, especially as our conversations are over matters of fundamental belief (my mother is Protestant, my sister an “apathetic agnostic” with deep resentment over Christianity). What’s more, because I am close to both of them, they can hurt me, as I can hurt them with my words. But I also learn an enormous amount from them, and they are the ones – more than books, or priests – that force me to be aware of my arguments, and reasoning behind my arguments. We argue because we believe we are right, and are absolutely concerned about the other person and that they may be wrong. Do we do that with our ecumenical dialogues? Are we so concerned about propriety that we take it upon ourselves to water down what we think is right?

That is one of my concerns with ecumenical dialogue. More so than with interfaith dialogue, ecumenical dialogue should be marked with passion: I believe that Christ is really present in the Eucharist and that is vital for Christian living. I cannot understand claims to the contrary. My understanding – my experience - of justice, of action is shaped by my reception of Christ. If I do not bring that to the Christian family table when we get together – not necessarily in an in-your-face kind of way, but something that I don’t need to avoid either – then I am not showing you respect or love, I am showing you I don’t care. Is that what is happening with many ecumenical conversations? The perception of unity becomes more important than truly caring for another: is that what Christian ecumenism is about?

I used the Eucharist as one example, but the other members of the family shape me as well. If I talk to a Protestant friend and say, “Yeah, I need to go to confession so that I can get absolved by the priest.” I WANT my Protestant friend to look at me and say, “So, confession is some kind of magical act that gets rid of sin? Confession is just about you; where does God fit in?” That hurts, but she is also being honest – being truthful – and that concern means that my view of confession changes, or at least specific possible abuses are made manifest. If my friend were to say, “Oh, that’s nice for you Catholics” how, honestly, does that show love? How does that reflect Christ?