OFFICES: via della Conciliazione, 5 - 00193 Rome (Italy). Telephones: +39 06.698.83212 (Editorial Office) - +39 06.698.83074 (Administration)Fax: +39 06.698.85365 - E-mail: vcaroli@christianunity.va

CONTENTS

PLENARY ASSEMBLY OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY, 15-19 November2010 ......................................................................................................................................... 73Address of Pope Benedict XVI ................................................................................................ 73Opening Address of Cardinal Kurt Koch, President PCPCU ................................................. 74Secretary’s Report on the PCPCU 2009-2010, Bishop Brian Farrell ..................................... 87

CELEBRATION OF THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN

UNITY, 17 November 2010 ....................................................................................................... 102Address of Cardinal Walter Kasper, President Emeritus ....................................................... 102Address of His Eminence John Zizioulas, Metropolitan of Pergamon ................................. 106Address of Dr. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury ................................................. 110

VISIT TO THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE BY A DELEGATION OF THE HOLY SEE FOR THE FEAST OF STANDREW, 29 November – 1 December 2010 ............................................................................ 114Message of Pope Benedict XVI to His Holiness Bartholomew I ........................................... 114Greeting of His Holiness Bartholomew I, Ecumenical Patriarch ......................................... 114

SPECIAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS FOR THE MIDDLE EAST, Rome, 10-24October 2010 ........................................................................................................................... 116

XITH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION, 22-27 July 2010 ......................... 127Discourse of Cardinal Walter Kasper, President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for

Promoting Christian Unity ............................................................................................... 127

ECUMENICAL NEWS .......................................................................................................................... 129Second Plenary Meeting of the International Lutheran Roman-Catholic Commission on

Unity, Regensburg, Germany, 22-29 October 2010 .......................................................... 129Joint International Commission for Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the

Malankara (Jacobite) Syrian Orthodox Church, Kottayam, India, 7 December 2010 ... 129Joint International Commission for Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the

Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, Kottayam, India, 8-9 December 2010 ................. 132Theological Conversations between the Baptist World Alliance and the Pontifical Council

for Promoting Christian Unity, Oxford, England, 12-18 December 2010 ....................... 133

N. 135 (2010/III–IV)

Editor: VLADIMIRO CAROLI, OP

SUBSCRIPTIONS

one year:

1 back issue: $9 – e 7

For your subscription, please enclose check or international postal money order, made out to:

Address for all correspondence

The material in this INFORMATION SERVICE is not copyright,but we would appreciate a copy of any publication which includes

extensive quotation from it.

ITALY: e 25EUROPE: e 35OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD: $48

Information Service - Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity - 00120 Vatican City, Europe

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI

Your Eminences,Venerable Brothers in the Episcopateand in the Priesthood,Dear Brothers and Sisters,

It gives me great joy to meet you on the occasionof the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Council forPromoting Christian Unity, during which you arereflecting on the theme: “Towards a new stage in theecumenical dialogue ”. In addressing my cordialgreeting to each one of you, I also wish to thank inparticular your President, Archbishop Kurt Koch forhis warm words expressing your sentiments.

Yesterday, as Archbishop Koch mentioned, youcelebrated with a solemn commemorative Act the 50thanniversary of your Dicastery. On 5 June 1960, on theeve of the Second Vatican Council which identifiedecumenical commitment as central for the Church, Bl.John XXIII created the Secretariat for PromotingChristian Unity which in 1988 was given the name of“Pontifical Council ”. This Act was a milestone on theecumenical journey of the Catholic Church. In thecourse of 50 years great headway has been made.

I would like to express deep gratitude to all thosewho have devoted their service to the Pontifical Coun-cil, recalling first of all the successive Presidents: Cardi-nal Agostino Bea, Cardinal Johannes Willebrands, Car-dinal Edward Idris Cassidy; and I am particularlypleased to thank Cardinal Walter Kasper, who has ledthe Dicastery in the past 11 years with competence andenthusiasm. I thank the members and consultors, offi-cials and collaborators, those who have contributed tobringing about the theological dialogues and ecumeni-cal meetings and all those who have prayed the Lordfor the gift of visible unity among Christians.

These are 50 years in which a true knowledge andgreater esteem has been acquired with the Churchesand Ecclesial Communities, overcoming prejudices

crystallized by history: we have grown in theologicaldialogue and in the dialogue of charity; various formsof collaboration have developed, among which, inaddition to those for defending life, for safeguardingcreation and for combating injustice, collaboration inthe field of ecumenical translations of Sacred Scrip-ture has been important and fruitful.

In recent years, then, the Pontifical Council hasbeen involved, among other things in an extensiveproject, called the Harvest Project, in order to drawup a first estimate of the goals achieved in the theo-logical dialogues with the principal Ecclesial Com-munities since the Second Vatican Council.

This is valuable work that has highlighted boththe areas of convergence and those in which it is nec-essary to continue to deepen reflection.

As I thank God for the fruits already gathered, Iencourage you to persevere in your commitment topromoting a correct assessment of the resultsachieved and to make known exactly the present stateof the theological research at the service of the jour-ney towards unity. Today some people think that thisjourney, especially in the West, has lost its impetus;therefore the urgent need to revive ecumenical inter-est and to give fresh purpose to the dialogues is felt.

Moreover we are presented with unheard of chal-lenges: the new anthropological and ethical interpre-tations, the ecumenical formation of the new genera-tions and the further fragmentation of the ecumeni-cal scene. It is essential to become aware of thesechanges and to identify ways to proceed effectively inthe light of the Lord’s desire: “ that they may all beone ” (Jn 17:21).

Also with the Orthodox Churches and the AncientChurches of the East, the “ closest intimacy ” (Uni-tatis Redintegratio, n. 15). The Catholic Church iseagerly continuing the dialogue, seeking seriouslyand rigorously to deepen the common theological,liturgical and spiritual patrimony in order to facewith serenity and commitment the elements that stilldivide us. With the Orthodox she has reached a cru-cial point in comparison and reflection: the role ofthe Bishop of Rome in the Church’s communion. Andthe ecclesiological issue is also the centre of the dia-logue with the Ancient Churches of the East: despitemany centuries of misunderstanding and distance, it

73

PLENARY ASSEMBLY OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCILFOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY

15-19 November 2010

On Thursday November 18, in the Clementine Hall, Pope Benedict XVI spoke to participants in the PlenaryAssembly of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, which this year celebrates its 50th anniversary. Thefollowing is a translation of the Pope’s Address, given in Italian.

* Sources of the texts are designated as follows: OR: L’Osserva-tore Romano, daily edition in Italian; ORE: L’Osservatore Romano,weekly edition in English. If texts come from sources other thanL’Osservatore Romano, this will be noted. When translation is madeby the Information Service it is indicated by the abbreviation: IS.

Rector of the Pontifical Biblical Institute and formerconfessor of Pope Pius XII, the Jesuit Augustin Bea,who would later be known as the ‘Cardinal of unity’and ‘Cardinal of ecumenism and dialogue’.2 PopeJohn XXIII himself may be considered to be the spir-itual father of the ecumenical movement in theCatholic Church. In order to realise effectively his keyaspirations, namely to renew the Catholic Churchand to re-establish the visible unity of Christians,3which he had linked to the Second Vatican Council,with wise and far-sighted vision he founded the Sec-retariat, renamed in 1988 ‘Pontifical Council’, whichsince then has aimed at re-establishing the unity ofChristians in common faith, in the sacraments, andin ecclesial ministry. The fact that I start my newresponsibilities as President of the Pontifical Councilfor Promoting Christian Unity in the year that thedicastery celebrates the 50th anniversary of its foun-dation4 is a very pleasant coincidence, which invitesus to reflect comprehensively on the state of the ecu-menical movement today.

I. THE ECUMENICAL HERITAGE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

With the Second Vatican Council, and above allwith the Decree on Ecumenism “Unitatis redintegra-tio ”, the Catholic Church officially entered the ecu-menical movement. This ‘point of no return’ has beenaffirmed by the Pontiffs and been translated intoreality in many ways. The ecumenical impetus of theCouncil was taken up by Pope Paul VI, and even dur-ing its proceedings he took a significant ecumenicalstep towards Orthodoxy with the memorable liftingof the excommunication of 1054, which was under-taken together with the Ecumenical PatriarchAthenagoras on 7 December 1965.5 This act removedthe poison of the excommunication from the heart ofthe Church, and the “ symbol of division ” wasreplaced by the “ symbol of charity ”.6 The eventbecame the starting point in the ecumenical dialogueof charity and truth between the Catholic Church andthe Orthodox Church, with the aim of re-establishingsacramental communion.

74

is joyfully noted that a precious common patrimonyhas been preserved.

Dear friends, even in the presence of problematicsituations or difficult points for the dialogue, the goalof the ecumenical journey remains unchanged, as doesthe firm commitment to pursue it. However, it is not acommitment in accordance with political categories,so to speak, in which comes into play the ability tonegotiate or the greatest skill in finding compromisesthrough which we as good mediators might expect,after a certain time, to reach agreements acceptable toall. Ecumenical action has a dual movement.

On the one hand there is the convinced, passion-ate and tenacious search to find full unity in truth, toconceive of models of unity, to throw light on dis-agreement and obscure points in order to attainunity. And this takes place in the necessary theologi-cal dialogue but especially in prayer and penance, inthat spiritual ecumenism which constitutes thevibrant heart of the whole journey: the unity of Chris-tians is and remains prayer, it dwells in prayer.

On the other hand, there is another active move-ment that stems from the firm awareness that we donot know the time of the fulfillment of unity betweenall Christ’s disciples and we cannot know it, becauseit is not “we who can decide it ”, God “decides ” it. Itcomes from on high from the unity of the Fatherwith the Son in the dialogue of love which is the HolySpirit; it is a participation in the divine unity. Andthis must not diminish our commitment; indeed itmust make us ever more attentive to understandingthe signs and times of the Lord, knowing and recog-nizing with gratitude what already unites us andworking to consolidate and increase it. In the end,also on the ecumenical journey it is a question ofleaving to God what is his alone and of exploring,with seriousness, constancy and dedication, what isour duty, bearing in mind that the binomials of act-ing and suffering, of activity and patience, of effortand joy are part of our commitment.

Let us trustingly invoke the Holy Spirit so that hemay guide us on our journey and that everyone mayfeel with fresh vigour the call to work for the ecu-menical cause. I encourage all of you to continue inyour work; it is help that you offer the Bishop ofRome in the fulfillment of his mission at the serviceof unity. As a sign of affection and gratitude, Iwarmly impart to you my Apostolic Blessing.

ORE, 24 November 2010

OPENING ADDRESS OF CARDINAL KURT KOCHPresident PCPCU

PROGRESS IN THE ECUMENICAL JOURNEY:THE STATE OF ECUMENISM TODAY1

Even before the Second Vatican Council, PopeJohn XXIII created the Secretariat for PromotingChristian Unity in June 1960, entrusting it to the then

1 Prolusio to the Plenary of the Pontifical Council for Promot-ing Christian Unity on 15 November 2010.

2 S. SCHMIDT, Augustin Bea. The Cardinal of Unity, New York1992; id., Agostino Bea. Cardinale dell’ecumenismo e del dialogo,Roma 1996.

3 Cf. H. J. POTTMEYER, Die Öffnung der römisch-katholischenKirche für die Ökumenische Bewegung und die ekklesiologischeReform des 2. Vatikanums. Ein wechselseitiger Einfluss, in: PaoloVI e l’Ecumenismo. Colloquio Internazionale di Studio Brescia1998, Brescia-Roma 2001, 98-117.

4Cf. Pontificio Consiglio per la promozione dell’Unità dei Cris-tiani (ed.), Unità dei Cristiani. Dovere e speranza. Per il 50° Anniver-sario dell’Istituzione del Pontificio Consiglio per la promozione del-l’Unità dei Cristiani (1960-2010) = Christian Unity: Duty and Hope.For the 50th Anniversary of the Foundation of the Pontifical Councilfor Promoting Christian Unity (1960-2010), Roma 2010).

5 Cf. Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Secretariat for Promot-ing Christian Unity (ed.), Tomos Agapis, Rome-Istanbul, 1971. Thisvolume collects the speeches and letters exchanged between Romeand Constantinople from 1958 to 1970.

6 J. RATZINGER, Rom und die Kirchen des Ostens nach derAufhebung der Exkommunikation von 1054, in: id., TheologischePrinzipienlehre. Bausteine zur Fundamentaltheologie, München1982, 214-230.

Pope John Paul II, especially in his Encyclical onthe commitment to ecumenism “Ut unum sint ”,explicitly underlined that the ecumenical journeyundertaken by the Catholic Church with the SecondVatican Council is irreversible. Taking up thesewords, Pope Benedict XVI re-emphasised this idea inhis message to the delegates and participants at theThird European Ecumenical Assembly held at Sibiu,Romania, in 2007: “With the Second Vatican Coun-cil, as my revered predecessor Pope John Paul IIobserved, the Catholic Church committed itself in anirreversible manner to pursue the path of ecumenicalresearch, allowing itself to heed the Spirit of theLord, who teaches how to read attentively the signsof the times ”.7 In his first message after his electionto the Papal Throne, Pope Benedict XVI affirmed hisdesire to take up “ as a primary duty ” the task of“ working tirelessly to rebuild the full and visibleunity of all the followers of Christ ” and defined thesearch for unity as his “ ambition ” and his “ urgentduty ”.8

This clear position testifies to the fact that theecumenical commitment of the Catholic Church isnot an option, but a duty. Therefore, there can be nodoubt about the irreversible nature of the path thathas been undertaken. Pope Benedict himself hasshown this clearly, rebutting criticisms made of himin the last years.9 It is true that the Holy Father hasproposed new emphases in relation to the hermeneu-tic of conciliar pronouncements. In his speech to theRoman Curia on the occasion of the presentation ofChristmas Greetings on 22 December 2005, hefocused at length on the spiritual legacy of the Sec-ond Vatican Council, and noted the distinctionbetween two different hermeneutics: on the onehand, there is a “ hermeneutic of discontinuity andrupture ”, which sees the Second Vatican Council notas part of the living tradition of the Church, but as amoment of rupture. It speaks of the existence of apre-conciliar Church and a post-conciliar Church, asthough we were no longer dealing with the sameChurch. On the other hand, there is the “hermeneu-tic of reform ”, which acknowledges the continualdevelopment in the doctrine of the faith, and con-nects continuity with tradition and dynamic renewal.In this dialectic between continuity and discontinu-ity, between fidelity to tradition and renewal, the

Holy Father sees the true heart of the reform, as hestated so compellingly in reference to the SecondVatican Council: If we read and receive it “with anauthentic hermeneutic to guide us, it can be — andcan become ever more powerfully — a force for thenecessary renewal of the Church ”.10

It is with this hermeneutic of reform that wemust also read the Decree on Ecumenism. The factthat this document signalled a new direction for theCatholic Church in its relations with other churchesand ecclesial communities is so evident that often itdoes not seem worthy of mention. Yet this newbeginning does not signify a rupture with the tradi-tion. That the ecumenical beginning made by theCouncil lies in basic continuity with tradition canbe already seen in the fact that this beginning mightnot have been possible had not the aspiration forecumenism (albeit in nascent form) been alreadypresent in the Catholic Church long before the Sec-ond Vatican Council. An example of this is theMalines Conversations, held in Belgium, which tookplace with the Anglicans from 1921 to 1926, withthe strong support of Pope Pius XI. It should also beremembered that at the beginning of the last cen-tury Pope Leo XIII and Pope Benedict XV in partic-ular energetically supported prayer for the unity ofChristians, which would come to be defined in“Unitatis Redintegratio ” as “ the soul of the entireecumenical movement ”.11 A further impetus to theecumenical movement was given by Pope Pius XIIwho, in his 1950 instruction, explicitly praised theecumenical movement, tracing in it the inspirationof the Holy Spirit. The fact that the same Pius XIIwas the most quoted source in the Council (afterSacred Scripture) shows this Pope’s role in prepar-ing the way for the Council with its numerous andfar-sighted encyclicals. Pope Benedict XVI under-lines this in an address dedicated to the magis-terium of Pope Pacelli:12 “Undoubtedly the Church,the mystical Body of Christ, is a living and vitalorganism, not lodged motionless in what was thesituation fifty years ago. This development, how-ever, has taken place with continuity. Becauseof this, the legacy of the magisterium of Pius XIIwas taken up by the Second Vatican Council andproposed anew to successive generations of Chris-tians.”13

In a comprehensive analysis of the conciliarDecree on Ecumenism, the Dominican theologianCharles Morerod showed that many of the perspec-tives in this document are already present in embry-

75

7 BENEDICT XVI, Message to the delegates and participants atthe Third European Ecumenical Assembly, held in Sibiu, in: Inseg-namenti di Benedetto XVI, III 2 2007, Città del Vaticano 2008, 150-153.

8BENEDICT XVI, Message to the Universal Church at the end ofHoly Mass with the Cardinal Electors in the Sistine Chapel, in:Insegnamenti di Benedetto XVI, I 2005, Città del Vaticano 2006, 1-7.

9 Cf. K. KOCH, “ Streit um das Konzil. Stellungnahme zurgegenwärtigen Situation in unserer Kirche ”, in: W. BEINERT (ed.),Vatikan und Pius-Brüder. Anatomie einer Krise, Freiburg i. Br.2009, 113-128. This vision has been confirmed by many authors inthe ecumenical field: K. NIKOLAKOPOULOS (ed.), Benedikt XVI. unddie Orthodoxe Kirche. Bestandsaufnahmen, Erwartungen, Perspek-tiven, St. Ottilien 2008; W. G. RUSCH (ed.), The Pontificate of Bene-dict XVI. Its Premises and Promises, Michigan-Cambridge 2009;W. THIEDE (ed.), Der Papst aus Bayern. ProtestantischeWahrnehmungen, Leipzig 2010.

10 BENEDICT XVI, “ Una giusta ermeneutica per leggere erecepire il Concilio come grande forza di rinnovamento dellachiesa ”, in: Insegnamenti di Benedetto XVI, I 2005, Città del Vati-cano 2006, 1018-1032, cit. 1028.

11Unitatis redintegratio, 8.12 Cf. P. CHENAUX (ed.), L’eredità del Magistero di Pio XII, Città

del Vaticano 2010.13BENEDICT XVI, “Un insegnamento inestimabile: Ecco il Mag-

isterio di Pio XII”, in: Insegnamenti di Benedetto XVI, IV 2 2008,Città del Vaticano 2009, 635-639, cit. 638.

II. ECCLESIOLOGY AS THE CENTRAL QUESTION IN ECUMENISM

Despite undeniable successes and fruits in ecu-menical dialogue, we are still a long way from ourgoal of visible unity. Rather, we frequently find our-selves at the point where the Second Vatican Councilstarted out. The Decree on Ecumenism, as we read inits very first sentence, affirms that “ the restoration ofunity among all Christians ” is one of the principalconcerns of the Council. It sees the fact that Christfounded “ one Church and one Church only ”, but“many Christian communities present themselves tomen as the true inheritors of Jesus Christ.” Since thissituation can create the impression that “Christ him-self [is] divided ”, the Council maintains that the sep-aration between Christians “ openly contradicts thewill of Christ ”, “ scandalizes the world ” and damages“ the holy cause of preaching the Gospel to everycreature ”.21

1. Ecclesiological consequences of the consensus onthe doctrine of justification

With the official signing of the “ Joint Declarationon the Doctrine of Justification ” at Augsburg on 31October 1999 between the Pontifical Council for Pro-moting Christian Unity and the Lutheran World Fed-eration, fundamental consensus was reached on acrucial question which had led to the division ofWestern Christianity in the 16th century.22 The use ofthe expression “ consensus on fundamental ques-tions ” indicates that there has not yet been a full con-sensus on the doctrine of justification and its conse-quences, particularly in the field of ecclesiology andthe theology of ministry. The “ Joint Declaration ”itself mentions areas that need further clarification:These include, “ among other topics, the relationshipbetween the Word of God and church doctrine, aswell as ecclesiology, ecclesial authority, church unity,ministry, the sacraments, and the relation betweenjustification and social ethics ”.23 Without a doubt this“ Joint Declaration ” represents a milestone on the dif-ficult path of restoring full unity among Christians.But a milestone is not a finishing post.24 Alongside thestill unsettled questions about the precise interpreta-tion of the doctrine of justification itself,25 the remain-

76

onic form in Thomas Aquinas, whose theology “peutjouer un rôle capital dans la compréhension des dif-férences entre chrétiens et dans leur résolution ”.14Morerod also demonstrated that only a “herméneu-tique du développement homogène ” of the Decree onEcumenism can effectively explain the intention ofthe Council itself.15 As stated explicitly in the Dog-matic Constitution on the Church “Lumen gentium”,the Council will continue the theme of previousCouncils to illustrate more clearly “ to the faithfuland the entire world her nature and universal mis-sion ”.16 Cardinal Walter Kasper also said that “ theCouncil started something new”; nevertheless, “ not anew church,” but “ a renewed church ”.17 In an auto-biographical note, he also recalled that hishermeneutic of Vatican II was influenced by thenotion of a continuous development and that hecould not see the Council “ as a rupture, and as thebeginning of a new Church ”; a rupture “would fun-damentally contradict the self–understanding of theCouncil, and would also contradict its conscious anddeliberate rooting in tradition and in the First Vati-can Council ”.18

Looking back on these last fifty years andreviewing the theological legacy of the Second Vati-can Council, we can in the first place emphasisemany heartening aspects. With satisfaction we notethat even within our own Church ecumenism is nolonger something on the fringes, but has come to beexperienced in the daily lives of many localchurches and parishes, ecclesial communities andspiritual movements. This ecumenism of life is offundamental importance, since, without it, all thetheological efforts aimed at reaching a lasting agree-ment on basic questions of faith between the vari-ous churches and ecclesial communities would bein vain. At the theological level as well, in the courseof recent decades, we have achieved significant con-vergences and consensus; these have been gatheredtogether in three large volumes in “ Growth inAgreement ”19 and have been treated anew in rela-tion to the results of the theological dialogues withLutherans, Reformed, Anglicans and Methodists inthe volume “ Harvesting the Fruits ”, which wasundertaken by our Pontifical Council and edited byCardinal Walter Kasper.20

14 J. MOREROD, “Unitatis redintegratio entre deux herméneu-tiques ”, in: Revue thomiste 110 (2010) 25-71, cit. 69.

15 Ibid., 68.16Lumen gentium, 1.17W. KASPER, “The Decree on Ecumenism – Read Anew After

Forty Years ” in: Searching for Christian Unity, New York, 2007.(Paper given at the conference for the 40th anniversary of the pro-mulgation of the Conciliar Decree Unitatis redintegratio held atRocca di Papa on 11November 2004).

18W. KASPER, Die Kirche Jesu Christi – auf dem Weg zu einerCommunio-Ekklesiologie, in: id., Die Kirche Jesu Christi = Gesam-melte Schriften., Freiburg i. Br. 2008, vol. 11, 15-120, cit. 24. Adhoc English translation provided here.

19 Cf. H. MEYER and L. VISCHER (ed.), Growth in Agreement,New York 1984; J. GROS, H. MEYER and W. R. RUSCH, Growth inAgreement II, Geneva-Grand Rapids 1992.

20 W. KASPER, Harvesting the Fruits. Basic Aspects of ChristianFaith in Ecumenical Dialogue, London 2009.

21Unitatis redintegratio, 1.22 Cf. B. J. HILBERATH / W. PANNENBERG (ed.), Zur Zukunft der

Ökumene. Die “Gemeinsame Erklärung zur Rechtfertigungslehre ”,Regensburg 1999; E. PULSFORT / R. HANUSCH (ed.), Von der“Gemeinsamen Erklärung ” zum “Gemeinsamen Herrenmahl ”? Per-spektiven der Ökumene im 21. Jahrhundert, Regensburg 2002.

23 Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification by Faith,no. 43.

24 “ Avec la signature du Document, nous avons atteint unepierre milliaire mais nous ne sommes pas parvenus au terme duchemin. La pleine unité visible des chrétiens et leur communionn’est pas encore un fait.” Thus W. KASPER, ‘Un motif d’Espérance:La Déclaration commune sur la doctrine de la Justification’, in: id.,L’Espérance est possible, Langres 2002, 59-76, cit. 70.

25 Cf. K. LEHMANN, “Einig im Verständnis der Rechtfertigungs-botschaft? Erfahrungen und Lehren im Blick auf die gegenwärtigeökumenische Situation, Bonn 1998; J. RATZINGER, ‘Wie weitträgt der Konsens über die Rechtfertigungslehre? ”, in: Commu-nio. Internationale Katholische Zeitschrift 29, 2000, 424-437;

ing questions can be clustered around the under-standing of the nature of the Church, as noted by Car-dinal Walter Kasper: “After the clarification of funda-mental questions on the doctrine of justification,ecclesiological questions are now the priority in thedialogue with the Churches stemming from the Refor-mation ”. For Catholics and Orthodox, these are“ essential if there is to be progress on the question ofEucharistic communion, particularly urgent from apastoral point of view. This is where we find ourselvestoday ”.26

This unresolved issue returned decisively to thecentre of the Church’s attention with the declarationon the unicity and universality of salvation of JesusChrist and the Church, “Dominus Iesus ”, publishedin 2000 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of theFaith.27 This document was intended to counter atheology that relativises religions, and a watering-down of Christology,28 but public controversy con-centrated on the statement in chapter four, accord-ing to which the churches born of the Reformationare not “ churches in the proper sense ”, but “ eccle-sial communities ”.29 This statement gave rise to awave of indignation; above all, reformed Christiansdeeply resented the definition “ ecclesial communi-ties ”.30 It is surprising in this case to note that theWorld Council of Churches, to which indeed around400 million Christians from more than 340 commu-nities in over 100 countries belong, describes itselfas “ churches, confessions and ecclesial communi-ties ”. It would be interesting then to know whichentities within the World Council of Churches are

defined as a ‘church’, or ‘ecclesial community’, orindeed as ‘confession’.

2. The Protestant churches in the light of the heritageof the Reformation

It is helpful to reflect on this question by glancingbriefly at history. There is a modern sensitivity whenthe term ‘church’ is not applied, but looking at historywe find a quite different sensitivity, one shared byMartin Luther himself, who had a fractured relation-ship with the term and the reality of the ‘church.’Towards the end of his life he declared that he did notrecognise the Catholic Church as a church, andexpressed himself rather harshly towards it: “We donot recognise that they (‘the old believers’) are thechurch, and they are not church […] the truth is that,thanks be to God, a child of seven years knows whatthe church is ”.31 Luther’s declaration, published in theSmalkaldic Articles of 1537, was taken up in the con-fessional writings of the Lutheran Church and is,accordingly, still valid. Set against this, if we readLuther’s polemic work “ Against the papacy estab-lished in Rome by the devil ”, we must agree with theemphatic but significant assessment of the CatholicChurch historian Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, whosaid that the ‘No’ of Luther related to the concept ofCatholic ecclesiology: “This radical and total denial,which poured forth from the depths of experience andwhich, it must be said, was filled with hatred, wasdirected towards the papacy and together with it thewhole church hierarchic and sacramental ordering ”.32Herein lies the real reason for Luther’s clear prefer-ence for the term ‘community’ over the term ‘church’,which he himself defined as “blind and erring ”.33

At the beginning of the last century, the Protes-tant historian of the church and dogma Adolf vonHarnack maintained that the Reformation and thedevelopments that followed it could not, and shouldnot, move towards a traditional catholic understand-ing: “ Protestantism should undertake a re-evalua-tion, recognising that it does not wish to, nor canever be, a church like the Catholic church, and that itshould reject all formal authority and rely exclusivelyonly on whatever evokes the message of God, theFather of Jesus Christ and our Father ”.34 Again in1962 the renowned reformed theologian Karl Barth,eminent author of “Church Dogmatics ”, declared inhis last lecture entitled “ Introduction to EvangelicalTheology ”: “ It is advisable from a theological pointof view to avoid, if not always at least as far as possi-ble, the obscure and overworked term ‘church’, and

77

T. SCHNEIDER and G. WENZ (ed.), Gerecht und Sünder zugleich?Ökumenische Klärungen, Freiburg i. Br. – Göttingen 2001.

26W. KASPER, “Situation und Zukunft der Ökumene ”, in: The-ologische Quartalschrift 181, 2001, 175-190, cit. 186.

27 Cf. M. GAGLIARDI (ed.), La Dichiarazione Dominus Iesus adieci anni dalla promulgazione, Torino 2010.

28 Cf. G. L. MÜLLER (ed.), Die Heilsuniversalität Christi undder Kirche. Originaltexte und Studien der römischen Glaubenskon-gregation zur Erklärung “ Dominus Jesus ”, Würzburg 2003;C. SCHÖNBORN, “Dominus Iesus” und der interreligiöse Dialog, in:E. KAPELLARI / H. SCHAMBECK (ed.), Diplomatie im Dienst der Seel-sorge. Festschrift für Nuntius Erzbischof Donato Squicciarini, Graz2002, 113-123; M. STICKELBROECK, “Christus und die Religionen.Der Anspruch der christlichen Offenbarung im Hinblick auf dieReligionen der Welt ”, in: J. KREIML (ed.), Christliche Antworten aufdie Fragen der Gegenwart. Grundlinien der Theologie PapstBenedikts XVI, Regensburg 2010, 66-103.

29 Cf. M. J. RAINER (ed.), “Dominus Jesus ”. Anstössige Wahrheitoder anstössige Kirche? Dokumente, Hintergründe, Standpunkte undFolgerungen,Münster 2001.

30 Pope Benedict XVI sees in this term, which could nonethe-less be improved, an attempt “ to capture what is distinctive aboutProtestant Christianity and to give it a positive expression ”, recall-ing that the Second Vatican Council had reflected that “ church inthe proper sense […] exists where the episcopal office, as thesacramental expression of apostolic succession, is present – whichalso implies the existence of the Eucharist as a sacrament that isdispensed by the bishop and by the priest ”. Where this is missing,“we are dealing with […] a new way of understanding what achurch is ”. The term “ecclesial community ” was intended to indi-cate “ a different mode of being a church. As they themselvesinsist, it is precisely not the same mode in which the Churches ofthe great tradition of antiquity are Churches, but is based on a newunderstanding ”. BENEDICT XVI, Light of the World: The Pope, theChurch and the Signs of the Times. A Conversation with Peter See-wald, London – San Francisco 2010, 95.

31 Die Bekenntnisschriften der evangelisch–lutherischenKirche, Göttingen 1976, 459. Ad hoc English translation providedhere.

32 W. BRANDMÜLLER, “ Die Reformation Martin Luthers inkatholischer Sicht“, in: id., Licht und Schatten. Kirchengeschichtezwischen Glaube, Fakten und Legenden, Augsburg 2007, 102-120,cit. 111. Ad hoc English translation provided here.

33WA 50, 625.34 “ Briefwechsel mit Adolf v. Harnack und ein Epilog“, in:

E. PETERSON, Theologische Traktate = Ausgewählte Schriften I,Würzburg 1994, 175-194, cit. 182.

coincidence that ecumenism has to concentrate sointensely on the understanding of the church. Evenat the time of the Second Vatican Council there wasa clear interdependence between the opening of theCatholic Church to ecumenism and the renewal ofecclesiology. For both the Pontiffs of the Council,Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI, ecumenism wasa major central theme of the renewal of the CatholicChurch and of its self-understanding. During theCouncil itself, Joseph Ratzinger made reference tothis rooting of ecumenism within the general con-text of the Council and especially within its eccle-siology. The relationship between the singular‘church’ and the plural ‘churches’ is fundamental forthe conciliar renewal of ecclesiology, in the sensethat while the one and universal church consists ofvarious local churches, on the other hand, the vari-ous local churches exist as the one and only church.As a result, Ratzinger observed that this relationshipalready makes evident “ the ecumenical problem inits entirety ”.38 From an ecumenical point of view,the plural ‘churches’ does not signify the variouslocal churches or sister churches in which the oneand universal church is present, but those ecclesialcommunities which are outside of full communionwith the Catholic Church. For Joseph Ratzinger, theparticular importance of the second chapter of theDogmatic Constitution on the Church is due to ecu-menical reasons, since the diverse levels of member-ship of the Church is expressed more appropriatelythrough the image of the People of God thanthrough that of the Body of Christ.39 As Prefect ofthe Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, thethen Cardinal Ratzinger observed that “ the entireecumenical problem ” is also concealed in thefamous formula “ subsistit in ”. With this formulathe Council sought to emphasise that the Church ofJesus Christ is truly present in the Catholic Churchas a concrete subject in history, and not as anabstract reality hidden behind the concrete ecclesialrealities and subsequently realised in the variousecclesial communities.40 The thorny ecumenicalissue therefore consists in identifying the way inwhich the Catholic Church can and should relate tothis plural “ churches ”, which exist outside it orrather in the divided religious communities that arein the process of becoming autonomous.41 Thisquestion arises both in dialogue with the OrthodoxChurches and, albeit in a different form, with thechurches and ecclesial communities of the Refor-mation tradition.

78

to replace it immediately and consistently with theword ‘community’”.35 As a result, in the past, variousprotestant translations of the Bible rendered the term‘church’ as ‘community’. The 1931 edition of theZurich Bible, for example, made it clear in a footnotethat the word ‘church’ was to be understood as ‘indi-vidual community.’

The same problem is evident not only when welook to the past, but also observing the present. Evenduring the Council, the catholic theologian ErichPrzywara, referring to the ecclesial communitiesof the Reformation tradition, spoke of a “ pluri-versum ”.36 Within this vast worldwide plurality ofecclesial communities, efforts to achieve a greaterinternal unity are only marginal. Cardinal Kasper, inhis prolusio at a previous Plenary, spoke of the vari-ous internal fragmentations within global Protes-tantism as direct consequences of a “ relatively elasticconcept of the unity of the Church ” and of the spreadof new evangelical and charismatic groups. Thisgrowing disintegration represents a new ecumenicalchallenge for the Catholic Church as well, since anincreasing number of groups belonging to worldwideProtestantism no longer see themselves being repre-sented by worldwide federations (Reformed orLutheran), and want to enter directly into talks withthe Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.Thus, the Catholic Church finds itself face to facewith the serious phenomenon of ecclesial fragmenta-tion, and has to address the delicate question of howto respond to the various requests for dialogue, with-out putting at risk the dialogues with the confes-sional world federations already underway.

However, the fact that the ecclesial communitiesof the Reformation tradition now resolutely under-stand themselves as churches should be seen in apositive light. They are called to give an account oftheir own concept of the church not merely from anempirical but a theological point of view. In this con-text, Cardinal Kasper, commenting on the Declara-tion “Dominus Iesus ”, noted that the ecclesial com-munities originating in the Reformation should beunderstood in a sense analogous to that of a church,or rather as “ a different type of church ”.37 It is nowup to these ecclesial communities to define what a“ different type ” means. Such an undertaking willfacilitate discussion on the nature of the Church,which has long been necessary, and provide a newbasis for ecumenical dialogue.

3. The one and only Church of Jesus Christ,and the pluralism of ‘Churches’

The issue of ecclesiology is related to many ecu-menical problems that remain unresolved. It is no

35 K. BARTH, Einführung in die evangelische Theologie, Zürich1962, 35.

36E. PRZYWARA, “Römische Katholizität – All-christliche Ökum-enizität ”, in: J. B. METZ et al. (ed.)., Gott in Welt. Festgabe für KarlRahner, Freiburg i. Br. 1964, vol. II, 524-528.

37W. KASPER, “Situation und Zukunft der Ökumene ”, in: Theol-ogische Quartalschrift 181 (2001) 175-190, cit. 185.

38 J. RATZINGER, Das Konzil auf dem Weg. Rückblick auf diezweite Sitzungsperiode des Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils, (English:The Council in Progress. Retrospective of the Second Session of theSecond Vatican Council), Köln 1964, 51.

39 J. RATZINGER, “Einleitung ”, in: Konstitution über die Kirche.Lateinisch-Deutsch, Münster 1966, 7-19, especially 12-13.

40 J. RATZINGER, “Die Ekklesiologie der Konstitution Lumengentium”, in: id., Weggemeinschaft des Glaubens. Kirche als Com-munio, Augsburg 2002, 107-131, cit. 127.

41 Cf. K. KOCH, Dass alle eins seien. Ökumenische Perspektiven,Augsburg 2006, especially Chapter II: ‘Systematische Verortungdes ökumenischen Kernproblems’.

a) Autocephaly or primacy in the Universal Church

The definition that best describes Orthodox eccle-siology,42 and in an analogous way that of the Orien-tal Orthodox, is Eucharistic ecclesiology,43 a conceptdeveloped first by Russian theologians living in exilein Paris after the First World War, in clear oppositionto the centralism of the papacy in the RomanCatholic Church. This ecclesiology emphasises thatthe Church of Jesus Christ is present and realised ineach local church, gathered around its bishop, wherethe eucharist is celebrated. Since the local churchthat celebrates the eucharist gathered around itsbishop is the representation, actualisation and reali-sation of the one Church in a particular place, therecan in principle be no primacy of the universalchurch over local churches. Apart from an ecumeni-cal Council, there cannot even be a visible principleor effective principle and organ of the unity of theuniversal Church, to which are attributed juridicalpowers, such as the Catholic Church recognises inthe Petrine ministry. Since every Eucharistic commu-nity is fully the Church and lacks nothing that wouldrender it so, horizontal unity between local churchesis not even considered essential or constitutive ofbeing the Church. Such unity is indeed seen as beau-tiful and pertaining to the fullness of the Church, butis not its constitutive element.44 This is all the moretrue in respect of a possible unity between individualeucharistic communities and the Bishop of Rome.This independence of individual Eucharistic commu-nities has however a cost: the central problem ofOrthodoxy is exactly the specific concept of auto-cephaly and the national principle related to it.

According to Catholic ecclesiology, the Church is,indeed, fully present too in concrete Eucharistic com-munity, but the individual Eucharistic community isnot the Church in its fullness. Accordingly, unitybetween individual Eucharistic communities unitedin their turn to their own bishop and to the Bishop ofRome is not an external ingredient of Eucharisticecclesiology, but an inner condition of it. This isshown by the mention of the name of the diocesanbishop and of the Bishop of Rome in the EucharisticPrayer in memento ecclesiae: this mention is not an

option that can be avoided according to circum-stances, but is the “ expression of communio ”, “ onlywithin which does the individual Eucharistic celebra-tion make sense in its deepest meaning ”.45 The con-vergences and divergences between Orthodox andCatholic ecclesiology therefore emerge clearly intheir respective interpretations of Eucharistic ecclesi-ology. The Catholic Church shares with Orthodoxy aEucharistic ecclesiology that allows for “ the respon-sibility of each single community ”; however, it differ-entiates itself from the Orthodox position when itemphasizes a Eucharistic ecclesiology that “ rejectsself-sufficiency and demands unity with the whole ”.46

The ecumenical problem in the relationshipbetween the Catholic Church and the OrthodoxChurch resides therefore in the fact that “ an ecclesi-ology tied to a national culture and a Catholic ecclesi-ology oriented towards the concept of universalityfind themselves confronting each other, and untilnow in disagreement ”.47 It is no accident that thisproblem has arisen in its most acute form over thequestion of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, andprecisely in the sense of primacy at the level of theuniversal Church and not simply at the regionallevel.48 As Pope Paul VI observed, on the one handthis represents the “major obstacle ” to the restora-tion of full ecclesial communion with Orthodoxy. Buton the other hand in the eyes of the present Pontiff italso constitutes the “major opportunity ” for thesame goal because, without primacy, the CatholicChurch would long since have broken up intonational and sui juris churches, making the ecumeni-cal landscape confused and complicated, andbecause the primacy can make possible stepstowards unity.49

In order to move forward, it is on the one handnecessary, as Archbishop Bruno Forte has for sometime insisted, for the Catholic Church to deepen theidea that the primacy of the Bishop of Rome is notsimply a juridical ingredient that stands outsideEucharistic ecclesiology, but rather that it is basedprecisely on it, because the global network ofEucharistic communities needs a ministry servingunity at the universal level as well.50 On the other

79

42 Cf. C. LANGE / K. PINGGÉRA (ed.), Die altorientalischenKirchen. Glaube und Geschichte, Darmstadt 2010; A. NICHOLS,Rome and the Eastern Churches. A Study in Schism, San Francisco2010.

43 Cf. J. OELDEMANN, Orthodoxe Kirchen im ökumenischen Dia-log. Positionen, Probleme, Perspektiven, Paderborn 2004.

44 Within Orthodoxy, several authors declare themselvesfavourable to an enlargement of ecclesial conscience, as for exam-ple the Russian Orthodox theologian A. Schmemann, inEucharistie. Sakrament des Gottesreiches (Einsiedeln 2005) 137:“Kirche ist nicht nur ‘quantitativ’, sondern auch ‘qualitativ’ undontologisch mehr als die Pfarrei; und die Pfarrei ist Kirche nursoweit sie an der Fülle der Kirche teilhat, sich selbst ‘transzendiert’und ihre innere und natürliche Selbstzentriertheit und Verengungauf alles spezifisch ‘Lokale’ überwindet.” (English: Church is notonly ‘quantitative’ but also ‘qualitative’ and is ontologically morethan the parish, and the parish is Church only insofar as it partici-pates in the fullness of the Church, so that it ‘transcends’ itself andits inward and natural self-centeredness, and overcomes the nar-rowness of everything specifically ‘local’.)

45 W. KASPER, “ Einheit und Vielfalt der Aspekte derEucharistie. Zur neuerlichen Diskussion um Grundgestalt undGrundsinn der Eucharistie ”, in: id., Theologie und Kirche, Mainz1987, 300-320, cit. 316.

46 BENEDICT XVI, Gottes Projekt. Nachdenken über Schöpfungund Kirche (English: God’s Project. Thinking about Creation andChurch) Regensburg 2009, 108.

47 W. KASPER, “Ökumene zwischen Ost und West. Stand undPerspektiven des Dialogs mit den orthodoxen Kirchen ”, in: Stim-men der Zeit 128, 2003, 151–164, cit. 157.

48 Cf. A. GARUTI, Patriarca d’Occidente? Storia e attualità,Bologna 2007; N. BUX / A. GARUTI, Pietro ama e unisce. La respons-abilità personale del papa per la Chiesa universale, Bologna 2006.

49 J. RATZINGER, “Briefwechsel zwischen Metropolit Damaski-nos und Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger ”, in: id., Weggemeinschaft desGlaubens. Kirche als Communio, Augsburg 2002, 187-209, cit. 203.

50 B. FORTE, “ Il primato nell’eucaristia. Considerazioni ecu-meniche intorno al ministero petrino nella Chiesa ”, in: Asprenas23, 1976, 391-410. Cf. also A. GARUTI, “Ecclesiologia Eucaristica eprimato del Vescovo di Roma”, in: R. KARWACKI (ed.), Benedictusqui venit in Nomine Domini, Radom 2009, 455-472.

pline and canon law, yet on the other they are incommunion with the Bishop of Rome.55 In this per-spective, their special duty in the work of promotingthe unity of Christians was made clear in the Coun-cil’s decree “Orientalium ecclesiarum”: “The EasternChurches in communion with the Apostolic See ofRome have a special duty of promoting the unity ofall Christians, especially Eastern Christians, in accor-dance with the principles of the decree on Ecu-menism of this Sacred Council ”.56 The Council alsorecognised the temporary character of the canon lawof the Catholic Oriental Churches, explicitly affirm-ing that “[a]ll these directives of law are laid down inview of the present situation until such time as theCatholic Church and the separated Eastern Churchescome together in the fullness of communion ”.57 Inthis sense, the Catholic Oriental Churches fulfil animportant bridging function, helping us now tobreathe more intensely with two lungs, and promot-ing “ wider contact with the East ” also in ecu-menism.

b) The Protestant Churches in continuity with orbreak from Tradition

The ecumenical dialogue with Orthodoxy mayalso have a positive impact on resolving ecclesiologi-cal problems relating to division in the WesternChurch.58 In fact, the ecclesiology of the Reformationpivots around the concrete local community, as isclear in the writings of Luther himself. Confrontedwith the difficulties of his era, Luther felt unable torecognise the Spirit of Christ in the universal Church.Nevertheless, he did not consider the various Protes-tant national churches, which had already started todevelop at the time, as Church in the theologicalsense; rather, he saw them as socio-political entitiesthat, in the absence of other authorities, were gov-erned by political forces. It is for this reason that hedefined the term ‘Church’ in a negative way, attribut-ing its theological sense to the term ‘community’. Inline with this tradition, the concrete local communitycontinues even today to be the gravitational point ofProtestant ecclesiology. The Church of Jesus Christ isfully present in the concrete community that gathersin the liturgical celebration around the Word andSacrament. In the well-known definition contained inthe Augsburg Confession, the church is considered tobe the assembly of believers in which the Gospel istaught in its purity and the sacraments are correctlyadministered. Since this is realised in the local com-

80

hand, the Orthodox Church needs seriously to dealwith the problem of autocephaly, an issue of funda-mental importance for its own future and for ecu-menism. It needs to find satisfactory solutions so thatit does not lose its own internal unity and its ownability to act in a concerted manner. It is preciselythe problem of autocephaly which shows the urgentneed, at a universal level as well, for an organ ofecclesial unity, which must have a balanced relation-ship with the specific responsibilities of localchurches.51

In the ecumenical dialogue between the CatholicChurch and the Orthodox Church on ecclesiology ingeneral,52 and on the primacy of the Bishop of Romein particular,53 encouraging steps have been made inthe course of recent decades. Especially noteworthyis the Ravenna document of 2007, in which bothChurches jointly declared that the Church needs aprotos at the local, regional and universal level. Fromthis promising starting point, we now need to clarifyfrom an historical perspective what the role of theBishop of Rome was during the first millennium ofthe undivided Church. This question is linked to animpasse that occurred in the last session of the JointInternational Commission for Theological Dialoguebetween the Catholic Church and the OrthodoxChurch as a whole held in Vienna in October 2010,and will accordingly need to be reflected upon fur-ther through a systematic study of the relationshipbetween primacy and synodality in the Church.

That said, we must not lose sight of the ultimategoal of ecumenical dialogue, which, for the CatholicChurch, can only be the re-establishment of visibleecclesial communion. In fact, as the then CardinalJoseph Ratzinger rightly observed, continuing tospeak of “ our two churches ” can mean institutional-ising a dualism in the ecclesiological concept, makingthe idea of the one Church seem like an “ imaginaryreality ”, whereas “ for her, it is precisely this livingbody which is essential ”.54 In overcoming this ecclesi-ological dualism, great help can be given by theCatholic Oriental Churches, which gathered in theSynod of Bishops in Rome last autumn. On the onehand, they are close to the Oriental Churches fromthe point of view of theology, liturgy, ecclesial disci-

51With reference to this controversy between Cardinal Kasperand Cardinal Ratzinger (between 1999 and 2001), which resultedin a notable rapprochement of positions, cf. K. KOCH, “Der Bischofals Bindeglied der Katholizität. Die episkopale Dimension derkatholischen Ekklesiologie ”, in: G. AUGUSTIN (ed.), Die Kirche JesuChristi leben, Freiburg i. Br. 2010, 56-107, especially 80-85. On thetheme in general, cf. A. BUCKENMAIER, Universale Kirche vor Ort.Zum Verhältnis von Universalkirche und Ortskirche, Regensburg2009.

52 Cf. G. MARTZELOS, “Der theologische Dialog zwischen derOrthodoxen und der Römisch-katholischen Kirche: Chronik –Bewertung – Aussichten ”, in: K. NIKOLAKOPOULOS (ed.), BenediktXVI. und die Orthodoxe Kirche. Bestandesaufnahmen, Erwartungen,Perspektiven, St. Ottilien 2008, 289–327.

53 Cf. W. KASPER (ed.), Il ministero petrino. Cattolici e ortodossiin dialogo, Roma 2004.

54 J. RATZINGER, “Briefwechsel zwischen Metropolit Damaski-nos und Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger ”, in: id., Weggemeinschaft desGlaubens. Kirche als Communio, Augsburg 2002, 187-209, cit. 205.

55 For background reading: A. ELLI, Breve storia delle ChieseCattoliche Orientali, Milano 2010; P. G. GIANAZZA, Cattolici di ritoorientale e Chiesa Latina in Medio Oriente, Bologna 2010;H. LEGRAND and G. M. CROCE, L’Oeuvre d’Orient. Solidarités anci-ennes et nouveaux défis, Paris 2010; A. O’MAHONY and J. FLANNERY(ed.), The Catholic Church in the Contemporary Middle East, Lon-don 2010.

56Orientalium ecclesiarum, 24.57 Ibid, no. 30a.58 Cf. W. KASPER, “L’Orthodoxie et l’Église catholique. A 40 ans

du Décret sur l’œcuménisme Unitatis redintegratio”, in: La Docu-mentation catholique 86, 2004, 315-323.

munity, not only does the Church of Jesus Christ sub-sist in the individual concrete community, but thelocal community is the prototype of the realisation ofthe Church.

Protestant ecclesiology also holds that individualcommunities are in a relationship of mutualexchange with the others. The trans-communitydimension of the Church exists implicitly, although itis secondary, and even more so the universal dimen-sion of the Church.59 In fact, even the worldwide fed-erations, such as those of the Lutheran andReformed, are not themselves church but alliances ofchurches which, at most, are transforming them-selves into ecclesial community. Thus, we comeacross the same problems as those we encounter inthe dialogue with the Orthodox Church, but in amore acute form. There emerges the difficult ecu-menical question of how to relate Catholic ecclesiol-ogy with its dialectic between the plurality of thelocal Churches and the unity of the universal Church,and Protestant ecclesiology which sees the concretecommunity as the most authentic realisation of theChurch, and of how it may be possible to arrive atsubstantial consensus on the issue.

A further complication lies in the fact that thesacramental dimension of the Church is an extremelycontentious point. In contrast to the churches andecclesial communities deriving from the Reforma-tion, the Catholic Church has a clearly sacramentalecclesiology, according to which the Church is notprimarily an assembly of people professing the samefaith, but is a sacramental foundation instituted inthe Last Supper Room which is realised in everyeucharistic celebration, as highlighted already byJoseph Ratzinger in his doctoral thesis with thetelling formula: “ The Church is the people of Godonly in the Body of Christ and only through the Bodyof Christ ”.60

This fundamental difference has an impact aboveall on the ecumenical question of eucharistic com-munion. For the Catholic Church, the obstacle to cel-ebrating the eucharist together derives principallyfrom the concept of sacramental ecclesiology, that is,the conviction — which can be found in the earlyChurch — that communion in Christ, ecclesial com-munion and eucharistic communion are not separa-ble but intimately united. This does not mean negat-ing the primacy of Jesus Christ in the sacraments,but it does question the absolute separation, byProtestants, of the sacramental sign and its author.

While it is inconceivable in Catholic ecclesiology thatsuch a separation between Jesus Christ and theChurch should exist precisely in the eucharist, theCatholic Church can accord with the Protestant con-cept in which it is Christ who extends the invitationto the Lord’s Supper, but must make the followingclarification: while it is Christ who invites, the invita-tion is conveyed by a minister whose ordination andmission are founded in Christ, and is therefore itselfa sacrament.61

Therein lies a further difference. On the onehand, Protestant theology defines the Church on theexclusive basis of the Word of God proclaimed “pureet recte ” and of the sacraments administered accord-ing to the Gospel, and understands the Word of Godas a reality that can be known independently andself-sufficiently with respect to the Church, and thatcan act as an independent corrective for the ministry.On the other, the Catholic Church considers andrecognises the apostolic ministry as a third criteriafor the Church: “She does not consider the Word asbeing quasi-hypostatic and self-sufficient withrespect to the Church ”, but rather, conceives theWord as living “ in the Church, just as the Churchlives in the Word — in mutual dependence and rela-tion ”.62

These ecclesiological questions should be at theheart of the ecumenical dialogue with the churchesand ecclesial communities originating in the Refor-mation. It would be useful in the dialogue to have aresponse on the part of Protestants regarding theway in which today the ecclesial communities origi-nating in the Reformation see themselves and inwhich the Reformation is self-defined: either as acountdown to modern times and the rising star ofmodernity, insofar as it represented the decisivebreak with the past, or as a development in funda-mental continuity with 1,500 years of Christianchurch history. It is interesting to note that BishopWolfgang Huber, former President of the Council ofthe Evangelical Church in Germany, affirmed thatthe Evangelical Church is the Catholic Church thatwent through the Reformation. In this perspective,the ecclesial communities deriving from the Refor-mation are seen to be in fundamental continuitywith the tradition of the Church. It is to be hopedthat such a theological understanding may prevail,making it possible to find satisfactory answers tothis issue, particularly in view of the anniversary ofthe Reformation in 2017. Cardinal Kasper hadalready in the past asked the ecclesial communitiesof the Reformation to define their self-understand-

81

59 It is surely positive that the trans-community and universaldimensions of the Church have been increasingly rediscovered bytheologians of the Protestant tradition, such as Wolfhart Pannen-berg and Gunther Wenz, with a clear reference to the eucharisticcelebration. Cf. W. PANNENBERG, “Kirche als Gemeinschaft derGlaubenden ”, in: id., Kirche und Ökumene = Beiträge zur Systema-tischen Theologie, Göttingen 2000, vol. 3, 11-22; G. WENZ, “Com-munio Ecclesiarum”, in: F. W. GRAF / D. KORSCH (ed.), Jenseits derEinheit. Protestantische Ansichten der Ökumene, Hannover 2001,111-124. However, this vision is not representative of modernProtestant ecclesiology.

60 J. RATZINGER, Vorwort zur Neuauflage von Volk und HausGottes in Augustins Lehre von der Kirche, St. Ottilien 1992, XIV.

61 Cf. K. KOCH, “Eucharistie und Kirche in ökumenischer Per-spektive ”, in: Schweizerische Kirchenzeitung 171, 2003, 619-631and 640-649. Cf. also K. LEHMANN, “ Einheit der Kirche undGemeinschaft im Herrenmahl. Zur neueren ökumenischen Diskus-sion um Eucharistie- und Kirchengemeinschaft ”, in: T. SÖDING(ed.), Eucharistie. Positionen katholischer Theologie, Regensburg2002, 141-177.

62 J. RATZINGER, “ Das geistliche Amt und die Einheit derKirche ”, in: id., Das neue Volk Gottes. Entwürfe zur Ekklesiologie,Düsseldorf 1969, 105-129, cit. 106.

1. The unity of the Church and the ecumenical goal

Arriving at an ecumenical understanding of thechurch has become today a question of unprece-dented urgency, particularly as it holds the key toresolving the main impasse in the actual ecumenicalsituation, that is, the fact that the various churchesand ecclesial communities have not yet been able toreach a consensus on the goal of the ecumenicalmovement itself, which indeed has become evenmore obscure over time. This fact illustrates the para-doxical nature of the modern ecumenical situation:on the one hand, it has been possible to achieve wideand encouraging convergences and consensus onmany particular issues; on the other, today ourremaining differences can be traced back to the dif-ferent confessional interpretations of what the unityof the Church itself means. This complex problemneeds to be seriously confronted once and for all. Infact, only when we have a clear view of the goal ofthe ecumenical movement will we be able to identifyand subsequently to take the necessary steps on ourjourney together.

The lack of consensus on the goal of the ecumeni-cal movement is due fundamentally to the lack ofecumenical consensus on the nature of the Churchand of its unity. As every church and ecclesial com-munity has and realises its own confessional under-standing of its specific church unity, and understand-ably brings this understanding to bear on the goal ofthe ecumenical movement, there are consequently asmany ideas of the goal of the ecumenical movementas there are Christian churches and ecclesial commu-nities.68 The diversity in the confessional interpreta-tions of church and ecclesial unity is the underlyingreason why it is impossible to move without frictionbeyond specific ecclesiologies towards a compatibleecumenical model of unity and communion. This isparticularly true when such a model is not discussedadequately in the ecumenical dialogue, with eachside preferring to treat its own confessional ecclesiol-ogy in absolute terms, thereby giving rise to the sus-picion of “wishing surreptitiously to impose a partic-ular confessional typology (that is, its own) ”.69

Experience tells us that no church is immune tothis temptation, and that it is particularly evident inthe ecumenical dialogue with the churches and eccle-sial communities originating in the Reformation.70 Inthe Leuenberg Agreement of 1973, they developedtheir own model of ecclesial communion, which wasintroduced within the Leuenberg communion of

82

ing and to clarify whether they consider the Refor-mation in basically the same way as the Reformershad themselves,63 that is as a “ reform and renewalof the universal Church ”, or rather as a new Christ-ian and ecclesiological paradigm “which distancesitself markedly in a ‘Protestant manner’ from theCatholic world due to an enduring fundamental dif-ference ”.64 The future direction of ecumenical dis-cussion on the theological nature of the Church willdepend on the response to this question.

III. THE CONTENTIOUS GOAL OF ECUMENISM

Theological clarification on ecclesiology ought tobe the foremost issue in ecumenical dialogue. Thethird chapter of “Harvesting the Fruits ”, which sum-marises the outcomes of forty years of work on theecclesiological question,65 could serve as a startingpoint. The elaboration of a common ecclesiologycould lead to a “ Joint Declaration ” similar to that onthe doctrine of justification or at least an in via Dec-laration as proposed by the Protestant ecumenistHarding Meyer;66 such an outcome would represent adecisive step towards visible ecclesial communion. Infact, there can be no ecclesial unity if there is not firsta clear concept of the theological nature of theChurch.67

63 Martin Luther defended himself against the accusation ofabandoning the ancient Church and creating a new Church in histext “ Wider Hans Worst ”, in which he stressed: “ We haveremained faithful to the true and ancient Church, we are the trueand ancient Church ”, forming “ one Body and one communitywith the entire holy Christian Church and communion of saints ”.John Calvin expounded a similar argument in the fourth book ofhis “ Institutio ”. The Protestant ecumenist W. Pannenberg rightlyobserved that the Reformers wanted the renewal of the oneChurch and not new Churches and, therefore, that the emergenceof new churches does not represent the success, but rather thelack of success, of the Reformation insofar as the realisation ofthe Reformation would only be effectively achieved throughthe ecumenical re-establishment of the unity of the Church.Cf. W. PANNENBERG, “Reformation und Einheit der Kirche ”, in: id.,Kirche und Ökumene = Beiträge zur Systematischen Theologie. Band3, Göttingen 2000, 173-185. The Protestant theologian G. Wenzmakes a similar assessment: “The reformation of the one Churchaccording to the criterion of the rediscovered Gospel of the justifi-cation of the sinner and not the institution of separate confessionalChurches was the original aim of the Reformation.” Cf. G. WENZ,“ Konfessionelle Theologie? Ökumenische Notizen aus protes-tantischer Perspektive ”, in: id, Grundfragen ökumenischer Theolo-gie. Vol 1, Göttingen 1999, 17-34, cit. 19.

64 Cf. W. KASPER, “Ökumenisch von Gott sprechen? ”, in:I. DALFERTH et al. (ed.), Denkwürdiges Geheimnis. Beiträge zurGotteslehre. Festschrift für Eberhard Jüngel zum 70. Geburtstag,Tübingen 2004, 291-302, cit. 302. Ad hoc English translation pro-vided here.

65 W. KASPER, Harvesting the Fruits. Basic Aspects of ChristianFaith in Ecumenical Dialogue, London 2009, 48-158: ChapterThree: The Church.

66H. MEYER, “Stillstand oder Kairos? Zur Zukunft des evange-lisch/katholischen Dialogs ”, in: id., Versöhnte Verschiedenheit. Auf-sätze zur ökumenischen Theologie III, Frankfurt a. M.-Paderborn2009, 132-144.

67 Cf. W. KASPER, “Kircheneinheit und Kirchengemeinschaft inkatholischer Sicht. Eine Problemskizze ”, in: K. HILLENBRAND /H. NIEDERSCHLAG (ed.), Glaube und Gemeinschaft. Festschrift fürPaul-Werner Scheele zum 25jährigen Konsekrationsjubiläum,Würzburg 2000, 100-117.

68 Cf. G. HINTZEN / W. THÖNISSEN, Kirchengemeinschaftmöglich? Einheitsverständnis und Einheitskonzepte in der Diskus-sion, Paderborn 2001.

69 F. W. GRAF and D. KORSCH, “ Jenseits der Einheit: Reichtumder Vielfalt. Der Widerstreit der ökumenischen Bewegungen unddie Einheit der Kirche ”, in: id. (ed.), Jenseits der Einheit. Protes-tantische Einsichten der Ökumene, Hannover 2001, 9-33, cit. 25.

70Cf. K. KOCH, “Kirchengemeinschaft oder Einheit der Kirche?Zum Ringen um eine angemessene Zielvorstellung der Ökumene ”,in: P. WALTER et al. (ed.), Kirche in ökumenischer Perspektive. Kardi-nal Walter Kasper zum 70. Geburtstag, Freiburg i. Br. 2003, 135-162.

churches.71 According to this model, ecclesial com-munion requires a common interpretation of theGospel, based on the message of justification, whichis considered to be the “measure of all the Church’spreaching.”72 On the basis of the common interpreta-tion of the Gospel, the churches of the LeuenbergAgreement declare themselves to be in fellowshipwith one another in Word and Sacrament, andaccord each other mutual recognition of their respec-tive ordination and the possibility of intercelebration.Thus, church communion is essentially a matter ofpulpit and altar communion between churches withremaining different confessional traditions.

Wilhelm Hüffmeier has rightly stated that as thismodel was “ approved in a Reformed context andsuccessfully implemented in the Leuenberg Agree-ment ”, it represents “ the Protestant model of eccle-sial communion ”.73 In fact, this confessional modelof ecclesial communion has proven to be successfulin the Protestant world. However, as the churchesand ecclesial communities originating in the Refor-mation consider that this model is also valid for ecu-menism, they transfer their own confessional conceptof unity also to the level of the ecumenical goal, sothat there is an underlying implication that weCatholics ought to become Protestants in order tomake further progress in ecumenism. Yet theCatholic Church, like the Orthodox Church, remainsfaithful to the principle, which was already recog-nised in the early Church, of the inseparability ofecclesial communion and confessional communion,and it commits itself on the ecumenical level so thatthe various churches may recognise each other as sis-ter churches in order to work together towards thegoal of ecumenism, which is visible unity in the com-munion of faith, sacraments and ecclesial ministry.The true goal of ecumenism, as often reiterated byCardinal Joseph Ratzinger is therefore “ the transfor-mation of the plurality of the separate denomina-tional churches into the plurality of local churches,which, in reality, form one Church ”.74

2. The abandonment of the ecumenical goal and theneed to safeguard the outcomes already achieved

In the light of the above, we can see the serious-ness of the problem regarding the lack of a commonunderstanding of Church and unity in the contempo-

rary ecumenical situation. The churches and ecclesialcommunities originating in the Reformation gener-ally define their ecumenical model of unity in termsof the formula ‘reconciled diversity’. Although notwithout its own truth and beauty, this formula runsthe risk of being used by all but never in the sameway. Catholics see it as an acceptable way of express-ing the goal of the ecumenical commitment, in thesense that ecumenism is essentially a process of rec-onciliation in which the various churches, after clari-fying and overcoming all the divergences which are asource of division, may recognise each other as theone Church of Jesus Christ and may be able to give avisible form to this unity. In contrast, Protestantsoften do not see it as the goal of the ecumenicalmovement, but rather as the adequate description ofthe ecumenical outcomes that have already beenachieved and therefore of the current ecumenical sit-uation, in the sense that they understand ecclesialcommunion as an assembly of churches of diverseconfessional traditions which recognise each other aschurches. In fact, the Leuenberg Agreement aims nei-ther at a profession of unity of faith nor the visibleunity of the Church. Rather, it envisages that theindividual churches retain their own church govern-ment, while committing themselves to workingtogether and recognising each other’s respective min-istries.

Inevitably one reaches the conclusion that thechurches and ecclesial communities originating inthe Reformation have abandoned the original ecu-menical goal of visible unity and have substituted itwith the concept of mutual recognition as churches,which is already feasible. The Catholic ecumenistPeter Neuner regrets that many in the Protestant andReformed churches, and indeed not a few Catholics,do not consider that ecumenical goal is the reestab-lishment of ecclesial communion, but rather simplyintercommunion; once this has been achieved, “ allthe rest can remain the same ”.75 It is clear that thereis a profound difference between this Protestantvision and the Catholic and Orthodox understanding,which holds that the ecumenical goal cannot beintercommunion but “ communion within whicheucharistic communion has its place ”.76 This convic-tion underlies the inseparability of ecclesial commu-nion and eucharistic communion for the RomanCatholic Church, as well as for the majority of Christ-ian churches.77 In fact, most Christian churches have

83

71 Cf. H. MEYER, “ Zur Entstehung und Bedeutung desKonzeptes ‘Kirchengemeinschaft’. Eine historische Skizze ausevangelischer Sicht ”, in: J. SCHREINER and K. WITTSTADT (ed.),Communio Sanctorum. Einheit der Christen – Einheit der Kirche.Festschrift für Paul-Werner Scheele,Würzburg 1988, 204-230.

72W. LOHFF, Die Konkordie reformatorischer Kirchen in Europa:Leuenberger Konkordie, Frankfurt a. M. 1985, no. 12.

73W. HÜFFMEIER, “Kirchliche Einheit als Kirchengemeinschaft– Das Leuenberger Modell ” in: F. W. GRAF und D. KORSCH (ed.),Jenseits der Einheit. Protestantische Einsichten der Ökumene, Han-nover 2001, 54.

74 J. RATZINGER, “Luther and the Unity of the Churches ”, in: id.,Church, Ecumenism and Politics: New Endeavours in Ecclesiology,San Francisco 2008, p.119. (German original: “ Luther und dieEinheit der Kirchen“, in: id., Kirche, Ökumene und Politik. NeueVersuche zur Ekklesiologie, Einsiedeln 1987, 97-127, cit. 114).

75 P. NEUNER, “Das Dekret über die Ökumene Unitatis Redinte-gratio”, in: F. X. BISCHOF / S. LEIMGRUBER (ed.), Vierzig Jahre II.Vatikanum. Zur Wirkungsgeschichte der Konzilstexte, Würzburg2004, 117-140, cit. 139.

76 P. NEUNER / B. KLEINSCHWÄRZER-MEISTER, “ Ein neuesMiteinander der christlichen Kirchen. Auf dem Weg zum Öku-menischen Kirchentag in Berlin 2003 ”, in: Stimmen der Zeit 128,2003, 363-375, cit. 373.

77 Cf. M. EHAM, Gemeinschaft im Sakrament? Die Frage nachder Möglichkeit sakramentaler Gemeinschaft zwischen katholischenund nichtkatholischen Christen. Zur ekklesiologischen Dimensionder ökumenischen Frage. Zwei Bände, Frankfurt a. M. 1986;G. HINTZEN, Zum Thema ‘Eucharistie und Kirchengemeinschaft’,Paderborn 1990.

This concept of ecclesial pluralism which is soprevalently shared today is the most profound reasonwhy the ecumenical movement has lost its initialenthusiasm and its firm determination to seek thevisible unity of the Church of Christ, with all itsindispensable and inalienable diversity. Many seemto have come to terms with the current state of diver-sity and are content with the de facto pluralism of thedifferent churches. For them, the already ‘tolerated’diversity between the churches suffices, and they donot see why this needs to be overcome in favour of agenuinely ‘reconciled’ diversity.81 We are faced todaywith two profoundly different attitudes: on the onehand, there is an ecumenism which continues to seekthe visible unity of the church, working and prayingfor this unity; on the other, there is an ecumenismwhich considers that what has already been achievedis sufficient and is satisfied in maintaining the statusquo, wishing to affirm through the practice ofeucharistic communion and continuing, for all therest, to live as separated churches. There is a real riskthat this attitude offers nothing other than a easyconsolation in the face of the scandal of church divi-sion, which remains the fruit of sin, and that it offersnothing more than an ecumenical ‘sedative’ at a timewhen what we really need is a ‘tonic’ to strengthenand deepen the will of the churches to make visiblethe unity of the Body of Christ, which is already pre-sent in their faith in Jesus Christ, and to make itfruitful in daily life, in line with the great visionaryecumenical spirit of the Second Vatican Council.82

This paradigm shift has a deep effect on manyChristians, and also within the Catholic Church, andclosely corresponds to the unquestioningly acceptedmodern spirit of pluralism and relativism. Its basicdogma affirms that one neither can nor may inquirebeyond the plurality of reality if one does not wish tobe open to the suspicion of intellectual totalitarian-ism, and also that plurality may be the only way thattotality is revealed to us, if it is revealed at all.83 Thisabandonment of the concept of unity is characteristicof post-modernism, which “not only accepts and tol-erates pluralism, but accords it a fundamental prefer-ence ”.84 Moreover, the post-modern mentality formsthe basis of today’s pluralistic religious trends,85whose premise is that there is not only a diversity ofreligions but also a plurality of divine revelations,and consequently that Christ too is only one among

84

remained faithful to the conviction affirmed alreadyby the early Church according to which there can be“ no true and authentic eucharistic communion ”without ecclesial communion, and, vice-versa, therecan be “ no full ecclesial communion ” without theeucharist.78

In contrast, the churches and ecclesial commu-nities originating in the Reformation tend to holdthat the ecumenical goal has already been achievedwith the common celebration of the Lord’s Supper,and that the churches may thus continue to remaindivided while offering each other mutual recogni-tion. Therefore, they have no further need of unifi-cation, but merely of mutual recognition in theirrespective diversity and, in part, confessional con-tradiction.79 For them, the visible unity of theChurch is nothing more than the sum of the variouschurches. As an analogy, the image comes to mindof many individual households in which familieslive independently, limiting themselves to invitingone another to lunch once in a while. However, thisimage seems irreconcilable with the biblical imageof the one Body of Christ and with the prayer ofChrist himself “ so that they may all be one, as you,Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may bein us, that the world may believe that you sent me ”(Jn 17:21). A mere ecclesiological pluralism basedon the sum of different parts, in the sense that allthe ecclesial realities are nothing more than “ frag-ments of a true church that exists nowhere ” andthat this Church “must be created by assemblingthese pieces ” certainly cannot be the icon of thedivine Trinity, but reduces the unity of the church tothe “work of a man ”, as Cardinal Ratzinger rightlypointed out. Such pluralism also contrasts with theCatholic conviction that the true Church of JesusChrist ‘subsists’ in the Catholic Church, or rather,that it is already an existing reality, “without havingto deny that others are Christian or to dispute thefact that their communities have an ecclesial char-acter ”.80

78 P.-W. SCHEELE, “ Eucharistie und Kirche gehören zusam-men”, in: Die Tagespost 59, 20 May 2003, 3.

79 This ecumenical concept has been argued in an audaciousway by E. Jüngel on the basis of trinitarian theology. He under-stands the unity of the Triune God in an ontological-relational wayas a communion of reciprocal alterity and, consequently, in ananalogous way he understands the unity of the Church as “Wesen-gemeinschaft gegenseitigen Andersseins ” (“ intimate communionof reciprocal alterity ”), leading him moreover to see the trinitariansubsistence of the one divine Being in the three persons of theFather, Son and Holy Spirit as being the legitimate basis for argu-ing the subsistence of the one Church of Jesus Christ in the variousconfessional churches. Cf. E. JÜNGEL, “Der Glaube an die Einheitder Kirche ”, in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 31 October 2007.This is an audacious analogy insofar as the multiplicity of the con-fessional churches is based on divisions attributable to human fail-ing, and certainly divisions cannot be understood to be the reflec-tion of the reconciliation between unity and diversity in the trini-tarian communion.

80 J. RATZINGER, “Luther and the Unity of the Churches ”, in: id.,Church, Ecumenism and Politics: New Endeavours in Ecclesiology,San Francisco 2008, p. 119. (German original: “ Luther und dieEinheit der Kirchen“, in: id., Kirche, Ökumene und Politik. NeueVersuche zur Ekklesiologie, Einsiedeln 1987, 97-127, cit. 114).

81 B. NEUMANN, “‘Nehmt einander an, wie auch Christus unsangenommen hat’ (Röm 15. 7). Bausteine zu einer Spiritualität derÖkumene ”, in: Geist und Leben 76, 2003, 182-196, cit. 183.

82 Cf. K. KOCH, “ Bleibende Aufgaben für die Ökumene auskatholischer Sicht ”, in: W. THÖNISSEN (ed.), “Unitatis redintegra-tio ”. 40 Jahre Ökumenismusdekret – Erbe und Auftrag, Paderborn –Frankfurt a. M. 2005, 287-315.

83 Cf. W. WELSCH, Unsere postmoderne Moderne, Weinheim1987.

84 Cf. W. KASPER, “Die Kirche angesichts der Herausforderun-gen der Postmoderne ”, in: id., Theologie und Kirche, Mainz 1999,vol. 2, 249-264, above all 252-255: “Absage an das Einheitspostu-lat: Der pluralistische Grundzug der Postmoderne ”, cit. 253.

85Cf. R. SCHWAGER, Christus allein? Der Streit um die pluralistis-che Religionstheologie, Freiburg i. Br. 1996.

many prophets and saviours.86 In the ecumenicalcontext, there is a parallelism between this religiouspluralism and ecclesiological pluralism, and thus anyattempt to achieve unity in ecumenism too isregarded with suspicion.87 At the very most, unity isunderstood to be the tolerant recognition of pluralityand diversity; indeed, such recognition is consideredto be the realisation of reconciled diversity. Becausethe flowering meadow of the different confessionalchurches is like an invitation to mutual growth andprosperity; it is understood as a more reasonable rep-resentation of Christian unity than the ‘monoculture’of one Church.

IV. ECUMENISM PUT TO THE TEST

Without doubt, today’s largest challenge for ecu-menism is — in view of the post–modern situation ofa pluralistic, and relativistic ‘anything goes’ mentality— how one can sense at all the fundamental ecu-menical task of searching for visible unity of theChurch of Jesus Christ. Christian ecumenism cannotaccept this challenge by adapting itself to thepost–modern paradigm, but instead, must also keeppresent the question of unity today by means of adetermined benevolence, because Christian faithwould abandon itself without the search for unity.For unity is, and remains, a “ fundamental categoryof the Bible ”88 as well as Tradition, confessing oneGod, one redeemer, one Spirit, one Baptism, and oneChurch (cf. Eph 4:4-6).

1. Ecumenism and mission

The intense search for unity is also motivated byanother fact, which is highlighted in the anniversaryof an event we were able to celebrate last year. Thefirst World Missionary Conference was held one hun-dred years ago in Edinburgh, Scotland, with the aimof addressing and responding to the scandal of divi-sion. The competitiveness of the separated Christianchurches and communities in the field of missionundermined the credibility of the proclamation of theGospel of Jesus Christ, particularly in distant lands,as the Gospel was brought to these lands togetherwith the divisions of the Church in Europe. The mis-sionary Anglican bishop Charles Brent spoke at Edin-burgh of the need to make greater efforts to over-come differences of doctrinal and ecclesial orderobstructing the path to unity, given that credible wit-ness to the salvific work of Jesus Christ in the worldcould only be possible if the churches overcame theirdifferences in doctrine and ecclesial life.

Since then, or rather since the explicit recognitionthat the separation of Christians constitutes the

greatest obstacle to mission in the world, evangelisa-tion has become one of the fundamental themes ofecumenism. Since Edinburgh, the ecumenical com-mitment and the missionary endeavour have come tobe seen as indivisible realities. Ecumenism and mis-sion have become twin sisters, seeking and support-ing each another. This pairing reflects the will ofChrist, who prayed for unity “ so that the world maybelieve that you have sent me ” (Jn 17:21). With theseconcluding words, the Gospel of John highlights thatthe unity of Christ’s disciples is not an end in itself,but is at the service of the credible proclamation ofthe Gospel in the world.

The close relationship between ecumenism andmission is demonstrated by the fact that whereverthere is a weakened missionary impetus, there is alsoa diminished search for Christian unity; and vice-versa wherever the scandal of separation is somethingto which people have become accustomed or indeedis no longer even considered scandalous, missionaryefforts also wane. The new evangelisation, which hasbecome a question of urgency in the modern world,can only succeed if the original ecumenical goal isrevived, that is, to find the visible unity of Christians.Therefore, Christian witness must seek an ecumenicalmusical key, so that its melody may be symphonicrather than discordant. The ecumenical movementmust once again today serve missionary endeavours,with the enthusiasm already discernible in the wordsof Cardinal Walter Kasper: “ If we give witnesstogether, our voice will surely be more credible ”.89

It is therefore particularly beautiful and signifi-cant that Pope Benedict XVI created a new PontificalCouncil for promoting the new evangelization90 inthe very year in which we celebrate the centenary ofthe World Missionary Conference and also the fiftiethanniversary of the foundation of the Pontifical Coun-cil for Promoting Christian Unity. All the churchesliving in traditionally Christian territories need a“ renewed missionary impulse, an expression of anew, generous openness to the gift of grace ”. Indeed,it is not a “human plan of expansion ” which lies atthe root of all evangelization, but rather the “desireto share the inestimable gift that God has wished togive us, making us sharers in his own life ”. As thefundamental task of evangelization is to bringhumans closer to the mystery of God and to intro-duce them to a personal relationship with God, theheart of the new evangelization must necessarily bethe question of God, which we for our part mustapproach from an ecumenical point of view, bearingin mind, as Pope Benedict XVI has reflected, thatwhoever does not give God, gives too little.91

85

86 K. KOCH, “ Glaubensüberzeugung und Toleranz. Interre-ligiöser Dialog in christlicher Sicht ”, in Zeitschrift für Missionswis-senschaft und Religionswissenschaft 92, 2008, 196–210.

87 Cf. M. N. EBERTZ, Aufbruch in der Kirche. Anstösse für einzukunftsfähiges Christentum, Freiburg i. Br. 2003, 17.

88 W. KASPER, Sacrament of Unity: The Eucharist and theChurch, New York 2004, 142. (German original: Sakrament derEinheit. Eucharistie und Kirche, Freiburg i. Br. 2004).

89 W. KASPER, “Neue Evangelisierung als theologische, pas-torale und geistliche Herausforderung ”, in: id., Das EvangeliumJesu Christi = Gesammelte Schriften, Freiburg i. Br. 2009, vol. 5,243-317, cit. 269.

90BENEDICT XVI, Motu proprio “Ubicumque et semper ”.91 Cf. K. KOCH, “Die Gottesfrage in Gesellschaft und Kirche ”,

in: G. AUGUSTIN / K. KRÄMER (ed.), Gott denken und bezeugen.Festschrift für Kardinal Walter Kasper zum 75. Geburtstag, Freiburgi. Br. 2008, 481-503.

full and realised communion. As Pope John Paul IIclearly highlighted in his encyclical on ecumenism“Ut unum sint ”, the martyrs “ are the most powerfulproof that every factor of division can be transcendedand overcome in the total gift of self for the sake ofthe Gospel ”.95

As Christians, we must live in the hope that theblood of the martyrs of our own time may becomethe seed of full unity in the Body of Christ. Yet wemust give witness to this hope in a credible way byoffering authentic help to Christians who are perse-cuted throughout the world, publicly speaking outagainst situations that underlie martyrdom and com-mitting ourselves to safeguarding the respect for reli-gious freedom and human dignity. This constitutesthe urgent kairological responsibility of Christians,which must be experienced in ecumenical commu-nion.

3. Ecumenism and spirituality

The most profound essence of ecumenical spiritu-ality, which is so absolutely necessary today, can betraced to the martyrological dimension of ecu-menism. With this, we come to a perspective which isfundamental for the ecumenical commitment. Toillustrate this, I would like to refer once again toEdinburgh.96 Two movements emerged from theWorld Missionary Conference which have continuedto be part of ecumenism: on the one hand, we havethe ‘practical approach to Christianity’ embodied inthe “Life and Work ” movement, which promotes anintensive cooperation among the churches inresponse to the challenges of society, and on theother, the “Faith and Order ” movement, which aimsat resolving the problems relating to doctrine andecclesial constitution which present obstacles topractical cooperation among the churches. As in thepast, ecumenism today and in the future will need towalk on both its legs: on the one hand, the theologi-cal and spiritual ecumenism will need to respond tosecular challenges; on the other, the social and ethi-cal ecumenism will need the theological and spiritualecumenism in order to maintain a Christian identity.

The problem arises when one of the two legsbecomes paralyzed. We run this risk even today,when a preference is made for the approach of “Lifeand Work ” over that of “Faith and Order ”. Not infre-quently, themes of a social or ethic nature are placedahead of spiritual or theological questions to such agreat extent that the impression can be given that thelatter, in all probability, will be in danger of fallingbehind. Even within the fundamental ecumenicalissue on Church unity and its relationship to theunity of humanity, the ethical aspect has often over-shadowed the sacramental dimension. With regard to

86

2. The ecumenism of the martyrs

The most credible witnesses to the faith and themost credible exegetes of the Gospel are withoutdoubt the martyrs, who have given their very lives forthe faith.92 In the average awareness of not a fewChristians today, the themes of ‘martyrdom’ and ‘per-secution of Christians’ belong to the past. Thesewords are principally consigned to historical mem-ory. One calls to mind, for example, the stoning ofStephen narrated in the Acts of the Apostles. Onecalls to mind the various waves of persecution in theearly era of Christianity which the Roman emperorsused to purge society of atheists, as Christians wereonce called. Certainly, there is also public awarenessof the 20th century, during which many Christianswere persecuted and killed for the sake of their faithunder the regime of the terror of national–socialismand communism. However, there is no longer talktoday of the persecution of Christians, even thoughthe end of the second millennium and the start of thethird have seen Christianity once again become theChurch of martyrs.93

The Christian faith has become the most perse-cuted in today’s world. In 2008 alone, of the 2.2 bil-lion Christians in the world, 230 million were vic-tims, for the sake of their faith, of discrimination,abuse, intense hostility and even outright persecu-tion. This means that 80% of those who are perse-cuted today for their faith are Christians. The Inter-nationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrechte has pre-sented the following unsettling appraisal: “ If we takethe international standards of human rights as ourcriterion, the situation of these Christians is often areal catastrophe. Those involved in this disaster havebecome accustomed to it, and our secularised societytakes cognisance, if ever it does, only when the cir-cumstances are so exceptional that waves of refugeesare displaced throughout the world ”.94

This devastating appraisal represents a vast chal-lenge to all the Christian churches, which are calledto an authentic solidarity. Many Christian churchesand communities have their martyrs. It is thereforeappropriate to speak of an ‘ecumenism of the mar-tyrs’. This in itself enfolds a beautiful promise:notwithstanding the drama of division among thechurches, the unshakeable witnesses of the faith inall the Christian churches and communities havedemonstrated that God Himself maintains commu-nion among the baptised at a far deeper level througha faith which is witnessed with the supreme sacrificeof life. While we as Christians and we as churchescontinue to live in imperfect communion on thisearth, the martyrs in heavenly glory are already in

92 Cf. H. MOLL, Martyrium und Wahrheit. Zeugen Christi im 20.Jahrhundert, Weilheim-Bierbronnen 2009; P.-W. SCHEELE, ZumZeugnis berufen. Theologie des Martyriums, Würzburg 2008.

93 Cf. R. BACKES, “ Sie werden euch hassen ”. Christenverfolgungheute, Augsburg 2005; KIRCHE IN NOT (ed.), Religionsfreiheitweltweit. Bericht 2008, Königstein 2008.

94 M. KLINGBERG (ed.), Märtyrer 2008. Das Jahrbuch der Chris-tenverfolgung heute, Bonn 2008. Ad hoc English translation pro-vided here.

95 JOHN PAUL II, Ut unum sint, 1.96 Cf. W. PANNENBERG, “Entwicklung und (Zwischen-)Ergeb-

nisse der ökumenischen Bewegung seit ihren Anfängen ”, in:H. FRIES et al., Das Ringen um die Einheit der Christen. Zum Standdes evangelisch-katholischen Dialogs, Düsseldorf 1983, particularly17-20.

developments in the World Council of Churches, theProtestant ecumenist Wolfhart Pannenberg hasrightly warned of the risk inherent in the shift fromthe sacramental-symbolic to the ethical-secularunderstanding of the relationship between the unityof the Church and the unity of humanity, identifyingin such a shift not a surplus but rather a deficit in thetheology of the history of salvation.97

And yet we can only make progress in ecumenismif we return to its spiritual roots and seek a renewedecumenical spirituality.98 It is not a coincidence thatthe Week of Prayer for Christian Unity emerged atthe very beginning of the ecumenical movement. Ini-tially promoted by Paul Wattson, an American Angli-can who later entered the Catholic Church, and bySpencer Jones, an Episcopalian, the initiative wasintroduced throughout the Catholic Church by PopeBenedict XV and later developed by Abbé Paul Cou-turier, a passionate pioneer of spiritual ecumenism.We reflect on these origins not simply in an historicalperspective, as a reality confined to the past, but as abeginning which continues to accompany us on ourjourney, for even today the ecumenical commitmentis in need of a deepened spirituality, which the Sec-ond Vatican Council described as the “ soul of thewhole ecumenical movement ”.99

The Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity has dedicated itself to this theme over the lastfew years, presenting the fruits of its work in the text“A Handbook of Spiritual Ecumenism”.100 However,it should be acknowledged that ecumenical spiritual-ity has not yet made a sufficient impact on the dailylife of the Churches. We should reflect on how ourPontifical Council could promote the rediscovery andrevival of the spiritual roots of all ecumenical commit-ment. For even today, the credibility of ecumenismeither stands or falls on the deepening of its spiritualdynamism and on whether the dialogue of charityand the dialogue of truth are mutually enriching.Moreover, ecumenical spirituality reminds Christiansthat we do not ‘make’ unity or determine its time andform, but rather we only receive it as a gift. PopeBenedict XVI affirmed this himself when he stated:“ The persistent call to prayer for full communionbetween the followers of the Lord expresses the mostgenuine and profound approach of the whole ecu-menical search because, in the first place, unity is agift of God”.101 It is up to us, however, to make everyeffort to achieve it with the same fervour that is thewell-spring of patience, which — as Charles Péguyexpresses beautifully — “ is the little sister of hope ”.

Ecumenical hope predominantly lies in a basicconviction that the ecumenical movement is the greatwork of the Holy Spirit,102 and that the Spirit has ini-tiated this endeavour, and that we would be showinglittle faith were we not to trust in him who will alsofulfil this work — when, where, and how he wishes todo it. With this hope, we keep going on the journey ofecumenism, which, considering today’s difficult situ-ation — already signifies a great deal, and is the onenecessary thing that we need to do.

SECRETARY’S REPORT ON THE PONTIFICAL COUNCILFOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY 2009-2010Bishop Brian Farrell

INTRODUCTION

2009 and 2010 were particularly eventful andfruitful years for our Pontifical Council. Besides themore well-known events, we have also continued topursue our commitment to the unity of all the disci-ples of Christ with less prominent yet complex effortsthat have required sensitive and patient dedication. Iwould like to mention not only developments in thebilateral and multilateral theological dialogues withthe various churches and ecclesial communities, butalso the many important events that have opened awindow onto the rich diversity of ecumenical rela-tions among the Christian churches searching for fullcommunion. The Pauline Year (2008-2009), forexample, offered a wonderful opportunity for theo-logical reflection, and also for prayer and sharedworship. There was also the centenary of the birth ofa true giant in the ecumenical movement, CardinalJohannes Willebrands, which coincided with the firstfifty years of the Catholic commitment to Christianunity.

CONCLUSION OF THE PAULINE YEAR

The Holy Father Benedict XVI’s vision of thePauline Year was marked by a deep reflection on thetheological and spiritual legacy of Saint Paul, partic-ularly his immense work of evangelization. Manyecumenical events took place during the year inRome and in other ‘Pauline sites’ that are linked tohim, including liturgies, symposia, pilgrimages, con-certs and many other initiatives. Saint Paul remindsus that full communion among Christians traces itstrue source to “ one Lord, one faith, one baptism ”(Eph 4:5), and that Christ’s teachings constitute thebasis of all theology of unity.

The Holy Father nominated seven Cardinals asspecial envoys for the closing celebrations of thePauline Year, held on 28 June 2009 in various loca-tions associated with Saint Paul, namely: CardinalWalter Kasper in the Holy Land; Cardinal Ennio

87

97W. PANNENBERG, “Eine geistliche Erneuerung der Ökumenetut not ”, in: K. FROEHLICH (ed.), Ökumene. Möglichkeiten und Gren-zen heute. Festschrift für O. Cullmann, Tübingen 1982, 112-123, cit.118 and 120.

98 Cf. K. KOCH, Rediscovering the soul of the whole ecumenicalmovement (UR 8). Necessity and perspectives of an ecumenical spiri-tuality, in: The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity(ed.), Information Service, 115 (2004) 31–39.

99Unitatis redintegratio, 8.100W. KASPER, A Handbook of Spiritual Ecumenism, New York,

2006.101BENEDICT XVI, General audience, 20 January 2010.

102 Cf. W. PANNENBERG, “Die Ökumene als Wirken des HeiligenGeistes ”, in: S. LEIMGRUBER (ed.), Gottes Geist bei den Menschen.Grundfragen und spirituelle Anstösse, München 1999, 68-77.

Antonelli in Malta; Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martinoin Cyprus; Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran in Turkey;Cardinal Josef Tomko in Greece; Cardinal AntonioMaria Ruoco Varela in Syria; and Cardinal AndréVingt-Trois in Lebanon. The special envoys met withthe authorities of the various churches and ecclesialcommunities during their visits, and in particularwith the bishops of the Eastern Churches, as many ofthese countries have a significant Christian presence,both from a numerical and historical point of view,belonging to the Orthodox Churches and the AncientOriental Churches. The conclusion of the PaulineYear in Rome was celebrated with solemn vesperspresided over by Pope Benedict XVI on Sunday28 June 2009 and attended also by representatives ofthe non–Catholic communities of the city.

CENTENARY OF THE BIRTH OF CARDINAL JOHANNESWILLEBRANDS (1909-2009)

Cardinal Willebrands played a primary role inpromoting the commitment of the Catholic Churchto the ecumenical movement, firstly in the Nether-lands and later with the Holy See and the CatholicChurch throughout the world. He was the first Secre-tary of the then Secretariat for Promoting ChristianUnity during the Second Vatican Council, laterbecoming its second President after CardinalAugustin Bea. For nearly thirty years, Cardinal Wille-brands influenced the Catholic vision, spirit andapproach to ecumenism during the post–Conciliarperiod. He also played a significant role in promotingrelations between Catholics and Jews in the spirit ofthe Council. Cardinal Willebrands believed that ecu-menical dialogue was an expression of a profoundlyspiritual reality. His theological expertise, spiritualsensitivity, and human generosity and warmth madehim one of the outstanding ‘bridge-builders’ in 20th-century ecumenism.

The centenary of his birth (1909-2009) was com-memorated in two important events held in Utrecht(Netherlands) and Rome. An ecumenical conferencewas held in Utrecht from 2–5 September 2009, jointlyorganised by the Willebrands Archive in Utrecht andthe Centre for Ecumenical Research of the TheologyFaculty of the Catholic University of Louvain. Themain speaker was Cardinal Walter Kasper, at thetime President of our Pontifical Council, whoreflected on the spiritual legacy of Cardinal Wille-brands and future perspectives on ecumenism. Otherdistinguished speakers included Professors AntonHoutepen, Günther Gassman and Mauro Velati, aswell as Reverend Professor Adelbert Denaux andMetropolitan John (Zizioulas) of Pergamon. The con-ference ended with an ecumenical celebration in theCathedral of Utrecht.

The Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity (PCPCU) organised an academic symposium inRome on 18-19 November 2009. The symposium wasinaugurated on the afternoon of 18 November at theCentro Pro Unione in Rome. The participants weregreeted by Cardinal Walter Kasper, by Baroness Hen-riette van Lynden-Leijten, Ambassador of the King-

dom of the Netherlands to the Holy See, and byBishop Johannes van Burgsteden, the AuxiliaryBishop of Haarlem. Dr Maria ter Steeg commencedthe symposium with a presentation on the criticaledition of the diary of Cardinal Willebrands. Thesymposium continued on 19 November in the AulaMagna of the Gregorian Pontifical University, featur-ing a range of presentations on the contribution ofCardinal Willebrands to the ecumenical movement.Reverend Professor William Henn, OFM, spoke ofthe commitment of Cardinal Willebrands to promot-ing relations between the Catholic Church and theWorld Council of Churches. Father Michel VanParys, OSB, reflected on relations with the EasternChurches. Father James Puglisi, SA, discussed rela-tions with the churches and ecclesial communities ofthe West. Monsignor Pier Francesco Fumagalli spokeabout Cardinal Willebrands’ relations with the Jewishcommunity. Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop ofCanterbury, offered an ecumenical witness, whileProfessor Jared Wicks, SJ, reflected on CardinalWillebrands’ inspired contribution to the develop-ment of Catholic ecumenical theology. Lastly, Cardi-nal Kasper spoke of the legacy of Cardinal Wille-brands and the future of ecumenism.

APPOINTMENTS

The Holy Father nominated two new members toour Pontifical Council in 2009, namely CardinalJean-Pierre Ricard, Archbishop of Bordeaux(France), and Bishop Johan Jozef Bonny, Bishop ofAntwerp (Belgium). The Holy Father also nominatedthe following consultors: Archbishop Luis FranciscoLadaria Ferrer, Secretary of the Congregation for theDoctrine of the Faith, and Archbishop Cyril Vasil’,Secretary of the Congregation for the OrientalChurches.

STAFF CHANGES

A number of staff changes took place in the Pon-tifical Council in 2009. Monsignor Johan J. Bonny,who was responsible for relations with the OrientalOrthodox Churches for eleven years, was appointedBishop of Antwerp on 28 October 2008. He wasreplaced by Reverend Father Gabriel Quicke (Bel-gium). In order to strengthen the Eastern Section,Reverend Father Andrea Palmieri (Archdiocese ofBari-Bitonto, Italy) was appointed to work with Mon-signor Eleuterio F. Fortino (Under-Secretary) in rela-tions with the Orthodox Churches.

On 1 July 2010, the Holy Father accepted the res-ignation of Cardinal Walter Kasper due to age limit.Cardinal Kasper dedicated eleven years of intensecommitment to our Pontifical Council, firstly as Sec-retary and later for nine years as President. The HolyFather has now called Bishop Kurt Koch, formerlyBishop of Basle in Switzerland, to guide our Council.With Cardinal Kasper’s retirement, we have also lostthe valuable service of Monsignor Oliver Lahl, whohas returned to his Diocese of Stuttgart as a parishpriest.

88

IN MEMORIAM

Monsignor Eleuterio Francesco Fortino

L’Osservatore Romano remembered MonsignorFortino as the “ historical memory and soul of theecumenical movement ”. He was the Under-Secretaryof our Pontifical Council from 1965, working closelywith Cardinals Willebrands, Cassidy and Kasper.Over the years, he took part in a wide range ofdebates, studies, and important meetings on ecu-menical themes, always with a positive approach anda perceptive sense of realism. We recall, for example,his contribution to the preparation of the EcumenicalDirectory. He also often shared his expertise with theCongregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Con-gregation for the Oriental Churches and the Pontifi-cal Council for Legislative Texts. He was a hard-working person who could often be found writing atext or an article, or preparing a catechesis for hisarbresh community, or for ecumenism in Italy, or forour Pontifical Council. He was a wise advocate of anauthentic Eastern spirituality, learned and experi-enced in the liturgy.

Father Emmanuel Lanne, OSB

A leading theologian, liturgist and ecumenist, theBenedictine monk Emmanuel Lanne, OSB, went tosleep in the Lord at the age of 87 on 23 June 2010.His funeral took place on Saturday 26 June in themonastery of Chevetogne (Belgium), where on14 April 1947 he had made his monastic profession.He shared his deep knowledge of the Christian East— its history, theology, liturgy, spirituality and eccle-sial ethos — through his academic role, his involve-ment with the formation of young seminarians andhis monastic life. He was engaged in the ecumenicalcommitment with both the churches of the East andthe ecclesial communities of the West. He was a con-sultor to the PCPCU, and a member from 1979 to2006 of the Joint International Commission for theTheological Dialogue between the Catholic Churchand the Orthodox Church.

PUBLICATIONS

The Pontifical Council continues to publish Ser-vice d’Information — Information Service, which hasa circulation of 3,000 readers. The current editor isReverend Father Vladimiro Caroli, OP. There is anongoing exchange with a range of other theologicaland ecumenical publications.

In drawing together the reflections of a long-standing project involving some staff members andconsultors of the PCPCU, as well as ecumenical part-ners and other experts in the field, Cardinal WalterKasper published Harvesting the Fruits: Basic Aspectsof Christian Faith in Ecumenical Dialogue (Contin-uum International Publishing Group). The text is aninitial attempt to present an overview of the rich har-vest of the theological dialogues undertaken withecclesial communities of the Reformation tradition.It presents the outcomes of these dialogues in a the-

matic order and with a critical approach, highlight-ing both the areas of convergence and the remainingopen questions. The text was translated and pub-lished in Italian with the title Raccogliere i frutti(Il Regno, n.1066, 1 November 2009, Ed. Dehoniane,Bologna). Other translations have been either pub-lished or are about to be published.

ORTHODOX CHURCHES

THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUE WITH THE ORTHODOX CHURCHAS A WHOLE

As agreed upon in Ravenna at the 10th plenarysession of the Joint International Commission for theTheological Dialogue between the Catholic Churchand the Orthodox Church as a Whole (8-14 October2007), the 11th meeting of the Commission discussedthe theme of The Role of the Bishop of Rome in thecommunion of the Church in the First Millennium.The 11th plenary session was held in Paphos(Cyprus) from 16-23 October 2009, and was gener-ously and warmly hosted by the Orthodox Church ofCyprus. The work of this plenary focused on a textdrafted after Ravenna, following the methodologyagreed upon from the beginning of the establishmentof the Commission (Patmos-Rhodes 1980). Two jointsub-commissions met during the first part of 2008with the aim of gathering the relevant historical datafor the period under consideration. Subsequently, theJoint Coordinating Committee met (Elounda, Crete,27 September-4 October 2008) to prepare a summaryoverview to present to the plenary session in Cyprus.The Commission was thus able to commence discus-sion on the key question underlying the historical dif-ficulty between East and West.

As agreed upon in Paphos, the 12th plenary ses-sion took place from 20-27 September 2010 inVienna, and was hosted by the Archbishop of Vienna,Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, to whom we aremost grateful. The plenary session was attended by23 Catholic participants, with some absences dueto health reasons. The Orthodox representationcomprised 27 participants from all the OrthodoxChurches except the Patriarchate of Bulgaria.

The participants learned the sad news of thedeath on 23 September of Monsignor EleuterioFortino following a long period of illness. MonsignorFortino had been the Co–Secretary of the Joint Inter-national Commission since its inception in 1980. TheCatholic and Orthodox participants were all pro-foundly saddened by his death, and prayed for therepose of his soul. Many of them had known him per-sonally and had the deepest respect for his role in thedevelopment of ecumenical relations between thechurches.

The meeting in Vienna continued its reflectionson the Crete text, with detailed attention to the his-torical data. After lengthy discussion, the Catholicdelegation agreed to consider the text as a workingdocument that could be useful in the subsequentphases of the dialogue when the theme of primacy

89

will be taken up in a more theological perspective. Itwas therefore decided to establish a joint sub-com-mission to commence work on the theological andecclesiological aspects of primacy in its relation tosynodality. Its work will then be submitted to theJoint Coordinating Committee which will meet in2011.

While it was not possible to agree upon the publi-cation of a joint document, it would be quite wrong toconsider that the plenary session was a failure. Thedecision to pursue the dialogue in a more theologicalperspective represents an opportunity to reflect withgreater depth on the theme of primacy. Furthermore,the great effort that has been undertaken in the jointstudy and interpretation of the primacy sources of thefirst millennium regarding the role of the bishop ofRome will undoubtedly be valuable in preparing atheological text on primacy and synodality.

ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE OF CONSTANTINOPLE

Feast days in Rome and the Phanarand other encounters

A delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate ofConstantinople guided by Metropolitan Emmanuelof France visited Rome from 26-29 June 2009 for thefeast of Saints Peter and Paul. On the morning of27 June, the delegates of the Ecumenical Patriarchatemet with Cardinal Walter Kasper at the PontificalCouncil for Promoting Christian Unity and were laterreceived by the Holy Father. The delegation took partin the Vespers presided over by the Pope in SaintPaul Outside the Walls on 28 June at the closure ofthe Pauline Year. On the morning of 29 June, the del-egation took part in the Mass in the Vatican Basilicapresided over by Pope Benedict XVI in honour ofSaints Peter and Paul.

The VIII Symposium on Religion, Science and theEnvironment took place in the United States from18–25 October under the auspices of the EcumenicalPatriarchate, which has since 1995 concerned itselfwith the theme of the safeguarding of the naturalresource of water. The 2009 Symposium wasdedicated to the Mississippi River. The Holy Fathernominated Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond ofNew Orleans as his personal representative, convey-ing a message through him to His All HolinessBartholomew I.

A delegation of the Holy See guided by CardinalWalter Kasper visited Istanbul from 29 November to1 December for the feast of Saint Andrew, the patronsaint of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Arriving inIstanbul on the afternoon of 29 November, CardinalKasper and the other members of the delegationwere received in a private audience by PatriarchBartholomew I. On the following morning, the dele-gation took part in the Divine Liturgy in the Patriar-chal Church of Saint George at the Phanar. At theend of the celebration, the Patriarch made a speechin which he warmly greeted Cardinal Kasper and thedelegation. His Eminence then conveyed the messageof the Holy Father to the Ecumenical Patriarch. Con-

versations between the Holy See and the SynodalCommission for relations with other Christians tookplace on the morning of 1 December at the patriar-chal office.

A delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarchate ofConstantinople visited Rome from 27-30 June 2010for the feast of Saints Peter and Paul. The delegatesof the Ecumenical Patriarchate visited the PontificalCouncil for Promoting Christian Unity on the morn-ing of 28 June, after which they were received by theHoly Father. In the afternoon, the delegation tookpart in the Vespers presided over by the Pope in SaintPaul Outside the Walls. The delegation also took partin the Mass held in Saint Peter’s Basilica on themorning of 29 June which was presided over by PopeBenedict XVI in honour of Saints Peter and Paul.

PATRIARCHATE OF JERUSALEM

During his visit to the Holy Land, PopeBenedict XVI visited Theophilus III, the OrthodoxPatriarch of Jerusalem, on 15 May 2009. The Patri-archate organised an ecumenical encounter with allthe Christian communities in the Holy Land. In hisspeech, the Holy Father highlighted the linkbetween the unity of the Church and her mission,insofar as it is the shame of division that hightensthe urgency of making known the Gospel messge ofreconciliation.

PATRIARCHATE OF MOSCOW

Besides regular contact, three important eventshave taken place in relations with the Russian Ortho-dox Church. Firstly, the enthronement of the newPatriarch of Moscow and All Russia, His HolinessKyrill, who was elected on 27 January 2009. CardinalKasper personally conveyed the message of the HolyFather Benedict XVI, as well as the gift of a chaliceand paten. The desire to continue the dialoguetowards full communion and to cooperate in promot-ing Christian values in modern society was recon-firmed in a meeting following the enthronement.

Secondly, the Russian Orthodox church of SaintCatherine in Rome, close to the Vatican and locatedin the territory of the Russian Embassy to the ItalianState, was solemnly blessed on 24 May 2009, on thefeast day of Saints Cyril and Methodius according tothe Julian calendar.

Thirdly, Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk,President of the Department for External ChurchAffairs of the Patriarchate of Moscow, visited Romein September 2009 and May 2010. The Day of Russ-ian Culture in the Vatican was organised during his2010 visit, concluding with a concert offered to theHoly Father by Patriarch Kyrill and the RussianOrthodox Church. Metropolitan Hilarion had conver-sations with various authorities of the Holy See dur-ing both visits.

Relations between Rome and Moscow areimproving, particularly after the election of PatriarchKyrill and also due to the dedicated efforts of the cur-rent Nuncio, Archbishop Antonio Mennini. Relations

90

are also improving at the local level in Russia, withfewer conflicts and accusations of proselytism. Arch-bishop Paolo Pezzi, the new Catholic Archbishop ofMoscow, is also actively committed to fostering rela-tions. However, there is still a long way to go beforewe can speak of true cooperation and friendship,especially on the part of some clergy. The massmedia have paid great attention to a possibleencounter between the Pope and the Patriarch, andwhile both have confirmed their willingness in prin-ciple, circumstances are not yet favourable.

EXARCHATE OF BELARUS OF THE PATRIARCHATEOF MOSCOW

Cardinal Kasper visited Minsk (Belarus) from 8-10 November 2009 in response to the invitation ofMetropolitan Philaret of Minsk and Slutsk, Exarch ofBelarus of the Patriarchate of Moscow, in order toattend the international conference on Christian-Jew-ish dialogue: Religious values as the basis of mutualrespect in civil society during the global economic cri-sis, which was organised by the Institute for Reli-gious Dialogue and Interconfessional Communica-tions of the Synod of the Orthodox Church of Belarusand the Christian Educational Center of SaintsMethodius and Cyril together with the PontificalCouncil for Promoting Christian Unity. CardinalKasper also presided over the eucharistic celebrationin the Catholic Cathedral of Minsk. He met withArchbishop Tadeusz Kondrusiewicz of Minsk, theApostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Martin Vidovic andother bishops of the Bishops’ Conference in order todiscuss the need to foster a positive attitude towardsecumenical dialogue.

PATRIARCHATE OF SERBIA

Reverend Father Milan Žust, SJ, visited Serbiafrom 24-30 October 2009 in order to renew directcontact with both the Orthodox Church and theCatholic Church. He also took part from 18-20November in the Holy See’s official delegation to thefuneral of Patriarch Pavle. The delegation was led byCardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College of Car-dinals. After the funeral, the delegation met with HisEminence Amfilohije, locum tenens of the patriarchalthrone, and Mr Vuk Jeremic, the Prime Minister ofthe Republic of Serbia.

The election of the new Patriarch marks a positivestep towards strengthened relations. Prior to his elec-tion, the Bishop of Niš had already shown openness tothe Catholic Church and had wanted to invite thePope to the birth place of Emperor Constantine for the1700th anniversary of the Edict of Milan. Sincebecoming Patriarch, he has renewed this proposalwith the support of a greater number of bishops. How-ever, some bishops are opposed to the idea, particu-larly in light of the difficult relations in the past withCatholic Croatians. This may hinder an official invita-tion at present, although the idea is gaining ground.

From 1-4 October 2010, Archbishop Koch led adelegation of the Holy See from 1-4 October 2010 to

Pec (Kosovo) in Serbia, the historical See of the Ser-bian Patriarchate, for the solemn enthronement ofthe new Patriarch Irinej, who was elected on 22 Janu-ary. The delegation conveyed the message of the HolyFather and the gift of a chalice.

ORTHODOX CHURCH OF CYPRUS

Benedict XVI undertook his first visit as Pope to acountry with an Orthodox majority when he visitedCyprus, meeting with His Beatitude Chrysostomos II,the Archbishop of Nea Justiniana and All Cyprus, on5 June 2010. Cardinal Kasper took part in the officialdelegation. Benedict XVI joined His BeatitudeChrysostomos and Metropolitan Giorgos of Paphos,together with other representatives of the otherchurches and ecclesial communities, in the ecumeni-cal prayer service held in the church of Sant KyriakiChrysopolytissa in Paphos on 4 June.

ORTHODOX CHURCH OF GREECE

Cardinal Kasper visited His Beatitude Ierony-mos II, the Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, inAthens from 21-24 February 2009. This was his firstmeeting with the new primate of the OrthodoxChurch of Greece, who had been elected the yearbefore. Cardinal Kasper was received in a privateaudience by His Beatitude, and later met with someof his staff in order to discuss cooperation in sharedfields of interest, such as pastoral care and the for-mation of clergy and lay people. As in other years, anumber of Greek Orthodox students were grantedscholarships through the Catholic Committee forCultural Collaboration in order to undertake furtherstudy in pontifical universities in Rome or in otherCatholic faculties of theology in Italy or France. Inexchange, the Church of Greece offered a number ofscholarships to young Catholic priests or seminariansfrom different parts of the world in order to under-take a summer course in modern Greek language andGreek Orthodox culture. The programme was organ-ised by Apostoliki Diakonia of the Church of Greece,under the guidance of Bishop Agatanghelos. Now inits sixth year, the programme has involved over 150participants who have been able to gain deeperinsight into the Greek Orthodox world.

ORTHODOX CHURCH OF ALBANIA

His Beatitude Anastas, Archbishop of Tirana, Dur-res and All Albania, undertook the first official visit ofthe autocephalous Orthodox Church of Albania to theHoly Father and the Church of Rome from 4-8 December 2009. In his opening address to the HolyFather, His Beatitude Anastas spoke of the historicalsignificance of this first visit to the Church of Rome.

ORTHODOX CHURCH OF THE CZECH LANDS AND SLOVAKIA

After a number of years, direct contact wasrenewed with the Orthodox Church in the CzechRepublic and Slovakia. His Beatitude Kryštof, Metro-

91

politan of the Czech Lands and Slovakia, visitedRome from 26-28 February 2009, together with a del-egation of 50 faithful in pilgrimage for the 1040thanniversary of the death of Saint Cyril, Apostle of theSlavs. After celebrating the Divine Liturgy in theBasilica of Saint Clement, the Metropolitan met withCardinal Kasper at the Pontifical Council for Promot-ing Christian Unity, and was later received privatelyby the Holy Father Benedict XVI.

THE ORIENTAL ORTHODOX CHURCHESThe Ancient Churches of the East

THE DIALOGUE WITH THE ORIENTAL ORTHODOXCHURCHES

The Joint International Commission for the The-ological Dialogue between the Catholic Church andthe Oriental Orthodox Churches (the Coptic Ortho-dox Church, the Syrian Orthodox Church, theArmenian Apotolic Church [with representativesfrom the Catholicossates of Etchmiadzin and Cili-cia], the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia, the Ortho-dox Church of Eritrea, the Malankara Syrian Ortho-dox Church and the Malankara Orthodox SyrianChurch) met in Rome from 26-30 January 2009under the co-presidency of Cardinal Walter Kasperand Metropolitan Bishoy of Damiette, SecretaryGeneral of the Holy Synod of the Coptic OrthodoxChurch.

The Commission focused on analysing andapproving the joint document entitled Nature, Consti-tution and Mission of the Church. This document isthe outcome of six years of dialogue, and has beensubmitted to the respective ecclesial authorities forevaluation. It represents a significant development inlight of the fact that the separation between theCatholic Church and these Churches dates back toover 1,500 years.

A new phase of dialogue commenced with the lastmeeting of the Commission held in Antelias from26 January to 1 February 2010, which focused on thetheme of the reception of the Ecumenical Councils.The members of the Commission will study howeach Church received the Ecumenical Councils, theway in which each expressed their communion in thefirst five centuries, and the role exercised by Rome inthe period prior to the separation after the Council ofChalcedon.

The next meeting will take place in Rome from24-29 January 2011. The members will deepen theirunderstanding of the communion and contactbetween the Churches until the middle of the fifthcentury of Christian history, as well as the role ofmonachism.

THE DIALOGUE WITH THE MALANKARA CHURCHES IN INDIA

The Malankara tradition is widespread in Kerala,southern India, and traces its origins to the greatmissionary expansion attributed to the apostle SaintThomas and to the Syrian Church in the first cen-

turies of the Christian era. The Saint Thomas Chris-tians remained a compact community in India untilthe 17th century. This unity disintegrated with thearrival of the Portuguese, and the Saint ThomasChurch is today divided into different communities.The Malankara Church of India is divided into two:the Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church, which is infull communion with the Syrian Orthodox Patriar-chate of Antioch, and the Malankara Orthodox Syr-ian Church, which aspires to full independence. Thetwo dialogues with these Churches have taken placeon a regular basis.

The Joint Commission for Dialogue between theCatholic Church and the Malankara Syrian OrthodoxChurch held its 12th meeting at the Patriarchal Cen-tre in Puthencruz from 14-15 December 2009. Themeeting was co–presided by Bishop Brian Farrell andMetropolitan Kuriakose Mar Theophilose. The maindiscussion point was the sharing of sacraments andplaces of worship. Consideration was also given toinitiatives for shared witness.

The Joint Commission for Dialogue between theCatholic Church and the Malankara Orthodox SyrianChurch held its 14th meeting at the Sophia Centre inKottayam from 16-17 December, under theco–presidency of Bishop Farrell and MetropolitanGabriel Mar Gregorios, President of the Departmentof Ecumenical Relations of the Malankara OrthodoxSyrian Church. Discussion focused on five mainthemes: 1) shared worship sites, particularlychurches and cemeteries; 2) the administration of thesacrament of extreme unction in specific circum-stances; 3) marriage between Catholics and Ortho-dox; 4) initiatives for shared witness, such as a con-ference for religious; cooperation between seminar-ies; a conference on family issues; 5) the Petrine pri-macy in the writings of the Fathers of the Churchand in ancient liturgical texts.

RELATIONS WITH THE ASSYRIAN CHURCH OF THE EAST

There have been many fruitful outcomes of thedialogue between the Catholic Church and the Assyr-ian Church of the East. Pope John Paul II and HisHoliness Mar Dinkha IV, the Patriarch Catholicos ofthe Assyrian Church of the East, signed a joint Chris-tological declaration on 11 November 1994. The dec-laration overcame a longstanding controversy regard-ing the Christological implications of the Council ofEphesus, and opened new horizons for both the theo-logical dialogue and pastoral cooperation. Subse-quently, the Joint Commission for the TheologicalDialogue between the Catholic Church and the Assyr-ian Church of the East planned two further phases ofwork: the first on sacramental theology, and the sec-ond on the constitution of the Church.

The first phase concluded with a wide consensuson sacramental issues, and the final document waspresented to the authorities of both Churches forapproval. However, difficulties arose in connectionwith the passage into the Catholic Church of one ofthe most active Assyrian bishops in the dialogueprocess. Despite an agreement in principle to re-

92

establish the dialogue, the Secretary of the Synod ofthe Assyrian Church of the East notified us in Octo-ber 2010 of the intention to suspend the preparationof the dialogue until the Holy Synod meets andexpresses its findings.

VISITS AND OTHER EVENTS

The Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity received His Holiness Abuna Paulos, the Patri-arch of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church,who had been invited by the Holy Father to make anaddress as a special guest at the Second SpecialAssembly for Africa of the Synod of Bishops held inRome in October 2009. In his speech on 6 October,His Holiness Abuna Paulos spoke of the situation inthe African continent and the challenges facingAfricans, reflecting in particular on the theme of theAssembly, The Church in Africa in Service to Reconcil-iation, Justice and Peace.

CATHOLIC COMMITTEE FOR CULTURAL COLLABORATION

Now in the 46th year of operation, the CatholicCommittee for Cultural Collaboration continues itscommitment to fostering relations at various levelswith the Orthodox Churches and the Oriental Ortho-dox Churches. The Holy Father has on many occa-sions spoken of the service of the Committee as oneof the most important aspects of the work of the Pon-tifical Council. With the support of a network ofbenefactors, the Committee grants scholarships toOrthodox students who have been presented by theirecclesiastical authorities and who will undertake ser-vice in their respective churches after their studies.The Committee also disburses funding for a range ofecumenical initiatives with Orthodox faculties andcentres. Many former scholarship holders havebecome bishops, priests, and academics or haveserved their churches in a variety of other ways, someof them with important responsibilities, thus con-tributing greatly to the growing communion amongChristians.

The current financial difficulties have led to aslight reduction in the number of annual scholar-ships, with 47 being granted in 2010–2011, that is,five less than last year.

Besides the scholarship programme, the Commit-tee funds a number of projects in the field of forma-tion, as well as conferences and the publication oftranslations of Catholic texts, particularly with long-standing partners in Moscow, Kyiv, Minsk, Balamandand Chambésy. These projects play a valuable educa-tional role in Orthodox formation and in exchangewith the different Orthodox Churches. The Presidentand Secretary of our Pontifical Council together withthe main benefactors gather annually in January atthe meeting of the Board of Management of the Com-mittee, during which the previous year’s work is dis-cussed and new projects are presented.

Particular mention should be made of some ofthe special projects. The Committee organised,together with the Pontifical Oriental Institute, a study

visit to Rome of some of the academic staff of theSaint Tichon Orthodox University of Moscow from18–27 February 2009. As well, the Committee organ-ised the visit to Rome of the main staff members ofthe Saint Clement Centre in Kyiv from 31 October to7 November 2009.

DIALOGUEWITH THE ECCLESIALCOMMUNITIES OF THEWEST

THE OLD CATHOLICS BISHOPS’ CONFERENCEOF THE UNION OF UTRECHT

The concluding session of the International Com-mission for Dialogue between the Catholic Churchand the Old Catholic Bishops’ Conference of theUnion of Utrecht took place in Salzburg (Austria)from 10-13 May 2009, under the co-presidency ofBishop Paul-Werner Scheele, Bishop Emeritus ofWürzburg, for the Catholic side, and Bishop Fritz-Réné Müller of Bern for the Old Catholics. The Com-mission approved the Final Report of its long-termconsultations on the existing ecclesial communionbetween the Catholic Church and the Old CatholicChurch. Entitled Church and Ecclesial Communion,the Report marks progress in developing an ecclesio-logical understanding and a differentiated consensuson doctrine and practice, as well as in identifying theremaining differences.

THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION

Ecumenical aspects of the Papal Visit to Great Britain,16-19 September 2010

The visit of Pope Benedict XVI to Britain was, itis generally agreed, remarkably successful, confound-ing those who had predicted significant protests ordisappointing crowds. One reason for this successwas undoubtedly the person of the Holy Father him-self, who in his manner and his message wasrevealed quite unlike the caricature that had beenportrayed in much of the hostile media.

A key aspect of the Papal visit was the ecumenicalencounters between the Pope and other Christianleaders, most notably the Archbishop of Canterburyand bishops of the Church of England. At Westmin-ster Abbey, the Holy Father took part in EveningPrayer celebrated with the full panoply of Anglicanliturgy — a notable example of the Anglican patri-mony that forms such a feature of the potential Ordi-nariate.

In general, Pope Benedict spoke warmly and posi-tively of Anglican/Roman Catholic relations. At Lam-beth he stated that it was not his intention to ‘speakof the difficulties that the ecumenical path hasencountered and continues to encounter.’ He spokepositively of forty years of ARCIC dialogue, givingthanks for the ‘remarkable progress’ made towardsthe goal of unity, and noting that ‘what we share, inChrist, is greater than what divides us.’

However, the Pope did several times mention in

93

general terms the problems facing ecumenical rela-tions, and warned that the search for unity requiresan obedience to the Lord’s will — ‘an obediencewhich must be free of intellectual conformism orfacile accommodation to the spirit of the age.’ Thishas been seen by some as a reference to the currentissues within the Anglican Communion.

Anglicanorum Coetibus

As the Holy Father left England, he spoke to theCatholic Bishops of Britain about AnglicanorumCoetibus, calling it a ‘prophetic gesture that can con-tribute positively to developing relations betweenAnglicans and Catholics.’ For Pope Benedict, theApostolic Constitution renews our enthusiasm for therestoration of full ecclesial communion, and encour-ages an enriching ‘exchange of gifts’ from our respec-tive patrimonies.

The crisis of Anglicanism is one of historic iden-tity versus the cultural fragmentation of the modernworld. Historically the strength of Anglicanism was‘comprehensiveness.’ What bound Anglicanismtogether was not rigid theology but cultural expres-sion, enshrined in the Book of Common Prayer andthe Authorised Version of the Bible and promulgatedthrough colonialism. Until the late 19th century,worldwide Anglicanism was an English Church exist-ing for expatriate Englishmen, or for those whowished to imitate them.

In the post-imperial age, as the ties of culturaldependence slackened, the Anglican Communion putdown roots in the local community, ordaining nativepriests and bishops rather than English missionaries.This has given Anglicanism a new vibrancy and confi-dence in international affairs. This has enhanced therole of the Archbishop of Canterbury, making him thefocus not merely of a national, but global, communion.

However, the diversification of Anglican identityhas brought profound problems. Without the ‘glue’ ofa national culture, and lacking any strong centralauthority, Anglicanism has become particularlyprone to local expressions of theology and ecclesiol-ogy. The comprehensive nature of Anglicanism,together with its loose ecclesiological structure, haspermitted radically differing interpretations of theol-ogy and anthropology, often owning more to localcultural trends than traditional teaching. Certainprovinces, notably in North America, have ordainedactive homosexuals to the episcopate, and haveauthorised same-sex blessings, to the outrage of moretraditional provinces: the Anglican province of Nige-ria (the largest) has declared that it no longer consid-ers itself in communion with the Episcopal Churchof North America.

Along with innovations in moral attitudes, thereare other theological issues dividing the communion,notably the ordination of women to the Episcopate insome provinces, and the presiding at the Eucharist ofdeacons rather than priests.

This has created a complicated situation for ecu-menical dialogue with the Catholic Church, whichhas to take into account not only new moral and the-

ological issues which render hopes of full and visibleunion merely abstract, but also the fall–out fromthese issues. Traditional Anglicans opposed to recentdevelopments have broken with their provinces andset up new entities, whose profession of faith is oftencloser to the apostolic tradition, and who have insome cases requested to enter into relations with theCatholic Church.

In an attempt to bring some coherence to theworldwide Communion, a committee set up by theArchbishop of Canterbury has proposed an ‘Anglicancovenant’ be presented to all Anglican provinces,expressing their adherence to procedures proposedby the Instruments of Government. The Archbishopof Canterbury has strongly supported the Covenant.However, after four revisions the obligatory aspect ofthe Covenant is greatly weakened; some provincesstill find it too centralising, and it seems unlikely theCovenant will become a useful tool either for Angli-canism or for its ecumenical partners attempting toidentify clear Anglican positions on a range of issues.It is hard to see how the Communion will avoid frag-mentation — a prospect admitted by the Archbishopof Canterbury himself.

The publication in November 2009 of the ApostolicConstitution Anglicanorum Coetibus, was a response torequests from groups of Anglicans and former Angli-cans, made over a significant period, for some form ofcorporate admission to full communion with theHoly See. Within the Anglican Communion the pro-mulgation of the Constitution provoked varied reac-tions, both positive and critical, with some concernexpressed that the Holy See now considered the tradi-tional form of official dialogue to be outmoded. Themany formal and informal contacts of the PontificalCouncil proved invaluable at this time, in explainingthe Constitution and providing an accurate context forits promulgation. At the same time, Cardinal Kaspermade it clear that the Apostolic Constitution providesa response to a pastoral need, which according to thedecree Unitatis Redintegratio §4 is a separate matterfrom the work of ecumenical dialogue. The work ofthe Pontifical Council, and its historic relations withthe Anglican Communion, will continue.

The visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury

Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canter-bury, who was accompanied by Bishop ChristopherHill, gave a talk at the symposium in honour of Cardi-nal Willebrands from 19-22 November 2009. Therewere also conversations on the current situation inthe ecumenical dialogue and on questions emergingin relation to the promulgation of the Apostolic Con-stitution Anglicanorum Coetibus. Dr Williams andBishop Hill, together with the Director of the AnglicanCentre in Rome and other members of the delegation,were received in audience with the Holy Father.

International Dialogue Commission

A preparatory commission to discuss the thirdphase of the Anglican-Roman Catholic InternationalCommission met in Rome on November 23, under

94

the co–presidency of Archbishop Alexander Brunettof Seattle for the Catholic side, and ArchbishopDavid Moxon of New Zealand for the Anglicans. Thiswas the third and largest meeting of the preparatorycommission, and it began by considering proposalsset forth at a previous meeting in 2008. These wereconsidered in detail, and rewritten to form a draftprogramme for the International Commission, devel-oping the mandate given by the Holy Father andArchbishop Williams in their November 2006 jointstatement. The focus of the third phase of ARCIC wassuggested to be: The Church as Communion, localand universal and How, in communion the local anduniversal Church come to discern right ethicalteaching. In both these areas, which have a particularbearing on current issues within the Anglican Com-munion, the Commission would be asked to buildupon the already agreed statements of the first twophases of dialogue.

Informal talks

Each year, talks are held in Rome between thePontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity andkey figures in the Anglican Communion representingLambeth Palace, the Anglican Communion Office,the Anglican Centre in Rome, and the InternationalDialogues. This meeting enables a frank and usefulexchange of ideas, and an updating on events amongthe dialogue partners. In 2009, the Talks focused onrecent events within the Anglican Communion andtheir impact upon the dialogue, as well as the effectof the Apostolic Constitution Anglicanorum Coetibus.

LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION

The year 2009 marked the tenth anniversary ofthe signing of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrineof Justification. The Lutheran World Federation(LWF) and the Catholic Church organised a com-memoration from 30-31 October, with a special eventin the town hall with presentations by Lutherans,Methodists and Catholics, as well as an ecumenicalcelebration in the cathedral attended by many localand international guests. Our Pontifical Council wasrepresented by Cardinal Kasper and Monsignor Türk.Similar celebrations were organised in various coun-tries.

1. The Lutheran-Catholic dialogue

The International Lutheran-Catholic Commissionfor Unity concluded its fourth phase of dialogue in2006 with the text The Apostolicity of the Church. Setagainst a complex and controversial ecclesiologicalbackground, the following themes were dealt with indetail: 1) apostolicity as the essential characteristicof the Church, in continuity with its original founda-tion; 2) the apostolicity of the ordained ministry;3) the means it has for maintaining faith and teach-ing in those truths that the apostles communicatedonce and for all.

The apostolicity of the Church is to be consideredwithin the context of the consensus reached between

Catholics and Lutherans on justification by the graceof Christ, and agreement in confessing that it isthe Holy Spirit who gathers believers into theChurch. Despite remaining differences, Lutheransand Catholics agree at a basic level on what consti-tutes the apostolicity of the Church and theyacknowledge, each with their own individual accents,the true apostolicity in each other’s traditions.

With regard to ordained ministry, the study docu-ment outlines the rich biblical witness and identifiesthe main changes over the centuries in the institu-tional order and theology of ministerial service.Today Lutherans and Catholics agree on the commonpriesthood of all believers and on ministry as a ser-vice instituted by God for all. However, Lutherans donot agree on the way that the Second Vatican Councilunderstood episcopal ministry as representing thefull realisation of ordained ministry. While the Sec-ond Vatican Council spoke of the defect in ministriessuch as the Lutheran, the study document observesthat other Conciliar texts, together with the consen-sus on justification, point to a more positive Catholicrecognition of the spiritual efficacy of the Lutheranministry.

With regard to the means by which the Churchpreserves the truth of the apostolic Gospel, the dia-logue proposes a reconciled diversity betweenCatholics and Lutherans on the biblical canon and onthe relationship between Scripture and Tradition.While the Commission does not deny the remainingdifferences regarding teaching ministries and themagisterium, it does demonstrate that Lutherans andCatholics fundamentally agree on the need for teach-ing ministries among multiple instances of witness tothe apostolic gospel and on its implications for mod-ern Christian faith, worship and life.

In response to the invitation of the local Luthe-ran church in Nordelbien, the Lutheran-RomanCatholic Commission on Unity met for the first ses-sion of its fifth phase of dialogue in Breklum, nearHamburg, in 2009 under the co–presidency ofBishop Müller of Regensburg (Germany) on theCatholic side, and Bishop Houvinen of Helsinki(Finland) for the Lutheran side. Discussion beganon the new theme of Baptism and Growth in Com-munion. Our common baptism is the foundation ofcommunion between Catholics and Lutherans. Todate, this aspect has been an assumption ratherthan a true object of ecumenical dialogue. TheCommission will now develop this implicit theologyon common baptism, in view of growing ecclesialcommunion. The theology of common baptism maythus make a contribution to growth in ecclesialcommunion. The Joint Declaration for the Doctrineof the Faith constitutes the basis for this importantdevelopment. While this text did not explicitly high-light the ecclesial dimension in the consensus onthe doctrine of justification, baptism is the Sitz imLeben of justification and has a clear ecclesial sig-nificance. The task of the Commission is to expoundthis aspect. Substantial convergences have emergednot only with regard to the understanding of bap-tism but also to its practice.

95

The Commission also aims to prepare a joint doc-ument for the 500th anniversary of the Reformationin 2017 on the modern relevance of the Reformationfrom an ecumenical point of view.

In view of the anniversary of the Reformation, theInstitut für ökumenische Forschung of Strasburg andthe Lutheran World Federation, together with theJohann-Adam-Möhler-Institut für Ökumenik of Pader-born have planned a new international ecumenicalproject which will undertake for the first time a jointstudy on Luther’s 95 theses of 1517.

A study group has met since 2008 to continue itsreflections at the international level on the Joint Dec-laration on the Doctrine of Justification. The groupcomprises Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist andReformed exegetes who have already reached a wideconsensus on the biblical foundations of the doctrineof justification.

2. Regional dialogues

Besides the regional bilateral dialogue commis-sions — such as in the United States (on the themeEschatology and Eternal Life), in Finland and Sweden(Justification in the Life of the Church), and since2009 once again in Germany (God and Human Dig-nity) — other new forms of exchange have emerged,such as the series of consultations between theJohann-Adam-Möhler-Institut für Ökumenik of Pader-born and the Lutherischen Theologischen Hochschuleof the Selbstständigen Evangelisch-LutherischenKirche (SELK) of Oberursel (Germany). The aim andcontent of such dialogues is to identify aspects thatare shared by the Catholic Church and confessionalLutheranism, within the structure of the Interna-tional Lutheran Council, to which the MissouriSynod in the United States belongs. Conversationshave also taken place since 2008 with Lutheran rep-resentatives of the Baltic states regarding a new levelof bilateral dialogue. The various regional dialoguesare complementary to the dialogue with the LutheranWorld Federation and offer it valuable input.

The eleventh General Assembly of the LutheranWorld Federation was held in Stuttgart in 2010 onthe theme Give Us Today Our Daily Bread. The assem-bly mainly reflected on social justice, peace and theenvironment. As an outcome of the work of theLutheran–Mennonite dialogue, a moving celebrationof reconciliation with the Mennonites took place dur-ing the assembly. It is envisaged that this bilateraldialogue will develop into a trilateral dialogue withLutherans, Mennonites and Catholics.

3. Future prospects

Lutheranism also faces difficulties in relation toits own communion and ecclesial identity. Lutheranshave suffered from internal division. New groups orparts of local churches break away and seek externalsupport, sometimes from ecumenical partners suchas the Catholic Church. This has occurred due torecent dissension on ethical and theological-moralquestions relating to secularization; sometimes thereis also a lack of solid foundations or shared spiritual-

ity. This has led to a harsher or more criticalapproach to ecumenical partners. In such a situation,interest in ecumenism diminishes and maintainingthe status quo becomes the sole concern. The aim offull and visible unity is sometimes reduced to thelevel of mere cooperation when possible without toomuch difficulty. In order to strengthen the ecu-menism of life and spiritual ecumenism in this inter-mediary situation, there is a need to consolidate andto pursue the bilateral dialogues based on theachievements to date. The spirit of relativism towardsfaith and Christian doctrine — which is widespreadin much of society — certainly does not help. As PopeBenedict XVI has affirmed: “For Christians to acceptthis faulty line of reasoning would lead to the notionthat there is little need to emphasize objective truthin the presentation of the Christian faith, for oneneed but follow his or her own conscience andchoose a community that best suits his or her indi-vidual tastes. The result is seen in the continual pro-liferation of communities which often eschew institu-tional structures and minimize the importance ofdoctrinal content for Christian living.” (Benedict XVI,Ecumenical prayer service, 18 April 2008, St Joseph’sParish, New York).

While many past differences have been overcome,many new problems have arisen which wereunknown in the past. Post–modernity has seen theemergence of a growing theological diversity withinLutheranism, which now needs to clarify the bindingaspects of its doctrine. The Lutheran World Federa-tion has for some years looked at questions such asthe renewal and consolidation of its structure as acommunion of churches. Other attempts at establish-ing a binding doctrinal constitution, such as in 2009adopting the Confessio Augustana as the confessionaltext for all members of the Protestant church in Ger-many, have failed in the face of individual differ-ences.

There is also worry about new dissension in theethical field. On issues relating to marriage and sexu-ality, some member churches of the Lutheran WorldFederation have taken up positions that on the onehand entail a risk of division among the faithfulthemselves, and on the other may lead to a break inecclesial communion with more traditional memberchurches. For example, many do not agree with thedecisions made by the Lutheran churches in Swedenand the United States regarding homosexuality andthe ordination of homosexuals.

On 27 August 2010, some conservative Lutheransin the United States separated from the EvangelicalLutheran Church in America (ELCA) and formed anew ‘North American Lutheran Church’ in responseto the decision of ELCA in 2009 to go ahead with theordination of active homosexuals. The extent of theimpact of this controversy for the Lutheran WorldFederation remains to be seen.

WORLD METHODIST COUNCIL

In 2009 and 2010, Catholic-Methodist relationswere maintained by means of the International

96

Catholic-Methodist Commission, and through con-versations, contacts, and official delegations.

Dialogue with the World Methodist Council hastaken place in cycles of five years during whichperiod a joint document is produced, to be presentedto the World Methodist Council session which meetsevery sixth year. 2010 marks the end of the currentcycle, and the document Encountering Christ the Sav-iour: Church and Sacraments will be presented to theWMC meeting in Durban, South Africa, in 2011. Thisdocument considers the sacraments of Baptism,Eucharist and Ministry in the light of the Paschalmystery. In addition, the Dialogue team has prepareda ‘synthesis’ document — along the lines of the Har-vesting the Fruits — drawing together the majorthemes of forty years of Methodist-Catholic dialogue.This document will be presented both to the WMCand to the PCPCU for official comment and recogni-tion.

The 2009 meeting of the International Catholic-Methodist Joint Commission took place at BostonCollege, Massachusetts, from 13-20 November underthe co-presidency of Bishop Michael Putney and Rev-erend Dr Geoffrey Wainwright. This was the fourthmeeting in the regular five-year cycle of the JointCommission. The Commission’s first task was to con-clude its discussion of a document synthesising allthe Methodist-Catholic dialogues since the officialecumenical contact began, entitled Together to Holi-ness; 40 years of Methodist-Roman Catholic Dialogue.The second and major area of business for the JointCommission was to continue its work on the docu-ment Encountering Christ the Saviour: Church andSacraments which focuses on the Paschal Mystery inrelation to the sacraments of Baptism, Eucharist andHoly Orders.

WORLD ALLIANCE OF REFORMED CHURCHES

The new World Communion of ReformedChurches (WCRC) formed with the merger of theWorld Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) andthe Reformed Ecumenical Council (REC). The newWCRC represents approximately 80 million Chris-tians of 227 denominations from 108 countries,including various Reformed, Congregational, Presby-terian and United churches.

The World Alliance of Reformed Churches(WARC) was created in 1970 by a merger of two bod-ies, one representing Presbyterian and Reformedchurches (formed in 1875), the other Congregationalchurches. It had 218 member churches in 107 coun-tries around the world, with some 75 million mem-bers.

The Reformed Ecumenical Council (REC) wasoriginally formed as the Reformed EcumenicalSynod (RES) in 1946. It was a Synod that originallyidentified itself against the more progressive Calvinistchurches of the twentieth century. It was originallyopposed to modern ecumenical relations, includingthe World Council of Churches.

The Uniting General Council (UGC) of the WorldCommunion of Reformed Churches was held in

Grand Rapids, Michigan in the United States from18-28 June 2010. Grand Rapids was the headquartersof the REC. Revd Gregory Fairbanks of the PontificalCouncil for Promoting Christian Unity (PCPCU) reada greeting from Pope Benedict XVI during the Unit-ing General Council. During the gathering, the Rev-erend Dr Jerry Pillay, General Secretary of the Unit-ing Presbyterian Church in Southern Africa, waselected as the first President of the new WCRC.

In April 2011 we will begin a fourth phase ofinternational Catholic-Reformed theological dia-logue. Three previous phases of dialogue with theReformed (WARC) have been held. The first, 1970-1977, produced a report entitled The Presence ofChrist in Church and World; the second, 1984-1990,produced a report called Towards a Common Under-standing of the Church; and the third, 1998-2005, pro-duced the report entitled The Church as Communityof Common Witness to the Kingdom of God.

In consultation with the WCRC we have chosenfor this phase the theme Justification and Sacramen-tality: The Christian Community as an agent for Jus-tice. This theme grows out of joint discussions study-ing the first three phases of dialogue, in the hope thatthe WCRC will be able to affiliate with the 1999 JointDeclaration on the Doctrine of Justification betweenthe Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federa-tion, which was affiliated by the Methodist WorldCouncil in 2006. The Catholic team for Phase 4 ofDialogue: Co-Chair: Bishop Kevin Rhoades (Bishopof Fort Wayne-South Bend, IN, USA), Dr PeterCasarella (USA)¸ Fr William Henn, OFM Cap. (Rome,USA), Professor Dr Peter De Mey (Belgium), RevdJorge Scampini, OP (Argentina), Professor DrAnnemarie Mayer (Germany), Revd Gregory Fair-banks (PCPCU, Co-Secretary).

DISCIPLES OF CHRIST (CHRISTIAN CHURCH)

Following the meeting of the International Com-mission for dialogue between the Catholic Churchand the Disciples of Christ, which met atKlosterneuburg near Vienna, Austria, (22-27 June2008) and which took up the theme The Priesthood ofChrist in Church and Ministry, the decision had beenthat the next step would be to put together the fruitsof dialogue of the overarching theme of the wholefourth phase, which had been, The Presence of Christin the Church.

From 28 June to 1 July 2009 in Indianapolis, Indi-ana (USA), Revd Dr David Thompson, Emeritus Pro-fessor of Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge (England),representing the Disciples of Christ, and Dr MargaretO’Gara, Professor at the University of St Michael’sCollege, Toronto (Canada), representing the Catholicside, met with the two Co-secretaries of the Interna-tional Commission, Revd Dr Robert Welsh for theDisciples and Revd Gosbert Byamungu, of our Pon-tifical Council, in order to draft the document sum-marising the outcomes of the fourth phase of dia-logue entitled The Presence of Christ in the Churchwith Special Reference to the Eucharist. In the follow-ing months, the drafters took into consideration the

97

observations that had been sent by the members ofthe International Commission in order to prepare thedefinitive text that was approved by all members. Thedocument now awaits approval from the respectiveauthorities of the Catholic Church and the Disciplesof Christ prior to publication.

It was also decided to commence the fifth phaseof dialogue in 2011, with a renewed dialogue teamappointed for a five-year mandate (2011-2016). Afterthe withdrawal of Revd Dr William Tabbernee, theDisciples of Christ have chosen Dr Newell Williams,President of the Brite Divinity School in Fort Worth(USA), as their new Co-President.

BAPTIST WORLD ALLIANCE

The Baptist World Alliance (BWA) is a fellow-ship of 216 Baptist conventions and unions com-prising a membership of more than 37 million bap-tized believers and a community of 105 million.Baptists practise adult ‘believers baptism’ like theirAnabaptist forbearers, thus the difference in thenumbers 37 million and 105 million. Baptist theol-ogy is a mixture of Anabaptist and Calvinist roots.Baptists are evangelical in their theologicalapproach, and tend to be with the Catholic Churchon most family and moral issues. The Baptist WorldAlliance began in London, England, in 1905 at thefirst Baptist World Congress. In 2004 the SouthernBaptist Convention (the largest protestant denomi-nation in the USA (16 million baptized members,approximately 50% of USA Baptists) withdrew fromthe BWA. Southern Baptists reject women’s ordina-tion, are wary of ecumenism, and are more Bibli-cal/traditional on social issues.

The second series of conversations between theBaptist World Alliance (BWA) and the CatholicChurch is entering its fifth and final year. The overalltheme of this phase, from 2006-2010, is The Word ofGod in the Life of the Church: Scripture, Tradition andKoinonia. Bishop Arthur Serratelli (USA) and RevdDr Paul Fiddes (UK) co-chair these conversations.After the first Phase of Conversations (Summons toWitness to Christ in Today’s World – 1984-1988), the1990 BWA global assembly rejected the first report. Itwas 18 years after the first phase concluded before asecond phase was initiated.

The fourth session of the second cycle of conver-sations between the Baptist World Alliance and theCatholic Church took place in Rome from 13-19December 2009. Discussion focused on the theme ofOversight and Primacy in the Ministry of the Church.

MENNONITE WORLD CONFERENCE

The Mennonites derive from the Anabaptist tradi-tion of the Reformation, which took up more radicalpositions in the 16th century with respect to Luther,Zwingli and Calvin. The MWC represents 1,600,000believers from 99 Mennonite and Brethren in Christnational churches from 56 countries on six conti-nents; more than 60% are African, Asian, or LatinAmerican.

There has been one phase of Conversationsbetween the MWC and the PCPCU (Called Together ToBe Peacemakers), 1998-2003. In 2009 the PCPCU sentan inquiry and request to the MWC for a new roundof bilateral conversations on the topic of baptism.Since both the Catholic Church and the LutheranWorld Federation have recommended baptism as atopic for conversations with the MWC, it has beendecided to have trilateral conversations between theMWC, LWF and the PCPCU. A study of baptism,which is one of the principal historic points of theo-logical division with Anabaptists, offers the opportu-nity to both look at the theological points of depar-ture as well as address the mutual recognition ofeach other’s baptism.

From 12-19 July, Revd Fairbanks took part in theMennonite World Conference at Asuncion, Paraguay,conveying the greetings of the PCPCU to the Assem-bly and to the new President of the MWC, DanisaNdlovu of Zimbabwe.

CHURCH COMMUNITIES INTERNATIONAL (BRUDERHOF)

Cardinal Kasper and Revd Fairbanks met on 26October at the PCPCU with a delegation of theChurch Communities International (Bruderhof), anAnabaptist group that is actively involved in promot-ing human life and family values.

SALVATION ARMY

The Salvation Army has its roots in mid-19th cen-tury England, as a mission movement serving thepoor. The Salvation Army operates in 121 countries.Its claimed membership includes more than 17,000active and more than 8,700 retired officers, over 1million soldiers, around 100,000 other employeesand more than 4.5 million volunteers. Salvationistscan be classified as Evangelical Christians who donot practise any sacraments.

The only bilateral conversations to date by theSalvation Army have been with the Methodist WorldCouncil and the PCPCU. A series of informal ecu-menical conversations between the Salvation Armyand the Catholic Church has been taking place forseveral years. The theological conversations are stillat an informational stage. In 2009 the theme of theconversations was how each side viewed Divine Rev-elation. The 2010 theme was how each side viewedJustification. The planned 2011 theme is Sanctifica-tion, and in 2012 Mission. There are no plans as ofyet to formalize the talks and publish any results.

PENTECOSTALS, EVANGELICALS, CHARISMATICS

The preparation of the next phase of the Pente-costal-Catholic international dialogue on the themeCharisms in the Church: their Spiritual Significance,Discernment and Pastoral Implications has been thefocus over the last two years in relations betweenCatholics and Pentecostals. In the meantime,Catholics have taken part in a range of different expe-riences relating to ecumenical formation. Monsignor

98

Juan Usma, Department Head, has taken part in suchinitiatives in Oceania (National Conference of Dele-gates for Ecumenism in Australia; meetings in theDiocese of Queensland; conferences and other eventsrelating to formation in several Dioceses in NewZealand) and in Latin America (meeting of the bish-ops responsible for ecumenism in the 22 Bishops’Conferences of the continent). The bishops of theCommission for Evangelization of the Federation ofAsian Bishops’ Conferences have also expressed inter-est in organising a meeting to discuss the ‘Pentecostalquestion’.

It will be important over the next few years togive consideration to the changes that have occurredand continue to occur in the Pentecostal world,exemplified in the interest given to ecumenical rela-tions during the last Pentecostal World Conferenceheld in Stockholm (Sweden) in November 2010.Dr Robeck, Co-President of the Pentecostal–Catholicdialogue, has affirmed that the emphasis placed onthe need for greater unity with the universal Churchreflects recent efforts to recover the original Pente-costal vision of Christian unity.

With regard to the Preliminary Conversations witha group of Non-Denominational Charismatic leaders,who belong to the so-called third wave of Pente-costals, the PCPCU has held a second meeting toreflect more deeply on questions relating to theirconfessional identity and self-understanding. TheNon-Denominational Charismatics spoke on thetopic Anointing in the Holy Spirit, while the Catholicsmade a presentation on The Role of Doctrine in theCatholic Church. While our partners in the interna-tional Pentecostal-Catholic dialogue expresseduneasiness and perplexity in relation to these Conver-sations, subsequent clarifications were welcome.Nonetheless, it will be a priority to seek ways inwhich to maintain contacts with these groups with-out harming the existing dialogue with Classical Pen-tecostals. The next meeting scheduled for 2012 on thetheme of the mission of the Church will seek also toevaluate the discussion to date and to establish theway forward in the future.

With regard to the Evangelicals, the third seriesof the Consultation between the Catholic Churchand the World Evangelical Alliance has commenced(with the second series concluding in 2003). Fourother encounters in the current series are envis-aged. The first meeting sought to establish thecommon basis for Catholics and Evangelicals inrelation to dogmatic and ethical questions. Whilein general terms Catholics and Evangelicals sharea common agenda and approach to ethical ques-tions, clearly there is significant divergence at theecclesiological level.

One of the most significant developments duringthis time has undoubtedly been the participation ofan official Catholic delegation of observers to Lau-sanne III, held in Cape Town, South Africa. This rep-resents a total innovation, as previous congresses hadnot even contemplated the participation of Catholics.The Lausanne Movement has played an importantrole in defining the identity of Evangelicals.

Despite the fact that the Catholic observers(Bishop Stephen Brislin, Bishop Graham Rose,Bishop Daniel, Bishop Oscar Cantu, Monsignor JuanUsma of the PCPCU) took part in all the events dur-ing the week, and that their presence was greatlyappreciated in the working groups, it should be men-tioned that their participation was never brought upduring the plenary sessions and that the greetings tothe various delegations were only conveyed duringthe meetings with the observers themselves.

MULTILATERAL RELATIONS

WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

The WCC’s Central Committee Meeting in Geneva(26 August-2 September 2009) elected the new Gen-eral Secretary, the Revd Dr Olav Fykse Tveit of theEvangelical Lutheran Church of Norway, and it issignificant to note that after taking office in January2010, one of the first tasks of the new General Secre-tary was to visit the PCPCU in May 2010, showing hisintention to continue to walk the ecumenical pathwith the Catholic Church.

The theological search for unity between the twobodies is carried out through the Faith and OrderCommission of the WCC, in which the CatholicChurch is a full member, and through the JointWorking Group (JWG) which seeks to discern andpropose possible areas of cooperation for the sake ofvisible joint witness to the Gospel. Thus from 20-23May 2009 the JWG Executive met in Dublin at theinvitation of Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, CatholicCo–moderator of the JWG, to discuss progress of theNinth Report on two themes and two issues whichthe current JWG is exploring, namely, EcumenicalReception, the Spiritual Roots of Ecumenism, Migra-tion and Youth. From 12-19 October 2009 the 36JWG Plenary members met in Córdoba, Spain, wherethey worked hard to develop these themes.

From 24-27 May 2010, the JWG Executive metagain in Targoviste, Romania, this time at the invita-tion of the WCC Co-Moderator of the JWG, His Emi-nence Metropolitan and Archbishop Nifon of Targov-iste. Recently from 26 September – 3 October 2010,the JWG Plenary met at the Greek Orthodoxmonastery of St Christophoros at Saidnaya, Syria,developing the texts for the Ninth Report on theabove-mentioned themes and issues.

In addition, the WCC and the Catholic Churchhave sought consistently to cooperate in the work offormation of future ecumenists. A Catholic Professorcontinues to offer courses at the Ecumenical Instituteof Bossey, and every year these students and theWCC Youth Interns visit the Holy See for a week,aiming to experience in person the way the CatholicChurch is organized and to learn of its contributionsto the one ecumenical movement.

This spirit also characterises the relationsbetween the WCC and the Christian World Commu-nions (CWCs), expressed through the Joint Consulta-tive Council (JCC), where Secretaries of the CWCs

99

exchange ideas with the WCC staff on how the oneecumenical movement is moving forward. During thelast JCC meeting (19-20 May 2010), the WCC GeneralSecretary, Dr Olav Fykse Tveit, intimated that he sawthe General Secretaries of the CWCs to be importantcontributors to the work of the WCC, and insistedthat the CWCs and the WCC ought to shape a com-mon vision and share resources to advance the goalof visible unity.

The potential to deepen relations in the one ecu-menical movement is the same idea behind the for-mation and activities of the Global Christian Forum(GCF). The PCPCU continues to support the work ofthe GCF committee, because of its teleological visionof working to bring on board the ecumenical move-ment, Pentecostal and Evangelical Christians whootherwise avoid the idea of joining the traditionalexpressions of ecumenical dialogue. Following thesuccess of the GCF Global Event at Nakuru, nearNairobi, Kenya, in 2007, the GCF Committee has metin Helsinki, Finland (23-25 February 2009), in Sun-bury-on-Thames, Great Britain (9-10 November2009) and Chicago, USA (16-17 June 2010). Severalregional meetings have taken place in the MiddleEast, covering Egypt, Lebanon and Syria (20-30 June2009); In Africa (Peduase near Accra, Ghana, [16-20November 2009]); in the Nordic–Baltic countries(Lathi, Finland, 28-30 September 2010); in Asia(Seoul, Korea, 12-16 November 2010) and in LatinAmerica (San José, Costa Rica 23-25 November2010). In all these meetings, a strong Catholic partici-pation has been invited and has attended withincreasing interest. A second GCF Global event isscheduled to take place near Jakarta, Indonesia from4-7 October 2011.

In light of the centennial celebrations of the firstWorld Mission Conference held in 1910 at Edin-burgh, Scotland, generally acknowledged to mark thebeginning of the modern ecumenical movement, it iscrucial to mention Catholic participation as a sign ofthe ecumenical engagement of the Catholic Churchover the decades. While Catholics were not repre-sented at the 1910 conference, the centennial celebra-tions in Edinburgh saw the involvement of a largeofficial Catholic delegation led by Bishop Brian Far-rell, Secretary of the Pontifical Council for PromotingChristian Unity, and an even more extensive Catholicparticipation from the local Church and fromCatholics from around the world. Catholic partici-pants gave presentations in plenary, presided oversmall discussion groups, and contributed in manydifferent ways to the successful outcome of the event.This shift reveals the extent of the change that hasoccurred after fifty years of Catholic engagement inthe ecumenical movement. This Catholic commit-ment to the unity of all Christ’s disciples, certainlyhas led to renewed reflection on the impact of ecu-menism on Christian mission and what this meansfor the future of global Christianity, of relationsamong the different Christian traditions, and of thecompelling force of shared Christian witness in theworld. For this reason, the PCPCU continues to sup-port a Catholic Consultant who works within the

structure of the Ecumenical Centre in Geneva. From8-12 June 2009 a WCC official delegation of the Com-mission of World Mission and Evangelism, togetherwith three Catholic Commissioners of the team washosted by the PCPCU. Among others, they visited theCongregation for the Evangelization of Peoples andthe Faculty of Missiology of the Pontifical Urban Uni-versity in Rome. The renewed commitment to explor-ing new ways of doing mission together, were one ofthe highlights of this visit. The PCPCU was invited topay a return visit to the WCC, which has yet to beorganised.

Study visit to Rome of students from Bossey

The students from the Bossey Ecumenical Insti-tute make an annual trip to Rome to visit the PCPCU,taking part in the general audience and visiting arange of dicasteries. They also visit the InternationalUnion of Superior Generals; the Centro Pro Unione;the Waldensian Faculty of Theology; the PontificalUniversities; the Community of Sant’Egidio; theFocolare Movement; the papal Basilicas; and the cat-acombs of Priscilla, attending mass on the last day atthe Transfiguration parish church.

Youth Interns

In response to a request of the WCC, our Pontifi-cal Council also welcomes a group of young peopletaking part in the ecumenical formation programmeorganised by the WCC. These youth interns follow asimilar programme to the students from Bossey.

COLLABORATION WITH FAITH AND ORDER

Faith and Order (F&O) had its first meeting inLausanne in 1927. The Catholic Church has been amember of the F&O Commission since 1968, having12 of the 120 commission member seats (10% of theCommission). There are three Catholic Commission-ers on the thirty-member F&O Standing Commis-sion, again 10%. The WCC states that Faith andOrder is “Christianity’s most representative theologi-cal forum ”. Catholic Standing Commission (SC)members are Fr Frans Bouwen, Dr Myriam Wijlensand Fr William Henn. Other Catholic members:Archbishop John Olorunfemi Onaiyekan, Dr BarbaraHallensleben, Prof. Dr Piotr Jaskola Roman, Prof. DrWolfgang Thönissen, Revd Prof. Angelo Maffeis,Revd Prof. Jorge Scampini, Sr Ha Fong Maria Ko, SrDr Lorelei F. Fuchs, DomMichel Van Parys, OSB.

The Faith and Order Plenary was held at theOrthodox Academy of Crete, Chania, Crete, Greece inOctober 2009. There are currently three main studyprojects for Faith and Order:

1. Ecclesiology: The study document The Natureand Mission of the Church (Faith and Order Paper no.198, 2005). More than 80 responses have beenreceived from churches and institutions after thedocument NMC was sent out. In the June 2010 Arme-nia Standing Commission meeting, a restructuringand shortening of the text was decided. Parallel to

100

this, work will be undertaken on another text, lesstheoretical, and more easily speaking to the level ofthe ordinary faithful.

2. Sources of authority: By looking at howchurches use sources of authority, the commissiontried to take a new approach to the old debatearound ‘Scripture versus Tradition’, moving it from atheoretical discussion towards a sharing of experi-ences. After a first consultation in September 2008and the work done in Crete in 2010, this workinggroup hopes to finish the first part of its work, con-cerning the early witnesses in the churches (‘Fathersof the Church, teachers), specially as interpreters ofthe scriptures, in the near future.

3. Moral Discernment in the Churches: throughthe examination of case studies — on controversialissues like proselytism, homosexuality and embry-onic stem-cell research — the commission criticallylooked at how churches arrive at their positions onmoral issues. The goal was to begin the process ofdeveloping an ecumenically recognized set of stepsfor the churches’ moral discernment. This study pro-ject has raised very high expectations in the WCC andin ecumenical circles.

Another Study Project: Baptism

A study document entitled One Baptism elabo-rated by a previous Standing Commission is finallyready for publication. Unexpectedly it met withstrong opposition, coming mainly from the Ortho-dox, at the Standing Commission (SC) meeting in

Cairo (June 2008). However, the WCC Central Com-mittee and many churches kept insisting on theimportance of that text and on its publication. TheJune 2010 SC meeting succeeded in finalising thetext after some minor changes, having emphasizedthat it is a study text and not a convergence docu-ment

We cannot conclude this section without men-tioning that each year the Pontifical Council for Pro-moting Christian Unity and the Faith and OrderCommission of the World Council of Churches con-tinue to prepare together the booklets for the Week ofPrayer for Christian Unity. The texts for 2012 origi-nated in Poland and reflect the ecumenical situationin that country.

CHRISTIAN WORLD COMMUNIONS

Bishop Brian Farrell and Revd Gosbert Bya-mungu took part in the plenary of the Secretary Gen-erals of the Christian World Communions, whichtook place in Canterbury (Great Britain) from 11-15November 2009. The plenary offered the opportunityto make contact with the Secretary Generals (or theirrepresentatives) from nearly all the churches andecclesial communities involved in the ecumenicalmovement.

The 2010 plenary was held in Geneva from 2-5November. The meeting focused on gathering infor-mation on ecumenical relations throughout theworld. The Secretary of our Pontifical Council waselected as the moderator for the next two years.

101

THE FIFTY YEARS OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL

FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY

Intervention of Cardinal Walter Kasper,President Emeritus

I. Fifty years of the Pontifical Council for Pro-moting Christian Unity! What inspiring words! Whata task! What grace!

What inspiring words! Unity is the great design ofGod for all of humanity and all of creation, it is — ifwe could say this — His dream. God wants to gatherup all things in Christ, the only head (Eph 1:10), toreconcile all in all (1 Cor 15:28). This is why hewanted the Church as sign and instrument of thisunity, as we confess in the symbol common to all thechurches.

But, indeed, what a task it is to promote thisunity! Who can undertake it? We fragile humans, oursmall Pontifical Council? Never! It would be arro-gance, presumption, it would mean going beyond ourlimited human resources. The unity of the Churchcannot be ‘made’. As the ultimate design of God,unity can only be the work and gift of God and of HisSpirit, it can only be the grace of God.

Thus, celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Pon-tifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity is aboveall an opportunity to thank the Lord for calling us tobe the poor instruments of His design and to takepart in his prayer, which is the testament left to us onthe eve of his death “ that all may be one so that theworld may believe ” (Jn 17:21).

II. Jesus wants unity, he wants one flock and oneshepherd (Jn 10:16) formed in the image of the triuneGod, as an icon of the Holy Trinity; all those who callthemselves Christians are baptised in the one body ofChrist (1 Cor 12:13; Gal 3:28) through the one Spirit.“ There is one body and one Spirit… one Lord, onefaith, one baptism” (Eph 4:4 f.).

We are all familiar with these phrases. How, then,can we not be disturbed when we listen to them andat the same time see, in the real world, the fragmen-tation of Christianity into hundreds of communitiesthat call themselves ‘churches’? We have injured thevery body of Christ, which bleeds from manywounds; we have torn the tunic of our Lord, whichwas a seamless cloth woven in one piece from the top(cf. Jn 19:23).

Our greatest risk is that we become accustomed

102

CELEBRATION OF THE 50TH ANNIVERSARYOF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY

17 November 2010

On 9 November 2010, the Press Office of the Holy See released the following communiqué « at 5 p.m. onWednesday 17 November, at the Sala San Pio X, at Via della Conciliazione 5, Rome, the Pontifical Council for Pro-moting Christian Unity will hold a public commemoration to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of theSecretariat for Promoting Christian Unity. The event will be presided over by Archbishop Kurt Koch, president of thePontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, and will be addressed by Cardinal Walter Kasper, president emeri-tus, His Grace Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury, and His Eminence Metropolitan Pergamo Ioannis(Zizioulas) of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

On 5 June 1960, the day of Pentecost, with his Motu Proprio ‘Superno Dei Nutu’, Blessed John XXIII estab-lished, along with the eleven preparatory commissions for Vatican Council II, a Secretariat for Promoting ChristianUnity. The first president to whom Pope John XXIII entrusted responsibility for the Secretariat was CardinalAgostino Bea, who was later succeeded by Cardinal Johann Willebrands, Cardinal Edward Idris Cassidy, CardinalWalter Kasper and, as of 1 July 2010, Archbishop Kurt Koch. In 1988 Pope John Paul II, with his Apostolic Consti-tution ‘Pastor Bonus’, changed the name of the Secretariat to that of the Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity. Over the course of the years, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has fostered relations withthe vast world of ecumenism, both at a multilateral level and through bilateral contacts and dialogue with manyChurches and Christian communities.

The date for the commemorative celebrations was deliberately chosen to coincide with the plenary session of thePontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, which will be held from 15 to 19 November and will focus on thetheme: “ Towards a new stage of ecumenical dialogue ”. This review of the past, focusing on the moment of founda-tion and on the road travelled thus far, will provide an occasion to give thanks to God for those people who havehelped to advance the cause of ecumenism, and for the abundant fruits that have been produced. It will likewise helpto arouse renewed interest in the cause of unity and underline the firm resolve to continue the journey towards thefull communion of all Christians, confidently facing the new challenges that arise.»

We publish here below the discourses of the participants.

to this situation of division, that we consider it a mat-ter of fact. But the existence of confessional churchesalongside each other is a reality that contradicts thewill of the Lord and is the outcome of sin. This situa-tion is a scandal, an obstacle to the holy cause of theproclamation of the Gospel to the whole world. Wecannot resign ourselves and leave things as they are.We must recognise that this is an abnormal situation.

III. In actual fact, throughout history the Churchhas never resigned itself to schism and division.Efforts to re-establish unity have been undertaken inevery century. We could cite all the great Fathers ofthe East and the West, Saint Basil in the East andSaint Augustine in the West; for the latter, the Bishopof Hippo, the resolution of the Donatist schism wasthe task of his life.

Therefore, what we today call ecumenism in itsessence is neither an innovation nor a recent discov-ery. It has been a task and a holy duty of the Churchthroughout the centuries. The ecumenism of the 20thcentury — which commenced one hundred years agowith the World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh– did not emerge from one day to the next; it was pre-pared in the 19th century by the prayer movement invarious continents and in various churches in anindependent way. The Catholic Church was amongthese churches. In Rome, Saint Vincent Pallottiorganised prayer meetings for unity; starting withPope Leo XIII, all the Popes have promoted the Weekof Prayer, an initiative that was first introduced in1908 by Paul Wattson, an American Anglican wholater became a Catholic, who was the founder of theSociety of the Atonement Friars and Sisters.

The Second Vatican Council therefore rightlyaffirmed that the ecumenical movement is the inspi-ration of the Holy Spirit. I repeat: the Holy Spirit, notthe spirit of the Enlightenment or of liberalism, assome presume. The soul of ecumenism is spiritualecumenism. None of us who have worked and whocontinue to work at our Council has ever thoughtthat the division among Christians could be healedthrough an exercise in ecclesiastical diplomacy,through theological negotiations resulting in facilecompromises, or through frenetic human activity.There is only one medicine: fasting, penitence andprayer. That is why the promotion of spiritual ecu-menism is a priority of our work and the Week ofPrayer for Christian Unity is for us the fulcrum of theliturgical year.

IV. God alone can re-establish unity. Nonetheless,God — who is the God of humans — is in need ofhuman instruments to promote his design of unity;God is in need of hands, hearts and human intelli-gence to repair the cloth of the torn tunic. And Godspeaks to us also through the signs of the times.

Blessed John XXIII had an attentive heart thatwas capable of listening to the call of God in thesigns of the times. He was aware of the situation inthe East, where he had lived for 19 years, firstly inBulgaria, and later in Turkey and Greece; he knewand loved the Christians of the East. When he was in

Paris, he became familiar with the ecumenical move-ment in Catholic circles and he met its great advo-cates not only in France, but also in Belgium, Hol-land, Germany and the United States.

Thus, he welcomed with joy the idea of creating aSecretariat for Unity which had been presented tohim prior to the Second Vatican Council by the Arch-bishop of Paderborn, Lorenz Jaeger. For ArchbishopJaeger as well, the idea of ecumenism was not aromantic dream, but an experience of life. He camefrom a mixed family. His father was a devout Protes-tant whom he greatly admired. As a military chaplainduring the Second World War he had noted thecloseness of the Catholic and Protestant soldiers inthe trenches, and also the closeness among their fam-ilies back home in the air-raid shelters. Catholics,Protestants and Jews felt close to each other in con-centration camps, united in their resistance to ananti-Christian and inhumane regime. In the citiesdestroyed during the war, Catholics opened churchesthat had been left unscathed to Protestants, andProtestants did the same for Catholics. Thus, ecu-menism for Archbishop Jaeger was not an abstractreality, but an experience, a life priority.

The same can be said for Cardinal Augustin Bea,from 1960 the first President of the then Secretariatfor Christian Unity. Cardinal Bea was first of all atrue man and true Christian. He was well aware ofthe tragedy of confessional division in his own coun-try. As a schoolboy he had Protestant friends, andlater as a student in Berlin he met leading Protestanttheologians. He was also a renowned biblical scholar,an expert in the Old Testament, and familiar withJudaism.

Thus, the pioneers of our Pontifical Council didnot promote an abstract reality or a distant utopia,but became the advocates of a reality that was a tan-gible experience in the life of the Church, which theyunderstood as a sign of the times, as a sign of God.Christian unity continues even today to be at heart tomillions of Christian brothers and sisters in all thechurches, who suffer due to division. There is noneed to explain to them the necessity of undertakingsteps towards unity; there is a need to explain tothem why such steps are not being taken and whyunity has not been possible to date. The cry ‘Unitate!Unitate!’ of the assembly gathered for the visit ofPope John Paul II to Bucharest must forever echo inour ears and echo in our hearts.

V. The work of the new Secretariat during theSecond Vatican Council was truly admirable. We callto mind its first exponents with sincere gratitude.First all, we recall Bishop and later Cardinal JanWillebrands, whose centenary we celebrated lastyear, who was the second President from 1969 to1989. Among the first staff members, we could men-tion Jerome Hamer, Charles Moeller, Pierre Duprey,and Eleuterio Fortino, who was called to his heavenlyhome only two months ago. We also recall competentwomen who were profoundly dedicated to theirwork: Corinna de Martini, Josette Kersters, PaolaFabrizi. Among the consultors, we could mention

103

Yves Congar, Gustave Thils, Balthasar Fisher, KarlRahner, Johannes Feiner, Jean Corbon, EmmanuelLanne, and Raymond Brown, and others. All thosewho have worked at our Council deserve our pro-found recognition.

These people commenced weaving a web of con-tacts, which had been inexistent beforehand, with theEcumenical Patriarchate and with PatriarchAthenagoras of venerable memory, with the Patriar-chate of Moscow at a time when the Iron Curtainwas still in place, with the Anglican Communion andwith the Archbishop Runcie of Canterbury, with theProtestant churches and with the World Council ofChurches and its first General Secretary, Visser’tHooft. We are today the heirs of this work: we standon the shoulders of those who laid the foundations,which still remain solid. In fact, ecumenism is not acollection of papers and documents; we undertakethe ecumenical commitment through a web ofhuman and Christian relationships, progressivelyconstructing mutual trust and friendship.

These pioneers undertook an enormous task dur-ing the Second Vatican Council, preparing not onlythe Decree on Ecumenism Unitatis redintegratio,which was approved on 21 November1964 by anoverwhelming majority with only 11 contrary votes,but also contributing to the drafting of the Constitu-tion Dei verbum, the Declaration Nostra aetate, partic-ularly the fourth chapter on Judaism, and the Decla-ration on religious freedom Dignitatis humanae. Allthese documents made history, and not only withinthe Catholic Church, and they contributed to creatinga new climate among the churches and ecclesialcommunities. One of the first fruits was the extraor-dinary event of 7 December 1965, the second last dayof the Council, when Pope Paul VI and the Ecumeni-cal Patriarch Athenagoras, accompanied by anextended and enthusiastic applause of the ConciliarFathers, lifted the excommunication of 1054 from thememory of the Church. This was a symbolic andprophetic gesture. A new ecumenical spring wasanticipated at the time.

VI. It is not possible in this context to evoke theentire history of our Pontifical Council under theguidance of Cardinals Jan Willebrands and EdwardI. Cassidy. What we have achieved is no small thing.The web of relationships has expanded, and we sawits tangible outcomes during the celebration of theGreat Jubilee in 2000, as well as at the funeral of theservant of God, Pope John Paul II, and at the inaugu-ration of the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI, whichwas attended by representatives of nearly all thechurches and ecclesial communities, a unique eventin the history of the Church.

I could also mention the visits of the many patri-archs and leaders of Protestant communities; theJoint Christological Declarations with the Coptic,Syrian Orthodox and Assyrian Churches, whichended controversies dating back 1,500 years; theJoint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justificationwith the Lutherans and later with the Methodists,which Pope John Paul II himself defined as a mile-

stone; the Ravenna Document with the OrthodoxChurches, which offers a positive basis for future dia-logues; and the achievements of the dialogues withour Anglican, Lutheran, Reformed and Methodistpartners, which we gathered together in the text Har-vesting the Fruits. We have extended our contacts anddialogues to include the free churches, as well as thegrowing Evangelical and Pentecostal movements,and we have not neglected the serious problem of theproliferation of sects, which has greatly changed theecumenical landscape.

It is with profound gratitude that we can say:what has been bestowed upon us over the last 50years is certainly not little. We give thanks to theLord and to all the friends who have worked togetherwith us, from the Churches of the East as well asthose of the West.

VII. For the sake of truth, however, we cannotignore the fact that today we find ourselves in a verydifferent situation to that of the optimistic and hope-filled atmosphere of 50 years ago. Despite the harvestof our fruits, the hope of the anticipated spring ofthat era has not been fulfilled. We face a difficult situ-ation today; our initial enthusiasm has undoubtedlyweakened.

As in all things, the reasons are complex andthere is nothing to be gained by pointing one’s finger,by seeking culprits. On the one hand, there are exter-nal reasons such as the secularisation of the Westernworld, and on the other, as a reaction, the diffusionof fundamentalist and anti-ecumenical attitudes anda growing fragmentation of ecclesial communities.Consequently, the churches are facing their owninternal problems; the defence of one’s own identityand self-sufficiency have become priorities.

However, there are also internal reasons. We havereached a consensus on what unites us and we haveunderstood that what we have in common is morethan what divides us; we have discovered a new fra-ternity and have developed new forms of cooperationwith churches and Christians not yet in full commu-nion with us. Now we need to face the remaining dif-ferences. With the Orthodox, these differences aremainly concerned with the question of primacy,which is rather delicate; a mutually acceptable solu-tion will need time to mature. With the churches andecclesial communities of the West, the litmus test isecclesiology; the diversity of the respective conceptsof ecclesiology leads to a diversity of ecumenicalgoals or, as we say today, models of unity. The latterseems to me to be the more difficult challenge. Infact, if there is no consensus on the goal, we run therisk of going in different directions and ultimatelyfinding ourselves more distant from one anotherthan we were at the beginning.

Immediate solutions to these dialogues are notenvisaged at the moment. Therefore, many have losthope in ecumenism. We repeat the same beautifulecumenical words in our homilies on Sunday, while adisillusioned pragmatism prevails in daily practice.Many limit themselves to a good-natured co-exis-tence and cooperation in the cultural and social

104

spheres, in the protection of human life, justice in theworld, and safeguarding of creation, which are allthings that are certainly useful and necessary. Thissituation represents an important intermediaryphase, but it is not the goal of ecumenism, whichremains unity in diversity and diversity in unity, aunity with is neither absorption nor fusion, in thewords of Pope John Paul II himself. This unity is notan optional element, as highlighted by PopeBenedict XVI, but is the will of our Lord and there-fore a fundamental condition of being the Church ofChrist.

What is needed, therefore, is a patient impatienceand an impatient patience; we need patience in thebiblical sense of hypomonè, that is, the capacity tobide our time and to bear all in hope. Indeed, if wewere to abandon the great goal of unity, we wouldbecome deaf to the call of God in our time and wewould disappoint the hope of many faithful, youngand old alike. We would lose not only the impetusbut also the realism of the founding fathers of theecumenical movement; our work would not be thefruit of a strong conservatism, but of an absolutelyweak conservatism, it would be a realism born of fearand not trust in one’s cause. In order to safeguard theheritage of the past, we need to set our sights to thefuture; we need an enthusiasm leading to courageousdecisions in the present.

VIII. By saying this, I do not want to defend awild kind of ecumenism that ignores problems andthat opts for forced interpretations at any cost. Nordo I want to make a case for an ecumenism thatneglects the question of truth and substitutes it withthe so-called new paradigm of practice and coopera-tion at the socio-political level, a paradigm that inany case has failed in the meantime. Ecumenismlives on truth and charity. Charity without truth isblind and dishonest, in the same way that truth with-out charity is cold and alienating. Ecumenism with-out truth, therefore, would be like building a houseon sand, destined to collapse at any minute.

We come to the question of what we can do intruth and in charity. What are the next steps? I do notintend offering an exhaustive overview of a pro-gramme: I will limit myself to three concludingpoints.

The first point is without a doubt to reawakenand to renew spiritual ecumenism. We need an ecu-menism made of prayer, penitence and fasting. Weknow that whoever prays to the Lord will be heard(Jn 14:13; 15:7; 16:23). And what better way is therethan to unite together in the prayer of Jesus himself,that all may be one (Jn 17:21)? My own experience inmany dialogues has led me to the conclusion that nomatter how interesting and profound the academicdialogue may be, if there is not an atmosphere ofprayer, nothing constructive is ever reached. In fact,every participant brings his expertise and insight tothe dialogue, and always has a response to the previ-ous orator, in such a way that it becomes an eschato-logical question. For this reason, I personally believethat the spiritual dialogue represents the greatest

hope in real terms, along the lines of that promotedby our spiritual movements and by some congrega-tions of consecrated life as well as by similar move-ments and communities of other churches. All of usmust strive to ensure that the Week of Prayer forChristian Unity becomes a week of profound and fer-vent prayer, and also that the prayer we entrust toGod during the eucharistic celebration for unity andpeace in the Church, before the sign of peace,becomes a true ecumenical prayer.

The second point is to strengthen what we alreadyhave in common, that is, baptism, through which weare already members of the one body of Christ, andthe baptismal faith professed in the Apostolic Creedwhen we say: I believe in God, in Jesus Christ and inthe Holy Spirit. This shared foundation is not some-thing to be taken for granted, that we have once andfor all, but is a richness that must be continuallyrenewed. Therefore, we must start with this founda-tion and study its consequences and its dynamism inorder to resolve our remaining questions.

Indeed, if this foundation is missing, everythingelse will collapse and fall. This seems to me to be thegreatest risk at present. The majority of our faithfulsuffer from a religious illiteracy and no longer knowwhat it means to be Christian, much less to beCatholic, Orthodox or Protestant. Often one’s confes-sional identity is reduced to a slogan or a prejudice.The question of truth is often hidden by relativism orby pragmatism, so that all is equal and all is possible.The consequence of this is an ecumenism to yourown liking, made to order. Therefore, there is a needfor new efforts to promote and reinforce ecumenicalformation. In the meantime, I would propose thesuggestion put forward during the Symposium onthe text Harvesting the Fruits of working towards acommon interpretation of the baptismal profession,that is, the Apostolic Creed, which will be easilyaccessible and comprehensible to all the Christianfaithful.

The third and last point concerns what I havecalled the litmus test of ecumenism. We are in needof purification, of renewal and of a deeper under-standing of the concept of Church. Those who seekunity need to know what the Church is and what theunity of the Church means. We must return to theschool of the Bible and the Church Fathers. We mustlearn from them the meaning of Church as commu-nion, that is, as icon and participation in the Trinitar-ian communion, and as sacramental reality, that is,the sign and instrument of the Kingdom of God,which came into our midst once and for all throughthe cross and resurrection of Christ and which,through the Spirit, is already present and operatingin the Church in a kenotic way, although it is not yetdefinitively and fully realised. Thus, the Church is aChurch in pilgrimage; it is always in need of purifica-tion and must continue to grow in order to representChrist in His fullness.

The ecumenical movement is inscribed in thiseschatological movement. The ecumenical dialogue,understood as an exchange not only of ideas but ofgifts, can be a means of growth and of being guided

105

through the Spirit into all the truth (Jn 16:13). Theecumenical movement is therefore anything but aperil: it is an opportunity, a kairós for the Church sothat it may become more faithful to Christ and morecredible in its mission to the world, which is to pro-claim the reconciliation and peace of Christ. The ecu-menical movement is an opportunity that the Churchcannot permit itself to lose if it wants to become theyeast of peace and unity in the world.

I would like to conclude by saying that if there isanything we need in our globalised world that is sowounded by conflict — both open and camouflaged— it is an authentic sign of unity and peace, the har-binger of great hope. If the 50th anniversary of ourPontifical Council succeeds in marking a new start-ing point and in being a sign of hope for the next 50years, it will mean that this celebration will not havebeen in vain, but a grace and a blessing for theChurch and for the whole world!

ADDRESS OF HIS EMINENCE JOHN ZIZIOULASMetropolitan of Pergamon

REFLECTIONS OF AN ORTHODOXON THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCIL

FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY

Introduction

It is a great pleasure and a distinct privilege forme to be invited to address this august gathering tocommemorate the creation of the Pontifical Council(originally Secretariat) for promoting Christianunity.

The decision of Pope John XXIII of blessed mem-ory to create this Secretariat in 1960 at the same timewith the appointment of the commissions responsi-ble for the preparation of the Second Vatican Councilshows the importance attached by this great Churchleader to the restoration of Christian unity as anessential part of the agenda of the Vatican Council.Four years later, on 21st November 1964, the decreeof the Vatican Council on ecumenism, Unitatis redin-tegratio, came to confirm officially in its introductionthat “ the promotion of the unity of all Christiansconstitutes one of the principle goals of the Council ”.The way to ecumenism has ever since become, in thewords of the late Pope John Paul II, “ irreversible ” forthe Roman Catholic Church. (Ut unum sint, 3, andpassim).

One of the main objects of the Council for pro-moting Christian unity was from the very beginningthe promotion of relations with the OrthodoxChurch, Cardinal Bea assisted by his Secretary MsgrWillebrands visited repeatedly the Ecumenical Patri-archate in Constantinople and other OrthodoxChurches to secure the presence of Orthodoxobservers in the Vatican Council. The response of theEcumenical Patriarchate in particular was verywarm, leading to a series of historic events in therelations between the Roman Catholic and the Ortho-dox Churches.

106

Thus, in 1965 the historic event of the meeting ofPope Paul VI with Patriarch Athenagoras took placein Jerusalem and the anathemas that gave rise to thegreat schism of the eleventh century were lifted as asign of “ the purification of collective memory ”1 inorder to initiate a “dialogue of love ” between the twoChurches. In the same spirit exchanges of official vis-its between the heads of the two Churches were initi-ated, while as a permanent custom official delega-tions from Rome and Constantinople are always pre-sent in the feasts of their respective patron saints. Inaddition, and perhaps more significantly, the twoChurches decided to establish a mixed internationalcommission for an official theological dialogue,which started in 1980 and continues until now.

All this and a great deal of background and unof-ficial work cultivating friendship, mutual respect andassistance between the Roman Catholic and theOrthodox Churches was the fruit of the devotion andlabour of the staff of the Pontifical Council. We grate-fully remember the contribution of the late cardinalsBea and Willebrands, bishop Duprey and MsgrFortino, who worked to promote relations betweenRome and the Orthodox Churches. May the Lordgrant them eternal life. Among those still with us, ourgratitude goes to cardinals Edward Cassidy and Wal-ter Kasper as well as to the staff that have assistedthem in their work in the Council (Johan Bonny, nowbishop of Antwerp and Paola Fabrizi, among others)for having contributed greatly to the promotion ofthe relations between Rome and the OrthodoxChurches, particularly through the theological dia-logue.

As we look back to the fifty years of life and activ-ity of the Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity the following fundamental questions come tomy mind as an Orthodox theologian:

a) What has this institution contributed to thetheological vision of Christian unity? What kind ofunity has it been promoting?

b) How did the Pontifical Council view theOrthodox Church in the vision of unity it has beenserving? and

c) What has become of the ecumenical idea inour time?

What Kind Of Unity?

An institution whose purpose is to promote Chris-tian unity cannot be simply a bureaucratic organiza-tion. Administration is certainly a part of its function,and an important one. But it is not enough todescribe its raison d’être. In order to fulfil its purposethis kind of institution must have a clear vision of theultimate goal it is serving.

For an institution which has as its purpose to pro-mote Christian unity the vision of the unity aimed at

1 Common statement of Pope John Paul II and EcumenicalPatriarch Dimitrios I. See, Eleuterio Fortino, “ The Catholic-Ortho-dox Dialogue ”, One in Christ, 18 (1982) 198.

cannot but be determined theologically. Ecclesiologyis the context in which this institution should func-tion. The question, therefore, that comes to our mindas we think of this institution today is inevitably thefollowing: What kind of unity did the founders of thePontifical Council have in mind in creating this insti-tution?

The nature of the unity the Christians seek in theecumenical movement is not understood in the sameway by all of them. For some of them it is enough forthe various Christian confessions to coexist peace-fully sharing the same eucharistic fellowship regard-less of their differences in matters of faith andchurch ministry. The vision of unity as “ reconcileddiversity ” among confessional bodies seems to bepredominant in many Christians, particularly in theProtestant world.

In creating the Pontifical Council the RomanCatholic Church has carefully chosen to put in thetitle of this institution the reference to this unity as“ the unity of Christians ”. This was probably done inorder to avoid calling “ churches ” all the Christianbodies that take part in the ecumenical movement.This would be consistent with Roman Catholic eccle-siology which presupposes certain conditions for therecognition of the ecclesiality in any Christian com-munity. Thus, the purpose of the Council seems tohave been to include in its scope all Christians,regardless of whether they were “ churches ” or sim-ply Christian communities (or even individuals?).

Such a broad scope of the Pontifical Councilraises, however, the question of the kind of unity thatthis institution ultimately wishes to serve. Is it simplythe unity of Christians or the unity of the Church thatconstitutes the vision of the Pontifical Council?

In order to answer this question, which for theOrthodox at least is of paramount importance, wemust turn to the decree of the Second Vatican Coun-cil on ecumenism. I believe that without the docu-ment Unitatis redintegratio the Pontifical Councilwould be simply an administrative body. It is thisdocument that offers the theological raison d’être ofthis institution.

Looking at the conciliar decree Unitatis redinte-gratio as an Orthodox I cannot but rejoice with thefact that the vision of unity which guides the Pontifi-cal Council in its ecumenical work involves certainprinciples which the Orthodox regard as absolutelyfundamental in ecumenism. The first is that the unitywe seek cannot avoid the question of truth. Ambigui-ties on the question of faith cannot be allowed for thesake of unity. There is, of course, as Unitatis redinte-gratio (no.11) admits, a “hierarchy of truths ” and adistinction must be made between Tradition with acapital “ T” and “ traditions ” with a small “ t ”. It isalso important to take into account the role ofhermeneutics in dealing with truth. All this must betaken into account when we make truth a sine quanon conditio in ecumenism. But the distinctionbetween what is “ true ” and what is “ false ”, orbetween what constitutes orthodox faith (or doctrine)and what is “heresy ”, must always remain a funda-mental concern in ecumenism.

The second point which derives from Unitatis red-integratio is that the unity we must aim at in ecu-menism must be visible and must take the form of theChurch. Thus it must be stressed as strongly as possi-ble that ecumenism must aim not simply at the unityof Christians but at the unity of the Church. Although,understandably, as I have already indicated, the Pon-tifical Council was described in its title as an instru-ment to promote “ the unity of Christians ”, the con-ciliar decree on ecumenism makes it clear that thenature of the unity it ought to seek in ecumenism isecclesiological; it is the unity of the Church, not ofindividual Christians or “Christianity ” in general.

If I understand well the ecclesiology which liesbehind de oecumenismo (and which constitutes thetheological raison d’être of the Pontifical Council forpromoting Christian unity) the unity we seek is oneof full communion (plena communio) as distinct fromthe imperfect communion (“ quadem communio, etsinon perfecta ” UR, 3) which already exists amongChristians. This “ plena communio ” is described asunity in faith, in the sacraments and in the ecclesialministry (UR, 2f). This seems to imply that there isalready some degree of “ ecclesiality ”(=communion),albeit imperfect, among the divided Christians whichallows for the distinction between “Churches ” and“ ecclesial communities ” made by the Second Vati-can Council. The unity, therefore, we seek in ecu-menism consists in the transformation of the “ eccle-sial communities ” into “Churches ” or better into theChurch; it is only then that full or perfect commu-nion will be possible. This seems to be the meaningof the word “promoting ” in the title of the PontificalCouncil. By being called to “ promote ” the unity ofChristians the Pontifical Council does not aim at pro-moting any kind of unity among Christians, but aspecific one, namely the unity implied in the termekklesia in the full sense of the term.

But what is the full sense of the term ekklesia?Given the fact that the document Lumen Gentiumspeaks of the Church as “mystery ”, the frontiers ofthe Church are difficult to establish with precision.As Pope Paul VI puts it in his opening address to theCouncil’s second session, on September 29, 1963:“ The Church is a mystery. She is a reality rooted inthe hidden presence of God. It belongs, therefore, tothe very nature of the Church to be always open to anew and deeper research ”. One could detect inthese words of the late Pope an eschatologicalapproach to ecclesiology and Christian unity, anunderstanding of the historical Church as existingin statu viae and not yet in statu patriae, to recall thepertinent distinction of St. Augustine.2 And yet thereare already in the historical life of the Church cer-tain qualities that allow for the distinction betweenEkklesia and “ ecclesial communities ”, a distinctionused by Unitatis redintegratio. This becomes clearwhen the conciliar document on ecumenism treatsthe Orthodox Church. Let us consider this in somedetail.

107

2 Augustine, In evang. Joan. CXXIV, 5 (PL. 35, 19 f., 7)

Rome. The decree admits explicitly the right of theOrthodox to maintain their canonical structure andrecognizes the validity of their orders:

“Through the celebration of the Eucharist ofthe Lord in each of these Churches (= theOrthodox Churches) the Church of God isbuilt up and grows in stature ” (no. 15).

“ These Churches, although separated fromus, yet possess true sacraments, above all —by apostolic succession — the priesthood andthe Eucharist ” (no. 15).

On the ground of such an ecclesiology Vatican IIgave the following important directive:

“ The Council urges all, but especially thosewho commit themselves to work for therestoration of the full communion that isdesired between the Eastern Churches andthe Catholic Church, to give due considera-tion to this special feature of the origin andgrowth of the Churches of the East and to thecharacter of the relations which obtainedbetween them and the Roman see before theseparation ” (no. 14).

This conciliar directive which is addressed, aboveall, to the Pontifical Council for promoting Christianunity, recognizes clearly the full ecclesial status of theOrthodox Churches as was the case in the first mil-lennium. Thus, dispelling all fears of subjection orabsorption of the Orthodox Churches into the struc-ture of the Roman Church, the late Pope John Paul IIreassured the late Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios Iduring the latter’s official visit to Rome in 1987 that,as in the period before the Schism Rome “ fullyrespected the power of these (Orthodox) Churches to‘govern themselves according to their own disci-plines’, so also now I wish to assure you, Your Holi-ness, that the see of Rome so attentive to all that isinvolved in the tradition of the Church, wishes torespect fully this tradition of the Eastern Churches ”[Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, Informa-tion Service, n. 66, 1988, (I), p. 25].

The Roman Catholic Church is, therefore, pub-licly committed to the model of unity with the Ortho-dox Churches which prevailed before the schism of1054. This model: (a) recognizes the OrthodoxChurches as Churches in the full sense of the term,and (b) respects the structure of these Churches, thusprecluding any subordination of them to the see ofRome. As Vatican II put it with absolute clarity(admitting courageously that this was not alwaysobserved in the past):

“ the perfect observance of this traditionalprinciple, not always indeed carried out inpractice, is one of the essential prerequisiteswhich are absolutely necessary for anyrestoration of unity ” (UR, no. 16).

Both Vatican II and the directives given by it tothe Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unitypreclude any subjection or absorption of the Ortho-

108

The Ecumenism Of The Pontifical CouncilAnd The Orthodox Church

The document of the Second Vatican Council onecumenism reserves a special place for the Orthodoxin its ecclesiology. There was a time, particularlyafter the great schism between Rome and Constan-tinople and in the polemic atmosphere that devel-oped and prevailed in the second millenniumbetween Catholics and Orthodox, when the impres-sion was given, and is still alive among some Ortho-dox today, that Rome was trying to subordinate theOrthodox under its rule and absorb them into its ownstructure.

This impression was not totally unjustified, sincethere were, indeed, during the second millenniumseveral cases of proselytistic attempts which gave riseto suspicions among Orthodox that behind the initia-tives of Rome to restore union with the Orthodoxthere was a hidden intention or even plan to absorbthe Orthodox Church into the structure of RomanCatholicism.

Looked at against this background the creation ofthe Pontifical Council for promoting Christian unitywould immediately raise the question in the minds ofsome Orthodox: is this not yet another method ofbringing the Orthodox under the domination ofRome? The strong reaction of certain Orthodox cir-cles today against ecumenism, and particularlyagainst attempts of reconciliation between Catholicsand Orthodox through theological dialogue and othercontacts, is rooted mainly in this fear.

However, a careful reading of the documents ofVatican II, particularly the decree on ecumenism,which is in a sense the theological magna carta of thePontifical Council for Promoting Christian unity,would show that such a fear is unfounded. In thisconciliar decree on ecumenism the OrthodoxChurches are called Churches, because they possessfully the sacramental life to a degree that there isnothing lacking in them for the salvation of theirmembers.3 It is notable that the decree says nothingexplicitly on the need for the Orthodox Churches tosubmit themselves to the authority of the bishop of

3 More on this, in Ioannis Zizioulas, “Unitatis redintegratio:Une reflexion orthodoxe ”, Rechercher l’ unité des chrétiens (Actes dela Conférence Internationale organisée à l’ occasion du 40e anniver-saire de la promulgation du Décret Unitatis redintegratio du ConcileVatican II ,11-13 novembre 2004), 2006, pp. 40-57, esp. 50 f.

The ecclesiological status of the Orthodox Church recognizedby Vatican II is closely linked with the interpretation of the expres-sion “ subsistit in ” by which Lumen Gentium (n.8) describes therelation of the Church of Rome to the Una sancta. If this expres-sion is understood as the equivalent of est, the logical conclusionwould be that no other Church, except the Church of Rome couldbe called Church in the true sense of the word. Such an interpreta-tion would contradict the idea of “ sister Churches ” by which offi-cial documents such as those included in Tomos agapis describethe relation of the Church of Rome with the Church of Constan-tinople. For a critical discussion of such an interpretation, and itsimplications for an ecclesiology of communion, see recently HervéLegrand, “Towards a Common Understanding of Papal Ministry: ACatholic Critical Point of View”, James F. Puglisi (ed.) How can thePetrine Ministry be a Service to the Unity of the Universal Church?,2010 p. 323f.

dox Church into the Roman Church. Fears about thecontrary, deriving from the past, would, therefore, beunjustifiable.

The Theological Dialogue Between The OrthodoxAnd The Roman Catholic Churches

One of the major activities of the PontificalCouncil for Promoting Christian Unity has been theestablishment of an official theological dialoguebetween the Roman Catholic and the OrthodoxChurches. After a pan-Orthodox decision in Rhodesin 1963 all the autocephalous Orthodox Churcheswere committed to this dialogue which was offi-cially announced by Pope John Paul II and Ecu-menical Patriarch Dimitrios during the former’svisit to Phanar in 1979. The Pontifical Council onChristian Unity worked hard with an inter-Ortho-dox committee to prepare the dialogue which bycommon agreement was to take place on equalterms in all respects, including the number of dele-gates, so as to dispel once again any fears of subjec-tion of the one side to the other. The subject of thefirst phase of the dialogue was to be ecclesiology asan area directly affecting the relations of the twoChurches, and the method would be to start fromwhat unites us and move gradually to the moreproblematic and divisive issues.

Looking at the theological dialogue in retrospectafter 30 years since its inception we may ask thequestion: What has it achieved so far? And what canbe expected from it in the future? The followingpoints may serve as an answer to these questions:

1. The spirit of the dialogue has been markedwith mutual respect and brotherly love from bothsides. This did not at all mean a compromise on mat-ters of theological principle and orthodoxy of faith.But it clearly meant a radical change of spirit andatmosphere compared with, for example, Lyon orFerrara/Florence in the past. One can be faithful tothe Truth without being polemical.

2. The dialogue has shown an agreementbetween Roman Catholics and Orthodox on funda-mental theological principles concerning the natureof the Church, her relation with the life of the HolyTrinity, her grounding in the mystery of Christ andthe Holy Spirit and her ministry and structure deriv-ing from the celebration and experience of the HolyEucharist. The role of eucharistic ecclesiology inreaching agreement on these points has been deci-sive.

3. As the dialogue moves towards more thornysubjects, such as that of the primacy of the bishopof Rome in the Church, its pace becomes slowerand the discussions more difficult. And yet, even onthis subject there has been an agreement on certainfundamental issues. In the common document pro-duced in Ravenna three years ago Catholics andOrthodox have agreed on two basic points: (a) thereis primacy in the Church at all levels of her life:local, regional and universal; and (b) this primacyshould be exercised always in connection and inter-

dependence with synodality. After an inquiry intothe way the primacy of the bishop of Rome wasunderstood and practised in the early Church beforethe separation of the two Churches in the eleventhcentury, the Joint Commission of the dialogue isnow planning a theological discussion in depth ofthe relationship between primacy and synodality soas to ground these two not simply in history butalso in ecclesiology.

4. The agenda of the dialogue is not exhaustedby any means with these subjects. The estrangementand conflicts that occurred between the twoChurches during the second millennium havebequeathed to us a host of problems, canonical aswell as doctrinal. We are undoubtedly dealing withthe most important but at the same time the mostdifficult theological dialogue. This dialogue has notbeen trouble-free over the thirty years of its history.In 1991 the new political situation in Eastern Europeafter the fall of communism gave rise to conflictbetween the Orthodox Churches and the Catholiccommunities of Eastern rite, and the dialogue had tointerrupt its course and deal exclusively with theproblem of uniatism for almost a decade. ManyOrthodox Churches still regard this problem as anunresolved one. It looks as if a great deal of work,patience and persistence will be required until theRoman Catholic and Orthodox Churches restoretheir full communion.

5. What does this mean for the future of this the-ological dialogue? There are opponents to this dia-logue who would be glad to see it fail. But these peo-ple would in any case be happier if the two Churchesremained separated for ever. There is in fact no alter-native to dialogue for those who care for the unity ofthe Church. As one who has served this dialoguefrom its inception I am fully aware of its difficultiesbut I am also convinced that it has proved to be aconstructive way of frank and open theological dis-cussion and has managed to lay the ground forprogress on the way to reconciliation, in faithfulnessto the common tradition of the early undividedChurch. The outcome of our humble efforts lies inthe hands of God Who is the only one that holds thefuture in His hands.

Conclusion

In 1951 the Orthodox Church of Greece orga-nized celebrations for the nineteenth hundredthanniversary of St. Paul’s arrival to Greece. Represen-tatives from all Orthodox Churches as well as non-Orthodox Churches and Confessions were invited,and the then Archbishop of Athens Spyridon alsoinvited the Roman Catholic Church to participate.The reply of the Vatican said: “ The august Pontiffwhile he is grateful to Your Excellency for the invita-tion, regrets to find himself in the obligation todecline it ”.

The letter bore the signature: Giovanni BattistaMontini (!). Fourteen years later the same person,now under the name of Pope Paul VI, would meet

109

and embrace the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagorasin Jerusalem, and two years later would announcethat in faith, charity, friendship and gratitude heintended “ to make a fraternal and official visit toPatriarch Athenagoras in his See in Constantinople ”.Clearly, this was nothing short of a revolution ”,4 andthe institute whose 50th anniversary we are celebrat-ing today has undoubtedly been the main instrumentof it.

Fifty years of activity of this institution is animportant time to take stock and ask how muchnearer the fulfillment of its original vision we are atthis moment. We have to be frank and admit thatmuch of the early enthusiasm for the restoration ofChristian unity has faded away. Christian leadersnow seem to be preoccupied with other concerns,and even to proceed with reforms in their Churcheswithout much consideration of the consequences forChristian unity. In Churches such as the one to whichI belong work for Christian unity is essentiallyneglected, if not suspected or opposed to by certaincircles. We seem to be less and less uncomfortablewith our divisions, forgetful of the will of our Lordthat we all may be one (John 17,23). And this at atime when the world desperately cries out for recon-ciliation and the very survival of Christianity is atstake.

All this underlines the importance of the work ofthe Pontifical Council for promoting Christian unity,and the need to continue it with devotion to the willof our Lord. And may He who prayed that His disci-ples be one as He and His Father are one, keep alivein our hearts an active desire for the blessed daywhen this prayer will be fulfilled in the Church forthe glory of God’s name.

ADDRESS OF DR. ROWAN WILLIAMS

Archbishop of Canterbury

We have already been reminded this afternoonthat the calling of the Pontifical Council is not pri-marily one of ecclesiastical diplomacy. Its task is notsolely, not even primarily, one of negotiation. TheCouncil has always been and it still is — very valu-ably — a place where the very idea of unity can bethought about. And one proper hope for this celebra-tion is that time should be given to thinking aboutthe very notion of unity as a theological concept. Thatwork has already been sketched this afternoon and inother discussions at the plenary meeting of the Coun-cil. What I hope to do in the first part of my remarksthis afternoon is to say a few words outlining what Ibelieve to be the biblical foundations for a theologyof Christian unity. I hope then to draw out some ofthe implications for the practice of the Church ofsuch a theology, and then to relate it to the very spe-cific challenges that our ecumenical dialogues face atthe present moment.

1. Biblical foundations for a theology of Christianunity

I wish to suggest that the New Testament pro-vides us with at least three dimensions for under-standing the unity that God desires. These dimen-sions appear with different emphasis in diverse pas-sages of the New Testament. But I believe that theyare powerfully coherent and that together they giveus a vision not simply of ecclesiology in a restrictedsense, but indeed of Christian anthropology: that is, aview of what is the destiny of humankind in the pur-poses of God, and therefore the destiny God intendsfor the world God has made.

And the first dimension of unity as the New Testa-ment presents it is very clearly and very simply unityin Jesus Christ with God the Father. Unity is first andforemost being in Christ through the Spirit. It is theunity of the very life of God; the unity in relationshipof Father, Son and Spirit. It is unity with the mind ofGod, and with the works of God. In St John’s Gospelchapter 6 we read of ‘doing the works of God’. In thesecond letter of Peter we read of ‘participation inthe divine nature’ — the text which lies at the root ofall Christian reflection on the subject of theo-sis, divinisation. We read in the New Testament ofpraying the prayer of Christ ‘Abba, Father’ in theSpirit. Our Lord speaks again in the Fourth Gospelabout drawing his disciples ‘to be where he is’. StPaul speaks of our ‘having the mind of Christ’. Theyare the themes that run throughout the Farewell Dis-courses in St John’s Gospel, and which dominate forexample the sixth chapter of Romans, the second andthird chapters of 2 Corinthians and the first chapterof Ephesians. Those are only a few references amongmany.

That is the dimension of unity that is primary andthat determines everything else we should say aboutunity: the unity that shapes everything else is unity inthe work, and the prayer, and the mind of Christthrough the gift of the Holy Spirit.

It is on the basis of that common gift throughthe Spirit, the gift of being made the adoptive chil-dren of God, that we move into understanding thesecond dimension of unity in the New Testament,and that is unity with one another in the body ofChrist. It is a dimension in which we recognise themutuality of the gifts of the Spirit: the fact thatevery gift the Spirit gives is for communion. It is therecognition of one another’s standing in Christ, ourplace, our belonging. It is the love of the brothersand sisters. This too is a theme of the Farewell Dis-courses in St John’s Gospel and very particularly thefifteenth chapter of John. It runs through the epis-tles of John, and in St Paul’s letters it dominates thediscussion of Romans 12-15, 1 Corinthians 11-14, 2Corinthians 8 and once again the first chapter ofEphesians and the second chapter of Philippians. Asthat second chapter of Philippians makes plain, tohave the mind of Christ is to be emptied of self-con-cern, and grow into the fullness of the life of thebody which is love of the community; and love ofthe community is the freedom both to give and to

110

4 Paul McPartlan, One in 2000? Towards Catholic-OrthodoxUnity, 1993, p. 120.

receive what we have received through Christ in hisincarnation, death and resurrection and the out-pouring of the Holy Spirit.

But, as I have just said, these are gifts received ina very specific way through the incarnation, throughthe death and resurrection of Jesus. And they aretherefore gifts which come alive for us and in us by athird kind of unity: that is, by means of unity withthe witness of the apostles. In the New Testament theapostles are witnesses of the resurrection, chargedwith the good news of the risen Jesus, given thepower and the unity to communicate that good newsso that lives are transformed in the Holy Spirit. Andso unity with apostolic teaching and apostolic wit-ness is a natural consequence of understanding unityas unity in Christ. Again it is a theme that emerges indifferent places in the New Testament: Romans 15touches on this matter, as do the first four chaptersof 1 Corinthians. In 1 Corinthians 15 especially StPaul speaks very directly of the need to hold to whathas been received from the apostolic witness to res-urrection. It is the theme of 2 Corinthians 10-13, andof the whole of Galatians where Paul (as you willremember) says that ‘if an angel out of heaven givesyou another gospel’, they are to ignore it’ (1.8). It isfound in Colossians 2 and 1 Thessalonians 2 and ofcourse it dominates much of the discussion of thePastoral Epistles.

Three biblical dimensions of unity: first, unity inChrist, unity with the prayer of Christ, the action ofChrist. Second, unity with one another, a dynamicnot a static unity, because it is a unity which con-stantly builds up human lives in holiness by theexchange of gift, grace and wisdom. And third,unity with the apostolic witness, a proclamation ofthe resurrection of this man Jesus Christ, in whomthe history of the world is transformed.

2. Implications for the practice of the Church

If we begin with such a threefold understandingof unity, what are the practical implications for thevisible life of Christ’s Church? Taking them one byone I believe these implications are something likethis: first of all, the visible concrete life of the Churchmust be a life that expresses and realises our stand-ing in Christ. The visible life of the Church mustdeclare this is where we stand: this is how we pray,this is the life that lives in us — the life of commu-nion in the Holy Trinity. Hence the centrality of theHoly Eucharist as the place where supremely westand in and with Christ and are renewed in his life.The Holy Eucharist is the place where, above all, theprayer of Christ becomes our prayer, and the life ofChrist becomes our life in the sacramental tokens ofhis body and blood. But also if the Church is called toexpress and realise our standing in Christ, then thevisible life of the Church must also show forth a ped-agogy of prayer that roots us one by one and day byday in Christ’s own praying. A church which is seri-ous about unity with Christ, is a church which isdevoted to growing and nourishing that life of prayerwhich is Christ’s life in us. And the twin priorities of

the Eucharist and life of contemplative holiness thatroots us in the prayer of Christ are the foremost waysin which the Church in its visible life declares whereit stands, with whom it is united, and in whom itlives.

Secondly, the visible life of the Church mustexpress and realise mutual service. It must bemarked by our availability to one another. To beavailable for one another’s sanctification is part ofthe essence of that communion which is the Church’slife. And being available for one another’s sanctifica-tion is of course — at the same time — to be there forthe sharing of this loving communion with all believ-ers or non-believers through our work and service inthe world.

So, from the centrality of the Eucharist and con-templative prayer grows the reality of mutual serviceand outward-facing service: being available, unitedwith one another in the dynamic of giving to oneanother, and united with one another in the presenta-tion of hope to the whole world.

And thirdly the visible life of the Church mustexpress and realise continuity with the apostolic tes-timony with the witness to the cross and resurrec-tion. It does this through a ministry in the Churchthat is (a) recognisable throughout all communitiesof belief, and (b) is held to account for its transmis-sion of the apostolic truth by the agreed doctrinaldiscernment of the whole body. To stand in Christ(point one), to be committed to mutual service(point two), is to stand daily in need of the apostolicwitness to resurrection; and the existence ofordained ministry and the sacramental scheme ofworship animated by that ministry is to be account-able for apostolic truth. It is to recognise that theremust be one proclamation of Christ crucified andrisen and not different and optional versions of thatstory.

In relation then to the actual work of ecumenicaldialogue and the hopes we have for it, the first of thepoints I made is very closely bound up indeed withwhat we have to say with and to one another aboutbaptism (and I echo here some of the things that HisEminence Cardinal Kasper has already said thisafternoon). Baptism understood as our sacramentalentry into the life of Christ, our stepping into theplace of Christ, is the foundation of both how we talkabout and how we realise our standing in Christ byunity within the life of the Trinity. It is bound upclosely and intimately with that entire agenda of spir-itual ecumenism about which Cardinal Kasper hasspoken so eloquently already: the shared search forholiness. But it spills over into the second area; it iswhat leads us into koinonia, the common life ofmutual service. In terms of formal relations betweenthe Anglican and Roman Catholic churches this isthe territory in which our episcopal Commission (theInternational Anglican Roman Catholic Commissionfor Unity and Mission) has worked. It is very particu-larly the responsibility of bishops working together,because a bishop’s task is pre-eminently both thenourishing within the body of a life of mutual giftand the shared work of holiness, and the missionary

111

presentation of this life and work to the world astransforming and transfiguring hope.

But the third area is of course where most of ourintractable difficulties arise, because we have notbeen able to recognise one another’s ministries ofhope. We debate (sometimes in history if not now)quite fiercely about what counts as fundamental inour theology of ministry. We disagree over how theapostolic witness is secured in its transmission. Andthe disagreements between the Orthodox, Reformed,Roman Catholic and Anglican Christians over theexact status of the need for communion with the Seeof Peter and Paul, and over the degree of authority ofthe bishop of that Apostolic See to determine thebounds of teaching and practice, is one of the mostacute and complex areas of this third territory withwhich we have to deal.

Thus it is quite tempting to say that the first andsecond areas of concern are the ones that really mat-ter and that the third has to be relegated to the ‘toodifficult’ pile of material. But I don’t believe that thatwill do as an agenda or a hope for ecumenical dia-logue: I don’t believe that it is finally possible to sepa-rate the first two points about unity from the third.Even if various churches and Christian communitiesin dialogue differ about what has to be regarded asessential in the theology of ordained ministrynonetheless there is work to be done. There is workthat has been done, with profit and with learning. Avery substantial agreement in ARCIC about the theol-ogy of ministry and sacraments — despite all subse-quent difficulties — remains for many of us a pointof orientation and a sign of hope. It is still worth hav-ing the discussion about that third area not leastbecause ultimately it is not separable from the othertwo. If we want to know that it is Christ we are talk-ing about, in his death and resurrection, the questionof unity with the apostolic witness is not a matter ofindifference. So it is worth continuing the discussionabout the nature of ordained ministry and it isequally worth continuing the discussion for an ongo-ing discernment about the actual and potential min-istry of the Apostolic See of the West, the See ofRome. That has to be pursued with greater energy,because if we are serious about the first and secondpoints, when we find ourselves standing in Christin different places or try to serve one another’s sancti-fication without the visible bond of communion, weare in a very strange and rather anomalous position.

Now of course we are here in the territory of the-ological conscience. There are good theological rea-sons why some communions find it difficult to recog-nise fully the ordained ministry of others. There aredifficulties that are grounded in theological con-science about recognising the unique charism of theSee of Rome, particularly as defined in Pastore aeter-nus. But however deep those conscientious groundsof theological difference, those who hold them arebound to be conscious of living in an anomaly, andone apparently to be sustained indefinitely in the lifeof the Church called to be visibly one in the oneLord, visibly one with his one prayer to theFather, visibly one in the common search for holi-

ness. To remain in such an anomalous position with-out some self-searching or self-questioning theologi-cal work, is not defensible. We have to explain howand why such-and-such a principle is so basic that iteffects the integrity of our understanding of being inChrist and serving each other’s sanctification.

But if I am right about this it constitutes a chal-lenge and an agenda equally for the Reformed andthe Catholic Christian. But I believe that the historyof the Pontifical Council has always been one inwhich scholars and thinkers have not been afraid toput challenges to both Reformed and Catholicthinkers.

3. Challenges that our ecumenical dialogues face at thepresent moment

In the near future of ecumenical dialogue Ibelieve that a more robust assertion of what it is werecognise when we recognise each other’s baptismwill be of great significance. To recognise oneanother’s baptism is not to recognise the mechanicalvalidity of some action: it is to recognise being inChrist. And if that is what we are recognising we needto work quite hard with those implications.

Likewise I believe that our understanding of myfirst point concerning shared unity with the prayer ofChrist will be materially strengthened by what Iknow has been discussed in the Pontifical Council’splenary, the idea of a shared commentary on theLord’s Prayer: that is, a shared and ecumenical reflec-tion with some claims to the normative standing withwhich we are all involved. The idea has also beensuggested that a shared commentary on the Apostles’Creed would be a desirable outcome of the work ofthe Pontifical Council. I would agree that this isimportant work but would simply add at the sharedwork done by the World Council of Churches Faithand Order Commission on the Nicene Creed some 20to 30 years ago issuing the document The Apos-tolic Faith Today, a resource of great importance herewhich I hope will feed into any future work on com-mon understanding of the common creeds.

But, in conclusion, I should like to suggest thatthere are really two focal points for ecumenical theol-ogy in the next generation. This is a bold claim whichmany may dispute. Many may identify other pointsof greater significance but I’ve been invited here tocontribute to a discussion and this is what I wouldlike to contribute.

First, I should like to see some attempt to work —as we say, ‘across the board’ — on eucharistictheology. I should like to see not simply bi-lateral dia-logues in which eucharistic theology figures butsome attempt to ‘harvest the fruits’ in terms of ashared discussion of eucharistic theology across anumber of confessional groups. I say this obviouslybecause of a belief which I’ve already mentioned thatour standing in Christ is most fully and effectivelyrealised in the Holy Eucharist. But I say it alsobecause there are many varieties of Christian prac-tice spreading in the world at present in whicheucharistic practice is not obviously central, and

112

eucharistic theology is very thin. There are parts ofmy own Communion and other historic communitiesof the Reformation in which eucharistic theologyseems to have slipped away from a prime position.We therefore, I believe, urgently need common workon the Eucharist. We need to remind ourselves as aChristian family across the globe of why and how itis that the Eucharist shapes where we are as Chris-tians, and defines who we are as Church. We need tounderstand better why it is that some apparently verypopular forms of Christianity do not seem to find theEucharist central to their practice. We need to dis-cover why this is and to engage; and I would say alsothat we need to share something of the wisdom thatGod has given us.

As part of such a reflection, maybe the PontificalCouncil should consider a working group that drawsrepresentatives from both the historic communionsand the newer churches across the world for a differ-ent kind of conversation from some of those we havebeen involved in so far. Perhaps that will be a neces-sary development if we are to clarify with full theo-logical integrity what unity means.

And the second focal point is that the agendaof Ut Unum Sint must not be allowed to slip out ofsight. There are many historic sensitivities about thecultural expression of the petrine ministry andindeed about the theological expression of its author-ity in the modern period. But these should not beallowed to obscure the need to clarify what is the ser-

vice that can and should be given to an apostolicchurch by the petrine ministry? The petrine ministrywhen it is fully itself is, I believe, a ministry of wit-ness to the apostolic heritage: a ministry quite simplyof witness to the resurrection. As the Lord says toPeter in St Luke’s gospel, ‘when you have turnedagain, strengthen your brothers’. What is the natureof service we expect from a petrine ministry acrossthe Christian confessions today? Why might thatmatter for a vital, living, and communicating Christ-ian unity?

I believe that by helping us clarifying matterslike that the Pontifical Council continues to play avital role, not least in its capacity to engage fellowChristians from across the whole spectrum of Chris-tian diversity. Because the Pontifical Council is ableto take up some of these profound and searchingtheological questions it is never going to let the restof us get away with the idea that (to use a phrasewhich I know has been discussed in the plenary)‘reconciled diversity’ is all we need. And I think thatis an important and critical point for all Christianconfessions to listen to, precisely because of thecentrality of our unity with the prayer of Christ andwhat that means.

So we, your fellow workers and friends in otherChristian confessions, give thanks for the capacity ofthe Pontifical Council to work in this vein and wepray for the continuance of that service, that ministryto Christ’s body.

113

MESSAGE OF THE HOLY FATHER

To His Holiness Bartholomew IArchbishop of ConstantinopleEcumenical Patriarch

It is with great joy that I write this letter to you, tobe delivered by my Venerable Brother Cardinal KurtKoch, President of the Pontifical Council for Promot-ing Christian Unity, on the occasion of the Feast ofSaint Andrew the Apostle, brother of Saint Peter andPatron of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, in order towish Your Holiness and the Members of the HolySynod, the clergy, the monks and all the faithful anabundance of heavenly gifts and divine blessings.

On this joyful feast-day, in union with all myCatholic brothers and sisters, I join you in givingthanks to God for the wonders he has worked, in hisinfinite mercy, through the mission and martyrdomof Saint Andrew. By generously offering their lives insacrifice for the Lord and for their brethren, the Apos-tles proved the credibility of the Good News that theyproclaimed to the ends of the known world. The Feastof the Apostle, which falls on this day in the liturgicalcalendars of both East and West, issues a strong sum-mons to all those who by God’s grace and through thegift of Baptism have accepted that message of salva-tion to renew their fidelity to the Apostolic teachingand to become tireless heralds of faith in Christthrough their words and the witness of their lives.

In modern times, this summons is as urgent asever and it applies to all Christians. In a worldmarked by growing interdependence and solidarity,we are called to proclaim with renewed convictionthe truth of the Gospel and to present the Risen Lordas the answer to the deepest questions and spiritualaspirations of the men and women of our day.

If we are to succeed in this great task, we need tocontinue our progress along the path towards fullcommunion, demonstrating that we have alreadyunited our efforts for a common witness to theGospel before the people of our day. For this reason I

would like to express my sincere gratitude to YourHoliness and to the Ecumenical Patriarchate for thegenerous hospitality offered last October on theisland of Rhodes to the Delegates of the CatholicEpiscopal Conferences of Europe who came togetherwith representatives of the Orthodox Churches inEurope for the Second Catholic-Orthodox Forum onthe theme “Church-State Relations: Theological andHistorical Perspectives ”.

Your Holiness, I am following attentively yourwise efforts for the good of Orthodoxy and for thepromotion of Christian values in many internationalcontexts. Assuring you of a remembrance in myprayers on this Feast of Saint Andrew the Apostle, Irenew my good wishes for peace, well-being andabundant spiritual blessings to you and to all thefaithful.

With sentiments of esteem and spiritual close-ness, I gladly extend to you a fraternal embrace in thename of our one Lord Jesus Christ.

From the Vatican, 30 November 2010

BENEDICTUS PP XVI

ORE, 1 December 2010

GREETING OF HIS HOLINESS BARTHOLOMEW I

Your Eminence, Cardinal Kurt Koch, with your hon-orable entourage, representing His Holiness theBishop of senior Rome and our beloved brother inthe Lord, Pope Benedict, and the Church that heleads,

It is with great joy that we greet your presence atthe Thronal Feast of our Most Holy Church of Con-stantinople and express gratitude to our brother inthe Lord, Pope Benedict XVI, who sent you here, forhis gracious fraternal gesture through you to partici-pate in this festive celebration of the sacred com-memoration of the founder of the Church in Byzan-

114

VISIT TO THE ECUMENICAL PATRIACHATE BY A DELEGATIONOF THE HOLY SEE FOR THE FEAST OF ST ANDREW

29 November – 1 December 2010

For the first time Cardinal Kurt Koch led the Holy See Delegation to the Phanar on 30 November for the Feast ofSt Andrew, Patron of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, in the context of the traditional exchange of visits for the PatronalFeasts. The President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity was accompanied by the Secretary,Bishop Brian Farrell, LC, and by Fr Andrea Palmieri. The Delegation took part in the Divine Liturgy and met withthe Ecumenical Patriarch and with the Synodal Commission.

We publish here below the text of the Pope’s Message, read by Cardinal Koch followed by the address of the Ecu-menical Patriarch Bartholomew.

tium, St. Andrew the First-Called of the Apostles. It ismany years now since the establishment of anexchange of formal delegations at the respectivepatronal feasts of our two Churches as an indicationof the brotherly bonds of love and honor among us,and we rejoice that this wonderful tradition is pre-served once again this year.

We especially salute the presence of Your Emi-nence among us for the first time as representative ofHis Holiness, congratulating you on assuming thehigh post of the presidency in the Pontifical Councilfor promoting Christian unity, as well as on yourrecent elevation to the position and honor of Cardi-nal. We deeply appreciate the broad theologicalknowledge and nobility of Your Eminence’s charac-ter, together with your attention to the sacred causeof the promotion of Christian unity. And we look for-ward to your cooperation with our Ecumenical Patri-archate for the further enhancement of the fraternalrelations between our Churches to the benefit of thepromotion of unity, for which our Lord prayed to HisFather immediately prior to His passion.

We note with particular joy that this year markedthe completion of fifty years of life and activity forthe Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian unity,over which Your Eminence now presides. Ourthought turns to the late Pope John XXIII, whofounded this Council in 1960 originally in the form ofa Secretariat, together with the convocation of theSecond Vatican Council, whose bold historical deci-sions paved the way for the participation of theRoman Catholic in the effort toward the reconcilia-tion of Christian unity. Among the fruits of this his-torical initiative on the part of the late Pope, thedevelopment of fraternal relations between theOrthodox and Roman Catholic Churches retains aprominent place. These relations were forged by thegreat ecclesiastical leaders, the late Pope Paul VI andour own predecessor Ecumenical PatriarchAthenagoras, while they were further sustained andstrengthened by their successors, Pope John Paul IIand Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios. Thanks to thetireless endeavors of your Council for Christian unity,and in particular of its deceased pioneer presidents,Cardinals Augustin Bea and Johannes Willebrands,assisted by such specialists in the history and life ofthe Orthodox Churches as the late Bishop PierreDuprey and Msgr Eleuterio Fortino, relations amongour Churches were cultivated still further throughmutual respect and brotherly love. The same rela-tions were enriched with due care by the predeces-sors of Your Eminence in the presidency of the Coun-cil, Cardinals Edward Cassidy and Walter Kasper,supported by their capable coworkers. To all of these,we express our fervent thanks for everything thatthey achieved in toil for the restoration of full com-munion among our Churches.

The context of these fraternal relations saw thecreation and continuation over the last thirty years ofthe official theological dialogue between ourChurches. This is because unity in love is of no bene-fit unless it is simultaneously a unity in faith andtruth. Therefore, “ speaking the truth in love,” accord-

ing to the exhortation of the Apostle (Eph 4:15), wemaintain this theological dialogue at the unanimousdecision of all Autocephalous Orthodox Churches inorder to examine, in love and sincerity, the theologi-cal matters that both unite and still divide, “ until weall arrive at the unity of faith,” according to theexhortation of the same Apostle (Eph 4:13).

In following with increased interest the develop-ment of this theological dialogue from our Ecumeni-cal Patriarchate, we pray for its success, especiallyduring its present phase when controversial subjects,which in the past proved cause of acute conflictamong our Churches, are being discussed.

The recent plenary meeting of the dialogue Com-mission in Vienna, under the joint presidency of YourEminence and our most venerable brother andcoworker, His Eminence Metropolitan John of Perga-mon, revealed the existing difficulties but also thedisposition and decision of all members of the Com-mission to overcome these difficulties with love aswell as with faithfulness to the doctrine and life ofthe Church transmitted to us from the first millen-nium in order to advance to their resolution.

Today celebrating the sacred memory of St.Andrew the First-Called of the Apostles, we cannotbut turn our attention also to his brother, St. Peter,chief of the Apostles. These two brothers were not justrelated by blood but especially by the infinitely moresignificant bond with Christ and communion inChrist. And they preserved this bond of communionin Christ unimpaired for an entire millennium, whilethe Churches that derived from the preaching andmartyrdom of these Apostles, namely the Churches ofRome and Constantinople, are obliged once more toregain this bond of communion in order to prove our-selves worthy successors of their deposit.

In the gospel reading proclaimed during today’sDivine Liturgy, we heard that Andrew personallyencountered Christ and hastened to introduce Him toPeter as well. Philip does the same with Nathanael,broadening in this way the circle of those in commu-nion with Christ, until the apostolic message reachesall people. Thus, the Church of Christ is demonstrated“ apostolic,” conveying Christ from generation to gen-eration and from place to place “ that the world maybelieve ” (John 17:21) in Him as redeemer and savior.

Even today, facing manifold impasses, the worldseeks redemption and salvation. However, those whopreach Christ in separation from one another cannotpersuade the world that ‘’we have found the Messiah,which is interpreted as the Christ ” (John 1:42) Faith-ful to the authentic and authoritative message of theApostles, we are called “with one mouth and oneheart ” to transmit this message to the contemporaryworld, discerning the concerns and embracing theproblems of the world.

With these thoughts, we welcome you as repre-sentatives of senior Rome with love and esteem, andonce more thank His Holiness, our brother, who sentyou, for “ the labor of love ” (1 Thess 1:3) that guidedyour steps here.

“To our God and Father be the glory to the agesof ages. Amen”.

115

MESSAGE OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS

XIV° GENERAL CONGREGATION

III. Communion and Witness Together with theOrthodox and Protestant Communities in theMiddle East

7. We send our greetings to the Orthodox andProtestant Communities in our countries. Togetherwe work for the good of all Christians, that they mayremain, grow and prosper. We share the same jour-ney. Our challenges are the same and our future isthe same. We wish to bear witness together as disci-ples of Christ. Only through our unity can we accom-plish the mission that God has entrusted to us,despite the differences among our Churches. Theprayer of Christ is our support; the commandment oflove unites us, even if the road towards full commu-nion is still distant for us.

We have walked together in the Middle EastCouncil of Churches and we wish, with God’s grace,to continue on this path and to promote its activity,having as an ultimate goal a common testimony toour faith, the service of our faithful and of all ourcountries. We acknowledge and encourage all initia-tives for ecumenical dialogue in each of our countries.

We express our gratitude to the World Council ofChurches and to the different ecumenical organisa-tions which work for the unity of the Churches andfor their support.

IV. Cooperation and Dialoguewith Our Fellow-Citizens, the Jews

8. The same Scriptures unite us; the Old Testa-ment, the Word of God is for both you and us. We be-lieve all that God revealed there, since he called Abra-ham, our common father in the faith, Father of Jews,of Christians and of Muslims. We believe in thepromises of God and his covenant given to Abrahamand to you. We believe that the Word of God is eternal.

The Second Vatican Council published the docu-ment Nostra aetate which treats interreligious dia-logue with Judaism, Islam and the other religions.

Other documents have subsequently clarified anddeveloped the relationship with Judaism. Ongoingdialogue is taking place between the Church and therepresentatives of Judaism. We hope that this dia-logue can bring us to work together to press those inauthority to put and end to the political conflictwhich results in separating us and disrupting every-day life in our countries.

It is time for us to commit ourselves together to asincere, just and permanent peace. Both Christiansand Jews are called to this task , by the Word of God.In his Word, we are invited to listen to the voice ofGod “who speaks of peace ”: “Let me hear what Godthe Lord will speak, for he will speak peace to hispeople, to his holy ones ” (Ps 85:9). Recourse to theo-logical and biblical positions which use the Word ofGod to wrongly justify injustices is not acceptable.On the contrary, recourse to religion must lead everyperson to see the face of God in others and to treatthem according to their God-given prerogatives andGod’s commandments, namely, according to God’sbountiful goodness mercy, justice and love for us.

ORE, 27 October 2010

INTERVENTION OF ARCHBISHOP KURT KOCH

Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of BaselPresident of the Pontifical Councilfor Promoting Christian Unity (Vatican City)

Communion and witness: appearing in the titlefor the Synod of Bishops are two key concepts ofChristian ecumenism, making reference to twoanniversaries celebrated this year.

In Edinburgh, Scotland, which our Holy Father,Pope Benedict XVI, visited in September, the firstWorld Mission Conference took place 100 years ago.Its primary purpose was to become aware of a scan-dal, to remedy: the inherent scandal in the fact thatmany Churches and Christian communities com-peted in their mission, thereby harming the credibil-ity of the announcement of the Gospel of Jesus, espe-cially in the most distant continents. From thatmoment, ecumenism and mission became twin sis-

116

SPECIAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE SYNODOF BISHOPS FOR THE MIDDLE EAST

Rome, 10-24 October 2010

During the 14th General Congregation held on Friday 22 October, the Synod Fathers approved the Nuntius, theMessage of the People of God, at the conclusion of the Special Assembly for the Middle East of the Synod of Bishops.

We publish here below an extract of the Synod’s Message, where the questions of seeking Christian unity and dia-logue with the Jews are tackled.

ters, called to rely on each other. This pair also corre-spond to the will of Jesus, who prayed for unity “ sothat the world may believe it was you who sent me ”(Jn 17:21). In Jesus’ eyes, authentic ecumenical unityis not an end in itself , but rather is placed at the ser-vice of the credible announcement of the one Gospelof Jesus Christ in today’s world. Our witness musttherefore have an ecumenical tone, so that its melodyis not discordant but musical. And this tone must beperceptible every day, a renewed growth of which isessential, or rather in the one faith, that operates inlove and through love.

Fifty years ago the Secretariat was established,today the Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity. Still now it has a duty to serve an ecumenicalobjective of visible unity within the faith, in the sacra-ments and in the ecclesial ministry. Here the secondkey concept, comes to the fore, that is communion,rooted in the Trinitarian mystery of God, as Johnemphasized in his first letter with these significantwords: “We are declaring to you what we have seenand heard, so that you too may share our life. Our lifeis shared with the Father and with his Son JesusChrist ” (1 Jn 1:3). The decisive point of departure ofevery communion is the meeting with Jesus Christ asSon of God incarnate. From this meeting springs thecommunion between human beings, founded on thecommunion with the Triune God. The ecclesial com-munion is therefore based on a Trinitarian commu-nion: the Church is an icon of the Trinity.

From what has already been said emerges thelink between two realities, between communion andwitness: our witness has as its content the mystery ofGod, that is revealed to us in his Logos just as He isand lives within himself. But this witness may onlybe credible in today’s world if the life of communionand the passionate pursuit of a broader communionbecome the same visible icons of the divine mysteryor, as Paul says, “ letters of recommendation ”: “Youyourselves are our letter, written in our hearts, thateveryone can read and understand ” (2 Cor 3:2). Ecu-menism may therefore be understood as a process inwhich ecclesial life grows towards communion: thatmeans that the communion of life of the true Churchbecomes a concrete witness and radiates in a fullerecumenical communion.

At this Synod communion and witness alsodemand an ecumenical declination, which we expectmost of all from the Oriental Churches in the MiddleEast. In fact they are called in a particular way tobreathe with two lungs. Hence I wish to concludewith this invitation full of hope: help us all and theuniversal Church to breathe like this, ecumenically!

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EMINENCE EMMANUEL ADAMAKIS

Metropolitan of FranceEcumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople

His Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholo-mew has requested me to pass on to you, on behalf of

the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople andSister Church, all his wishes for a positive outcome,during these days, for the Synod of Bishops for theMiddle East.

We wish to emphasize two facts which seemessential. The first is the progressive disappearanceof Christianity in the Middle East. How can the pres-ence of Christians continue in the region taking intoaccount our bilateral dialogues? The working docu-ment of the Synod, the Instrumentum Laboris,remember, was made public by Pope Benedict XVIon the occasion of his official visit to Cyprus in June2010. So this is a sign not only directed to the East-ern Catholics, but also to the Orthodox Church andits faithful. In this regard, it is worth recalling the.importance of the Orthodox presence within Easternsocieties. Thus, the place for pluralism must be ableto advance our various initiatives for dialogue and beable to bring about as much cooperation as is neededand useful for the sake of a growing and efficienttransmission of the Gospel witness. In fact, empha-sizing the good relations that our Churches maintaintoday, the tangible hope of a future unity will have acatalyzing effect. A union would ensure the continua-tion of the Christian presence locally.

Secondly, we would like to offer a clarificationparticularly on our ability to dialogue with other reli-gious elements in the region and in particular withour Muslim and Jewish brothers. The increasingnumber of initiatives that, up until today, inter-religious dialogue has brought to the fore should notmake us lose sight of the fact that institutional initia-tives are not relevant if all of society does not investin the need to live together in peace. The MiddleEast, in fact, must abandon the thesis of a clash ofcivilizations. Yes, living together is possible, in waysthat will not be dictated by others, but by those wholive there day after day. They are “ the salt of theearth ”. Now, the first inalienable condition for anyco-existence remains a guarantee of religious free-dom for all. Only on this basis, relations between reli-gions, peoples and cultures will be able to encouragethe emergence of what Levi-Strauss called “ the co-existence of cultures that have between them thegreatest diversity ”.

ORE, 17 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EMINENCE MAKARIOS TILLYRIDISMetropolitan of KenyaGreek-Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria and allAfrica

On this special day, I am greatly honored and tothe utmost humbled by this honor to speak beforeyou. I also count it a blessing that I get to speak inyour presence, Your Holiness, from this region whichwill always be unique in the history of Christianity,because it is here that creation credits its origins. Tothe majority of the world, the Middle East is avolatile region. But we, as believers in the Gospel ofChrist know better, because our belief is founded onthe teachings of the Prince of peace.

117

Your Holiness, your own words of insight, whilespeaking to the British Society recently, express thisbelief that, “ This is why I would suggest that theworld of reason and the world of faith — the world ofsecular rationality and the world of religious belief —need one another and should not be afraid to enterinto a profound and ongoing dialogue, for the good ofour civilization ”. This message is very much applica-ble and relevant here in the Middle East, where recon-ciliation, love and understanding are very essential forpeaceful co-existence and cooperation.

St. Thomas Aquinas once said that, “because of thediverse conditions of humans, it happens that someacts are virtuous to some people, as appropriate andsuitable to them, while the same acts are immoral forothers, as inappropriate to them”. This speaks out in asetup like the one we have here in this region where amixture of religions and cultures abide, where one’sbelief is not similar to his neighbour’s. In the MiddleEast, freedom of religion customarily means freedom ofworship and not freedom of conscience, the freedom tochange one’s religion for belief in another. The setupthat once is faced with here is one where religion is asocial and even a national choice, and not an individualone. Change of religion is viewed as betrayal to society,founded largely on a religious tradition. We howevershould always remember that this does not lock outlove which is required for unity and the workingtogether of all Christian churches in the Middle East. Itis very important for us as Shepherds to cultivatetogetherness, in love unfeigned, remembering MotherTeresa’s words; “ If you want a love message to beheard, it has got to be sent out.” We are therefore calledto send out a message of love to all those who surroundus and impact our lives in different ways.

Concerning the community of Muslim brothersand sisters as well as the Jewish community all aroundus, we can’t fall to respect their belief and way of life.We need to cultivate respect and appreciation of allbeliefs that surround us, while preaching the messageof love and peace amongst the different religions. Co-operation with the Non-Christians is very important inhealing past injustices and promoting peaceful coexis-tence. As shepherds in this great vineyard of our Lord,I encourage you to forge ahead in humility, love andunderstanding, in advancing the great commission ofour lord in Matthew 28:19-20. In humility, the mes-sage of our Lord will surely be heard among all races,creeds and cultures that surround us in this region.

Once again let me express my sincere gratitudefor this special invitation, especially to your HolinessPope Benedict XVI. I wish you all peace from ourLord and Saviour Jesus Christ. May he keep usunited in the faith always.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EMINENCE GEORGES KHODRE

Metropolitan of Byblos, Botrys and Mount LebanonGreek-Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East

“This communion within the Universal Church ismanifested in two ways: firstly, communion in the

Eucharist; secondly, communion with the Bishop ofRome”.

The ambiguity of this statement rotates aroundthe use of the term Catholic Church as well as the tieof the Eucharist with the Pope. Now, the expressionbegins with Saint Ignatius of Antioch, and desig-nates communion in a local Church united in Ortho-dox faith to his bishop in such a way that the liturgymentions him without referring to another ecclesialauthority. The mention of the Bishop of Rome in theliturgy outside of one’s own diocese introduces theidea of a universal Church mentioned in the Instru-mentum laboris and repeated in the inaugural Massof this synod. The word introduces a numeric, spa-cial, sociological note while the Catholic Church isconstituted herself first locally by the Lord as HerBody. Does not the Universal Church have as hercorollary the existence of a universal bishop whowould exercise a jurisdiction over a world indepen-dently of the Eucharist, the only sign of communionbetween Christians? It is the Eucharist that makesus everywhere a “ chosen people, a royal priesthood,a holy nation ”.

In mentioning the Pope of Rome in the Easternliturgies we are inviting the Churches to a practicethe East has never known.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF ARCHBISHOP CHRYSOSTOMOS IIOrthodox Church of Cyprus

Text read by Rev. Dr. Demosthenis DemosthenousWe warmly thank His Holiness the Pope of Rome,

Benedict XVI, our most beloved Brother in Christ,who has kindly invited us to participate in the Synodof the Catholic Churches of the Middle East.

We are completely convinced that this Synod istaking place in a moment that is decisively critical forthe whole world, but especially for the sensitiveregion of the Middle East. Certainly, the Word Incar-nate, the Savior of the World, Jesus Christ, broughtto all men a message of peace, freedom and justice,teaching us by his example and with his preaching tolive in peace with our neighbor and with all peoples.When, though, peace is endangered, as unfortunatelyit has been in Cyprus for 36 years now, because of theuninterrupted Turkish invasion and occupation ofthe northern part of our island, it is the duty of all ofus to defend it from those who intend to endanger it.

I am particularly happy because this message ofpeace guides and unites our Churches. Appealing toyour goodwill, we cannot but point out that Cyprus isthe only nation of the European Union that finds alarge part of its territory under occupation, wherealmost half of its population has been violentlychased from their homes and have become refugees,while 520 churches and other venerated sacredplaces and sites of fervent devotion destroyed, pil-laged and turned into entertainment venues or eveninto stalls for livestock.

For all these reasons, the Christians of Cyprus askfor and await your help and support in the just strug-

118

gle for the withdrawal from our island of the invad-ing Turkish army and the colonists who have settledthere, and for freedom, peace, justice and, in general,all the human rights of the legitimate indigenousinhabitants of the island.

We wish every success to the works of the Synod,for the good of the peoples and inhabitans of theMiddle East. We hope, furthermore, that the LordJesus Christ will grant His Holiness Pope BenedictXVI health and serenity for many years to come, forthe good of the flock that has been entrusted to him.May the grace and blessing of the Lord be with all ofyou. Thank you once again.

With my most heartfelt best wishes and greataffection, the Archbishop of Cyprus Chrysostomos II.

ORE, 17 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EXCELLENCY BARNABA EL SORYANYBishop of the Coptic-Orthodox Diocese of Saint GeorgeItalyCoptic-Orthodox Patriarchate of Alessandria

His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, Pope of Alexan-dria and Patriarch of Saint Mark Episcopate,entrusted me with the mission to attend the Synod ashis representative, and to express his warm gratitudeto His Holiness for extending an invitation to partakein the Synodal works. He entrusted me with deliver-ing a tribute of fraternal love to Your Holiness and toall the members of the Synod, in the name of ourLord Jesus Christ, praying and hoping that God willlet the Synod bear its desired fruits for the good andconsideration of the Christians of the Middle East.

Allow me to say that this Synod comes at a verylate stage, as the conflicts and persecutions that ourregion suffers from have multiplied and turned intolamentation and suffering, resulting in the migrationof a large number of the finest young Christians,leaving their homelands behind. I also mean leavingtheir hearts behind, with their history, authentic cul-ture and tradition, in order to live and take refuge inanother country, whose traditions and way of life arestrange to them, not in line with their nature, but,compared to what they went through, still moresecure and safer, providing them and their childrenwith the hope of a better future.

The title of this Synod on communion and wit-ness takes on a new meaning and significance withregard to the suffering and challenges faced by theChristians of the Middle East, due to precarious andcomplex political conflicts, particularly the Arab-Israeli conflict, as well as the wars this region haswitnessed and still is enduring; wars that have causedan upsurge in Middle Eastern problems, where, as areaction, anti-Jewish and anti-Christian Salafistmovements alike were launched, while the spirit ofhatred, rejection of the other and isolationism werefelt on the other side in response to the psychologicalpressure and persecution. That, to the point of mar-tyrdom, marginalization and the feeling of being“ non-native ” citizens enduring discrimination at

work and in political institutions and parliamentaryand local councils. In this sense, it fell to the Churchas a reality that it had to live and live with, particu-larly in how to minister to those communities thatdeparted and scattered all over the world — in addi-tion to ministering the remaining communitiesinside the country, encouraging them not to leavetheir homelands, and seeking to resolve their issues,as much as possible, through the intercession of offi-cials. From my personal experience, I can confirmthat we were forced to undergo the reality of emigra-tion. Nevertheless, the Coptic church realized theperils of emigration and migration, of leaving thecountry whatever the reason for the exile. Accord-ingly, with his keen intellect and spiritual sensitivity,Pope Shenouda III recognized the need of our Copticmigrant communities (around two million ChristianCopts) residing overseas to live in the same ecclesias-tic oriental spiritual environment they grew up andwere raised in according to its traditions. That is whyPope Shenouda III sent the Church after its faithfulcommunities, to look for them in fear of losing themand their Copt identity, as well as their disappearingin foreign communities. Thus, he founded churchesand monasteries and established Copt schools inimmigration countries, such as: In the United States:around 160 Egyptian Coptic churches, two monaster-ies and five bishops; in Canada: 20 Coptic churches;in Bolivia: several churches and a bishop; in Brazil:several churches and a bishop as well; in Australia:20 Coptic churches, a monastery and three bishops;in Europe: churches in almost every European coun-try, three monasteries and three bishops; in Sudan:two parishes, two monasteries and two bishops; inSouthern Africa: churches in Kenya, Zimbabwe andremaining countries — a monastery and two bishops.He also founded Coptic schools in the United States,Canada and Australia.

I would like to affirm that we look forward to thisSynod, thanks to the efforts of His Holiness and theSynod members. May it be the glimpse of hope thatcarries within it better solutions for the Christians’problems in the Middle East.

My thanks go to the Synodal members who suc-ceeded, throughout their addresses, in covering allthe aspects they have experienced and witnessed,dimensions that have had direct or indirect influ-ences on emigration movements in the Middle East.

ORE, 17 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EXCELLENCY ARMASH NALBANDIAN

Bishop of Damascus, SyriaCatholicosate of All Armenians

1. Emigration. We, the Christian churches, aresuffering from a big problem concerning the emigra-tion of our faithful believers. That is not because ofthe political or economical reasons or circumstancesin the countries in which we live, even though thereare many difficulties of the Israeli-Palestinian con-flict, and the war in Iraq or political instability inLebanon and in other Middle Eastern countries. The

119

major cause for emigration is oftentimes the plan ofwestern or international politics, when it ignores theexistence of Christians in the Middle East and in theHoly land, and when they name our countries as ter-rorist countries or societies. An Islamic country doesnot automatically mean a terrorist country.

2. Dialogue with Islam. Every day we witness ourChristian faith, when we are forced to clarify thespirit of the message of the Gospel, the message oflove, peace, tolerance etc., in non-Christian countries,because of international politics, that intend todeclare nearly every Middle Eastern country as a rad-ical Islamic and terrorist country. Interreligious dia-logue often needs big efforts to find a common pathwith our Muslim brothers and sisters and to acceptand respect, that Islam also contains the principals oflove, peace, solidarity and the witness of a mercifulGod, the almighty Creator. We can only expect fromthe churches in the West to raise their voice or putefforts against the politicians and those who intendto use religion to justify the war of economical andpolitical interests. The moral authority of the churchhas its own weight and value on the internationalpolitical decisions.

3. Ecumenical dimension. A very healthy, vividand good ecumenical relationship exists among thechurches of various confessions in the Middle East.We are very hopeful that the Special Assembly for theBishops of Middle East will offer us new opportuni-ties to find new ways for ecumenical dialogue, coop-eration and witness of the message of the Gospel. Butwe feel a burden when we read in Lineamenta inparagraph 9 the statement “ In the wake of these divi-sions and separations, periodic attempts were madeto re-establish the unity of the Body of Christ. Thisecumenical effort gave rise to the Eastern CatholicChurches ”. Our Churches exist in countries whichhave been the cradle of Christianity. They are the liv-ing guardians of our Christian origin. These landshave been blessed by the presence of Christ himselfand the first generations of Christians. We have toaccept the historical facts but let us not call it “ ecu-menical efforts ”.

We hope throughout this Special Assembly forthe Bishops of the Middle East a reorganization ofthe Catholic churches and refreshment of the witnessof faith will take place. But the mission and so theexistence of the catholic churches can be or must beunderstood only in ecumenical communion andunity with the other churches in the region 38.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EXCELLENCY SHAHAN SARKISSIANBishop of Alep SyriaArmenian Catholicosate of Cilicia

In “Christianity at the Crossroads in the MiddleEast ”, published in 1981, His Holiness Aram Istalready expressed himself in these terms: “The Mid-dle East was the cradle of the Church, but her Christ-

ian presence is threatened there today. In this region,which was the source of Christian culture and theo-logical thinking, the Christian culture and identity isweakened. Also, the Church fights for her existenceand survival in the Middle East ”. This concern thatHis Holiness expressed way before, today is morethan a reality. There are situations in which theefforts of the Church are limited. This means that itis obviously impossible to drastically change the con-ditions that surround us. However, as Church, wecould determine together the process related to ourcommitment in view of a renewal and internal soli-darity that is more effective. The following prioritiesare drawn to the attention of the Synod:

1. We must more concretely and more clearlymanifest the Unity of the Churches that make upmore than ever today an imperative for the MiddleEast. With respect for the ecclesiological differences,the Churches must always be together, to plantogether and to work together.

2. Mutual respect and reciprocal understandingconstitute the basis for dialogue and Islamic-Christ-ian co-existence. To deepen co-existence with Islamwhile remaining faithful to their Christian missionand identity.

3. Christian witness is also the vocation of theChurch. To relaunch and promote Christian educa-tion, spiritual renewal and the diakonia, internalevangelization and the transmission of Christian val-ues to the young, active participation with the laity inthe life and vocation of the Church is considered as apriority.

4. To underline the importance of institutionalecumenical cooperation as well as bilateral theologi-cal dialogue. The reform and the reorganization ofthe Council of Churches of the Middle East, consti-tutes today a major priority to which the Churchmembers are already promised.

This synod is considered, in a certain way, by hisHoliness Aram Ist as the synod of all the churches ofthe Middle East, because we face the same condi-tions, we share the same problems and are faced withthe same challenges. In consequence, we should con-centrate collectively on the Christian presence andwitness in the Middle East and consecrate ourselvesall together to reorganize and renew our commit-ment and our mission.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EMINENCE MAR GREGORIOS

YOHANNA IBRAHIM

Metropolitan of Alep, SyriaSyrian Orthodox Patriarchate of Antiochand All the East

First of all His Eminence Gregorios presented thegreetings from His Beatitude the Patriarch to HisHoliness Benedict XVI, and expressed his wish thatthe Synod should have a successful outcome. He thentouched on three important topics, namely:

120

1. The emigration of Christians from the MiddleEast, which he defined as a fatal illness, saying thatup to now this topic had not received enough atten-tion; the proof of this is that massive emigration con-tinues everywhere. The number of Christians is drop-ping every day and in order for this illness to betreated and suitable solutions found to bring this phe-nomenon to an end a special conference is required.

2. As regards the ecumenical journey, His Beati-tude put forward a new suggestion to His Holinessthe Pope, namely separating communion fromauthority. In this way the whole Church enters into asingle communion and unity in faith goes back tobeing what it was before the era of the divisions.

3. As regards relationships with the Muslims, HisBeatitude affirmed that the most dangerous enemyChristians and Muslims have to face is ignorance,which is what often dominates religious discussion,creating tensions, instability and conflict betweenChristians and Muslims. He suggested that the Chris-tian Church promote enlightened thought andentrust itself to moderates.

In conclusion, he made the following suggestions:1. Even if this topic has already been dealt with

by other Synodal Fathers at this assembly, this is thetime and place to draw it to your attention and thento proceed from a rapid study and translate it intoreality: this is a general request of all the Christiansof the Middle East, that is, finding a solution to unifythe date of the Feast of Easter. Christians are waitingimpatiently to see their unity represented by thissymbol. So will it be this venerable Synod that takesthe decision to unify the Feast of Easter? His Beati-tude the Patriarch Gregorios Laham has announcedit on various occasions, in fact he came close to real-izing this dream of all the Churches of the MiddleEast on unifying the date of Easter. This could be thefirst step towards the longed-for Christian unity.

2. Our Churches are rooted in persecution andwe in the East are the children of martyrs. We mustnot forget the martyrs of the 20th and 19th centuries,the victims of inhuman massacres, or what we Syri-acs call Sifo. My proposal is that Your Holiness adoptthe idea of a single feast for the Christian martyrsuniversally and that requires no more than the con-sensus of all the Christian Churches, so that a daymay be established for the celebration of the Feast ofthe Martyrs everywhere. We will thus have takenanother step towards Christian unity and, at thesame time, we will perpetuate the memory of ourholy martyrs every year.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS BEATITUDE MAR GEWARGIS SLIWA

Metropolitan of Baghdad and Iraq, IraqPatriarchate of the Assyrian Church of the East

I am glad to bring to you the greetings andprayers of our Patriarch His Holiness Mar Dinkha IV.

All the Christians in the Middle East and espe-

cially Iraqi Christian citizens have heard about thesemeetings. All of them consider that this is a spiritualand holy gathering and believe that whatever andwhenever we ask God for their safety and happinesswill be given. Thus, I think that these meetings willhave great responsibility on us if nothing of whatthey expect has been achieved and we should beaware that their faith and their dependence on thechurch might be affected.

Let us all with our different beautiful and holygardens, work together friendly, brotherly and spiri-tually to continue watering the roots of Christianityon our land and to rescue our world from differentfearful disasters, and to live respectfully and friendlywith other believers in our Almighty God whereverwe live and in which ever country we live as goodand respected citizens and to be good neighbors tothose who are in need.

All the peoples of the world, all the governments,and all the church and humanitarian organizations,all over the world, know what is going on in Iraq andrealize clearly the unexpected circumstances andhorrible situations that are facing the Iraqi people ingeneral, especially the Iraqi Christians since the inva-sion of April 2003.

The problems and sufferings of Christians in Iraqare different from those of other Christians in theMiddle East countries.

We should look for and study so as to know the rea-sons that caused such unexpected and horrible circum-stances and to recognize who is behind all this so thatthis conference will find the solution to put an end towhat is going on in our country and to stop the IraqiChristian citizens of thinking of fleeing the country.

The situation needs quick, wise and urgent stepsand actions. Otherwise the tired and suffered IraqiChristian citizen will depend no more and will haveno hope in such meetings and will say: “ Till whenshall I wait ” and then prepare to flee his cradle ofcivilization and Christianity.

I take this important gathering as an opportunityto ask you, my dear brothers and sisters, according toyour positions and responsibilities, to urge the inter-national humanitarian and political organizations, tosave Iraqi people in general from this destruction andto create the peaceful circumstances that will keepthe existence of Christians in the country. This willhelp to stop the Christians’ migration and will give nomore headaches to those foreign West governmentswhether to accept these immigrants or not.

I wish this blessed gathering a very successful andfruitful outcome so as to strengthen the faith andhope of our believers in the holy church.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EXCELLENCY MICHAEL LANGRISHBishop of Exeter, United KingdomAnglican Communion

I bring Greetings from His Grace the Archbishopof Canterbury. We are mindful of the emigration of

121

Christians in much of the Middle East and of the cir-cumstances which can make it difficult for them toremain and flourish. This is a situation about whichthere is too much ignorance among Christians in theWest. Anglicans seek to play their part, alongside thehistoric churches of the Middle East in raising theawareness of governments and the media as well astheir own members. We seek to join together in aprophetic re-engagement with the scriptures, assuredof the hope and truth of the incarnate Word of God.These matters were discussed by the Archbishop andthe Holy Father during the recent Papal visit to theUK. Through study, prayer, advocacy, pilgrimage,and through drawing the Eastern Catholic Churchesas fully into our ecumenical dialogue as our Ortho-dox brothers and sisters, we seek to grow in our abil-ity, by God’s grace, to hold fast, in the one body, tothe one Lord by whom we are called and sanctified.

ORE, 10 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF HIS EXCELLENCY MUNIB YOUNAN

Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordanand the Holy LandLutheran World Federation

The Apostle Paul calls us in Ephesians 4:3 to“make every effort to maintain the unity of the Spiritin the bond of peace ”. And so I stand here “with allhumility and gentleness ” speaking to you about ourcommon concerns for the body of Christ.

On 21 October 1999, in Augsburg, Germany wecame together to sign the Joint Declaration on theDoctrine of Justification — a historical event thatlifted former condemnations and set a course for ourcommon future. It is good that the relationshipbetween Lutherans and Catholics has developed insuch a way and is still progressing. This past summerwhen the Lutheran World Federation met in Assem-bly in Stuttgart, Germany, our theme was “Give usthis day our daily bread ”. We share the same loaf, weshare the same responsibility for a hungry world,hungry for spirituality and hungry for justice. Weshare this responsibility in securing food, eradicatingpoverty, and combating deadly diseases.

In particular I want to stress the good relation-ship between the ELCJHL and the Catholic Churchin Palestine, Israel and Jordan. I am blessed to havecollegial and fraternal relationships with all theCatholic Bishops and prelates in Jerusalem. Thismust continue for the welfare of our people and for acommon witness.

The Middle East is the cradle of Christianity. Itwould be tragic if after two thousand years this wit-ness were to vanish. I ask you: What would the Mid-dle East be without Christians? We share this com-mon concern. However, I do not want to dwell on theproblems.

How can we together offer a living and dynamicwitness? It is essential that we not concentrate only ona confessional witness, but that we speak with onevoice in a common witness. Our grassroots are ex-

pecting to see us acting together, witnessing together,living together, and loving together. For this reason, itis essential that we strengthen our ecumenical relationsboth in Israel-Palestine and in the whole Middle East.

How can we do this? First, the Middle East Coun-cil of Churches is the only body in the world whichgathers the four families of Churches: Catholic,Orthodox, Oriental, and Evangelical. We are cur-rently not walking as vigorously as we should, butrather limping along. I appeal to you to help us revivethis ecumenical framework where we all can worktogether.

Secondly, we have to act together in creating jobs,in providing safe and affordable housing, in improv-ing schools, and in strengthening all Christian insti-tutions because they serve everyone regardless ofgender, ethnicity, politics or religion. Our LutheranSchools, for example, educate an equal number ofChristians and Muslims, boys and girls, side by side,creating a climate of mutual respect. This is ourstrength. We must continue our efforts so thatChristians may remain steadfast in their own coun-tries, as an integral part of the fabric of their ownsocieties, working for the good of all.

The track of interfaith dialogue promotes Mus-lim-Christian-Jewish relations. The Council of Reli-gious Institutions in the Holy Land brings together inJerusalem leaders of all three faiths to jointly pro-mote coexistence, combat extremism and seek solu-tions to societal problems. Currently academic con-sultants are studying hundreds of textbooks fromIsraeli and Palestinian schools in an effort to uncoverand eliminate discriminatory and derogatory state-ments. This project is the preferred way to justice,peace and reconciliation.

We Lutherans are committed to work togetherwith you Catholics, as with the Orthodox Churchesand other mainline Evangelical Churches, for thesake of our common witness in the Middle East. Andso we commit ourselves to “making every effort tomaintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond ofpeace ”.

ORE, 17 November 2010

INTERVENTION OF RABBI DAVID ROSEN

The Fifth General Congregation of the Synod hostedSpecial Guest Rabbi David Rosen, Advisor to the ChiefRabbinate of Israel, Director of the “Department forInterreligious Affairs of the American Jewish Committeeand Heilbrunn Institute for International InterreligiousUnderstanding. Here below is the text of his interven-tion delivered in the afternoon of October 13, 2010.

The relationship today between the CatholicChurch and the Jewish people is a blessed transfor-mation in our times — arguably without historic par-allel.

In his words in the great synagogue here in Romelast January, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVIreferred to the teaching of the Second Vatican Ecu-menical Council as “ a clear landmark to which con-stant reference is made in our attitude and our rela-

122

tions with the Jewish people, marking a new and sig-nificant stage ”.

Naturally this striking transformation in the waythe Jewish people is viewed and presented, still hadand has to contend with the influence of centuries, ifnot millenia, of the “ teaching of contempt ” towardsJews and Judaism, which obviously is not eliminatedovernight nor even over forty five years. Inevitably,the impact of this transformation in Catholic-Jewishrelations varies considerably from one context toanother, influenced by sociological, educational andeven political factors. Arguably the most dramaticinternalization has taken place in the United Statesof America where Jews and Christians live in an opensociety side by side as vibrant self-confident and civi-cally engaged minorities. As a result the relationshiphas advanced there to a unique degree involvingcooperation and exchanges between the communitiesand their educational institutions; and today the USboasts literally dozens of academic institutions forCatholic-Jewish studies and relations, while there areperhaps three in the rest of the world. Indeed there isa widespread perception among the Jewish commu-nities in the US of the Catholic Church as a genuinefriend with profound values and interests in com-mon. It is my privilege to head the internationalinterfaith representation of the American JewishCommittee, which has been and continues to be theleading Jewish organization in this remarkable andhistoric transformation.

However, there are many countries where suchsocial and demographic factors are not present. Inmost countries where Catholicism is the dominantsocial force, Jewish communities are small if presentat all, and the relationship between the Church andJudaism often gets little notice. I confess to havingbeen surprised to find Catholic clergy and sometimeseven hierarchy from some countries not only igno-rant about contemporary Judaism but often evenabout Nostra Aetate itself, the Vatican documents thatflowed from it and thus the relevant teachings of theMagisterium concerning Jews and Judaism.

While as indicated, Jewish experience in the UShas done much to alleviate negative impressions ofthe tragic past; there is still widespread ignoranceabout Christianity in the Jewish world — especiallywhere there is little or no contact at all with modernChristians.

In the only polity in the world where Jews are amajority, the State of Israel, this problem is furthercompounded by the political and sociological con-text. In the Middle East, as in most parts of theworld, communities tend to live in their own linguis-tic, cultural and confessional settings, and Israel is noexception. Moreover Christian Arabs in Israel are aminority within a minority — approximately 120,000among an Arab citizenry of around a million and ahalf which is overwhelmingly Muslim and whichconstitutes some twenty per cent of the Israeli citi-zenry as a whole (some seven and a half million.)

It is true that Christian Arab Israelis are a particu-larly successful religious minority in many respects.

Their socio-economic and educational standards arewell above average — their schools receive the high-est grades in annual matriculation examinations —many of them have been politically prominent andthey have been able to derive much benefit from thedemocratic system of which they are an integral part.However, the daily life of the vast majority of Arabsand Jews takes place in their own respective contexts.As a result, most Jewish Israelis do not meet contem-porary Christians; and even when they travel abroad,they tend to meet non-Jews as such, not as modernChristians. Accordingly, until recently most of Israelisociety has been quite unaware of the profoundchanges in Catholic-Jewish relations. However, thissituation has begun to alter significantly in the lastdecade for different reasons, but two in particular areespecially noteworthy.

The first is the impact of the visit of the latePope John Paul II in the year 2000, following theestablishment of full bilateral relations betweenIsrael and the Holy See six years earlier. While thelatter had already had some effect on perceptions inIsrael, it was the power of the visual images, the sig-nificance of which Pope John Paul II understood sowell, that revealed clearly to the majority of Israelisociety the transformation that had taken place inChristian attitudes and teaching towards the Jewishpeople with whom the Pope himself had maintainedand further sought mutual friendship and respect.For Israelis to see the Pope at the Western Wall, theremnant of the Second Temple, standing there inrespect for Jewish tradition and placing there thetext that he had composed for a liturgy of forgive-ness that had taken place two weeks earlier here atSt. Peter’s, asking Divine forgiveness for sins com-mitted against the Jews down the ages, was stun-ning and overwhelming in its effect. Israeli Jewrystill has a long way to go in overcoming the negativepast, but there is no question that attitudes havechanged since that historic visit. In addition it led tothe remarkable new avenue for dialogue, under-standing and collaboration in the form of the bilat-eral commission of the Chief Rabbinate of Israeland the Holy See’s Commission for Religious Rela-tions with the Jews, established at John Paul II’s ini-tiative and praised extensively by Pope BenedictXVI during his pilgrimage to the Holy Land lastyear and also in his words at the great synagoguehere in Rome earlier this year.

The other major factor is the influx of otherChristians who have doubled the demographic make-up of Christianity in Israel.

I refer first of all to the estimated approximatelyfifty thousand practicing Christians who were partand parcel of the immigration to Israel in the last twodecades from the former Soviet Union. As integrallyconnected at the same time to Jewish society throughfamilial and cultural ties, they arguably represent thefirst Christian minority that sees itself at the sametime as part and parcel of a Jewish majority since thevery first Christian community.

These Christians, as the Arab Christian communi-

123

ties, are Israeli citizens who enjoy full franchise andequality before the law. However, there is a third sig-nificant Christian population in Israel whose legalstanding is sometimes problematic.

These are the scores of thousands of practicingChristians among almost a quarter of a million ofmigrant workers — from the Philippines, EasternEurope, Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. Mostof them are in the country legally and temporarily.However, close to half of them have entered orremained illegally and their position is legally precar-ious.

Nevertheless the substantial Christian presenceamong this population maintains a vibrant religiouslife and constitutes a significant third dimension tothe Christian reality in Israel today.

These factors have contributed, among others, toan increasing familiarity in Israel with contempo-rary Christianity. In addition, while there are anestimated two hundred or so Israeli organizationspromoting Arab-Jewish understanding and coopera-tion generally, there are also literally dozens of bod-ies promoting interreligious encounter, dialogueand studies, and the Christian presence in these isdisproportionate and highly significant. This ofcourse is substantially due to the presence of Christ-ian institutions and their clergy, scholars, interna-tional representatives of churches and so on, whocontribute totally out of proportion to their num-bers to these efforts especially in the field of schol-arship. Moreover the fact that in the State of Israel,Christians, as Muslims, are minorities with a needto be accepted and understood by the Jewish major-ity also serves as impetus for interfaith engagement(as opposed to elsewhere where the contrary mayoften be the case).

Christians in Israel are obviously in a very differ-ent situation from their sister communities in theHoly Land who are part and parcel of a Palestiniansociety struggling for its independence and who areinevitably caught up in the Israeli-Palestinian conflicton a daily basis. Indeed the location of some of thesecommunities on the intersection between Israeli andPalestinian jurisdiction means that they often bearthe brunt of security measures which the JewishState feels obliged to maintain in order to protect itsown citizenry against continuous violence fromwithin the Palestinian territories. It is only right andproper that such Palestinian Christians shouldexpress their distress and their hopes regarding thesituation. However it is notable and regrettable thatsuch expressions have not always been in conso-nance with the letter and spirit of the Magisteriumconcerning the relationship to Jews and Judaism.This would seem to be reflected in a wider geographi-cal context, where the impact of the Arab-Israeli con-flict has all too often meant a discomfort for manyChristians with the Church’s rediscovery of its Jewishroots and sometimes a preference for historical prej-udice.

Nevertheless the plight of Palestinians generallyand Palestinian Christians in particular should be of

profound concern to Jews both in Israel and theDiaspora.

To begin with, especially as Judaism brought therecognition to the world that every human person iscreated in the Divine Image; and that accordingly, asthe sages of the Talmud teach, any action of disre-spect for another person, is an act of disrespect forthe Creator himself; we have a special responsibilityin particular for neighbors who suffer. This responsi-bility is even greater when suffering is born out of aconflict of which we are a part and paradoxically pre-cisely where we have the moral and religious duty toprotect and defend ourselves.

For me personally as an Israeli Jerusalemite, thedistressing situation in the Holy Land and the suffer-ing of so many on the different sides of the politicaldivide, is a source of much pain; even as I fully real-ize that it is used and abused to heighten various ten-sions that go well beyond the geographical context ofthe conflict itself.

Yet I give thanks to God for the remarkableamount of organizations in our society working toalleviate as much suffering as possible in this verydifficult context.

I am proud to be a founder of one of these organi-zations, Rabbis for Human Rights, whose directorand members, precisely as loyal Israeli citizens, con-tinue to struggle to preserve and advance the humandignity of all and especially of the vulnerable. I am ofcourse fully conscious of the carnage of the recentpast in the streets of our cities and the ongoingthreats of the present from those openly committedto the destruction and extermination of Israel.Notwithstanding, we must strive to do all we can toalleviate the hardships of the situation and especiallyas they pertain to the Christian communities inJerusalem and environs.

In fact, in recent months there has been a notableimprovement in conditions, for example, regardingthe free movement of clergy, and there have also beenrecent indications that there is a growing under-standing of the needs of the local Christian commu-nities by the authorities, notwithstanding the securitychallenges. We continue to advocate for such, believ-ing it to be ultimately in the interests of all.

Indeed, Jewish responsibility to ensure that Chris-tian communities flourish in our midst, respectingthe very fact that the Holy Land is the land of Chris-tianity’s birth and holy places, is strengthened by ourincreasingly rediscovered fraternity.

Yet even beyond our particular relationship,Christians as a minority in both Jewish and Muslimcontexts play a very special role for our societies atlarge. The situation of minorities is always a pro-found reflection of the social and moral condition ofa society as a whole. The wellbeing of Christian com-munities in the Middle East is nothing less than akind of barometer of the moral condition of ourcountries. The degree to which Christians enjoy civiland religious rights and liberties testifies to thehealth or infirmity of the respective societies in theMiddle East.

124

Moreover, as I have already indicated, Christiansplay a disproportionate role in promoting interreli-gious understanding and cooperation in the country.Indeed I would presume to suggest that this is pre-cisely the Christian métier, to contribute to overcom-ing the prejudice and misunderstanding that bedevilthe Holy Land and which of course are greatly rein-forced in the region at large. While it is not fair toexpect the small local Christian communities to becapable of bearing such responsibility alone, perhapswe may hope that supported in this by their universalChurch and its central authority, they may indeed beblessed peacemakers in the city whose name meanspeace and which has such significance for our com-munities. Already some initial sign of this has beenevident in the local Catholic leadership role in theestablishment in recent years of the Council of theReligious Institutions of the Holy Land, which bringstogether the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, the ShaariaCourts and Ministry of Religious Affairs of the Pales-tinian Authority, and the official Christian leadershipin the Holy Land. This Council not only facilitatescommunication between the various religiousauthorities, but it is also committed and working tocombat misunderstanding, bigotry and incitement,and also seeks to be a force for reconciliation andpeace so that two nations and three religions maylive in the land in full dignity, freedom and tranquil-lity.

The Instrumentum Laboris of this SpecialAssembly for the Middle East quotes Pope BenedictXVI in his interview with L’Osservatore Romano onhis way to the Holy Land as follows: “ it is importanton the one hand to have bilateral dialogues — withthe Jews and with Islam — and then also trilateraldialogue ” (sect. 96). Indeed this last year, for thefirst time, the Pontifical Council for InterreligiousRelations and the Pontifical Commission for Reli-gious Relations with the Jews co-hosted togetherwith the International Jewish Committee for Inter-religious Consultations (IJCIC) and the foundationfor the Three Cultures in Seville Spain, our first tri-lateral dialogue.

This was a particular joy for me as the proposalfor this was put forward during my chairmanship ofIJCIC and I earnestly hope that this is just the begin-ning of more extensive trilateral dialogue, to over-come suspicion, prejudice and misunderstanding, sothat we may be able to highlight the shared values inthe family of Abraham for the well-being of allhumanity.

It appears to me that the aforementioned bilateralcommission with the Chief Rabbinate of Israel andthe Council of the Religious Institutions of the HolyLand together offer even greater opportunity andchallenge in this regard.

The Instrumentum Laboris also provides impor-tant insights into the nature of relations for Chris-tians with both Muslims and Jews. It quotes PopeBenedict XVI’s words in Cologne in August 2005when he described relations with Islam as “ a vitalnecessity… on which in large measure our future

depends ” (sect. 95). Indeed in the Middle East this isa truism. Whether one understands the concept ofdar el Islam in just a geographical/cultural context orin a theological one, the critical question for thefuture of our respective communities is whether ornot our Muslim brethren can see the Christian andJewish presence as a fully legitimate and integral partof the region as a whole. Truly the need to addressthis issue is nothing less than “ a vital necessity… onwhich… our future depends ”.

Indeed this relates to the very issue that is at the“ root ” of the Israeli-Arab conflict. Those who claimthat “ occupation ” is the “ root cause ” of conflict areat best disingenuous.

This conflict had been going on for decades longbefore the Six Day War in 1967 as a result of whichthe West Bank and Gaza came under Israeli control.“Occupation ” in fact is precisely a consequence ofthe conflict, the real “ root issue ” of which is pre-cisely whether the Arab world can tolerate a non-Arab sovereign polity within its midst.

However, the Instrumentum Laboris commentingon Dei Verbum describes the dialogue of the Church“with her elder brothers ” as not just necessary, butas “ essential ” (sect. 87). Indeed in his visit to thegreat synagogue in this city this year, Pope BenedictXVI quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church(sect. 839).

“ It is in pondering her own mystery that theChurch, the People of God of the New Covenant, dis-covers her own profound bond with the Jews, whowere chosen by the Lord before all others to receiveHis word ”, and added that “ the Jewish faith, unlikeother non-Christian religions, is already a response toGod’s revelation ”.

These words echo those of the late Pope JohnPaul II who in his historic visit to the same centralJewish place of worship in this city in 1986 declaredthat “ the Jewish religion is not extrinsic to us but ina certain way is intrinsic to our own religion. WithJudaism therefore we have a relationship which wedo not have with any other religion ”. Furthermore inhis Apostolic Exhortation of June 28th 2003 hedescribed “ dialogue and cooperation with believersof the Jewish religion ” as being “ fundamentallyimportant for the self-knowledge of Christians ” inkeeping with the Synod’s call “ for acknowledgmentof the common roots linking Christianity and theJewish people, who are called by God to a covenantwhich remains irrevocable ”.

As I have noted, the political realities in the Mid-dle East do not always make it easy for Christians inthe region to acknowledge, let alone embrace, theseexhortations. However I pray that the miracle ofwhat John Paul II referred to as “ the flowering of anew springtime in mutual relations ” will increasinglybecome evident in the Middle East as throughout theworld.

To this end let us dedicate ourselves ever moredevotedly both through prayer and in work for peaceand dignity for all. Let us pray in the words of PopeJohn Paul II at the Western Wall in Jerusalem with

125

which Pope Benedict XVI concluded his presentationat the Rome great synagogue. “ Send Your peaceupon the Holy Land, upon the Middle East, upon theentire human family; stir the hearts of those who callupon Your Name, to walk humbly in the path of jus-tice and compassion ”.

And allow me, as one who comes to you from thecity that is holy and beloved to us all, to conclude withthe words of the Psalmist “May the Lord bless youfrom Zion and may you see the good of Jerusalem allthe days of your life ” (Psalm 128:5).

ORE, 3 November 2010

126

DISCOURSE OF CARDINAL WALTER KASPER,PRESIDENT EMERITUS OF THE PONTIFICAL COUNCILFOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY

Reverend Bishop Mark HansonDear Ishmael Noko!Dear friends!

It is with great joy and with all my heart that Iexpress the most cordial greetings of the CatholicChurch, of Pope Benedict XVI, of the Catholic Dele-gation here present, and of myself personally to thisXIth General Assembly of the Lutheran World Federa-tion. Peace and joy be with you all!

You are assembled here in Stuttgart, which is thecity of the Bible and the place of important world-wide Biblical associations; here in Stuttgart wheretoday Catholics and Protestants are represented inmore or less equal numbers and where they –together with members of all the other churches –are in excellent ecumenical relations, where they live,work and pray together; here in Stuttgart in one ofthe German cities with the highest percentage of peo-ple of immigrants, a city therefore with a vast cul-tural plurality; and not the least you are here inStuttgart in my own homeland and my own homediocese. You are very welcome!

Addressing you today after eleven years as Presi-dent of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christ-ian Unity, I reflect with great emotion and deep grati-tude when I look back on these years of such richand enriching cooperation with the Lutheran WorldFederation. These were years in which I found somany friends among you. Thank you for this! Thankyou Bishop Mark Hanson! Thank you Ishmael Noko!You have been good friends.

We started in 1999 in Augsburg with the signing ofthe Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification,which remains for me and for the Catholic Church amilestone of the ecumenical movement. Many othershared endeavors have marked our friendship over

127

the years, up to my participation in the last GeneralAssembly in Winnipeg. In the last year together withmy co-workers I published a booklet Harvesting theFruits, and I was more than surprised to see that hasbeen such a rich harvest and that we have achievedmuch more than we could even dream before. Therehas been no ecumenical winter!

Lutheran-Catholic relations have been since thebeginning of our international dialogue in the year1967 — some of you may not even have been born atthat time — in my heart and they will remain inmy heart. Because I am convinced the ecumenicalmovement is God’s own movement. We are only sim-ple instruments in his hands in order to bring ustogether and to reconcile us. Our Lord himselfprayed on the eve of his death, that all may be one(Jn 17:21). Today more than 40 years since the startof our international dialogues these dialogues are stillan unfinished agenda. We have every reason to con-tinue and even to intensify and to deepen our dia-logues.

The motto of your General Assembly — Give usour daily bread! — gives strong expression to thisurgency. There are millions of people in the worldwho are not as well-off as the overwhelming majorityhere in Stuttgart, millions who do not have theirdaily bread and all that it implies, millions who donot have access to pure water, who don’t have shel-ter, who don’t have access to work, who do not live insituations of freedom, justice and peace.

There are also millions who are lacking the dailybread of spiritual orientation for their life, who donot have the daily bread of faith and for whom hopeis in short supply.

These millions are our brothers and sisters and inthis situation we as Christians — regardless ofwhether we are Lutherans or Catholics — we share acommon responsibility. In this situation we can nolonger afford our differences.

Yet, we cannot and we must not jump over seri-ous different convictions. We have to continue our

XITH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION

Stuttgart, 22-27 July 2010

Delegates from 145 different national churches gathering more than 70 million members worldwide, electedPalestinian Bishop Munib A. Younan of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land, new Presi-dent of the Lutheran World Federation (LWF). The members of the LWF’s Council who will be entrusted with theFederation’s work until the next General Assembly were also designated.

A moving reconciliation ceremony took place in Stuttgart between Lutherans and Mennonites. This initiative,promoted by the Lutheran-Mennonite dialogue, will be carried on in the future on a tri-lateral level with the partici-pation of the Catholic Church.

Cardinal Walter Kasper represented the Holy See on this occasion. We publish here below the discourse headdressed to the Assembly.

128

dialogues in truth and in love. But at the same timewe should reflect on how we could give more com-mon witness of the faith we share, a faith — as SaintPaul tells us — expressing itself through love (Gal5:6). We have to speak the truth in love (Eph 4:15).Again, our dialogues must continue, but at the sametime we have to reflect on how to engage more incommon cultural, social, environmental projects, andhere in Western Europe unfortunately how to defend

and how to promote our common Christian rootsand our common Christian heritage.

Dear friends, I leave my office, but I do notleave you and I do not leave our common ecumeni-cal commitment. So I am not here to say goodbye. In our German language we say “ Auf Wiederse-hen ”, au revoir, arrivederci, hasta la vista! So not“ good bye ” but “ farewell ”. All the best, and Godbless you all!

SECOND PLENARY MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONALLUTHERAN ROMAN-CATHOLIC COMMISSION ON UNITY

Regensburg, Germany, 22-29 October 2010

1. PARTICIPANTS

Co-chair Bishop em. Eero Huovinen, Rev. Dr.Wanda Deifelt, Dr. Sandra Gintere, Prof. Dr. TuridKarlsen Seim, Prof. Dr. Ronald F. Thiemann, Prof.Dr. Hiroshi Augustine Suzuki, Prof. Dr. TheodorDieter and Co-secretary Prof. Dr. Kathryn Johnsonparticipated on the Lutheran side. Prof. Dr.Friederike Nüssel and Rev. Dr. Fidon R. Mwombekiapologised for their absence.

Co-chair Bishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Rev.Prof. Angelo Maffeis, Prof. Sr. Susan K. Wood, SCL,Prof. Frt. Michel Fédou, SJ, Dr. Christian Washburn,Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Thönissen and Msgr. Dr. MatthiasTürk as Co-secretary participated on the Catholicside. Prof. Dr. Thomas Söding and Prof. Dr. Eva-Maria Faber apologised for their absence.

Due to his nomination as President of the Pontifi-cal Council for Promoting Christian Unity in June2010, Archbishop Kurt Koch, nominated Cardinal,will be unable to continue his membership in theCommission. Nevertheless, he participated from 27to 29 October 2010 in the consultations.

Due to his personal conversion to the RomanCatholic Church during the first half of 2010, Prof.Dr. Michael Root also will not continue his member-ship in the Commission. Instead, for the North Amer-ican region, Prof. Thiemann was welcomed in thismeeting.

2. SUMMARY OF THE MEETING

During its Plenary meeting held last October inRegensburg at the invitation of its Catholic co-Presi-dent, H.E. Msgr. Gerhard-Ludwig Müller, the Inter-national Lutheran Roman-Catholic Commission onUnity carried on its work aimed at drafting a com-mon position on the 2017 Reform Year, focused on thequestion of what can be considered today a properevaluation of the Reformation from the ecumenicalpoint of view. For the first time in 500 years, bothLutherans and Catholics wish to commemoratetogether the Reform anniversary. The Lutheran co-President of the Commission, Bishop Eero Huovinen,spoke of a “ revolutionary step ”. This will not be a“ triumphalist celebration ”, but a common commem-oration, he affirmed.

The basic question lies in understanding how dothe Ecclesial Communities which arose from theReform perceive the Reformation nowadays. In viewof the 2017 anniversary, it should be made clear

129

whether these Communities still consider the Refor-mation a break with Tradition, the beginning ofsomething totally new, or whether they regard it asthe reformers themselves did, that is, not a will tocreate a new Church but a renewal of the Church. Inthis sense, the rise of new Churches, as is oftenaffirmed by Lutheran theologians, demonstratesrather the failure of the Reform than its success.Therefore, it is within the ecumenical movement thatthe real Reform might be realized. This is why theReform anniversary could be commemorated ecu-menically and could therefore offer a strong witnessto the common legacy which has matured betweenLutherans and Catholics.

The International Commission of dialogue is alsopreparing another document on the theme of “Bap-tism and the growing ecclesial communion ”.

JOINT INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR DIALOGUEBETWEEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE MALANKARA(JACOBITE) SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

Kottayam, India, 7 December 2010

The Joint International Commission for Dia-logue between the Catholic Church and theMalankara Syrian Orthodox Church held its meet-ing at the Spirituality Centre, Manganam, Kottayamon Tuesday 7th December 2010. The meeting beganat 10:00 a.m. with prayer led by His Grace, JosephMor Gregorios. Archbishop Mar Joseph Powathilwelcomed the members on behalf of the Catholicrepresentatives. He recalled that this year is veryimportant for both Churches since it is the twenti-eth anniversary of the meeting of the dialogue com-mission, the 50th anniversary of the Pontifical Coun-cil for Promoting Christian Unity and the 25th

anniversary of the visit of the Holy Father, PopeJohn Paul II to Kerala and the visit to CatholicosBaselios Paulose that initiated the present dialogue.His Grace Kuriakose Mor Theophilose, Co-Chair-man of the Joint Commission, welcomed the dele-gates on behalf of the Catholicos of the JacobiteChurch. “ The theological dialogue between theCatholic Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churchmust not diminish the importance of the bilateraldialogue here ” he affirmed. “Otherwise we are lim-iting the very scope of the dialogue here and ourrelationship ”, he added. Bishop Brian Farrell, Sec-retary of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Chris-tian Unity and Co-Chairman of the Joint Interna-tional Commission expressed his satisfaction aboutthe dialogue and hoped the meeting would be fruit-ful by the grace of God our Lord. He also gave abrief description on the origin of the Pontifical

ECUMENICAL NEWS

Council for Promoting Christian Unity and of therole the Council plays in dialogue with the otherChurches and ecclesial communities.

The Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church was rep-resented by: His Grace Kuriakose Mor Theophilos(Co-Chairman), His Grace Joseph Mor Gregorios, HisGrace Kuriakose Mor Eusebius, Rev. Dr. Addai JacobCor Episcopa ((co-secretary), Rev. Dr. KuriakoseMoolayil Cor Episcopa and Rev. Fr. Gregor Kollan-nur. The Catholic Church was represented by HisExcellency Bishop Brian Farrell (Co-Chairman), HisGrace Mar Joseph Powathil, His Grace Mar MathewMoolakatt, His Grace Mar Thomas Mar Koorilos, HisExcellency Most Rev. Selvister Ponnumuthan, Rev.Dr. Mathew Vellanickal, Rev. Dr. Xavier Kooda-puzha, Rev. Dr. Jacob Thekkeparampil, Rev. Dr.Philip Nelpuraparampil and Rev. Fr. Gabriel Quicke(co-secretary).

Rev. Dr. Philip Nelpuraparampil presented thereport of the last meeting in 2009 and the commis-sion approved it.

The first topic for discussion was the possibilityof sharing of sacred places such as Church buildingsand cemeteries. The subcommittee appointed by theJoint Commission to study the question had pre-pared a draft paper on it and sent it to the KeralaCatholic Bishops’ Council (KCBC) and the Synod ofthe Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church. Both theKCBC and the Synod approved the text with littlemodification. The commission also approved theagreement (after a detailed discussion and clarifica-tions), which will be sent to the bishops of bothChurches and will be published in the official bul-letins of the Churches.

Secondly, the Joint Statement made by theCatholic Church and the Malankara Syrian OrthodoxChurch on Episcopacy and Petrine ministry was pre-sented during the meeting. Rev. Dr. Addai Jacob CorEpiscopa introduced the statement and the meetingapproved it for publication as the result of our ongo-ing dialogue. The document will also be publishedby the Pontifical Council for Promoting ChristianUnity in Information Service. The Joint Commissionrequested Rev. Dr. Addai Jacob and Rev. Dr. PhilipNelpuraparampil to translate the document intoMalayalam and to publish it in the official bulletinsof both Churches.

Thirdly, as decided in the Joint Commission of2009, the agreement between the Churches on Inter-Church marriages and the pastoral guidelines of bothChurches along with the other agreements reachedby the Catholic Church and the Jacobite SyrianChurch have been published in Malayalam. TheJoint Commission decided to send the copies of itwith a covering letter to the bishops. The Joint Com-mission observed that the booklet will be helpful forthe wider reception of the agreements reached so far.The Joint Commission also considered further guide-lines proposed by the subcommittee. The proposalswill be considered at the next meeting.

Fourthly, the emergence of Pentecostal groups inthe Churches was discussed. Bishop Brian Farrellpresented the history and the development of the

130

Pentecostal movements and their significance for theecumenical dialogue. A subcommittee with Metro-politan Thomas Mor Koorilos as coordinator andMetropolitan Thomas Mor Themotheos, Rev. Fr.Shibu Cherian and Rev. Dr. Jacob Thekkeparampil asmembers will study the question and present a paperin the next Joint Commission Meeting.

Finally, the Joint Commission decided to publishthe theological papers discussed so far in our dia-logue and the agreements reached in the form of abook. Rev. Dr. Addai Jacob Cor Episcopa wasappointed as the Chairman of the subcommitteeresponsible for publishing the documents, with Rev.Dr. Philip Nelpuraparampil and Rev. Fr. Gregor Kol-lannur as members.

The next meeting of the Joint Commission will beheld on Tuesday 6th December 2011 at the PatriarchalCentre at Puthencruz.

The following major issues will be on the agenda:

1. The reception of the agreement on sharing ofsacred places such as church buildings and cemeter-ies, and the agreement on Inter-Church Marriagesand the Pastoral Guidelines.

2. The emergence of Pentecostal groups in theChurches.

3. A catechism on ecumenism. The Joint Com-mission decided to prepare a catechism on ecu-menism in the form of a booklet outlining differentissues: an introduction to each church, the histori-cal background, the history of ecumenism, the out-come of the ecumenical dialogue and the agree-ments between the Churches. Mar MathewMoolakatt will be the Chairman of the subcommit-tee and His Grace Kuriakose Mor Eusebius, Rev.Dr. Kuriakose Moolayil Cor Episcopa, Rev. Dr.Xavier Koodapuzha, Rev. Dr. Augustine Kadayi-parampil, and Rev. Dr. Cherian Karukaparampilwill be the members.

We publish here below the text of the “Agreementbetween the Catholic Church and the Malankara Syr-ian Orthodox Church on Sharing of Sacred Places ”and the Joint Statement made by the RomanCatholic and Syrian Orthodox Churches regardingEpiscopacy and Petrine Ministry.

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCHAND THE MALANKARA SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH(JACOBITE SYRIAN CHRISTIAN CHURCH) ON SHARINGOF SACRED PLACES

This agreement between the Catholic Church andthe Malankara Syrian Orthodox Church (JacobiteSyrian Christian Church) on the Sharing of SacredPlaces has been prepared taking into account thecommon profession of faith on the mystery of theIncarnate Word and the common affirmation of thefaith in the mystery of the Church and the Sacra-ments. Besides, the possibility given by the declara-tion for a pastoral collaboration including the mutualadmission of the faithful belonging to both theChurches to the reception of the sacraments ofPenance, Eucharist and Anointing of the Sick for a

grave spiritual need and the agreement on MixedMarriage have also been taken into account.

Churches are consecrated buildings which havean important theological and liturgical significancefor both the Catholic Church and the Malankara Syr-ian Orthodox Church. However, if one of these twoChurches do not have a place or the liturgical objectsnecessary for celebrating worthily the Eucharisticliturgy, the diocesan bishop of the other Church mayallow them the use of a church building of theirChurch and also lend them what may be necessaryfor their services. Under similar circumstances per-mission may be given on sharing of the cemeteries.

The Joint International Commission for Dialoguebetween the Catholic Church and the Malankara Syr-ian Orthodox Church proposes the following asguidelines for the sharing of church buildings andcemeteries.

Agreement between the parishes

1. Where a community of the Catholic/Malan-kara Syrian Orthodox Christian of a particular placedoes not have a place for celebrating the Eucharisticliturgy or cemetery for Christian burial, the parishpriest of that community may request the diocesanbishop of the Church who owns such a place withthe recommendation letter of their diocesan bishop.

1.1 Having made the necessary consultation withthe parish priest and considering the local situation,the bishop may give the written permission indicat-ing that this permission does not give any claim onthe land.

2. While giving permission for sharing of thecemetery the following conditions have to beincluded.

2.1 Minister of the funeral must be the ministerof the person concerned. But when the minister ofone’s own Church is not available, the minister of theother Church is entitled to officiate the ceremony. Hehas to do it using liturgical text and liturgical vest-ments of his Church.

2.2 Post funeral prayers in the cemetery shall beallowed without causing inconvenience to the parishto which the cemetery belongs.

2.3 The formalities regarding the funeral anderection of the tomb stone, cross etc. at the burialplace must be according to the norms of the parishcommunity to whom the cemetery belongs.

JOINT STATEMENT MADE BY THE ROMAN CATHOLIC ANDSYRIAN ORTHODOX (UNDER THE HOLY SEE OF ANTIOCH)CHURCHES REGARDING EPISCOPACY AND PETRINE MINISTRY

15-10-2002

1. Both the Churches agree that the bishops aresuccessors of the 12 apostles of Jesus Christ by virtueof their ordination in the apostolic succession.

2. The bishops are the symbol of unity in thelocal Church and of communion with the universalChurch.

131

3. When a bishop celebrates the Holy Eucharistin communion with all other bishops and his pri-mate, then and there, the one holy catholic and apos-tolic Church is manifested. There is a reciprocal rela-tion between local Church and universal Church inspecific time and space, and the universal churchbeing the communion of local churches.

Full communion of churches presupposes mainlythe unity in faith, sacraments and hierarchical min-istry.

4. According to Scripture and Tradition Jesusentrusted Peter with a special ministry. Giving himthe name Kepha (Rock), Jesus made him the head,the representative, and the spokesman of the twelveapostles. Peter and his successors are endowed withthe ministry of unity in the universal level. In theCatholic Church this ministry of unity is exercised bythe Bishop of Rome and in the Syrian OrthodoxChurch by the Patriarch of Antioch.

According to Syrian Orthodox Church the Patri-arch of Antioch, as successor of Peter, is the visiblesymbol of unity and he represents the universal Syr-ian Orthodox Church.

The Petrine ministry is exercised by the Patriarchof Antioch only in consultation with the Holy Episco-pal Synod of the Church.

According to the Catholic tradition, the Bishop ofRome (Pope) is the successor of Peter and has beenentrusted with the Petrine ministry of unity in thewhole Church.

5. The exercise of this ministry of unity wasdetermined by many contingent historical factorsduring the course of centuries. The challenge today isto rediscover the very essence of the ministry of unityand to exercise it in response to the mission of theChurch and the needs of our times.

6. In the beginning of this third millennium ourChurches face the crucial responsibility of continuingand fulfilling the great ministry of Jesus Christ in thisworld, through rediscovering the original and realessence of episcopacy and primacy. The model ofleadership that Jesus taught is summarised in love,self sacrifice and service. The model for bishops andprimates is none other than Jesus Christ himself, theGood Shepherd sent by God.

7. Since in the case of the faith of our twoChurches there is little difference and is almost thesame, the time has come to seek practical ways andmeans to materialise unity aiming at full communionbetween the two churches, which we all ardentlydesire.

MEMBERS PRESENT IN THE DIALOGUE

From Catholic Church

1. His Grace Mor Joseph Powathil

2. Most Rev. Dr. Marc Ollet

3. Bishop Mar Mathew Moolekkattu

4. Bishop Joshua Mar Ignatius

5. Very. Rev. Msgr. Johan Bonny

6. Very Rev. Dr. Xavier Koodapuzha

7. Rev. Dr. Geevarghese Chediath

8. Rev. Dr. Francis Pereparamil O.C.D

From Jacobit Syrian Orthodox Church

1. H.G. Joseph Mar Gregoriose Metropolitan

2. H.G. Markose Mar Koorilose Metropolitan

3. Very. Rev. Dr. Adai Jacob Corepiscopa

4. Rev. Fr. Shibu Chenan

5. Rev. Fr. Daniel Thattarayil

6. Rev. Fr. James C.S.

7. Rev. Dr. Mani Rajan

8. Rev. Dn. Dr. Saji K. V.

9. Rev. Dn. Thomas Abraham

JOINT INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION FOR DIALOGUEBETWEEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE MALANKARAORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH

Kottayam, India 8-9 December 2010

The Joint International Commission for Dialoguebetween the Catholic Church and the MalankaraOrthodox Syrian Church was held at the SpiritualityCentre, Manganam, Kottayam on Wednesday andThursday 8th and 9th December 2010. The meetingbegan at 10:00 a.m. with prayer led by Rev. Dr. JacobThekkeparampil. Archbishop Mar Joseph Powathilwelcomed the members on behalf of the Catholicrepresentatives. He recalled that this year is veryimportant for both Churches since it is the twentiethanniversary of the meeting of the dialogue commis-sion, the 50th anniversary of the foundation of thePontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity andthe 25th anniversary of the visit of the Holy Father,Pope John Paul II to Kerala and the visit to Catholi-cos Baselios Mar Thoma Mathews I that initiated thepresent dialogue. Dr. Gabriel Mor Gregorios, the Co-Chairman of the Joint International Commission,also welcomed the members and reflected on theimportance of this meeting. “ The official dialoguebetween the Catholic Church and the Oriental Ortho-dox Churches must not diminish the importance ofthis bilateral dialogue that has produced manyresults. The common heritage of these Churches is astrong foundation on which to build up good rela-tionships between both Churches. Respect for theidentity of the Church will bring us closer ”, heexplained.

Bishop Brian Farrell, Secretary of the PontificalCouncil for Promoting Christian Unity, and Co-Chair-man of the Joint International Commission,expressed his satisfaction in the dialogue and hopedthat the meeting would be fruitful by the grace ofGod our Lord. He also gave a brief description of theorigin of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christ-ian Unity and of the role the Council plays in dia-

132

logue with the other Churches and ecclesial commu-nities.

The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church was rep-resented by His Grace Gabriel Mor Gregorios (Co-Chairman), Rev. Dr. Johns Abraham Konatt, Rev. Dr.Baby Varghese, Rev. Dr. Jose John, Rev. Dr. T. I.Varghese, Rev. Dr. O Thomas, Rev. Dr. Regi Mathewand Rev. Fr. Abraham Thomas (co-secretary). TheCatholic Church was represented by His Excellency,Bishop Brian Farrell (Co-Chairman), His Grace MarJoseph Powathil, His Grace Mar Mathew Moolakatt,His Grace Mar Thomas Mar Koorilos, His ExcellencyBishop Selvister Ponnumuthen, Rev. Dr. Mathew Vel-lanickal, Rev. Dr. Xavier Koodapuzha, Rev. Dr. JacobThekkeparampil, Rev. Dr. Philip Nelpuraparampiland Rev. Fr. Gabriel Quicke (co-secretary).

Rev. Dr. Philip Nelpuraparampil presented thereport of the meeting in 2009 and the commissionapproved it with a minor addition.

The first topic for discussion was the possibilityof sharing sacred places such as Church buildingsand cemeteries. The subcommittee appointed by theJoint Commission to study the question prepared adraft paper on this theme and sent it to the KeralaCatholic Bishops’ Council (KCBC) and the Synod ofthe Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. Both theKCBC and the Synod approved it with some modifi-cation. Two papers with similar proposals were pre-sented in the meeting, one from Rev. Fr. AbrahamThomas and the other Rev. Fr. Philip Nelpura-parampil. The meeting approved the agreementderiving from a combination of both proposals (afterdetailed discussion and clarifications). The agree-ment will be sent to the bishops of both Churchesand will be published in the official bulletins of theChurches.

The proposed draft statement on Inter ChurchMarriages was again taken up for discussion. It hadbeen presented in both the KCBC and the Synod ofthe Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church and hadbeen sent back for further clarifications. Consideringthe ecclesial bond between the two Churches, thestatement was again discussed in this meeting. Modi-fications were proposed and introduced into a newform of agreement that will be presented to theSynod of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Churchand to the KCBC.

A paper on “ Primacy and Conciliarity in Dia-logue ” was presented by Rev. Fr. Abraham Thomas.After discussing the question in detail, it was pro-posed that the text be submitted to a deeper liturgicaland patristic study in the next meeting. The pro-posed statement on the sharing of the Sacrament ofthe Anointing of the Sick in a grave emergency situa-tion, especially in hospitals and homes for the aged,was also presented and was approved by the JointInternational Commission. This agreement will bepresented to the KCBC and the Synod of theMalankara Orthodox Syrian Church.

The agreement on the sharing of sacred placessuch as Church buildings and cemeteries was signedby both co-chairmen. As well, the proposed agree-ment on the sharing of the Sacrament of the Anoint-

ing of the Sick and the Joint Statement on InterChurch Marriages were also signed by both Chair-men. These two proposed agreements will be sentfor the approval of the KCBC and also of the Synodof the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church.

A meeting of the available members of the JointInternational Commission will be held on Tuesday 5th

July 2011 at St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Insti-tute (SEERI), Kottayam, to evaluate the develop-ments in the dialogue.

The next meeting will be held in Sophia Centre on7th and 8th December 2011.

The following major issues will be on the agenda:

1. The reception of the agreement on sharing ofsacred places such as church buildings and cemeter-ies, and on the sharing of the Sacrament of theAnointing of the Sick.

2. Monastic spirituality in India, by FatherXavier Koodapuzha.

3. Rev. Dr. Baby Varghese and Rev. Dr. PaulyManiattu will present papers on ‘The Place of St.Peter in the Liturgical Texts’.

4. Rev. Dr. Jacob Thekkeparampil will present apaper on ‘Simon in St. Ephraem and Jacob of Sarug’.

We publish here after the text of the proposed“Agreement on the Sharing of Sacred Places ”.

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCHAND THE MALANKARA ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCHON THE SHARING OF SACRED PLACES

This agreement between the Catholic Church andthe Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church on the Shar-ing of Sacred Places has been prepared taking intoaccount the common profession of faith on the mys-tery of the Incarnate Word and the development inthe understanding of the common faith in the mys-tery of the Church and the sacraments.

Churches are consecrated buildings which havean important theological and liturgical significancefor both the Catholic Church and the MalankaraOrthodox Syrian Church. However, if one of thesetwo Churches does not have a place or the liturgicalobjects necessary for celebrating worthily theEucharistic Liturgy, the diocesan bishop of the otherChurch may permit them the use of a church build-ing of their own and also lend them what may benecessary for their services. Under similar circum-stances, permission may be given for the sharing ofthe cemeteries, which are also sacred places.

The Joint International Commission for Dialoguebetween the Catholic Church and the MalankaraOrthodox Syrian Church proposes the following asguidelines for the sharing of the church buildingsand cemeteries.

1. Where a community of the Catholic/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Christians of a particu-lar place does not have a place for liturgical celebra-tions or cemetery for Christian burial, the parish

133

priest of that community may request the use of suchplaces from the Diocesan Bishop of the Church whoowns such a place with the recommendation letter ofhis own diocesan bishop.

2. Having made the necessary consultation withthe parish priest and considering the local situation,the bishop may give the written permission indicat-ing that this permission does not give any claim onthe land.

3. On the approval by the bishop, the local ParishCouncil/ Managing Committee has to prepare the rel-evant ‘terms and conditions’ considering all localimpediments.

4. The ‘terms and conditions’ have to get its priorapproval from the concerned bishops on either sidebefore being signed as an agreement.

5. Since the issues related to burial could be sen-sitive, professional legal advice may be taken whilepreparing the necessary ‘terms and conditions’.

6. The minister of the funeral must be the minis-ter of the Church of the deceased person. When theminister of his/her own Church is not available, theminister of the other Church is entitled to officiatethe ceremony. The celebrant has to follow the liturgi-cal rites of his Church.

7. Post-funeral prayers in the cemetery shall bedone without causing inconvenience to the parish towhich the cemetery belongs.

8. The formalities regarding the funeral and theerection of the tomb stone, cross etc. at the burialplace must be in accordance with the norms of theparish community to whom the cemetery belongs.

9. In the event of both the Churches lacking aburial site, both Churches could approach the localauthorities for permission to secure a common ceme-tery.

On behalf of the Joint International Commissionfor Dialogue between the Catholic Church and theMalankara Orthodox Syrian Church

Signed by

His Excellency His GRACERt. Rev. BRIAN FARELL Dr. GABRIEL Mar GREGORIOS

Co-Chairman Co-Chairman

9 December 2010

THEOLOGICAL CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE BAPTISTWORLD ALLIANCE AND THE PONTIFICAL COUNCILFOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN UNITY

Oxford, England, 12-18 December 2010

The final round in the second series of theologicalconversations between the Baptist World Alliance(BWA) and the Pontifical Council for PromotingChristian Unity (PCPCU) of the Catholic Church tookplace December 12-18-2010 in Oxford, England. The

134

co-hosts were two Permanent Private Halls of theUniversity of Oxford: Regent’s Park College (Baptist)and St. Benet’s Hall (Benedictine).

A first phase of international conversations hadtaken place in 1984-1988, resulting in a report in1990 entitled “ Summons to Witness to Christ inToday’s World.”

An overall aim is to explore the common groundin biblical teaching, apostolic faith and practicalChristian living between Baptists and Catholics, aswell as an examination of areas that still divide thetwo Christian traditions.

The objectives of these international conversa-tions are to increase mutual understanding, apprecia-tion, and Christian charity toward each other; to fos-ter a shared life of discipleship within the commu-nion of the triune God; to develop and to extend acommon witness to Jesus Christ as the Savior of theworld and the Lord of all life; and to encourage fur-ther action together on ethical issues, including jus-tice, peace and the sanctity of life, in accord withGod’s purpose and to the praise of God’s glory.

The theme of this phase, from 2006-2010, is “TheWord of God in the Life of the Church: Scripture,Tradition and Koinonia.”

Bishop Arthur Serratelli, Bishop of Paterson, NewJersey, USA, and Rev. Dr. Paul Fiddes, Professor ofSystematic Theology in the University of Oxford,Oxford, England, UK, co-chair these conversationson behalf of the Catholic Church and Baptist WorldAlliance respectively. The secretaries for the co-chairs were Rev. Dr. Fausto A. Vasconcelos (BWA)and Rev. Dr. Gregory J. Fairbanks (PCPCU).

The Baptist team consists of permanent mem-bers, and persons specially invited as “ esteemedguests.” Permanent members participating in thisround of conversations include Drs. Fred Degbee

(Ghana), Timothy George (USA), Steven Harmon(USA), Nora Lozano (USA), Tomás Mackey(Argentina), Rev. Tony Peck (Czech Republic), Drs.Rachael Tan (Taiwan) and Tadeusz J. Zielinski(Poland). Drs. Curtis Freeman (USA) and ElizabethNewman (USA) participated as “ esteemed guests ”for this round of conversations.

The Catholic team consists of permanent mem-bers and consultants. Participating Catholic mem-bers included Drs. Peter Casarella and Susan K.Wood, SCL of the USA, Dr. Krzysztof Mielcarek fromPoland, Rev. William Henn, ofm cap. and Dr. TeresaFrancesca Rossi of Italy, and Rev. Jorge Scampini,O.P. of Argentina. Sr. Sara Butler, M.S.B.T., of theUSA, participated as a consultant.

BWA General Secretary Rev. Dr. Neville Callamsent a message which was read to the Joint Interna-tional Commission of the Baptist World Alliance andthe Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unityat the start of the week.

Greetings were also conveyed by Rev. J. FelixStephens, OSB, Master, St Benet’s Hall, Oxford, Co-Host of the Conversations; Rev. Dr. Robert Ellis,Principal, Regent’s Park College, Oxford, Co-Host ofthe Conversations; The Very Rev. Dr. Richard Finn,OP, Regent of Blackfriars Hall, Oxford; Rev. BrendanCallaghan, SJ, Master of Campion Hall, Oxford; Dr.Paul Joyce, Chairman of the Board of the Faculty ofTheology in the University; Monsignor Andrew J.Faley, Assistant General Secretary, Catholic Bishops’Conference of England and Wales; The Rev. GrahamSparkes, Head of Department for Faith and Unity,Baptist Union of Great Britain, and Rev. Dr. MaryCotes, Ecumenical Moderator, Milton Keynes,

The 2010 meeting in Oxford brought to comple-tion the second phase of international conversationsand focused on the preparation of the final report.

VATICAN PRESS