PHILIP SCHAFF MAY 3 0 1996
UBRARY
THE NEW MERCERSBURG REVIEW
Journal of the Mercersburg Society
•
Number Nineteen Spring 1996 mE NEW HERCERSHURG REVIEW Journal of the Mercers l'JUrg SOCiety
R. Ho\larc Paine, Editor
Officers of the SOCiety
Presid~nt Horace T. Allen , J r. Vice President R. Howard Paine secretary John C. Miller Treasurer John D. Bonebreak
Executive vice President Jeffrey L. Roth
Execut i ve comni ttee
Deborah R. Clemens Linden J. De 8 i e J ames H. Gold Benjamin T. Gr i ffi n John 8. Payne Harry G. Royer
TIle New Mer cer sburg Review is published semi-annually by the Mercers burg Society
Ed i t orial Office
The New Mercersburg Review 762 Tamarack Trail Reading, Pennsylvania 19607
610/777-0679 THE NEW MERCERSBURG REVIEW
Number 19 Spring 1996
Editorial Introduction 1 R. Howard Pa ine
3 What Would EVangelical Catholicism Look L!ke in the Present Religious Situation? A United Metho dist Perspective Mark Wesley Stamm
11 EVangelical Catholicism and t he search for a Conduit of Communion ThOll'as G. Lush
18 Theology on a Crooked Line: Phili p Schaff 's Understanding of EVangelical Catholicism John M. Koehnlein
51 The Parliarrent of the World's Reli':1ions and the Reunion Of Religions Richard T. Schell hase
70 FredericK Augustus Rauch: First American Hegelian Linden J . deBie IDrTORIAL INTRODUCTION
The Mercersburg Society is resolved that the th eology whose name it bean. nOI be seen as a relic from the mid-nineteenth century. In pursuit of this objective we have been effective in establishing the Chair in MercersbUl'"g Theology and Ecumenism at Lancaster Seminary and the Mercersburg Prize for theological students. The thrice yearly Theological Forums are also encouraging some helpful and infonnative studies. In this issue of the Reyiew we are pleased 10 publish papers from the November 3, 1995 forum presented by Mark Stamm and Richard Lush on the theme of what Evangelical Catholicism looks like today.
John Koehnlein's paper on Philip Schaff traces the growth of ecumenical thought in the mind of that great church historian and church statesman whose career culminated in his innuence upon the Parliament of the World's Religions in 1893. an event which he barely got 10 attend because of rapidly failing health. The anicle by Richard Schellhase who attended the centennial reprise of the Parliament follows a trajectory towards which Schaff arguably could have been pointing as he widened his ecumenical embrace beyond thaI expressed in his MercersbUl'"g years. We would be eager 10 receive reader reaction to this thoughtful and somewh at daring essay.
When we talk about Mercersburg. Frederick Augustus Rauch who also belongs among the worthies of thaI exciting movement frequently gets passed over lightly. Linden DeBie reminds us that he carried considerable weight in his seminal role of introducing and interpreting German Mediating Philosophy to the American scene. He did much to produce a climate which Nevin and Schaff would fmd congenial for the shaping of their theology. and in this spirit we are still relating their thought to the contemporary scene.
1 •
WHAT WOUlD EV ANGm..ICAL CA'lHOI K"SM LOOK LIKE IN THE PRl1SIiNI' REJ1GlOUS SlTUA'I1ON? A UNITED ME1lIODIST PER8PECTIVE
M.... Wesley g,.,..a Pa:::! - . Trinity Unikd Mo Jlwxtiso Oun:b Roarios Spring. Pallisylvllllia
Inuoduction-- Which Methodism?
"What would evangelical catholicism look like in the present religious situation?" In light of John Williamson Nevin'~ dismal appraisal of Methodism.! my addr-eS.<;ing a Mercersburg ~-orum on this topic seems ironic. Have you not invited the fox into the chicken coop? Notwithstanding Nevin's protestations. the issue is not that simple. Referring to the unending debates about John Wesley's intentions for the Methodist movement. Professor Kenneth Kinghorn of AsbW"y Seminary once &dressed his faculty colleagues saying, · Will the real Mr. Wesley please stand up?.2 I will begin my discussion of loday's round table question by extending Dr. Kinghorn's witticism and asking, "Which Methodism?" Merely to profess allegiance 10 Methodism does nOI communicate enough.
Granted. the Methodism of Nevin's experience was a somewhat degenerate fo~ having fallen into what James White has called the liturgical "black hole" of the Frontier Tradition. In its beginnings, however. Methodism was both evangelical and catholic. lndccd. when John Wesley fonned the Oxford University "Holy Club" in 1729. members committed themselves both to missional outreach and to classical disciplines of the ancient church. They visited prisoners and sick person;;. They srudied classical theological texts. and they received communion every week. 4The Methodist societies sought a similar balance. John Wesley's careful synthesis of evangelical and catholic elelTlCflts did not, howevcr, survive two key events--the transplanting of Methodism to the American mission field and his dealh in 1791 . When confronted with the inevitable tensions between a classical ccclcsiology and their" church's call to missional wimcss and flexibility. most Methodists have chosen the missional over against the classical. The typical "resolution" of the problem was expressed in cir"cuit rider Jesse Lee's evaluation of Wesley's 1784 revision of the Book of COmmQn Prayer.
"Being ful.ly satisfied that they could pray bener, and with more devotion while their" eyes wc£e shut. than they could with their" eyes open. (sic) After a few years the praycr book was laid aside. and has never been used in public worship." 5
Sueh a mentality persisL~ today. For example. in 1993 Superintendent Joanne M. Link prepared to officiate at the funeral of a motorcyclist who had been killed by a drunk driver. She went to hcr task prepared to usc the newly published United Methodist Book of Worship (1992). When she arrived. however, she discovered that her congregation was a group of (presumably) unchurched bikers. Hcr account reflects Brother Lee's logic:
"... Tears flowed frely. and the widow was deluged with greetings. words of remembering, and blessings. I tltrew caution and the new United Methodist Book of Worship to the winds. stuek with the scripture. and did my best.... 6 (emphasis added)
While I disagree with her approach. 1the Reverend Link's appeal arises from an importAnt insight-·the contemporary United States is a mission field not unlike the one faced by eir"euit riders at the dawning of the nineteenth century. Indeed. the church exists in a "post-Christian" culture with similarities to that faced by Christians in the second and third centuries. 8
lbree United Methodists epitomire the primary responses to the "present religious situation." The first two. the team of Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon. argue thaI the church should define itself more clearly, magnifying its liturgical and ethical panicularity over agairut the culture9 The third,
3 I George Hunter, insists that the church must fmd ways to evangelize ~ns p?ssessing little or no ec.clesiasrical background. According to Hunte£, churches should commUnicatc m the thought forms I and musical idiom used by !he secular culture. IO Methodists will recognize thcmselves in both emphases. To regain their synthesis is essential, but how?
At their 'fPt. the questions raised by Hauerwas/Willimon and HunlCf arc qucsti'¥!S about Christian initiation. How docs one make and fonn a Christian? In my doctoral dissertation, I argued that one way to resolve Medtodism's dichotomy between classical ecdesiology and missiology is through an expanded initiatory system liat would bear S?mc similarities to the Ror:mn Church's Rite o f C~tian Ini'ig'joo of Adul!5 (BCIA). What follows Will rencet some of that earher work. In the next secUOn, I will discuss initiatory habits of the Methodist Societies unde!" Wesley. In the concluding section, I will use these Meiliodist insights to speculate on a possible shape for a conJcmporlll)' evangelical catholic ecdesiology. Throughout, I will presume that a church which began as a missionill)' sociely must remain faithful to that charism.
Spreading Scriptural Holiness; Initiatory Habits in the Early Methodist Societies
The praxis of Christian initiation was a particular focus of John Wesley's work. That claim may surprise those who deEne Christi an initiation as baptism and confirmation alone. because Wesley had little to say about those rites. Indeed, he e xcised the confirmation rite from his 1784 prayerbook revision. What he wrOle about baptism was not particularly positive or helpful. His treatise "On Baptism: "borrowed" from his father Samuel, was little more /pan a review of standard Anglican theology regarding i.'lfant baptism as the remedy for original sin. In h.is sermon, "The New Birth." Wesley took issue with those who were insisting that baptism alone is sufficient for salvation. He wrOIC,
Was (sid yOu devoted to God al eighl days old. and have you been all these years devoting yourself to the devil? .. For in your baptism you renounced the dcvil and all his works. Whenever, therefore you give place to him again. whenever you do any of the works of the devil. then you deny your baptism. IS
ACCOI"dinglO mat sermon. the "new birth" is the remedy for continuing sinfulness. but baptism is not the new birth. Modem Methodism's ambivalence about baptism is rooted in that assertion.
Notwithstanding the above-noted deficiencies in Wesley's thought and practice, if one defmcs Christi an initi.ati.on as the full range of ritcs. disciplines. and experiences involved in one's becoming a maturc C~uan, then one can profitably argue thai the entire Methodist movement was organized to Cflhance that Journey. For Wesley, the ini ti atory processes were organized around two axes. The fll'St involved attempts to meet the culture on its own terms. The second included a continuing process of Christian foonation centered in the various means of grace and especially the Lord's Supper. As such, Wesley's methodology foreshadows and synthesizes the seemingly disparate approaches advocated by Hunter and Hauerwas/Willimon.
As ~~ advo:ca!CS of "seekers' services" will argue. if one is going to initiate persons into the fulllncss of Chrisuan futh. then one must fmd ways to begin that convL>fSation. Wesley accomp lished that tluough field preaching. At fmil, he resillted the idea. He wrote.
I could 5C.arce reconcile mrseif at fltSt to this strange way of preaching in the flelds ... havmg been all my hfe... so tenacious of every point relating to docency and order that I fcould have thought the saving of souls almost a sin if it had not been done in B church.
But ~ he changed his mind when he .saw the positive results of George Whitefield's open air preaching. Wesley commented, " .. .1 submmcd 'to be more vile,' and proclaimed in the highways the glad tidings of salvation." \7 His preaching in the fields was solidly biblical, although not k:ctionary
4 based. tSMany times. preaching texts were chosen for a panicular occasion. 10 meet a specific ~need.~ 19
Why was freld preachin~ necessary? In large measure, the Church of England had failed the lower classes. SO ~esley and hIS .pr7achers. many of them laymen. filled thai void. 2OYct, Wesley never saw fi71d pr~achtng as an end tn Ilself. It was simply a way to meer people who were not being reached Without II.
Those persons. 'aw~a:'ed' by W~leyan preaching were urgd 10 place themselves under the discipline of the MethodlSl SOCIeties and thel! class meetings. Here was a primary difference between Whitefield. that mellifluous folic. hero of the First Great Awakening. and Wesley. Wesley always insisted on the follow-up disci~~ , .and Whitefield did not. Persons "(desiring) 10 flee from the wrath 10 come. 10 be saved from their Strul. were held accountable for the keeping of three General Rules.' The fint rule insisted that they "(do) no harm. by avoiding evil in every kind ... • The second rule called them 10 "do good" in every way possible. As one finds in the catcchumenate dcscri~ by Saint HippolytuS. Wesley offered specifIC examples of evil to be avoided and good 10 be done. The third rule charged members to "anead upon all the ordinances of God." specified as follows:
The public worship of God: the ministry of the Word. either read or expounded; the Supper of the Lord: family and private prayer. Searching the Scriptures: and fasting, or abstinence. 23
Those brought from the fields were given a context of mutual accountability in which they learned a Orristian lifestyle and came 10 cherish the means of grace. Indeed. the cI~ and its lewe!" fillod a role similar 10 dial which Nevin envisionod for Christian parents and paslOrs. While Wesley insisled thaI conversion itself happens instanlaneously. 25he believed thai one came to diat moment not through emotional manipUlation. but through exercising the means of grace. After die experience of justification. one remained unde!" the discipline of the class. for further growth was expected. In summary, Wesley and the early Methodists. mel people on their own temJS, butdiey met them with die Gospel. They sought 10 help each o*er move toward a mature practice of the faith centerod in die Word of God and die Holy Eucharist.
EYlll!gelir A! Catholicism in the Present Religio ... Situation: Prooosels [or a Contemoorary MMIw4i$! fcrlcsiology
I begin this fmal section by reviewing one of the c8ldinal insights of Mercel'1>burg historiography-·the idea that each ccciesial body. including die sects, represents a charism thai should become part of the emerging Catholic Church. Schaff wrote,
... if a union is to come. as we pray and hope in reliance upon Christ's promise, it will nOI present itself dcstroctively IOwal-d hislOry. but lake up rather the whole contents of it into its own life. Every single denomination, every ~tian poople. every Christian century. has something to conuibute to this great result.
What does this mean for Methodism? First, we should conlinue the tradition of missionai flexibility which, fOf' all its well-known faul ts,'ZSconuibutod heavily 10 die evangelization of North America. Second, contemporary Method.ist ocdesiology should reflect the disciplinuy ~aracteristics of ~ class meeting, and not die permissive habits of die state churches. ;Jong diese lines. Hauerwas sild that being a Methodist is akin to being a "high church Mennonite." Many Methodists assume, howeve!", thai disciplined Christianity is expressed primarily in small group or parachurch ministries and not in the church as a whole. Granled. thaI was the shape of Methodism when it stood within die Anglican communion, yet a Methodist church should be different. Methodist ecclcsiology should reflect many of the insights found in catechumenal systems ancient and modem.
5 To use a phrase coined by Daniel Benedict, churches should co~e equipped ~th "a porch."30 That is, each congregation should develop and/or employ methodologies for meetmg the unchurched and marginally churched. Such methodologies will reflect the spirit of Wesley and his field preaching. Of course. those who seek the unchurched must believe they exist. thai many pen!Ons know little or nothing about the Bible, the creeds. the sacramenlS, and Christian lifestyle. Once the unchurched are acknowledged. Methodists must continue "to submit to be more vile." 3!
"Porch" rninisuics might take any number of fonns, including mass evangelistic rallies, radio and television programming and advertising, contemporary Christian concens, seminars addressing marriage and family issues, and even "seeker services" presented in the fonn of "entenainment."32 Such efforts attempt to elicit conversation with those outside the Christian church. Errors related to such porch ministries are two-fold: The fust mistake involves viewing the porch as a pennanent resting place. One can argue that the crowds in the Gospels followed Jesus because he entertained them. and "met their nee1.,~ healing the sick and multiplying bread; however, serious disciples must begin carrying the crollS. The second error is a failure to present the full picture of Christian faith . Indeed, the goal of any Chrutian initialOry process is full eucharistic participation with all that such implies about profession of the Creed and the practice of Christian lifestyle. Inquirers should be offered a dear picture of Chrutianity and its essential moral vision. that those who prorocd toward baptism will know what they are ac.cepting and those who tum away wi!! know what they have rejected.
What hapens to those unchurched and marginally churched who decide to prorocd toward full eucharistic participation? Indeed. catechumenal tradition speaks fairly dearly on the maner of the unchurched. They will be assigned mentors such as catechists and dass leaders, who will assist them in hearing the biblieal slOry. Cathechists will teach them Christian doctrine and lifestyle. After a suitable period of formation, the previously unchurched will be received into full communion through the initiatory rites of baptism, chrumation. and first comunion.
Such tradition is not so dear on the matter of the marginally churchcd, defined here as baptized Christians who attend church rarely. perhaps at Christmas and Easter. but often not at all. Many of these persons reemerge when they have children and feel compelled to have them baptized. Here is one of the most difficult challenges faced by pastors. While there is no legal compulsion to baptize all who request it. many clergy proceed as if there were. A careful review of baptismal rites. however, challenges a pcnnissive view of infant baptism. For instance, the United Methodist service asks the following:
WiU you nurture chere children in Christ's holy Church. that by your teaching and example chey may be guided 10 a~t God's grace for themselves. profess their faith openly. and to lead a Christian life? 3
According to this riro, baptismal sponsors enror an ecclesiastical/caching offjcc. one as crucial as those held by bishops. pastors. and seminary professors, if nOI more so. Normally, Ihe church would not ordain a paslOr who had not completed an extended period of spiritual and prores~ional formation, nor would our universities grant a teaching doctorate to someone who had nOI written and defended a dissertation. Why then do we allow those who rarely sit under the church's teaching to assume the vows of baptismal sponsorship? Absentee Christians can hardly be prepared 10 teach and model the Cailh.
Clergy who understand this problem must exercise the "keys of the kingdom," convinced that abiding faith is built on the rock of biblical formation. Nevertheless. unchurched or marginally churched sponsors should not be turned away out of hand. They should, however, be treated as Christians who need reconciliation; that is. as those who have forgotten their eucharistic vocation. I have PUlPOsed that su~ persons .spend a fun ~ear under the teR:Ching and mentoring of the church before presenting their child fOf bapnsm.34 MenlOnng should occur III established discipleship groups.
6 PedobaptislS may fmd this an overly radical proposal. especially those who practive it as a matter of principle. Nevertheless. the proposal is not without precedent. Aidan Kavanagh has noted the RCIA presumes adultjjaptism as the nonn f(X the Roman church even though podobaplism is still palllittcd and pracriooi. The difference between nonnative and permissible is crucial. and to aclrnowledge it will lead to changes in practice. In the present religious situation. the church should emphasize not 50 much infant baptism. but baptism. the sacrament which sets one apan for eucharistic lifestyle. As was the case with early Methodism. disciplinary structures within the congregation should assist per50llB in actualizing that lifestyle while holding them accountable to the same.
7 ENDNOTES
1. Nevin argued that the "am[ious bench" system is fitled "the life of Methodism" Williamson Nevin, The Am:io!1$ Bench, 1844, of John Willi!lfD5Ol\ Nevin, edited by Charles Pickwick Press, 1978), 13.
2. Kinghorn recalled this exchange during a 1982 classroom lecture. By the way, Nevin weighed in on the topic of "the rea! Mr. Wesley," insisting that Wesley was but "a small man as compared with Melancthon." See ArutiQ"§ Bench, 13.
3. James F. White, Proleslant Worship, Traditions in Transition (Louisville, Kcntucky: Westmiru;ter/John Knox Press, 1989). 178-79.
4. John Wesley, "A Short the People Called Methodists." 1781, The Works of John Wesley. Volume M i edited by Rupert E. Davies (Nashville: Abingdon
5. Jesse Lee. quoted in , selected and introduced by Bard Thompson (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
6. Joanne Montgomery Link. Chambersburg District Newsletter. October 1993, I. Her article was published in the November, 1993 edition of The Link. the Ccnlra! Pennsylvania Conference newspaper. It was presented as a positive example of church growth logic.
7. For my critique of the church growth movement and its Central ""'" Il,,~;. • Annual Conference version. see my article "Indigenous or Traditional Worship." VD :3 (Ordinlf)' Time 1994): 29·32. Soc a version of the article in The Link, Dcrember
8. The discussion of "post-Christendom" is well underway. the clearest pre;entation of the issues is that by Lorcn Mead in The Once and Future Church D.C,: The Alban Institute. 1991). Others addressing the topic from varied angles include p~:~ (San Francisco: Harper and 1993): Daniel Benedict and ( (Nashville:
"'~. (Nashville: . and George O. Hunter Abingdon Press.
9. Hauerwu and Willimon, Resident Aliena, 38.
10. Hunler, How to Reach Sgular People, 147-48.
11 . Nevin's "System of the Catechism" also addressed initiatory questions. See The AnxiQ!!S Bench, 105·26.
12. Marie. Wesley Stamm, a.s.L., "Baptism and Initiation in United Methodism: Toward an Evan8elical and Catholic Synthesis" (Th.D. diss. , Boston Uni versity, 1995).
13. .Rill: Qf Christian Initiation Qf Adults, Vatican F'tumenical Council, Volume One
, 14. John Wesley, "On Baptism," 1758, John Wesley, Alben C. Outler, editor (New York: Oxford Univer.;ity Press, 1964), 317·32.
IS. John Wesley. "The New Birth: 1760, John Wesley's Forty-Four Sennons (London: Epworth Press, 1994), 525.
16. John Wesley. Journal, March 29. 1739. Volume 19. loumP!s and Diaries II edited by W. Reginald Ward and Richard P. Abingdon Press. 1990), 46.
17.\\'esley, lournal. April 2, 1739. Sec 2 Samuel 6:22. K.J. V., from the story of David dancing half naked before the ark. New Measures, indeed! Wesley's discourse was filled with biblical aUusiollS. I am indebted to W, Reginald Ward's foolno!C in Volume 19 of the Abingdon Wesley Works. Sec p. 46.
18. Both lectionaries available to Wesley were one year cycles. The BCP offered a eucharistic lectionary which provided Epistle and Gospel for Sundays and other feast days, The BCP provided a much more e xtensive daily Icctionary for Morning and Evening Prayer. Generally speaking. Wesley did not use the daily office lessons as texIS for his preaching.
19. See Journal. May 26,1739: June 24,1739; July 3,1739: August 14, 1739; September 23. 1739. Many o f the open air audiences were assembled for just one occasion. which justifies an ad hoc or extemporaneous usage of Scripture,
20. Indigenous Wesleyan hymnody answered it similar need.
21. John Wesley. "The Nature. Design, and General Rules of the United Societies, in London. Bristol, Kings-wood. and Ne wcastle upon Tyne." 1743, The Works of John Wesley, Volume 9, The Melhodist Societies: History. Nature. and Desi&!1 edited by Rupert E. Davies (Nashville: Abingdon Press. 1989), 70.
22. Compare The Aoostolic Tradition of Saint Hipooly!H§ of Rome. 215 C.E" II, xvi, 1·15. Edited by Gregory Dix (London: The Alban Press, 1937), 23·28.
23. Wesley, "Nature. Design, and General Rules." 73 .
24. Nevin, Anxiolls Bench, 54.
25. Sec Journal. preface 10 Augus! 12, 1738 [0 November I, 1739 extract, paragraph 5. See aJ.so May 15,1739.
review of the class the study by David Lowes WalSon. {Nashville: Discipleship Resources.
27. Philip Schaff. What is Church HislOD', A Vindication o~ ~c Idea of li.istorical Deyelop~nt, 1846, Refun!!*, and Catholic: Selocted Historical Writings of Philm Schaff. e 28. "New Measures" are not always theologically problematic, if well considered and ~eol 9 29. Stanley HluelWlIS, "The Testament of Friends.' The Christian CentWY 107 (January 28. 1990) : 214. 30. Daniel BencdiCl. O.S.L., "Adding a Porch to Your Church: Part I. SacramentAl Life 8: 1 (Lenl/Ea5tef. 1995).28-33. 31. See discus&ion on page 5· 32. Before one rejects Bill Hybels et. aI. out of hand, one should remembe!" thlt the morality plays of !he Middle Age/! were entertaining. lIS were church processions. 33. The United MfflmdiSl Boolc. of Worship (Nashville: The United Methodist Publishing House. 1992). 88. 34, Swnm. "Baptism and lnitiation in United Methodism." 375·79. 35. Aidan (New Yorlc.: Pueblo Publish.ing Company, 10 EVANGELICAL CATIlOLfOSM AND TIlE Sl':AR.CH FOR A CONDUIT OF COMMUNIoN 'Thomas G_ 1mb P>e .... Trinity UndOO Orun:h of ClJrist BigIo, .. iDe. p..,"'.. ylvania No offense is meant b~t the :-eader ~f th~ paper will need to think of herself or himself as a dog on a short leash. The tOpIC asSigned IS thIS: what would Evangelical Catholicism look like in the co~rempo~ world? While I am sure that much could be wrillcn on the subject covering an array of topICS, I wish 10 focus my comments upon communion. I havc come to the conclusion that an essential ingredient of an Evangelical Catholic congregation is that it be a faith community of Christians who seek to live in communion with God and with one another. Further. this communion is facilitated and seeks maturity through a particular fonn of life. or way of being in the world. that is revealed in the perichoretic dance of the Trinity. I realize that when the subject of Evangelical Catholicity is opened one could go digging in the soil of ecumenical councils. sniffing at the structures of liturgy and worship, seek to chew on the bones of the creeds or bark at the theological basics of unity. However, the leash is taut and we wilt heel at the topic of rommunion. I wanlto begin by outlining a few thoughts of Latin American theologian Leonardo Soff put forth in his book &Clesiogenesis.l Soff observes that the New Testament makes two propositions concerning the Church: (I) The church is one. Just as there is one God, one Lord, one Spirit, one baptism, one faith. so there is one church (Eph . 4:4-6), This church. 80ff ~eminds us. "is universal and includes all the faithful regardless of their origin. race. nation. or culture." (2) The church is multiple. "It is fonned of a multiplicity of communities differentiated by city. province. local ronditions. and sociocultural idiosyncrasies (I Thes. 2:14; I Cor. 1:19.2 Cor. 8:1: Acts 15:41, 16:5, 18:22)." In addition. there is a relationship between the one church and the multiple church or to use Boffs terms between the universal and the particular churches. The universal church 'ronsists in the mystery of salvation of God. realized by the Son, in the power of the Holy Spirit acting within history and reaching all human beings." So the universality of the church. or its catholicity. resides in the universality of God's salvific offer. This universal salvific mystcry takes on the particularities of ages and places in the particular church where the universality is roncretizcd and historicized. The particular church then is "the universal church. happening." 3The universal church is manifested in the particularity of the local churches. Boff explicates his thinking by slating some of the ronccpts that are not included in his definition of catholicity. It is not a 'geographical roncept (a church present in all pans of the world). Nor is it a statistical concept (a church quantitatively more nume£Ous). Nor is it a sociological roncept (a church inserted into every culture). Nor indeed is it a historical concept (a church preserving its identity through the centuries)." To be Catholic, says Boff. the church must preserve its true identity. not just any identity. This true identity resides in the church's unique faith in God, who sends the Son to save. in the power of the Holy Spirit, all men and women. This unique and single faith is mediated by the church which is, according to Boff. "the universal sacrament of salvation." An Evangelical Catholic rongregation is one whose core identity is rooted in God's salvific will. Nevin also defined Catholicism in terms of identity . He distinguished between an UflCCfStanding of catholicism as the sum of the parts. a mechanical unity, and a catholicism of the whole where the parts have no independent existence but "draw their being f£Om the universal unity itself in which they arc romprehended." 4 A catholic congregation is not an element of a ronfederation. separarely constituted and subsequently entering into relationship with the universal church. It is not a part of the whole but, in Boffs words, "a portion oriented toward a whole." A catholic congregation is anentive to. or oriented toward, its head, Jesus Christ, from whom salvation and life flow into the congregation. So catholic Christians are those who draw their life from Christ in a rommon-union or rommunion in which the 11 believer progre'lSively matures. Christ is the "root" ,and the "foun~". of ~ new ordc~ of life: Nevin postulated that natural birth inserts II person into the life of Adam. ThLS IS a ~e ?f re~lh~n agams~ God aimed at living in isolation from God. Spiritual birth. however, secures a like lIlScrtlon mto the life of Christ. So Christianity isn't simply learning about Jesus or learning some guidelines for living, nor is it trying to be "good" or a "better Christian." The essence of the Christian life is my insertion into the life of Christ and Christ's life into mine. The goal is union with God: the entering of God's life. Being united with God doesn't come about by getting one's head straight nor by being a good person who does Ihe right things. Union with God comes through Christ who is "the way, the truth and the life," True life flows from Chrisl 10 those who trust him. The flow continues today in the church, the faith community. for the church is "the depository of all the life powers of the Redeemer." There is a living, organic union in which Christ dwells in his people by the Holy Spirit. Through the Holy Spirit the believer is ttansformed: the life of Chris! is reproduced so that the true human charac!er which Christ exhibited in his person is exhibited in the believer also. Whenever the church gathro, we are seeking!o be open 10 and enter inlO the life of Christ that flows to us. This transfer of Christ's life to us is not mechanical nor does it happen simply by our effort to be spiritual. Salvation, new human life in Chris!, is a communion that reaches over by the Holy Spirit into believers and once there. goes to work with constant reproduClive energy until at length the whole person is transformoo. into Christ's image. This is a life long proces.'l of growth and development. A catholic congregation is one in which there is a fOC1!sed attention on the flow of Christ's life into the lives of believro.5 Once we begin speaking of Christ's life flowing into the lives of believro in the church several key concepts come into play. They are: faith. communion. par1icipation. and mystery. An Evangelical Catholic congregation is not only ~a depository of the life powro of the Redeemer.' a benefactor of the salvific gift that comes from above but it is also a faith community of human effort. The effort is to respond in humble acceptance to God's salvific offer. Boff writes that ~faith is the aCI by which human beings open themselves to God and accept in their lives the salvation. forgiveness, and indwelling of the triune God."6 The particular catholic congregation is "an assembly of those who gather IOgether by reason of and for the sake of their faith." 7 Faith is essentially communion. It is a participation in the life that is offered in Christ. To be in communion is 10 enter into the life of another. The ultimate paradigm of this enuance of one life into another. each fully participating in the other, is found in Christ. Jesus is the communion or common-union of the divine and human nature. In Christ, we see the hypostatic union of two natures "without separation. without mingling. without confusion ~ 1Chalcedon). The Divine and human remain complete entities in Christ and yet also exist in ful! relationship or communion with one another. Theologian Catherine LaCugna describes this union of the two natures in this way: Jesus is what God is: infinite capacity for communion. Jesus is what our humanity was created to be: theonomous. catholic and in communion. right relalionship. with every creature and with God. He is who and what God is: he is who and what we are to ~~me . Jesus owes .his whole existence. authority. identity and purpose to God: he ongLnates from God. IS begonen of God. belongs eternally to the life and existence of God. Through him we, 100. originate from God. are begouen of God. and belong eternally 10 the life and existence of God. 8 The person of Christ testifies to the life of communion to which we are sununoned. Faith is a part!cipation in a ~ertic.aJ communion with God and the risen Christ along with a corresponding hon:lOntai communiOn With those who share in the life of God in Christ.9 Whenev~r w: speak of Christ's life flowing to the lives of believers, of communion, of participation. we are .en~g mlO the land of my.stery and s~cramcnt. This land of mystery and sacrament is 8. foreign temtory ~n a world obsessed Wl~ the tangible. The sacrament is the gift of God's own self-giving. Mystery IS the holy wonder that IS struck when we face the fact that we are invited and indeed can participate. in God's life through Christ. Who can explain the details of the transactio~ whereby God's love and rule and very self could reach over into the kingdom of this world? Mystery is no! primarily a J2 • phenomenon to be eJCpiained ?U[ 10 ~ entered into. When we enter the unimaginable in the UUSt thaI is real ~ true and Ct?mm,une With Ctt?sl and one another, we have entered the mystery. The Evangelical CatholIC congrcgallOn IS one that IS n~ StrangeJ" 10 mystery. The core of the mys!e£y is !hat the Su~rur.aI ~ en~ the natural. II IS held by William DiPuccio that Nevin's cen[fa} intuition about ~n~ lifc IS th~t . It ~as " Supernatural power within the human being thai transformed it from Wlthlll .. larhe ~tlan bfe IS ,the ,mystery of sacrament: Christ's life flowing into the believer. An Evangelical ~atholi~ congregation IS a particular gathering of believers who, by their faith that the Supernatw'al ~ .enterIng the natural. ~ f.ai~ that Christ's life flows into the believers. participate in the one great mysl~. Ihe ~ystery of ~e tnmtanan God who communicated to human beings in defmitive and eschatoloR,lcai form III Jesus ChrISt and who continues to roffimunicate through the presence of the Holy Spirit." 1r Pscudo-{)rholicism It rna>: ~ ~elpful III this point, in view of the conlemporary situation, to Slate whaJ: Evangelical CalhohclSm IS not. An Evangelical Catholic congregation is not a voluntary association of like-minded individuals who ':'elieve that Jesus had some good ideas to share with us that ean be implemented by the church to make bfe better. Nevin warned of a pseudo-catholicism thai was "a consent to be of one mind in the main on the greal subjcct of the gospeL"I! A consregation may be organized around a Christ who calls believers to change the world, to be advocates of certain causes such as peace and justice, a Christ who calls belicvcfIi to change the world. to be advocates of certain causes such a.~ peace and justice, a Christ who is useful in surviving world ly pressures. or a Christ who escorts believers 10 the great "Disney Land" in the sky. The danger. and even tragedy, of a church organiuxl around an axis other than the mystery of the indwelling Christ who brings the church into communion with God and with one another is that the end result may well be what Soren Kicrkegaard Icnned "low-pressure Christianity: Kieritcgaard defined low-pressure Christianity as a trend to reduce Christianity to the lowest common denominator and thus produce "banalions of mediocrity: 13 The roots of !he concept of !he church being an association of the like-minded run deep. Historian Sydney Mead has offered an inleresting synopsis of the transition from catholicity to individualism in the church. a transition that he ses as being prcclominanltoday.]4 Mead's thesis is that from the 4th century to the end of the 18th century the heart o f the Church was creedal and confessional belief in a supematural power mediated to men and women through the sacraments. The church claimed inclusiveness and universality but by the same token was exclusive. Outside the Church and its sacraments there was no salvation. With the Reformation came fragmentation of the Church and a growing afrmity to be in tune with the popular rising consciousness. In America. that consciousness was individualism. There were several streams that fed into the great expanse of the river of individualism. One stream was the American pioneen; who , out of their need to survivc on the fronticr, tolerated all others. It was one's self-interest to gel along with others and nOI draw distinctions that would cause separation. Another sll"earn was the revitalization of the personal religious life under Pietism. The emphasis was placed on personal experience more so than objective uuth. The church became an association of those who had the experience. No aeed was acknowledged but the bible. At the same time, there was the arrival in America of several European sects. With their arrival came an emphasis upon freedom and co-exislerlcc as opposed to uuth. Religion was a matter between God and the individual, In the political realm, Jefferson and Madison were advocating religion as a duty to God in th e hope that people with good religion would make good citizens. LlISuy, there was the stream o f the 18th century Rationalism thaI proclaimed that an individual is moved and guided only by the weight of the evidence contemplated in one's own mind. All these streams came together in an era of heightened concern for freedo m and a loss of historical perspective resulting in a bonding of people to the obvious tendencies of the moment. In this atmosphere, many. if not most, of the forming American denominations were fOWldoc:i upon the desire to be useful to the individual and purposive within society. The foundation was not confessional. The concern was more with the task 10 be aCf'l)mplished than communion with the supemarwa1 God. Under the fanning Protestanl denominations religion was a personal expeticnce with the emphasis being " placed on a faith that directed personal h.abits, was useful in the secular world, and ~ would be tang.ibJe, results producing, The sacramental character of the Church. took a back seal. A destre to better oneself and the world obscured God's call to the church to be catholic - a community of failh where all entered the mystery of both vertical and horizonlal communion. The Trinity - A foundational Element in Eyangelical Catholicism Evangelical Catholicism recognizes the tempting seduction to reduce faith from trust in the supernatural God who cBlIs UB into communion to trust in a natural god who serves our wants and desires. II is aware that the life of communion with God and one another is full of ups and downs. Faithfulness to communion willl God and commitment to the faith heritage is a constant struggle. Life easily degcnenues into a rat race to do more. o wn more and be more. The temptation to succumb to prioritizing worldly useful.nes5 and AtU)mplishment over communion is incessant. The seduction to trusl oneself rather than God constaDtly titillates. Hope in overcoming the degeneration and seduction lies only in the fact that "God is more for us than we arc for ourselves." 15This, in facl, is the Good News. So an Evangelical Catholic church focuses on the self-giving God who offers God's self in communion through Je!U!I Christ and calls the congregation into both vertical and horizontal communion. There is an attentiveness to an organic faith as opposed 10 a mechanistic faith. In organic faith the life of God flows to believClS through Christ. II is understood that individuals can not manage their lives on lheir own through a regimen!ed following of Ch.rist spiked with a periodical injection of emotionalism. The aim of failll is not 10 live as the bible says, nor is it to make God happy o r prove oneself worthy of heaven. A life of communion. of entering into and being infused with Christ's life is the point. This life of communion is not iiimply internalized but must also be externalized in a life of service to both. God and human beings. In light of the emphasis on communion the theological foundation of Evangelical Catholicity is Ille Doctrine of the Trinity. The Trinity reveals that God is personal life in relationship. Jesus said "!he Father is in me and I am in the ."ather" (John 10:38). This is a reciprocal communion in which individuality not only remains but is cnh.anced. The communion of the Three is nol simply an aspect of God's being but communion is also the goal of all God's actions and sal vific work on our behalf. Whether we look at God's own home of .'alher, Son and Holy Spirit or God's actions toward and on behalf of the human family we sec thai God's life is about persons in communion. Both the immanent and economic testimony of God hold together in unity. Members of the church, created in the image of God, called to Ii:,"e in ICe likeness of God, exist as God exists and take on God's way of being. It is the way of commun}()f\. The Perichoretic Dance If indeed a cenual axis of Evangelical Catholicity is the life of communion with God and one another, lhen t?c question is W?~t fo~ of life, what way of living. will serve as a proper conduit for this life? How IS ~e flow of dlVl~e life ~ugh C~t actually conducted? I would suggest that the life of ~~uruo~, whether vertical or .hon~ ta1, IS condu~ted through thc perichorctic dance. This concept ongmates m the Greek word penchOfCSIS. The meamng of the tcnn is a choreographed dance in which persons move all aro~.d and even through one another retaining lheir individuality yet sharing fully their own perso.n and receIVIng fully Ille person of another. Borf explains this trinitarian concept by quoting ~e CouncLI of florence: ."The Father is.~hotly in the Son and whotty in the Holy Spirit; the Son wholly m ~e Fa~er and w~otly m the H~ly SPLflt; the Spirit whoUy in the Father and wholly in the Son.'.!1 The ~c?o~c dance IS a p~ersh.[p of movement in which each person not only expresses his or her ~~viduahty but. ~ves WI~ . and ev~n toward the other for fulfillment. It is the movement of reciprocal ~~~~~ .and rece[~g. of g[:,"mg aglWl ~ receiving ~ain .. Perhaps a hClpful way of envisioning !his ~~ IS through ICe ~anclng, as. seen In the OlympICS, In which each dancer is observable as an individual yet moves WIth another 111 a choreographed common-union. 14 II is. importan~ I? n.otc. that ~ur participati,on in pcrichoretic relationship is not on the basis of our own ment but ~ s Ul~lIaUOn. \\ e have Jesus statement that "as you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be Ul us ,(John ~ 7:21). Boff has noted that we arc partners called to panicipate in the divine dance throupt .Gods elocoo". ~Eph. 1:3-14). Thc dance originates with God and returTUI us 10 God all through Chris! Ul the Holy Spmt. LaCugna makes clear that there are not two sets of communion. one in the Divine ~unitr .and another ~ong human beings with the laner trying to replicate1!f:e fOiiber. ~ather there ~ one div,me d~ that Incorporates God and humanity as beloved partnen. As we are mcorporated III the perichoretJ.c dance we are changed and matured by being permeated by our divine partner. Jesus Christ. Autheillic Christianity is to be pcnncated by Christ· it is to have Christ's life flow inoo us. Likewise. authentic human relationships arc characlCrized by ~teq>enctration of one life by another. Perichoretic dance is not simply a metaphor or conceprualization of communion. It is an actual form of life that is supported by 11.1 least four components: communing. self-revelation. freedom and disposability. Communing is the practice of presence with another. It is a real speaking and listening to another. Self revelation is Ihe practice of transparency milking known one's own particularity. leaving nothing 10 deduction to be made by the other. Freedom is self-transcendency; il is to leave one's concern for self to mo~'e toward another. Oisposability is the commitmenlto serve another. It is also a disposabilily to the uuth seelcing to scrape away the sclerous deposilS of the ego that block our relationship with God and one another. These are bare-bones defmitions of these components. Space does not pennit a full fleshing out that is needed. The point I wish to make, however. is that Ihere is a concrete way of life that will act as a conduit for the life of communion. It seems to me that the conection between fonn of life and the conception or image we hold of the life of faith has been lost. If communion is a central axis of Evangelical Catholicily as I suggest. then it must be made clear to believers what kind or fonn of life will serve as a conduit to bring their own persons into this communion. I recently spoke to a man in his early forties who told me that although he grew up in the church. he did notleam to pray until he participated in Alcoho lic..s Anonymous. He rocalled serving as an acolyte when a teen and asking his pastor what to pray when he bowed in fronl o f the allar. The answer was "jUSt bow your head and count 10 ten." The challenge. you see. is to teach people how exactly, step by step, to enter into communion with God and one another. This challenge becomes manageable through the componenlS of the perichoretic dance. The task is to teach people the fonn o f life that communes. self·reveals. acts in freedom and seeks 10 be disposable. People need dance insuucto[5. So I would suggest. for example. that prayers o f confession in worship be more specific . ' We have sinned against you in thought, word, and deed, by whal we have done and by whal we have left undone." What exactly are we speaking of here? Why nOI be specific and reveal that we worry. are anxious. participate in gossip, seek control through our busyness and so on. Does objectivity require weekly repetition? Conlemporary Evangelical Catholicity will. in the least. advocate a life of communion with God and one another. This life of communion is rooted in the flow of Christ's life 10 us. The conduit for the sharing of life that communion entails is the perichoretlc dance. I do not know yet how to fully e xplicate this fonn of life. This is my challenge for the future. I do believe. however. that the enumeration of the fonn of life that permits the life of Christ [0 flow to us in communion is one o f the crucial challmges of the Mercersburg movement. for it is a challenge that if answered will open the door to lay participation. II seems to me that the critical task: of Mercersburgers is not to bow at the feet of 10hn Nevin, worshiping his theological insight and genius. but to stand on Nevin's shoulders advocating the life o f vertical and horizontal communion whereby the salviftc work and life of God flows to us as an alternative to the contemporary life of isolation in which salvation is achieved through individual faith and effort. Week after week the Evangelical Catholic Church testifies to the superabundant reservoir of divine communion: "the communion of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit be with you aiL" The challenge lies in the delivery system. In the town in which I live the walc£ supp!y is more than adequate, .but ~e delivery system is an antiquated mess that includes wooden water nwns from the 1920,. The infenor 15 mains. which are also extremely n8.lTOW by modem standards, result in an experience of low water pcessure for many homes. In much the same manner, Christians today experience Kieric:egaard's "low pressure Christianily." The flow of Chrisl's li fe inlo the believer is a trickle. Whal the Evangelical Camolk. lradition must face is thai, no matler how great the spiritual reservoir, without an adequate and effective conduit for the transmission of the water the thirsty will continue 10 turn 10 their private wells in search of refreshmenL The life of vertical and horizontal communion is the untapped reservoir of Evangelical Catholicism in the contemporary age. Unless an effective conduit is found many will go thirslY in spite of the presence of an ocean of quenching relief. '5 ENDNOTFS L Leonardo Boff. Ecdesiogetlesis: The Base Communities Reinvent the Church. (Ortis Books, 1994). 2. Boff, 16. Boff, argument and the words I am quoting all come essentially from pp. 16-22 in EccJesiogenesis . 3. Boff is quoting here J. B. Libanio. Igreja particular (Sao Paulo: Loyola. 1974), 37. 4. John W. Nevin, ~Cath.olicism" in The Mercev;blU8 Review Vo l. 3, No.1, 1851 ,3. 5. I have summarizod Nevin's thinking here that is expressed in The Mystical Presence (Lippincott. 1846). The phrase "the depository of all the life powers of the Redeemer" comes from a sermon by Nevin preached 10 the 1847 Synod o f the German Reformed Church. The sermon was titled -The Church." 6. Boff. 19. 7. Boff. 19. 8. Catherine LaCugna. God For Us: The Trinity and Christian Life. (Harper Collins. 1991). 296. 9. Boff speaks of this vertical and horizontal communion on p. 19. 10. DiPuccio's comments on Nevin's thinking can be found in his editorial introduction located on p. 37 of The New Me«:ersbwg Review, No. 17, Spring 1995. 11.80f£.19. 12. Nevin, "Catholicism." 26. 13. Lois S. Bowers, translator and George K. Bowers, editor, Soren Kiet"kegaard: The Mystique of Prayer iIIId PraY-e£. (CSS Publishing. 1994). 123. 14. See Sydney Mead, The Lively Experimen t: The Sh;qJing of Christianity in America. (Harper & Row. 1963). 15. Walta Brucggemarm. Finally Comes the Poet. (Fortress Press. 1989),36. Chapters 1 and 2 of this book present a d i.scU55ion of !he self-giving of God. 16. John Zizioulas in Being As Communion (Darton. Longman ~d T.odd. 1985) argues ~at the church is not an institution but a · way of being." This "way of bemg" IS not a moral altammcnl. nor an accomplishment but a way of relationship wi!h the world, wi!h God and with o!hers. 17. Leonardo 8off, Trinity and Society. (Orbis Books. 1988), 135. 18. See LaCugna. 274. 17 'IbooIogJ 00 A Cruokcd I.inc- Ii John M. Koc I • •""" P "-, St. John'S I.d'. ' at 0Iun:h W· Millie "C, M.rJ1md Introduction We condenn, without qualification, both rationalism and sectarism. Still our historical sense itself will not allow us to look upon then as the work of Satan ~ly. Go::!., who brings good out of evil, has been wisely active also in the imrense systen of destruction that has been going forward in the Christian world in these forms since the beginning of the last century. "Go::!. writes on a crooked line," says an old Portuguese proverb. l When a sailor wishes to head for a particular spot and does not have a favorable wind, he or she engages in a rraneuver known as tacking. An imaginary straight line is drawn to the destination, outer boundary lines are established, and a zig-zag across the center-line is begun. The boat is sailed to the starboard lmtil it reaches the right boundary; then, turning to port, it crosses the center-line and continues in that direction until the left boundary is reached. By this repetitious back and forth movement between the extrEmes headway is made toward the final destination. To those who view only brief snippets of the maneuver the boat will appear to be sailing in opposite directions, but in fact, the action of tacking with the wind provides correction, not contradiction. Indeed without correction, the zig-zag in the course, the boat would go beyond one or the other of those imaginary boundary lines and sail off course . The C\.ITJ..Ilative effect of the zig-zagging is to head the boat toward the final goal, the destination initial l y selected. In the years iliiilediately surrounding 1988, the centennial anniversary of the American Society of Church History, several works were published about Philip Schaff, the Society' s founder and first president. The scholarship produced at that time forused on his life, his a?cCJ1lllistJ-nE:nt~ ir: a v.arie~y of hetels, and his legacy . Even though the reun10n of Chnshamty 1S w1dely acknowledged to have been of inmense irrportance for Schaff, and several scholars have recognized that he focused on different aspects of Christian unity over " the course of his career, there are few works which pI ace Schaff's understanc:ung of Christian unity at the center of investigation. Generally, evangellcal catholicism Schaff's term for the caning together of the best of Protestantism and Catholi~ism, has been treated as one focus of equal irrportance with several others which occupied his attention; or it is seen as a subordinate theme in his overall approach to history. Investigation into the change in errphasis between Schaff's Mercersburg and New York writings on.evan~elical catholtcism seems to have been of lirrcited concern for scholars untll fa1rly recently. Philip Schaff claimed that God's history "m:)Ves zig-zag like a s ailing vessel." Like the sailor who knows the destination and ultimatel y will get there, so God's outcome, the fulfillment of His plan for history (both for the wodd and for the Church). is assured and the goal will be reached. Along the way , however, the wi nds may not always be favorable. A.t any not£Jlt in time it may appear that events are heading in the wrong direction. But, as Schaff was fond: of pointing out, "God. can use evil for good." The ultimate attail'VT£nt of the objective is not in doubt, and the progress toward God ' s destination is obvious to those who take the long view of histor y. Yes, there have been zig zags in the flow, and the line of history has been c rooked instead of straight; but there has also been a steady movement toward the f inal des tination. That zig-zag motion of history also affec ted the way schaff visualized the futUre. He ass ured that the ultimate goal of history was a new (Johannine) age, that ffat£nt when God's love finally would rule over Church and world. For the Church the Johannine P.ge meant \.mity, the s ynthesis of the best of Catholicism and Protestantism. To approach the shore of Christian unity, schaff , too, had to tack with the wind. To a lirrcited degree that zig-zag approach is seen within a mnber of his writings as he placed conciliatory words alongside forceful rebukes. Even when Schaff viewed opponents ' actions as of the devil , he could also see s ome Ir£ans by whi ch God would make use of those actions and therefore Schaff prOvided moderation to his own polerrdcal prcnounceiieuts . But in addition to those rrcinor zig- zags within specific documents, Schaff also made a major course-change in his approach to Christian unity. A.fter nearly a decade of s ailing in the currents of denaninational unity, Schaff shifted toward an unders tanding of unity that focused more on individuals than institutions. Schaff ' s abil ity and desi re to shi ft positions, in an atterrpt to find some means of reaching Christian unity, came in part from his mediating-school teachers. This theological/philosophical school was one of several to which Schaff was exposed during his university education. The atterrpt to develop an acceptablerrciddle ground between the c~eting claims of other schools of thought was a hallrrark of the mediating school. Thro\.l9hout his career the content of Schaff ' s ecunenical theology shifted fran one extreme to another, but the technique he used in his writings, whereby he would provide some alternative to his rrain thesis, consistently reflected the influence of the mediating school. Thcis paper will argue that the shift in emphaSis in the content of ~haff ' s art~culation of evangelical catholi cism came, at least in part, from ~s observa~lon of the theological directions taken by colleagues who shared his eady high church evangelical catholic tendenci es. Although, early in his career , Schaff was a vocal supporter of the evangelical catholicism advocated 19 by the Prussian High Orthodoxy he later shifted away fran that position because its particu~ar approach to Christian unity (at least as rranifested aroong several churchllen ~nth whan he was a~S~ia~ed) .led either to exclusive confessionalism or converslon to Ranan cathollClsm. Nelthec of the two dicections in whi ch high church evangelical ca tholicism tended t o head provided the form of Christian reunion whi ch Schaff desiced. Having been pcovided in his schooling with another nvxiel for realizing Christian unity, Schaff -- following a period of reflection - - beg~ . to pUnoc .more closely A\J9\:ISt Neandec ' s tDlderstanding of evangelical cathohclsm. In his later career, lt would be this understanding which would form the base of his efforts to achieve Christian union. Among the shifts in errphasis which were occasioned by Schaff ' s change in ecunenical direction, his views on themmner in whi ch evange lical catholicism would be realized will be discussed here. His shift in theological position is most clearly seen in the JOOdifi cation of his perception of denaninationalism and i n his undecstanding of the means by which Christian union might be achieved. Early in his career, Schaff's desire for unity steered !T¥:Ire in the direction of "church unity", that is, an institutional unity or caning together of the different branches of Christianity. In line with this desire he attacked the plethora of F.meri can dencminations and was vociferous in his condemation of those individuals who might start or join newly fowed religious groups. He came close to insisting that all Christians needed to be under a single urbrella organization to achieve Christian unity. Later in his life, Schaff ' s discussions of unity increasingly referred to individual Christians and a shared oneness in Christ. Yet Schaff did not shift so far in errphasis as to mimi c Neander and thereby ignoce the institutional nature of Christianity. By sailing increasingly in the channel of i ndividual Christianity, however, Schaff became !T¥:Ire irenic towards F.merican dencminationalism and finally wa s willing to accord each denanination some place of importance within God's plan. In addi hon, Schaff ' s pronouncellents as to when Olristian unity would be achieved also changed over the years. The failure of the Johannine Age to appeac during the nineteenth century led to a reevaluation of his millennial expectations. By the end of his career the hope of a youthful Schaff that evangelical catho! icism would be attained during the nineteenth century had faded and was replaced by a similar hope for the twentieth. It is not possible hece to do justice to the full r.ange o.f Sc~ff ' s ectmenical writings. My objective is to stimulate further lnves.llgallon ?f Schaff's later writings and particularl y a more caTl'iete coopanson of his Mercersburg and New York views. 20 Theol Philip Schaff wa s born on January 1, 1819 in Chur, SWitzerland, and baptized into the Refotilled Church. 6 His father died befo~e his fi~st birthday and not long thereafter his mother remarried and placed t~s onl y .chil ~ fran her first marriage in an orphanage. AI though not cl osely assocuted loll th his mother, Phi lip s eals t o have fnherited her pietistic tendencies which we re then nurtured by the local pastor. In 1834 he entered a boys ' ~cademy in Komthal in the kingdan of Wue r ttmberg. Komthal was one of the maJor centers of wuertterrberg pietism; and the academy was operated by pietists. The wuerUmberg pi ,:,tism of the 1830s blended a desire to spread the gospel by word and acts of chanty, and a traditional respect f or the church, with an erootional spiritual ity that sprang fran the German Great Awakening. Al though a student at the academy for less than a year, philip there experienced an evangelical conversion and, as was the tradition with this churchly form of pietis1' was confirmed as a Lutheran f ollowing a period of catechetical instruction. The following year he moved to stuttgart, another center of German pietism, and enrolled in the local gyrmasil.l11. While a s t udent there he lived in the home of Julius Mann , a leading pietist. The mrnerous pietistic influences in Schaff ' s youth gave direction to his early religious develOtment, provided an alte rnative to the later influence of Fe rdinand C. Baur ' s rationalism, and remained an influential c~onent of his ecanenical thought throughout his life. In 1837, at age eighteen , Schaff enrolled at the University of Tuebingen and was there d r awn i nto t he swirl of t heological activity that recently had overtaken GerTTiUl universities . For appr oximately two decades three main schools of theological thought had contended for daninance. Each argued that it offered the proper theological/philosophical system by which the Bible and Christiani ty shoul d be interpreted . New Lutherans sought to take the church back to the orthodoxy of the sixteenth century and errphasized the confessions of the Reforrr.ltion era . Rationalists appUed the methods of higher criticism to scripture and the beginning of Christianity. Fi nally, a mediating school sought to make use of the new c ritical methods but without destroying faith. Each school sought adherents within the academic world. In addition, t he Ranan Catholi ~ OlUrch was represented at Tuebi.ngen by Johann Moehler, a rarantic theolo~uan wh~ stressed the corporatE' side of Christiani ty. Several years before SCha~f 5 arClval Moehler had published a polemic against Protestantism. Ferd1nand Baur, arooIlg others, had responded to Moehler; and the debate between the two over the nature of Protest~tism and Ronan Catholicism was still lively when Schaff entered the university . Although several schools of thought were ~ep r~sented b~ ~rs.of ~he ~ebingen faculty, the university was known as the ca~lta l. of higher cnbc1sm. In keeping with Hegel ' s dialectic of thesis, anbthesls and synthesis, Baur understocxl. rTl.ich of the New Testament t o consi st of a .collection Of. post- ,r.,pos tolic wdtings which discl osed a controversy between Petn ne and Pauhne trends; the resulting synthesis produced the Christian Church. Even th?l19h Schaff proclaimed that Baur' s works were "unt.heology" he nevertheless a~red the man 's abiliti es and appropriated fram him the concept of t he progress1ve development of history:l0-- n , During ~s ,third year o f studies, Schaff attended the University of Halle where the mediatlng school was strong. Since this, gr,aup was primarily united and characterized by the purely ~otmal pnnclple of mediation, its theological views and practical lote.esls we re far l ess homogeneous and far more versatile than ei thee "Lutheran confessional ism or, for instance I Baue' S "Tuebingen School . But all the mediating theologians may be said to have had the following features in ca'lion. Most of them either hailed frem the [German Great] Awakening or had at least cane in contact with this movement. Their theology was, therefore, based on the e~rien~e of , personal salvation, closely bound up with the Holy Welt as lts highest authority, and indebted to church tradition. All of them considered it the noblest task of theology to bring about " the eternal pact" -- of which Schliermacher had spoken __ between Christian faith and the science and culture of their times. They, therefore, had elevated the mediation between the differences inherent ~n the age in which they lived, to the main task of theology. The mediating school at Halle was represented by Julius Mueller and Frederick Auqustus G. Tholuck. Tholuck, like Schaff, was a product of pietism and the Gennan Awakening; and during Schaff ' s year at Halle the t wo developed a close professional and personal relationship. That closeness continued even after Schaff left the 'Fiversity and served to strengthen Schaff ' s ties to the Iffidiating school. I The conci liating ways of the mediating school fit well with Schaff's personal ity, and throughout his career he sought to find the middle ground between confl i cting positions. Like many gifted scholars of the day Philip Schaff caT{)leted his theological studies at t.he University of Berlin. There he came in contact with the high-church views of Ernst Hengstenberg, and the ranantic-movement ideas of Neander and Friedrich von Schelling. Schaff was also regularly exposed to the high-church and ectmenical views of Ludwig von Gerlach during the nunenous Saturday evening gatherings which Schaff attended in the von Gerlach hare. When Frederick William IV was crowned king of Prussia, he brought to power with him a group of like-minded, theologicall y orthodox aristocrats including the Raman Catholic Radowitz, von Gerlach, and Hengstenberg. Hengstenberg arranged for Schaff to be one of his proteges and saw to it that Philip attended his course. In addition, Schaff contributed articles to Hengstenberg ' s Evangelische Kirchenzeitung. This qazette was extreTlE!ly influential in presenting the theological views of the Prussian High Orthodoxy; it had been in the Evangel j sche Kirchenzeitung that Hengst~rg ~irs~ pt!filicly proclaimed the iflllortance and necessity of the chul.'ch as an lnstltutlon. Ludwig von C.erlach's ideas included a ~Jief that th,,: churc~ was a divine institution which wa s the visible body of Chnst, and of which Chnst was the head. Just as the head and body of a living person are joined, so too, Christ is always joined to his church. The body of Ch:ist ~as, therefore ~ ~ot sare abstract concept but a physical, historical entlty Wl th the worshipl.ng camunity its visible manifestat.iCl'l. The Genran Awakening had effected both 2Z Protesta:"lts and Reman catholics. Growing out of this simila.r heritage hig~ churchmen like von C~rlach acknowledged similarities ,with the1r Roman.catho~lC brethren, and were increasingly dismayed at the disuxnty of Pro~estantlsm whi.:::h they viewed as antithetical t.o the nature of the one holy c,at,hollc and apostollc church In their att€llllts to restore the unity of the vlSIble body of Chnst these prussian aristocrats looked to the medieval church as an ideal type, and emphasized the Reformation's continuity with the Middle Ages. The Reformation was for von r~rlach, as for Schaff, the finest flower of the Middle Ages and a necessary develoF'fleJlt of catholic tradition. Based on their concept of the church, and growing out of their particular historical circumstances, those who followed Hengstenberg and von Gerlach expressed a desire for a union of what they perceived as the best of each tradition, Reman Cat.holic form~? Evwgelical Protestant substance, which would produce an evangelIcal cathollclsm. Although Philip Schaff had already graduated £rOO! the University of Berlin before schelling joined the faculty in 1841, the young privatdocent was able to attend Schelling's lectures during the years 1842-44. While it was admittedly a late addition to Schaff's theological repertoire Schelling's presentation of church history in terms of the t.hree apostles Pet.er, Paul, ~ John became Schaff's favored model of church history -- past and future. 8e9inning wit.h t.he apostolic age, Schelling -- in an argurent essentially the same as Saur used to describe the founding of the Christian Church -- posited a Petrine 6T{lhasis on aut-hori ty and objecti vi ty, a Pa,ll ine emphasis on freedOO! and subjectivity, and a synthesis of the two in a Johannine age of love. Schelling, and Schaff, differed from Saur in that they saw this Hegelian triad not just as an explanation for the fotmding of Christianity, but as the structure for the whole development of Christianity down to the present. The Johannine age, therefore, became not silT{lly an event of the past but also the glorious future in which evangelical catholicism would be manifest. It was, however, August Neander who made the greatest lasting irrpact on Schaff. A cctrbination of Schliermacher's theology and the effects of the Awakening produced in Neander an awareness of t.he importance of pii~y and led him to support a specific tmderstanding of evangelical cathol icism. writing of Neander in 1857, Schaff offered the following, ''He is more the historian of the invisible kingdom of Christ in the hearts of his individual members, th~ of t.he visible chu(ch in its great conflict and contact with the wicked world." Although Schaff attended only one of Neander's courses, their friendship and close scholarly interaction led Schaff to consider himself primarily a student of Neander. Neander's influence on Schaff wa s as much personal as scholarly. In particular, Neander ' s personal piety made a lasting irrp(ession on his disciple. Schaff's appreciation of Neander's Christian s}'lTtlathy did not, however, eliminate his disapproval of what he perceived as his teacher's failu(e to criticize others when it was needed. Early in his career, whi le roost strongly under the influence of the Prussian Orthodoxy, Schaff wished that. Neander had been roore critical of rationalists and sectarians more orthodox and roore supportive" of the View of the church as institution." Yet as Schaff aged, and his view of evangelical catholicism focused more on the invisible Kingdom of God than on the visible instit~Fonal church, he too became more accepting of those he had formerly attacked. 23 In 1841 Philip Schaff, having absorbed historical ideas and views of the church and evangelical catholicism fran a wide variety of sources, carpieted his studies at the Uni versity of serlin, passed his examinations and was granted the degree of Licentiate of Theology. Following an extended tour of Europe Schaff returned t o Berl in as a privatdocent. Between the fall of 1842 and April 1844 he lec tured, t ~ lt ored, and remained in close contact with Il\?St of his former professors -- thus ensuring their continued intellectual influence 011 him. The wide array of ideas absorbed during his years as a s tudent and yOWlg teacher continued t o affect Schaff's theological stance throughout his life. As Schaff s teered towa rd the shoreline of Christian Wlity his views concerning the church and ~icity reflected his theological indebtedness to the various schools of thought which hi s professors represented. The daninance of first one approach t.o evangel:i cal cat.holicism f ollowed by t_he other deuoflstrateci Schaff's willingness t.o shift course to wha t ever direction provided the best opportunity to realize Christian unity. t n so doing, he roade use of wha t he perceived as the best poi nt.s of each of his t.eachers. On Denaninations The occasion of philip schaff ' s inaugural address, October 25, 1844, as Professor of Church Hist.ory and Biblical Literature at Mercersburg Seminary, provided him wi th an opportWli ty t o define in great detai I his Wlderstanding of Protestantism. ''The Principle of Protestantism" was a sll'T1Tlary of Schaff' s Wliversity training in C.ermany, and would not have been considered new or unusual in that setting. In mid-nineteenth-century America, however, with its unhistorical approach to Christianity and a strong anti-Raran Catholic bias, the address caused quite an uproar. within a year the address was ~nlarged fer publication; "Iso within t.hat time Schaff was charged w1th heresy. In Thp. Principle of Protestantism SChaff vehemently attacked the entire American denaninational system, what he called the "sect system". For SChaff. Protestantism, even though an advance by the Church beyond medieval catholicism, was not wi thout its preblE:'fl\S -- it.s di s eases. The first of t hese diseases was rationalism which was ;'lone-sided theoretic subjectivism" and ultiTrately the "theology of unbelief". The second disease of Protestantism, "one-sided practical subjectivism" or sectarism, was viewed by SChaff as the rrore dangerous of the t.wo because it had "fastened itself to the heart of Protestantism" . The great nmber and variety of denaninations (which he usuall y referred to as sects) that Schaff witnessed in America appalled him. The sect system provided, A variegated sampler of all conceivable religious chimeras and dream5 .... Every theological vagabond and peddler may drive here his bungling trade, withfiut passport or license, and sell his false wares at pleasure. He declared that sects were r ooted 1n the sinful nature of mankind and particularly in a spiritual vanity. The sinful founder of a sect. could be expected to hold himsel f superior to the great reformers of the sixteenth century, and indeed to the E'fItire history of the Christian Church.o He.builds himself of a night accordingly a new chapel , in which now for the first time since the age of the apostles a pure congregation is to be fOIllled ; baptizes his followers with ~is ~ n~, t o whi c h he t.hus secures an immorta lity, unenvl able 1t 1S true , but such as is always flattering to the natural heart; rails and screams with full throat against all that refuses to do homage to his standard' and with all ~his though utterly unprepared to Wlderstand ~ single book, is ~ot ashamed to appeal continually to the Scriptures, as havlng be~ sealed. entirely, or in large part, to the understandlng of e1ghteen centuries, and even to the view of O\lr Reformer~ themselves, till now at l ast God has been pleased to lnndle the true light in an obscure corner of the New World! 14 25 • This sect s ystem wa s manifest in the United states in the separation of ch~rc~ and s tat,:, ~d the ~ro liferation of religious bodies fcnned by the free assocl~tJ ?J1 ~ f rel , l~l ousJ.y llke-minded individuals. The result was a perversion of Chns~ l anl~Y. VIsIble 10 t.he pr,oc.larration of "neology" rather than theology, and the llTpOSltion of personal opInion upon the biblical text.. For Schaff, the ;:meri c~n den~national syst.ern and the sect.s that flQvrished under it were a pros t ] tuhon of Protest.anhsm and s atanic in nature}) Nor wa s Schaff ' s vehemence limited solely t o t.he American syst.em. He was equally forcef ul in his attack upon speci fi c denaninations. Unitari. ans and Universalists werE' condemed as heretics. Eiel£ots o f the early Wes leyan ITOvernent were .:I.ttacked as ser.essi onist.s, and thei r later split fran the Church of England lJas label ed " unnatural and wrong". Even " orthodox" Protestants __ Episcopalians, Luth~ans, and Reforned - - we.e cmstised for t.heir hostility lowards one anot her. I~ Schaff opposed sect·", f or a va riety of reasons; the first was their unhis t Orlca l na ture. Much of 1I.me>tican dencmi.nationallsm s aw litt.le or nothing of vil! l1e betwe€'n Ye t. even wit.hin t his very forceful ;:!,ttack upon t he Ameri can Oe1crnillOit iO!l OlI .c;VSlPlA, this ",r:'nlP!lical t heologian r:ould s t ill find at least a word or two o f faint. praisf' for dpnaninations, a zig to accQ'I1)any the zag. Since C.ad ... ould hi! th'" ('Il O> t o ra ise lip the One Church just as it wa s God who worked all good throughout his!_ory, Schaff arguoo , rationa lism and sect.arism, ... hile works of the rlevil, WBrF! nevertheless tools which Goo used to bdng sane good int.o being. $f.ets hild wnrth in that they t.ended to arise in response t o s~ fault or we;:!,k ness withi n the wider Church. Schaff felt, however, that h3vlng point.ed t o t he defici",nc:y in the larger Church, sect s l ost their right to exist t,o the Sail.,. do'!g ree that the Church corrected the fauJt that led to !_he spl~t. Chri s tianit'y wi'l ~ an indivisihl e unity, and the sin of .the sect. wa~ ItS belIef t hat it could [",acll perfection in s eparation fran the lIfe of the .w lder Ch~rch. For Schaff, the g rowth o f di.vi sion ,within t.,he d:urch woul~ co~ tlnue unt~l.at. l ast., in e xasperati on ... ith dencminatlonal s t rIfe, I t would gl vebnth to a, IlVlng desire f or Chri~!, ian union. Tn that. sense, God could use even satan s sect 5ysten f or good. It is in c~ring philip ,5t:haff ' s initi a l and fin~l posit ~~s that his change in course is roost evident. "The Retmion of Chn~tfflldan was ~s conci liatory as The Principle of Protestantism was confrontatlonal. In thIS 26 final paper which was t>resented t.o t. he World ' s Parliament I)f Re ligions in Chicago on Septf'!'l'ber 25, 189:i, lesn than one JOOTlth before his neat.h , the enphasis was on unity withi n diversity. It is fitting that Schaff began his final paper by reciting Jes us' repl y t o hi s discip I es, ''W i th men thi s is irrpossibl e , but wi th God a II things are possibl e" (Ma t t. 19: 26). Al t.hollgh the question the disci pI es asked pert.a i ned ~ o s alvat ion , Schaff >lr:knnwlwgf> The fuln.;.ss of ChI istiani I.y wa s not. t.o be found in anyone denanination, but only in t.h":! totality of d"n(.,\inations and l herefore every Christian denanjroat.ion, Schaff c lairned, ""'il l retain its dist. inct.ive peculiarity". HE' had cane to accept t hat the destruc tion o f dencminat:ions ... ould not. nccllr in t~ l ",1 tirrOf'!; th'" I''''union of Chr-i.c;t .. ndrm WI'I S essential l y an eschatol O9i ca I event, ('..00 ' s dOl ng. Nev"'rthel ess, there w,;o s m..lcn t hat i ndi vidual s and denOTli nations cOHld do to "'ork toward t.hat· reunion. tn Schaff ' s desirp. t.o find a way by which cbl'istian union coul d be achievAd, he providerl a list of mP.ar~C; for praroting Christian union, lIrgP.O a reSo:'llution of the controvers y over t.he Fili ?9'.~: a~ even s uggest.€-d t.hat t.he pope "s hould inf allibly declare his own falhblll t.y mall mattprs ly:ing outside of his own cUlII .lnion, and i nvite Greeks and Protest.ant.s to a fraternal pan-Christl an cO\Ulcil in J erusalem." IlIt.irMt.el y ... hat Christians should look for wa s not. an organic union under onp govell~nt., but r a ther a br oade r union that would include Ol:;;t,hodox , Reman r"',athollc amI. Protestant Churches ,alder t.he " headship of chd st . "J~ Pi na II 't, true cathol i ci t.y could not be I imi tP.d t o Chrj sli ani t.y a lone. ~ Schaff look~ t.o t.he culmination o f histor y, the Johannine Age , he accepted It. as a s!'l't hesis of the church and the wor ld. Ulti~tely , Chr ist. and his church wou!d ~elgn over t.~e whol e of htln!mity. Schaff concluded the paper by urging Chns~lans t.o f orgIve ~ f orgel each other ' s sins and errors and [t1roerrOer only the VI rtues and ITIE' ri ts. 27 'T'h~ t oru! ~ f '''T'h", Retmion of Christendcm" was Ill.Ich ITO r e conci I iatorv th~ ~n~ of hIS preVl?US ,works on Chri.s Uan re\lnion. Yet even in this highly opt.Unlstl c work SChaff s Vlew of e<:1..Il"Jenl c(t1 relations did not reflect unbounded exuberance . Schaff dE>da r ed that Lhe l arge m.rrber of dencminat.ions was " a r e~r'1ch t o the Chl.i sUan name" and s aw denominational jealousy as a growing eVil. Incl uded WI t.h the actual address, in t he publ ished vers i on was an appP.ndix which c on t.ained If>tters of r e,<;ponse anri reaction by c hllr c~ IOho had revi ~ed the arlrir ess . Selected by Schaff bim;:;el f hem among the nl.fllerous let ters receiv~ j us t. pr i or t o h,i s ? ea.th, t he cor responnpnce i nr.J uded in the appendix proclallTM:!d t.hanks for hIS I nSl ghl~ and pr oposals, hut a lso words o f caution r.onceni ng thl? i ntr i ca: d es of ecuneni cs. Wonis of apprecia t.i on a n Des pj t. e thp worrls o f (;<1' 11 ion, "The Re uni on of Christendem" procl a .i med a highl y celE'hr a tory viE'w o f de-naru.n(l t. ions and t.he prospects for Christian r eunion, Tha t. conci l i a t.ory ", ta"ce did not silfl)ly a rjse a t li f e ' s end. ~: arl es eariier, i ndeerl nol r1\3 ny ye-i'l r s after lhe plthl i cat.ion of The Princi pl e of Prot.est.anti !':lT1, Scha ff ' s P(lrlif"s t moVf"fT\en ts i n t ha t dirpct ion coul rl he s een alOO9s i rl", his at t a: cks on s e c t (t ri anism, As ",;pl aceO hy iI s aTlF'Wha t more i r~ic discussi on of rl ffiooU nat i ons. 'J'h .. di v i si QI""IS of Prot est ant j sm w.. r e s t. i II conside r ed f> vi I and rles tnlct.ive and t heir e-xi s t.pncE' i n l\mPriCII hild t umen the l ilnd i nt.o a rel i gi ous hat.tlefi p1ri; t.hp o rt hodoxy o f s ane dpnrmi nations Wil S still being ques t.ioned; and s ect s we r e "ps eudo-prot",stant O!'xtrffi"le.<;' '' I"h,, \" were "confus ed rni xtllt es of privat.f" upinion..<; " . Bll t s ec t'. s we n!! no longel denolmcoo as s atanic. Instead, Schaff , at. t his point in his career, tended t o recognize t.hp divisions of Chr istianity as nf."(:essa ry " vil s , tl,f" requirj¥l prel ud E' l o a new reformat.i on t.ha t \oIol, ld usher i n thO' .J ohann i ne agf" of lUli ty , After nearl y a decarle of teaching and writing an €'xhaustp(l Phi li p Schaf f , in the fa ll of I RS:>, wa s grant...o a l eave of ",!>sence f r crl'1 Merce rsburg and I!IlharkP.rl on a ypar-] ong trip t.o Eu r ope , Dq ring his E\n"opean sabbati cal SChaff lOas f requpn\" 1 y a .':Ike<'! to d ..s e d 1)1;' AJ1 l1"' ri c <1n c'li tur p and he gave s eve n I ].,ctures on t.he t. opi c to iI vaript.y o f audiences. A. book based on t.hose lectHres was pub!is herl: in Berl in in 1854 iI.nn a yeilr l a t.er in t he Uni t ed Stat es, In America, A Sket..-:b of its Pol iti .-:a l , socia l , "'nrl Re-liqiol.ls Charact.e r Schaff paid t.ribut.e t o hi s new 1H nd ann ,$ lmrnri zed i t.s char ac t.er as he percei ved it. f oIl owi ng a decade of experi en ce . ; ~ Alt.hotl 7B h~ favorably highlight€ It. brings all sort s of impure rootives int.o play, and encourages the use of unfai r or at. least questhlilabl e means for the prcrootion of it.s ends. It nourishes party spirit and passion, envy, selfishness, ana bigotry. It changes the peaceful kingdol1 of c..od into a battle-field, where brothe r fights brother, not, of course, with sword and bayonet , yet wlth loveless harshness and all rranner of detraction, and too often subordinates t.he int.erests of the chllr('h unive rsa l to those of his own part.y. It tears to pieces t.he beautiful body of Jesus Christ, and continually throws in among its members the fire br;mos of jealousy and discord , instead of rMk ing thew work together harrooniousl y for the Satre hIgh and holy end. ' It is import.ant to note tha t :i n t.his lO ork Schaff introduced a distincUon bet.we<"n sect. and sect spirit.. He first attributed to a theologian f riend (presuITahly John w. Nevin) an tmder st.anding of the sect. syst.em as t.he "American AntiChrist." Wh ile neither affirming nor denying that assessment, Schaff continued hy st.ating lbat "pious minds" disappnwPd of "the sect s pirit". This particul a r spir.it " recedes in proport ion as the genuin~ spirit of ChristianHy, t.he ~jting and coope rative spirit of brotherly love and peace, makes itself f e l t.." '! wit.h the i ntroduction of t.his new distinction between sect and sect spirit, Schaff slightly t6'lllered his opposition t o the dencmi national division that. was a part of Arrer.ican church life. A decade later, In 1865, Schaff returned to Europe d\\ d ,ng a post Civil WCir sahbCIt.ir:al. Thlring the rmma of speo'!ches which lOere part. of t_his excurSlOn he d",cl are By October 18 , ]871, when he delivered his i naugural address as Profess,?r of Ap?logetics, Syrrbolics, and Theological Encyclopedia at. Union Theologlcal Seminary, New Yo rk, Philip Schaff was able to articulate the ectrneni cal position he would hold throughout the remainder of his career. Union is no roonotonous lmiformity, but ilTplies variet.y and full developnent. of a ll t.he various types of Christian doctrine and discipline as fa r as they are founded on constitutional differences, m9 de and intended by God himself, and as far as '9 • !_hey an~ ?uppl"",~ oe ntary rather than contradictory. True tuli on IS esSP.IltH lly Inw~rd and spiritual. It does not r equire an e)(tem~ l am:-J9amat~on of exist.ing organizations i nto one , but. may eXist wIth.thelr perfect independence in thei r own spheres o~ l abor: I t. IS as far r emoved frOO1 iocii fference to dencmina tlo~ al cI~St.lct.iQ~s, as fron sect arian bigotry and exclusiveness. It IS qlll t f! r.ons 1 ~t.p.nt wi t h I oya I ty to t.ha t. pa rtj cu1 a r branch o~ Chri st. ' 5 kingdan wi t.h whi ch we are severa 11 'I connected by hI rth, regenpratI on or providential call. Evtlry one IlJ.lSt. labor In that. part of the vineyard wheCf~ Provirienc@ puts him, and where he can rio most. 900:1. The Church of (".od on earth is a vast. spiritual terpie wi t h rmny stories, and each st.ory has many , ap<)rhnents; to, be in this house Most r1i ffprellces het.wef'!n denCfTlinat j("ln .." Br.hliff now felt, were onl y seconoary in nat ure and therf'!fore not. t.ruly £unrlaJTlAnt.i'll. He later d ecla r.~, ''We should love th.;om (1)50 hf:>,caus f>. of their pecul i a rities and differences . . . " This acceptance of va riet.y pxtenrlerl e Vfm to (I den(nlin8tion' ..,. cl Schaff' s l a t. €' r rf;!<;OllT'I€'I"II"iation for Christ.i '0 Ecclesiology Philip Schaff's concept. of the Church provided t.he t.heological justification for his view of dencrn:ina~ions. During (he, 1840s and ea rly 1850s Schaff ' s ecclesiologv displayed the lnfluence of Ludwlg von C"-.eriach, Ernst. Hengstenherg, and oth"ers who 5upportP.d. a highly favorable view of the ilTportance of t.he instit_utional Church. schaff, following the lead of these Prussian high churct-men, pointed t.o t wo bihlical SOllrces -- St. Paul's d%'cription of the (:hurch as the Body of Chri st (Rcm:;lnS, t ('.or., etc.) and .Jf'!5U.c; ' prcmi se a I ways to be with the Church (Ma tt..) - - to snbstant:i ate hi s eccll!.!\iology. In addition, a high opinion of the Middle Ages and the Medieval Chllrch derived frcm early nineteent.h-cent.ury Rananti cism also contributed t o t.l)js th€'Ological posit.ion; "The Mioole A.ges hav,," been taken up by Protest.ant ism. , .. t 11.1 t.hough schaff seemed tn pers(ll1ify the Mediating SChool ' s way nf steering a cours". between extremes, his early wri t. ings disclosed the strong influenc,," of the high-church position anri in particular vnn Gerlach' s nollons of the visible c hurch -'l.S the Body of Christ.. Sr::haft's st.atarent,s concerning the Body of Christ were m:)st clearly and fully articulated in his first three major works, The Principle of Protestantism (1845 ), what is Church History? (1.8 4';) , and Hi.c;t.ory of thp- Apost.olic Church (1851), 115 he s01l9ht bnth to rp-puoi at.e Arneri can primi ti vist theo! ogy and arlvance an ~mmical vision groundf'd :in an al'pr~iation o f the progressive oeveloplcnt of Church hist.ory. Sch.:..ff disbngu il' h~ betw","'n the idea of t.he Church in God ' s mind wh ich was perfect and cCfllllete and unchanging, and the "actual lTWlifestation" of t.he Chllrch on earth whir::h was (orct'd to struggle wit.h an ungodly worlo as well as i lit erna 1 foes. The eart.hl y chllL'ch mi 1i tant, on] y a it.E'r Sill vi ving its di seases and being "purged frern sin and error", would becane the heavenl y church tr.il~hant. SChaff declarPd that the Church on earth wu ccrrpos~ of bot.h a "visible chllrch" and all "invisihl,., church". The visi.ble church included all t.hf' haptized, "whether they be nanin.. l Christians only or real " . H".! ar::knowled9ed that t.he visible church containP.d. divisions wh ich corr".!sponded to the different ,~onfessions of the chm-ch anrl which often were in hosti 1", relation to one another. Within the visible chur ch existed the invisible church wh ich schaff iabeled the "pure church". In cont.rast tt"l t.he visible church, th:is chvtch was C":CII'I'POSen of trw~ ~liever s, those unit Because Jesus declared that hI':! would always be with his followNs , SChaff. af~i~ that the Body of Christ had been present t.hroughout the history of Chnstlanlty; and was Se<'m in the c'lrpor;;r.t.(> nature of th'" faith. For SChaff in his early career, t.his lo!(! to a softened ~hasis on individueal salvation and a heightened alot.3.reness of the ettrm.Jnal nature of the Chllrch which was TrOSt evident in the gat.hered, worshiping , C(J mllTl:i ty and i n t.he hist.orical continuity of the Church throughout the ages. " ; . .. Even though ~e acknowledged differences between the visible arxl lnvisible church,. SC,haff s n:lferences to the ~y of Christ as part of his attacks on sectarIanI sm tended t o blur the distinction. In those situations Schaff' s polemical st~n?e tended t o leave t.he reader wHh the irrpression t.hat he ~lso /!qualed t.he vls]bl~ church,. the inst.itutjona] church, wHh the Body of Chnst, The resuI t of thl s hi urn ng was t.hat discussions of oneness tended toward, although never flllIy e:roraced, the need for one institutional church. True t o the ~iating school ' s attempts always t o sail between the extremes, Schaff never fully went t o the point of proclaiming the need f or only one institutional church; inste Al though Sr:haff hrief l y usoo t.he t erm "Body of Chdst. " in an address t.o the t"".erman Evang.,l i c In De r BurgE"rk rieg (1865), Schaff int.roduced the metaphor of the many laborers in the viney;:m-i . Tn t.his descd ption of the Church , each laborer was assi gnl!ld t.o CII I t i va te A ~pecj f i C s.ect i on of the vineyanl. The chAnge in errq:Jhasi s frr'.fT1 t.he one Body i s ch"ar. Tns tead o f JrefThers all organically connected to 8 Ilni f iM who le, t.h@ vinpyarri is a place in which wor.kers function s eparately. Althollgh t.here i s a s i ngl e ()W!1~r I and his vi ney 11. coo-parison of the dates for Schaff ' s p ronouncements on Ameri can denmrinationalism and his ecclesiological statements suggests that Schaff ' s ecclesioiogical position, at least in his use of t.heological methaphors, trailed behind his changing attitudes OIl nencminations. schaff ' s writ.ings d isplayed his attE!l'lllt to fi nd a s uitable theologk.al language to explain the s hift in aUitude t.oward American dencminationalism that he had already experienced. Although 32 schaff apparently eliminated T!l.Ich of his us~ of theol.ogical langua.ge associated with high-church evangelical catholicism dunn? the nud 18505: he dld not rep~ace it wit.h language roore attuned to Neander s underst.andlng of .ev~ge~lcal catholicism for nearly a decade. During t.hose int-ervemng y~ars, .I t IS 11~ely t.hat. he was in search of a satisfactory means for groundlng hIS practlcal experience in a suit.able et':clesiology. Schaff's changing position on Church unity can ~ seen in his ex~p.sis and frequent use of t.he proof text, " SO there will be one flO Away with hunan denaninations, down wit.h religious sect.s ! Let our watchword be: Or'Jf! spirit and one bociy! One Shepherd and one flock! All conventicle and chapels ~,t perish, that from their ashes may rise the on", Church of ('.00 .... J{ During his t.ransition",l years Schaff stated, . .. if wo;> look to the f inal en Finally, :u a professor in New Yor k wi t.h his course-correction caTFl ete, Schaff proclaimed, 11nit.yof out.ward organization is not absolutely necessary for the unity of the chllr ch . This is esso;>ntially spiritual. Our savior prrmisl"d t.hal'. I.h .. rp will he "one flock and on'" shepherd" (as t.he Greek original and t.he Revised Version have it) hut not one "fold" and one shepherd (as the Latin Vulgate and the Aut.hori7.oo Version wrong I y ann mi schi foOVOUS I y render t.hl!! passage in John )( .16) . rherl!! Tl'o3y bP. many folds, and Yl!!t one and the same flock under Christ., t.he great. arch-;;hephern of souls. Even in Heaven there will bP. "many mans i OrIS. to) At the beginning of his career, Schaff ' s use of "one flock" provided support f or his desired unit.y of t.he Church with its overtones (although not outright. affirl'Mtion) of inst.utiOMI tmi nn. Shifting course during the latter half of his Mer~rsburg years , Schaff ' s desir":! for an organic union was still present, but he could no longer affirm t.he Jrore institutional aspects of \mity. As a result, and in concert with Neander's errphasis, he professed a desire for t.he tmit.y of believers. The consdousness ann signif:icance of t.his shift. is found in his c:hoico;> of th", phrase "one holy cat.holic: kingdOOl of Christ" where t.he tradi t.ional and creedal responsl'! would lead one nat.urally to I!!xpect t.hat Schaff would have usoo "Church" instead of "kingdom of Chri,st". Later in his career Schaff was explicit. that Chrislian unit.y did not. require inst.itut.ional unity. His argument was for one flock, the group which was under the shepherd's care, as clearly differentiated fran one fold, a single entity into which all the sheep might be gat.hered. 33 • The Mid-('.ourse Correction . . No~-, able changes in, Schaff ' s f'Mnner of defining evangelical cathoilc lSln eVIdently OCC llrr'1 pnor t. o his 1871 inaugural address as professor at Uni on Theoi09jcal Semina ry . S The limited nature of Schaff's writings during t.he late- Antebel l U11 and ci vil War periods ITI3.ke it di fficul t t o Imow exactly when those changes were inaugarat,ed , or how they developed wi t hi n Schaff's mind. The HerCf'!t'sburg Review, of whi ch Schaff wa s s aneti rre edi t or and regular contri butor , was not. published during t. he war. He ne ither authored nor edited any major t.heological books during those years; and t.hose writings that Schaff did produce during t he decade t~t bo:!9an a bout 1857 f ocused a hros t e xc l usi vely on t opics othe r than ~" iE'I Li sm. '!'he onE' work fran thi 5 per i od whi eh nea I t at. I eas t peri pheraJ 1y wi t.h eclrnenical acti vity was Dl:!r Bll r ge rkri eg und das Chri s tliche LebP.n in Nord-Amerika (1865) whi ch, in many ways , was a general narr ati ve of American life and .. ctivi t i es riUrlng t.he Civi I Wa r and whi ch include<"! Ameri can r eligious activity as one of s everal war-related concerns . r'.. The mill i ons of voltmt.eers who contri buted time and money t o Christian efforts convi nced Schaff that r eligion in America could s tand any t.es t. , even the turbulent condition o f civi l war. The United St.at f':! S San i t a r y Coomi s sion contributed medici ne , food suppl ies, and c l ot.hi ng t.o soldiers of both sides. The united states Chrlstian Ccmni ssion cared f or the sick and wounded, regardless of the col or of their uni forms . Both organizatinns wen> support.ed ent:irely bysubscri pt.ion. Four thousand c lerical and lay volunteers visited bat t.1 ehel ds and hospital s to d:i st ri bute t.ract.s and religious newspapers. Prea chers held tent meetings and quietly ministered t.o the wounded and dying. The American Bible Society distributed over two million Bi bles t o the union Armies and a half million to t.he Southern Armies . SChaff worked in the area bet.ween l\.nnapolis and RidInond. These cha ritable acts opened Schaff's eyes to t he new truth that war could not. destroy religiolls life in J\merica. He was irlllcnsely proud of Christian activity during the war. I t had shown t.hat "loxr for one's enemies cannot be stifled by the raging passions of war." Del' Burgerkrieq, however, was not. a theological t.reatise but. instead a celebration of American spirit and co-operation in the midst of the t.errible conflict -- interrlenaninational co-operation being sirr{lly one aspect of Schaff ' s , celebrat.ory narrative. The church rustorlan, therefore, is faced with a nearly silent. decade in regards t.o Schaff ' s ectJnenical stance. fran approximately 1857 unti I SCfl"etime during t.he Reconstruction years SChaff's various interests led ,• him awav frem fllrther discussion of his ch('rished evangelical catholicism. Yet even before that decade, Schaff was showing signs of tacking to a new heading. " In contrast to Bowden, Klaus Penz('l sees the course change as 1:>('9iooing rruch e~rlier, during Schaff's 1853-54 Europ('an trip. In particular Penz('l points to Schaff ' s Trini ty Sunday ('vening ll'lO':'di t.ation during his visi t to Trent, Austria, (site of t.he fann\1S sixt('enth-c('ntury R<:m;I.n council) . Although Schaff cont.inued t.o advor:l)te the relmion of all Christians, Penzel argiles t.hat frem t.his point. onwa rri sch1'lff saw his p('rsonal task t.o ~ the rr~Jr(, narrow on(' of fostering the reunion (If evangel .ical Prot('st.antism. ~ Because th(' Tn'nt meditation experience came towards t.he end of Schaff ' s E\\ropean trip, only a , hrief glirrpse of his ec~rnenical chang(' in cours(' was visible in America. , AI t.hough tll(, acU om; assoc:iat.ed wi th int.('rdencmi national acti vi ty dllring t.h e Ci vi I War may we-II have gi ven scme di recti on to Schaff's np.w cours<:,:, and may have even increased t.he speed wi t.h wh ich his ideas modified, Penzel identifies Austria of t.he mid-1850s as the locat.ion of SChaff's ecunenical course correction. Whil e Schaff's mid-course correction was lTOSt likely influenced by his first European tri p as well as t.he Ci vi I War, it is the opinion of t.he author of this paper that neither of t.hese two eVf"nts was the sole or even the init.ial cause of his shift of OplnlOn concerning denaninations and ectID"'nici ty; the factors which cont.ributed to his shi ft in positjon were mul t.ifaceted. Evangelir:a I cat.hol j cislll was supposed to Imi te RCUBn Cltholic form and Evangel ical Protestant substance to creat.e a new Christi an uni ty. Schaff was an ent.hu.'li asti c supporter of thi s goal and proel aimed. that John wi II iam50n Nev~n. "occupie~ es~ent.iall."i the same ground t,hat I do and ~onfirm:: me in my POSltlon. He IS fllled With the ideas of German theology. " Yet fran 1850- 1853/54 Schaff watched, virtually helpless, as his friend and colleague st.ruggled with the decision of whether or not to convert to Ranan Catholicism -- an action evangelical catholicism never int"'nded. Throughout t.he lat.e 1840s th'" "church Question" was uppenrost in t.he theological works of bot.h Schaff and Nevin. By t.he end of the der.ade Nevin was fairly pessimistic about. t.he fut.ure of Christ.iani ty Iinder t.he s""ct system. The concept of Chllrch beCillTle ""ven more GrHical for Nevin with the Church of Fngland ' s Gorham case of ]850. He l"€'sponded t.o that ""vent. with a series of artiel es during 1851-2 in which he probed the nature of the Church and questioned the legi timacy of Protestant-ism. He resigned fran hi.s professorship at Mercersburg Seminary in 1851 and fran the presidency of Marshall Col leg"" in 1853, the same year it. rroved fran Mercersburg to Lancaster, to devote additional time t.o personal reflection. Schaff expressed conc""rn for his friend and colI eaglle in a numer of publ i C CcrTTf'P..nts during N~vin's time of turrooil. In "German Theology and the Church Question", Schaff sllTlllt.aneously at.terT{lted to support Nevin in his theological strugole and chastise him for considering such a backward move as to return t.o Rane ."Ul q . . Schaff ' s 18~3 - 5 4 t.rip to Genrany, which was designed f or re )Uv,:"atlOJ'l, returned h1m to Berlin ~here, in the decade since his departure, the . high-churc:J-men had moved. theo.l ogleall y f r an an ect.. "e . 1i ea 1 posi ti on t o a stnctly pro-Lut.heran confesslon.al1sm: That Schaff wa s opposed to this changed focus on t. he part. of t.he PnlSSlan ~ugh-churdTOen was evident frOO) his later crihcism o~ Hengs~e~rg in ~rma~ y. Al though he s poke favorably 'of Hengs t. ermerg 5 oPPosItIon t.o ratlonahsts, semi-rationaii.o;ts and liberals and rus awa reness o f hist.ory, he was not suppo r tiw~ of his former professor ' s lack of openness to ot.her denoorinat.ions. And he re is tht> defect i n the high-churchism of HeIl9stenber-g and his schon.I. The churchly tendencies which are indeed needed, should not flOlJ In t.he narrow c hannel of Lutheran denaninationalism, or any ism or SIK''-, but bo;> as broad and cCtT{lrehensive as t.he kingdem of Christ., and i n harmony wi th t. he deepest. wan ts and mov~nts of ~he aae that hat€'s dpspot)!'\I11 anr! lovps frE'edem in Chllrch and Stat.e. - In these fel low support.ers of evangeli cal cathohcism Schaff now saw not a synthesis of Pauline and Ppt.rine trends t o f orm a new Johannine age - - not. even a nesire for the synthesis -- but r a t.her a hardening of t.heological positions inte> spPCific versions of Pau]jne and Petrina c~s, and a coercing of indivirluals into one crurp or t.he ot.her. We rray s peculat.e, t.herefor e, that Schaf f ' s oh«p rvation of Npvin and the Prussians as they move..-! away frem t he uni on of the best. of cat.holicism and PI-o t.est.antism, away f ran Christian reunion as Schaff eonvisioned it, led him t.o seek a new course heading whi ch would bring him to his destination. The winds of ecunenicity had changed d.irect.ion and wha t Schaff ohse rved in hi s frienrls in t.be early 1850s led him to try a di fferent tack in his jo,.mey t.o Christ.ian \lD ity. I n addi tion, Schaff left f or Europe wi t.h a di Herent. understanding of F\rne>ri can denaninati on..<; Hvm that which he had when he PlJtered the country a rlp.cade earlier. fly the tirre nf his ret.um to (""",rmany, Schaff had observed, and was wi J 1 j ng t.o concede t.hil t , despi t e "111 the bickering and fight i ng between dencmlnations 10100 the evil o f the se.-:t systen, Amer i(:an denmrina tionalism was succeeding het.tp-r in ch'.rchiD9 t.he Uni t.ed St.at.es than the state <:-.hu rch s ys tem was doing in Europe. Frem a praGUcal perspective that observation gave him an insight i nto American dencminational ism t ha t W 36 th'lt he was not willing to accept.. Becau.<;e Schaff ' s t.rip to Europe allowed him t.o observe first-hand the changes t.hat had occurred in t.he theological position of Hengsteni>erg and his support.ers, this author agrees with Penzel t.hat t.he first European trip wa s crucial for Schaff's ecrnlenical course change. It SCUllS, however, that Berlin, where Schaff spent a considerable amount of time visi ting friends and delivering public lect.ures, nay have been a more inflliential location t.han Trent. And H. is oossible t.hat Mercersburg, frem whi ch he left exhausted, was at least as equally 'influential among the factors whi ch led to his mid-course r.orrecti on. Schaff, t.herefore, was left- in a position where t.hose who shared his initial means of verbalizing his belief in evangelical catholicism were moving in opposite directions to equally extr eme positions. At the same time, those who did not necessarily sha re his underst.anding of how t.o verbalize t.he desirE' for ccuToenic:ity, and t.he oneness of the church, nevert.he less were sharing his ecltTlenical desire on a practical level. In response t.o t.his perception of t.he situat.ion, Schaff began his m:wement during t.he mid-fifties frem the Prussian High Orthodoxy view of evang",lic(li cCl t.holicism t.o Neander's lmderst.anding of evangelical catholldsm which f ocused more on the individual than on the i nst.j t.uti anAl church. Neander's evangel i ca I catho lid sm had fOlmd its root.s in t_he shar~ experi ences of Protestant.s and Rerum Cat.hol i cs in t.he ('.0t3rmaTI Great Awakening . For Schaff , shared .;.xperience::< C 37 ('.oncl usi on Although Philip Schaff denied any basic change in his ectrnenical t~e ol ogy, cont.~~aries as .well as modem-day church historians have generally dl!' An ::8 At the conclusion of ThP. Princ iple of Protestantism Schaff voiced a hope t.hat the Johannine age would be i naugura ted during the nineteenth century and in 1\merica. As both t.he nineteent.h century and Schaff ' s career came to conclusion, he expressed a similar desire t hat. the tWBnUeth centHry wOllld be the time when God would have great things in store for the Church. As was so typi<:al of Schaff's theology , his Johannine-age millennialism also tended to steer a course bet ween t he extremes. Although he opposed the pre-millennial Imderslanding of a destru~tive i ntervention by C~ at the close of the pre~ent time , Schaff was not consist.ent.l y post-mi 1 lenni al ei ther. He general J y supported the notion that individuals and dencrninations could, and did , contribute to the progression of history which would culminate in the Johannine age. At the same time, however, he understood that nothing short of divine intervwtion wO\l ld bring about the changes necessary to inaugurat.e true C}l\Irch union. Having done what. he could to advance Christiani ty beyond it.s Pet.rine and Pauline influences and direct it toward the new Johannine Age, less than a mont. h aft.er "The Reunion of ChristendOOl" was presented, Schaff died in his bed in the earl y rooming hours of October 20,1893. The grClnite marker on his grave includ!!!d t.he follOWing words: '''p, Teacher of Theology for Fift.y Years. Hist orian of t.he Church. President of t,he ~rican ('".cmni t.tee of Bible Revjsion . He i\dvocat.f'd th.. Reunion of ChristendOOl." • Bi hi iography Bowden , Henry. "Phi I i p Schaff and Sectarianism; t.he Americanization of a European Viewpoi nt" Journal of Church and state 8:97- 106 Wi n t.p. r 19fi6. _ _ , ed" Ca''';;~ .Johnson, Kathryn. "The HHs tard Seed and t.he Leaven : Philip Schaff ' s Confident Vi ew of Ch ristl an Hist ory" Episcopal c:h'lt"ch 50 :117- 1 Nichols , JatMs. The Mercersburg Theology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1966. Rl'lT'oan ti c ism in Amer ican Theology; Nevin and Schaff at. Mp.r cp. r sburg. Chicago: Un l versit.y of Chicago Press, 1 961 . Payne, J ohn. " Schaff and Nevi n , Col I e>\gues at Me rcer s burg: The Chur ch Question" Chu r ch Hi st.Ory 61( June, 1992) : 169-190 . PenzE!l , }{la't~. "Church Hi s t ory anrl t.he EclfTlP.ni cal Q\lest.. 11 Study of t.he ('..ennan &! r: kground and Tho\lght. of Philip Schaff" ThD diss ertation, Union Theologica l semina r y , New York, 1962 . "Phi l ip Schaf f' s Li fe-Long Ques t For ' Evangelical cathol icism ' ''. 11 paper del i vered t. o t.he Mer cersburg Soci et.y, SUlliler 1993. Le t.t.er t.o ______, ed .. philip schaff: Historian ~nd Ambassador of th, Universal Church . Select-en Writings. Macon , ('.a.: Mercer University Press, 1991 . Schaff , Phi I ip. J\merica. P. Ske t ch of Its Politj r:al. Social. and Reli!j!ious cMrac ter. edited by Per ry Hiller. (Based on l ectures deli vered sept.., l A54) carmridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1961 . An essay re~d before the National --' "The Anglo-Flrnerican Sabbath". Sabbath Convent.i on , Saratoga, 1IUgHs t 11, 1863. Schaff, Philip. "Der Burgerkrieg tu1Cl das Christliche Leben in Nord-Amedka" . Translated by Charles C. starbuck as "Dr. SChaff ' s Lectures en America. Delivered in Europe, 1865". Christian I ntel1igencer Harch-May, 1866. Christ. and Christianity; Stud.ies on Christology. CrE!f:!ds and confessions. Prot.estantism, RCl"Mnism, Refotmation Principles, Sunday Observance. Religious Freedom, and Christian union. New York: C SCribner, 1885. Philadelphia, --" "Chris tianity in America : A. report prepared for t he meeting of the EVangelical Alliance hel d i n Berlin in Septerber, 1857" The Mercersburg Review IX(Oct ober , 1857) :493-539 . --" "The EVangelical Chur ch Diet o f Germany" The Merc ers burg Review IX( January, 1857 ):1-28. "German Theology and the Church Question" The H1'!rcershurg Quarterly Review V( Januar y , 1853) :124-144. --" . ndsay and OPr Heidelberger Katechi smus . Philadel phia, 1863. His.t oryof the A.po..qt olic Church: With a General I nt.roduction t. o Church H1story. New York: Scribner, 1853 ( c .l8Sl]. History of the Chrjstian Church. New York' Scribn 1894-1910. (Initially pub1ish~ in three vollll'les 18SS-1867. ~:~ised and enla:9ed to seven [eIght.] volllTles bet.ween 1882 (. 1910 and cOOi>leted by hlS son.) , 41 • schaff, Philip. The Principle of Protestantism As Related to the Present St.ate of the Church, translat.ed by John W. Nevin , 1845 . Vol. 1 of Lanca~ter Series on th~ Mercer~burg Theology, Bard ThOO{lson & George H. BrIcker, eds .. Phlladelphla: United Ch,~ch Press, 1964. The Progress of Rei igious Freedcm As Shown in the History of Toleration Acts. New York: SC ribner, 1889. "Recol lections of Neander " The Mercersburg Revi~ III (January, 1851):73-90. "The R€union of Christ.endcm" A Pf!I?er pr€pared for t.he Parliament of Religions and the Na tiona l Conference of the Evangelical Alliance held in Chicago. September and October , 1893 . New York : Evangelical Alliance Office, 1893. "The State Church Syst.em in Europe" The Mercersbllrg Review rX (January, 1857):151-166. Thp. V8.t.ican Decrees in Their Be~ring on Civil Allegiance; A Political Exposition. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1875. What. Is Church History? A Vindi~,.a ____ , carp .. "T~h,e,-,C<" e,,",,,,,-,o"fcC,,!,h"'Ci~,,,t.en,\,,d~~'!!;,,W!!!i Shriver, George. Philip Schaff: christi~ SCholar and Ecumenical Prophet: Cent.enni al Biography For The Amerir.an Society of Church Hist.ory . Macon, Ga.: Mercer Uni versi t.y Press, 1987 . " Philip Schaff ' s Concept of Organic Historiography Interpreted in Relation t.o the Realization of an 'Evangelical Cat.holicism' Wit.hin the Christ.ian C... " "unity" PhD dissertation, Duke University, 1961 . 911ylie, J. H. " Phi lip Schaff: Ecunenist.; The Reunion of Protestantism and Ranan Cathol icism" Encounte r 28 : 3-16 Winter 1967. Wa rd , William R~ina ld. The Prot.estant Evangelical Awakening . Carrbridge: Carrbridge University Press, 1992. Yrigoyen, Charles. ''Mercersburg ' s Quarrel wi th Methodism" Methodist History 22:3-19 0 1 983 . 1 Ph'l' Schaff The Principle of Protestantism As Related to the Present st.ate 1 o~P the Chu~ch, translated by John W. Nevin, 1845. Vol. 1 ?f Lancaster series on the Mercersburg Theology, Bard ThClq)son & George H. Bncker, €cis:, (Philadelphia: united Church Press, 1964). p. 168. Schaf.f rna?e use of this concept throughout i n his carE'er. In 1888 as part Of. hlS history .of the Refornation schaff wrote, "The past cannot be undone; history rroves zlg-zag, like a sailing vessel, but never backwards." philip Schaff, Histo~y of the Christian Church, Vol. VlJ Modern Christianity: The German Reformatlo~, (New York : Scribner, 1894-1910), (Initially published m three voltmes ln 1867. Revised and omlarged to seven [eight.) vo!\I1'"I€s between 1882 & 1910, and cO'lllleted by his son.), p. 50. A year lat.er in a lettOOlr t.o TheodorOOl Appel (~eb. 13, 188?) he wrot.OOl, "1 believe that Christ rules suprere, and that his church 1S progressing, though in a zigzag line .at.her than in a straight course." (Letter located :in Archives of Evangelical and Reforwed Historical Lancaster, cf . Schaff, J.B. Lippincott Co., Theology and the Church Question" The Mercersburg 1853) :124-144. 2. lvnc:m9 the nunerous books and articles t.hat appeared in connection with this event, two books dOOlserve special note -- Henry W. Bowden, ed., A Ce!"lt.ury of Church Hist.ory: The Legacy of Phi l:i p Schaff, (Carbondal e, I II . : Southern III inois University Press, 1988) in which several cont.ributors reflected on such topics as Philip Schaff's ideas on church hist.ory, areas of schaff's int.erest that had been pursued by t.hose in the Alrerican Society of Church History (ASOi) since Schaff ' s death and how those endeavors were reflective of the fotUlder's interests, and t.he developnent of the A5O{ during its one hundred yea r history; andGeorgeH . Shriver, Philip Schaff: Christian Scholar and ECl.lTleIlical Prophet, (Macon, Ga.: Mercer Oni versity Press, 1987), a biography of Schaff's life corrnrissioned by the ASOH. 3 . Two excellent. works which examine Schaff ' s ecunenical views in great. depth are Klaus Penzel, "Church Hist.ory and t.he Ectmenical Quest. A Study of the Gerrran Background and Thought of Phi lip Schaff," ThD dissert.ation, Union Theological Seminary of New York, 1962; and George H. Shriver, "Phil ip Schaff's Concept. of Organic Historiography Interpreted in Relation t.o the Realization of an 'Evangel ical Cathol i cism' Wi t.hin the Christi an Catmmi ty ," PhD dissert.a lion, Duke University, 1961. Both of these authors recognize in Schaff's thought a very close relationship between the concepts of evangelical catholicism and the deveiop"""nt. of history. Unfort.unately neither deals fully with the changes t.hat occur in Schaff's understanding of evangelical cat.holicism. In fact, Penzel in particular declared that he opted for an analysis only of Schaff's earliest writings. In so doi ng he managed to escape dealing with the changes. Penzel, pp. 6,9. In a paper presented to the Mercersburg Society as well as in ~rsonal corresponden~e with this author, Klaus Penzel recently addressed t he lTTport~ce of w~at ~his paper refer7 t.o as Schaff' 5 zig-zag approach. Penzel stated 1n rart, I ':H II therefore clalm that quite possibly the true significance of Schaff 5 ecunemca! legacy may be found not so m..lch in his contributions to t~e Me rcersburg. TheolO?y, ~lTpOrtant as they were, but in a unique dialectic t.hat hlS career, Vlewed 1n ltS totality, established between " catholic" and "evangelical" Christianity, under the overa rching and omduring ideal of ; "evangel ieal cathol i cism. " Klaus Penzal, "Philip Schaff's Life-Lcxlg Quest For 'Evangelical Catholicism''', (11. paper delivered to t.he Mercersburg Society. SlIliiler 1993.) 4. The Prussian High Orthodoxy wa s not "orthodoxy" in the older confessional sense of the term, but rather a part of the confessional-ranantic reaction against the Enlightenment and cultural modernization. 5. Johann August Wilhelm Neander was bom David Mendel on January 17, 1789. en February 15, 1806, Hendel cOllverted to Christianity, was baptized, and assll'!led the name Neander. In 1813 he was called to Berlin where he lectured 00. church history and the exeges i s of the New Testament until his death on July 14 , 1850. Neander understood Ch ristianity as a force within hunan life, indeed as a life itself, rather than a system of dCgliA. He, therefore, viewed church history as history of the procE"SS by whi ch hl.ll1 6. Philip Schaff wa s naIMd e i ther Phllipp Schaaf, Philip Schaaf , or Philip Sehaf at his birth (each is refered to by sane a uthor). He changed t he spelling scrnetime bet.ween his 18 44 arrival in the United States and 1847. Why he rrede t.he change was not recorded in any of his surviving correspondence. Throughout this paper (wi th t.he except.ion of direct quot.ations in which va riant spellings ITaY appear) his name will consistently be spelled as he chose in the late r years of his li fe_ 7. Shriver, Philip Schaff: Christian Scholar, pp. ]-2. Nichols, however, s tates t.hat. Schaff was born into a poor and hurble family and raised by his widowed mother. James H. Ni chols, Rananticism in P.rrerican Theology: Nevin and Schaff at Mercersburg. (Chi cago: - The Un iversity of Chicago Press, 1961). p. 64 . There is also sane debate as to the possibility that schaff was illeqi tirrete. This viewpoint was initially raised by the clouded nature of Schaff's early life, hy certai n ohlique references by him, and hy the fact that his son David who was a lso a historian and Phil ip ' s biographer destroyed large portions of his correspondence which lef t future historians guessing at both the motive for the destructi on and the content. of what wa s damaged_ (The destruction of correspondence has similarly led to questi ons about cert.ain of Philip' s relationships in his lat.er life.) Tn particular, Shdver states that Schaff ' s own wd tings in his "Remi niscences" " lends sane credence" the runor that he was illeqitil'lBte, hut at. pr~sent onl y "circtlT\St.antial ilflPli~. evidence" supports the claim. Shrjver, p. 1. In his most on PhilIP Schaff, Klaus Penzel claims that Schaff ' s mother deserted and then filed suit him to KI aus Penzel , ad., {Macon , Ga.: 8. Shriver, "Philip Schaff ' s Concept of Organic Historiography," pp. 3-4; Penzel, Philip Schaff, p. xviii; Penzel . "Church History, " pp. 16-21. The tem "AWakening" refers to those periods of history in which there was r.apid ~i~ible change in religious feeling among lacge mtrbers of people. thIS splntual rebirth which was also referced to as a warming of the heart o r a spidtuai awakening was often associated wi th Anglo- American cevivals in the decades before and aHer the American Revolution. William Reginald Ward has cecently written on the pan-European nature of these social-theological rrovernents which he t races to a callion Protestant frarre of mind emerging in response to political repercussions resulting fran the Peace of Westphalia (1648), The Protestant Evangel ical Awakening, (cambr idge: cambridge University Pcess, 1992 ). 9. Johann Adam Moehler (1796-1838), a Rcnan Catholic church historian, was a professor in Tuebingen and later in MWlich. Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792- 1860) joined the Tuebingen faculty in 1826 and H!JRined there t.hroughout his career. Although the exact relationship of Baur's philosophy to Hegel 's is a ntter of debate, Baur's basic views can be said to be fran the Hegelian s ystem. 10. Shriver, Philip SC'haff: Christ.ian Scholar, pp. 3-6; Nichols, pp. 65-68; Penzel, "Church History", p. 51. II. Penzel , "Church History", pp. 70-71. 12. Shriver, Philip Schaff: Christian Scholar, pp. 5-6; and Nichols, pp. 67-68. Julius Mueller (1801-1878). a Lutheran theologian, served as a professoc of theology at Halle. Friedrich August Gottreu Tholuck (1799-1877), was a t heologian and preacher . He served as professor of theology at Halle fran 1826 until his death. 13. Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg (1802-1869) Lutheran theologian and biblical scholar and professor in Berlin. In 1827 he becarre the editor of the EvanqeliscM Kirchenzeitunq through which he exercised widespread religious influence \mti l his death. Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling (1775-1854) was a professor of philosophy in Jena, Wuerzhurg, Munich, Erlangen, Stuttgart., and Berlin. Ludwig Friedrich Leopold von C..erlach was born in 1790 and died in 1861. 14. Nichols, p. 71. 15. Nichols , pp. 73-4; Penzel , "Church History" , pp. 84-91. 16. Shriver argu~ .t hat Schelling' s i deas in this matter were an echo (Shriver's term) of th~ w~lt1ngs of both Joachim of Floris and Dante. Shriver, Philip Schaff: Shnshan Scholar, p. 9. Pem.al sees a two-part influence on schaff. Fran Sc~d and. Neander. carre an understanding of the three (initially fouc) apostollC types In relatlon to the apostolic church. It was Schelling, however, who (Penzel. states) taught. Schaff to this same pattern as a rocd.el for all of church history. P':flzel, XXXll. Schaff mentions in an extended footnote In that th . d , . st . t ad __ ~ "b h e 1 ea was lr Inr.. u .....,.. yte ' and, avored 1n· recen t tunes by phlI osophers . • Schell and. Von Schaden and theologians Neander, Ullmann, Scbnieder, Lange and Philip Schaff, History of the 1 (New York: regularly unity. The Modem (1893) . 17. It is important to nOle that Neander's support of evangelical catholicism derived fran the shared experiences of Protestants and Reman Catholics dudng the Awakening and primari ly was individual in nature. On the other hand, the high-chu[cm-en's evangelical catholicism was roore a product. of their inst.itutional notions of ecclesiology and a rcmant.ic eI"I1'hasis on the Middle Ages and therefore focussed roore on organizational matters. 18. Philip Schaff, Gerrrruw; Its Universities, Theology. and Religion: With Sketches of Neander , Tholuck, Olshausen, Hengst€'rilierg. Twesten, Nitzsch, Muller. Ullmann, Rothe. Dorner, Lange, Ehrard, Wichern. and Other Dist.inguished Genran Divines of the Age, (Phil adelphia : Lindsay and Blakiston, 1857), p. 277. 19. Nichols, p. 69: Penzel, "Church History", pp. 95-98. Schaff, Gerrrany, p. 261ff provides a full account on Neander. For addi tional infonnation on Ne-.ander, see Philip Schaff, History of the Apostolic Church;, pp. 95-107. As will be SePAl below, there wa s a marked shift in Schaff's writings from condemnation of sectarians t.o conci! iation am:mg Christians. In that sense, the later Schaff was I'OOre closely aligned to the thought of Neander than was t.he recent graduat.e. 20. Nichols, pp. 77-83, 107-1]2; Philip Schaff, The Principle of Prot.estantism, pp. 7-17; shriver, Philip Schaff: Christian Scholar, pp. 12- 27; and Shriver, "Philip Schaff ' s Concept. of Organic Historiography", pp. 13- 53. Schaff, at. this point in his life, wa s not complet.ely fluent in English. The published version of his address was produced in German. In that same year an Eng llsh translation was prepared by Schaff ' s Mercersburg colleague JOM Williamson Nevin (1803-86), professor of theology at Mercersburg and president of Marshall College. Nevin had served earlier as a professor at both Princeton SEminary and West.",rn Theological Seminary . Later he taught and served as the president. at Franklin and Ma rshall College. The hp.resy charge was fought. in t.he r ei igio05 press as m.l<'.:h as anywhere else. Tn Schaff's defense Nevin took the more carbative approach, Schaff the more i r enic . Schaff was exonerat.ed at. both the 1845 heresy trial and a later 1847 heresy inquiry . 2l. Schaff , The Principle of Protestantism, pp. 134-35 . 22. Ibid., p. 15O. 23. Ibid., pp. 140, 144, 148-50 . 24 . Ibid. , p. 149. 25 . Ibid. , pp. 140, l50, 153 . '6 26. Ibid., pp. 137, 146, 150. 27. Ibid. , pp. 149-155. 28. Ibid., pp. 168, 172. 29. Schaff was scheduled t o address the Parliament in p~rson. However, at the l ast rlUient because of his failing health, it was declded t hat the Rev. Dr. Siroon J. McPherson, a fri end, would read the paper for him. 30. Phil i p Schaff. ''The Reunion of ChristendOOl" A paper preJ?:1'red. f o~ the Parliament of Religions and the National Confer ence of the Evangehcai All1ance hel d i n Chicago, Septsri:ler and oct ober, 1893, (New York: Evangelical Al liance Office, 1893), P , 1. 31. Ibid., pp. 4-11. 32. Ibid., p. 12 . 33. Ibid., pp. 40-45 . As late as 1888 Schaff had highlighted belief in the Trini ty and the acceptance of the ectrnenical creeds as irrport.ant ties for bindi n9 Christianity together. Schaff, Hist ory of the Christian Church Vol. VII Modern Chris tianity: The GerTl'BJl RefonratiQ!l, p. 5. 34. Schaff, The Retmi on of Christendom, pp . 28, 38-40. 35. Ibid., p. 40. 36. Ibid., p. 8. 37. Schaff, What is Church History?, pp. 95 , 114, 122; Schaff, "Getl'l"an Theology and the Church Question" , pp . 139- 41 . 38. Phil:ip Schaff, Arreri ca . A Sket.ch of Its Political, Social, and Religious Characb>.r, edited by Perry Miller, ( Based 00 lectures delivered Sept., 1854) (Cambridge : Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1961). pp. XXV- XXV I, xxxiv . 39. Ibid. , p . ll . 40 . I bid. , p . 99. 4l. Ibid., p. 100. 42. Philip Schaff, Del' Bu rgerkrieg und das Christliche Leben in Nord-Amerika, as transl ated by Rev. Charles C. Starbuck and printed under the t.itle "Dr. Schaff ' s Lectures on Jlmerica . Del i vered in Europe, 1865" i n the Christian Int.eiieqencer Harch - May, 1866. 43. Philip Schaff, "The Theology of Our Age and Country" in Chri s t and Chris . an' : Studies on Christo reeds and Conf ess:ons Protestantism and ROOWl ism, Refonnation Principl f'!s. Sunday Observance. Religious FreedOOl, and " ; Chris~ian Uni ~, ~ New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1885). pp. 16-17. This hook IS a caTpll a tlon of several addresses delivered by Schaff to whi ch he also added other rraleria l dealing with Jesus, Christianity, and Christian union. 44. Schaff , "Creeds and Confessions of Faith" in Christ and Christianity, p. 152. 45 . Schaff, "The Theology of OUr Age and Country" In Ch r ist and Christianity, p. 18. 46 . Schaff, "Creeds and C"..ontessions of Faith" in Christ and Christianity, pp . 146- 8. It is interesting to nole that the Un i ted Church of Chri st (U.C.C.) which came into bei ng as the res u! t of a twentieth- century merger and which inc luded the institutiona l descendant of Schaff ' s German Reformed Church, cooilined Schaff's earl y concept of Christian reunion with hi s l ater views. In particular, the U. C.C. res ulted fran t he institutional mergers of scrne congregation.'!] Chtlrches , The Christ i an Church, The Evangelical Church, and The German Refotll&"! Chur('h. Thi s newl y f Ollled denoorination mani fested Schaff's earl y I:'flllhasis on a vi sible lmity. As part of t he ~rger, however, each denoorination's under standing of t heology wa s t o be accepted by all of the other parties to t.he ITP-rger. This was agr~ t o even t hough t.he theological positions of the C'.ernan Reformed and Christian Chur ches, for eXalll>le , are i n conflic t with one another i n regard t o the Church' s a cceptance of creeds. In that s ense the ITP-rger was an exarrpl e of Schaff ' s lat er errphasi s on a genera l acceptance o f other denoori nati ons despite credal d i fferences. 47 . Schaff , Wh a t I s Ch urc h Hlso. t ry'., p. 92. 48. Schaff, pp. 7- 11; Schaff, of Protes tantism, p. 49. Schaff , "The Evangelical Church in Germany in its relation to the Daughter Churches in AI"lY' rica , and its dut y to the German Emigrants. Report of Prof. Or. Schaff, of Mercersburg, Pennsylvania, read before the seventh meeting of t.he Evangel lea l Church Di et. , at. Frankfort on the Maine, on the 20th of 1854" , i ncluded at the conclusi on of Jlmerica. Po Sketch of Its p. 228 . As late as the January, Schaff ' s arU c le "Geman Theology >"~ first appeared in Gennan the preceding Septe'Der, ': dE".alt. wi th the corporat e nature of Chris t ianity and explicitly refered to of Chris t. SO. Schaff, "The Evangel ical Church Diet of Germany" The Mercersburg Review rX(January, 1857) : 24; Schaff, "Christianity i.n Arneri.ca:. A report prepar~ for the meeting of the Evangeli cal Alliance held In Berhnln Sept ~r, 1857 Ill!. Mercersburg Review IX (OCtober , 1857):538; Schaff, translated by Charles C. Starbuck in Christ.ian Intel1ige!lcer 51. Schaff, translated by C.C. Starbuck in Christian Intel I iqencer f , "The Theology of Our Age and COlmtry" in Christ and Christianity, p. 17. 4. 52. Schaff, The Principle of Protestantism, p. 155. 53. Schaff, "The state Church System in Europe" The Mercersburg Review IX(January, 1857):163. 54. Schaff, "The Discord and Concord of Christendem; or Oenaninational Variety and Christian unity" presented before the Eighth General Conference of the Evangelical Alliance held at Copenhagen, Septerrber 2, 1884, in Christ and Christianity;, p. 302. 55. Schaff, however, as late as 1872 denied that there had been any basic change in his views; philip Schaff, "The card" Weekly Messenger (Pebruary 21, 1872). My thanks to Dr. Penzel for his information regarding this statement. of course, if Schaff saw his theology as steering a course between extrerres on his way to Church union, what we perceive as changes on his part would sirrpiy be viewed as a faithful following of the zig-zag stream of history by him. 56. Volume 13 of the Mercersburg Review was published in 1861 with Schaff as editor; vol1.lTle 14 was not published until 1867 with H. Harbaugh as the new editor. Schaff ' s writ.ings during the d~ade in question tended to focus on biblical and catechetical issues rather than ecciesioiogical or ec\.menical ones. 57. Henry Warner Bowden, "Philip Schaff and Sectarianism: The Americanization of a European Viewpoint," Journal of Church and State 8:97-106, Winter 1966, pp. 103-4. Bowden's contribution is based on his personal translation of Schaff's Der Burgerkrieq tmd das Christliche Leben in Nord-Amerika, (Berlin : Wiegant und Grieben, 186fi) , pp. 29-32 . 58. Penzel, Philip Schaff, pp. 79-80. 59. Shriver, Philip Schaff: Christian Scholar, p. 20. Shri ver takes this quotation frem Schaff ' s journal. 60. Schaff's art.icle appeared first in the Septerrber 1852 issue of Der Deutsche Kirchenfreund and was later translated into English as "German Theology and the Church Question" The Mercersburg Review V(January 1853) : 124-144. Nichols offers t.he opinion that Schaff was of little help to his friend during Nevin's "five years of dizziness". Indeed, Nichols views Nevin as the stronger of the two personally and theologically; and sees Schaff as ''tlIlder the ascendancy of Nevin's powerful personality ... ". Nichols, pp. 192, 219. John Payne, on the ot.her hand, offers a sanewhat more positive, if only suggestive picture of schaff ' s influence. John B. Payne, "Schaff and Nevin, C~lleagues at Mercersburg: The Church Question" Church Hist.ory 61(June 1992): 169-190. 61. Schaff, Germany, p. 319. 62. In rec~t corres~enc~ with this author (July 22, 1993), Klaus Penzel has noted that 1n the relatl.onshlp o~ Schaf~ a~~ Nevin, "the accent so far has always beCll p!aced on. Schaf.f mfluencl~ Nevm. He further speculated that, given s.::haff 5 r~lah.ons ~lth father-ttgures, a psychohistory of Schaff in regard to ~lS rela.bonshlp loll th the older Nevin might prove il hrninating. It is mteresbng that by the early 18505 Nevin and Hengstenberg, both potential ~-9 father-figures, were still alive while Neander , the scholar with whan Schaff ultimately aligned his theology, had already died. Further research into this whole area of Schaff's life and its relation to his theological develop"",.t is certainly needed. 63. Schaff, America , pp. 10-11 , 75-80, 94-5. 64. Schaff , History of tbe Apostolic Church, p. 618. 65. Ibid., p. 674. 66. Schaff, The Principle of Protestantism, p. 218; Schaff , The ReWlioo. of Christemdom, p . 38. 67. Schaff, The Reunion of Christ.endom, p. 2; Schaff, What is Church History? , pp. 107, 126-7; Schaff, ''The Discord and Concord of Christendam" in Christ and Christianity; , p. 308. 68. Shriver, Philip Schaff: Christian Scholar, p. 107. 50 liIE pAItlJAMENT or TIlE wORLD'S ItELIGJONS AND TIlE REUNION OF REUGIONS Richmi T. g. hd'nE Rdi...,d Un"" 0Iun:h of a.'51 M"IOi'1r MillenviDe. P'jlibylvao;' The purpose of this essay is (1) to describe the people and events of the Parliament of .the World's Religions held in Chicago from AugUllt 28 to September 4, 1993; (2) to offer f?Uf ~ne.f personal conclusK>ns based on my obscn'ations at the Parliament; and (3) to reneet on some unphcauons for us Christians of the interreligious reality in which we confess our faith and seck to be faithful to the call of Christ. It can be said without contradiction, I think. that this Parliament wu the most broadly-based interreligious gathering in history. It wu conceived and advenised in part as a centennial celebration of a similar coogress caUed the World'S Parliament of Religion. also held in Chicago, in 1893. The 20th century event and its significance can be seen and understood more clearly if we first look at its 19th century predecessor. The 1893 Parliament In 1893 Chicago hosted the Columbian Exposition. a celebration of the coming of Columbus 400 years earlier and an anticipation of the fifth American century. Thai Parliament attracted over 6,000 participants from around the world. They met in what is now the An lnstilUle and had scores of speeches and presentations which were published in two volumes totalling 1.582 pages. In all there were 900 5Cpll1ate sessions. Major addresses were complemented by meetings in which fony different denominations reported on their work and activities. There was no historical precedent for so broad an interreligious event. It attracted many of the most renowned religious leaders of the day and was the first introduction to the general public in America of Asian or Eastern religions. It anticipated both the ecumenical movement among Chris tian communions and the rapprochement of the world's major religions. The list of participants read like a Who's Who in religion in 1893. The most innuential Roman Catholic prelate in America at the lime. Cardinal Gibbons of Baltimore, attended along with the Archbishops of Chicago and Philadelphia. and the president of Catholic University in Washington. Most surprising. perhaps, was the prominence of women: Frances Willard. Julia Ward Howe, Susan Anthony. Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Jane Addams, Mary Baker Eddy and many others. They were all there. or sent a message to be read by a representative. Lady Henry Somerset of Great ['ritain said it well: • As Columbus discovered America. the Columbian Exposition discovered woman: Interestingly, there were no native Americans at the convocation. They were, however, exhibitod in a side-show on the Midway! There were a few African Americans. but because there were so many persons from India and other Asian countries, the Rev. Benjamin W. Amen, a Bishop in the AME Church. who had been "invited to give color to the Pjrliament," said. as he looked around. "I think it is very weU-colored; colO£ is in the majority this time!" There was only one Muslim prescrll. a conven from New England. 51 9 Th,e. five ministers who reported at the «Congress of the Refonned Church in the United &ates- were: Willi~ Rupp. a professor at Lancaster Theological Seminary, T.G. Appel. a professorand librarian at Frank1m & Marshall College from 1853 to 1874 and editor of The Messenger from 1878 to 1886, J.H. Dubbs, .A.J. P~ters. and .E .R. Eschbach .. (The .Rev. Dr. Eschbach presented the two bound volumes of the Par~HiJ~ents proceedmgs to the Semmary library on Dec. 29, 1893, according 10 notes he recorded on the IllSlde covers of the books: and I was not a little surprised to team thai I was the first person to check the volumes out of the library in 100 years.) Among the in!e£csting data ci,too by the Reformed clerics were the following: On April 27, 1793 (one hundred years before the Parharrtent), the Synod of the Refonned Church was constituted in Lancaster with approximately 10,000 confymro members and 22 ministers. In 1893 the numbers had increased t~ 215,000 and 900. respectively. Philip &haff To those of us who are readers of the New Mercersburg Review, the most interesting participant in the Parliament was Philip &haff. who died less than a month after the convocation. On Sept. 22, the twelfth day of the Parliament. he was asked to lead the assembly in the Lord's Prayer. after which he made the following statement: This is shon notice to speak to be given to one who has just risen from the dead. A linle more than a year ago I was struck down by apoplexy; but I have recovered by the mercy of God. and r am a miracle to myself. I was warned by physicians and friends not to come to Chicago. They said it would kiU me. WelL let it kill me. I was determined to bear my last dying testimony to the cause of Christian Union. in which I have been interested tIl my life. I think the Lord will give me strength to survive this Parliament of Religions. Three days later. too weak to read his paper. "The Reunion of Christendom: he listened as it was read by the Rev. Dr. Simon 1. McPherson. (A week prior 10 &haffs death it was read in a slightly diffe£ent form at the meeting of the Evangclical Alliance by the Rev. Joachin Elmendorf.) In this valedictory. &haff acknowledges that "the reunion of Christendom presupposes an original union which has been marred and obstructed, but never entirely destroyed." After listing the prominent points of unity which underlie all divisions. he traces some of these forces and issues beginning with the question of circumcision (Acts 15) and the ·party spirit" in the congregation at Corinth (I Cor. 1-3), His peroration peaks as he creates a litany that encompasses all pans of the Body of Christ: "The Greek Church is a glorious church---;" "The Latin Church is a glorious church---;" "The Evangelical Lutheran Church is a glorious church;" "The Evangelical Reformed Church is a glorious church;" "The Congregational Church is a glorious church;" "The Society of Friends is a glorious church," On and on rolled &haff, singing the praises and noting the contributions of church after church. embracing even the Unitarians, the Universalists and the Salvation Army, After putting a positive spin on the unique gifts of each, he finally concludes, "There is room for all these and many other churches and societies in the Kingdom of God. whose height and depth and length and breadth, variety and beauty, surpass human comprehension." 5 Other Parliament Participants The Parliament was conceived and carried out by main-line Protestant leaders in the face of some formidable objections, The Rev, John Henry Barrows" pastor of a prominent .Presbyterian Church in Ch.icago, was the general chairman and a forceful and arttcu!ate leader of the Parliament, ,even thOU&? th~ Presbyterian General Assembly, meeting in Portland, Oregon in 1892, opposed the P~hament.lIaymg,lt was "uncalled for, misleading and hurtful." The Archbishop of Canterbury also declmed 10 endorse II. 52 writing that the Parliament implied "a leveling of religion: Despite these protests, the Parliament was one of the most significant r~ligious e:ven~ in history, Dharmapala, a Buddhist from Calcut1§, called it "the noblest and proud:st ac~ev<:ment IJI hiSt,ory and th~ crowning work of the 19th century," Lady Somerset noted that It was the nughtlest ecumemcal council the world has ever seen: 7 While the leaders and the program of the 1893 event were suffused with good will and good intentions, a reading of their proceedings reveals an unfortunate condescension ,m,d ,an uneas~ toleran~, of the non Christian participanlS. The mood of the Protestant sponsors was optimiStiC. even Ulumphalistlc: and from our perspective of 100 yean;. arrogant and insensitive, They proclaimed with passionate certainty that Christianity was superior to all other religions. The impartial reader of their speeches comes away with the impression that they hoped that their guests would see that Christianity was the truth and would sign up! Even a certified liberal, Charles Briggs of Union Theological Seminary in New York City, suggested that "other reliiioos scriptures are torches in the night." while lauding the Christian Bible as the sun giving full light, ., The General Chairman, Dr. Barrows. summed up this prevailing attitude in a speech given just prior to the Parliament, as he sought to defend the approaching convocation. · We believe," he said. "that Christianity is to supplant all other religions because it contains all the truth that there is in them. and much besides. revealing a redeeming God ... Though light has no fellowship with darkness. light does have fellowship with twilight ... Those who hav$ the ful! light of the cross should bear brotherly hearts toward all who grope in a dimmer iUumination." Nothing was more embarrassing to read than a report by those who had been tl)'ing to convert Native Americans. The speaker was outlining the difficulties. and the spirit of hospitality was listed, as strange as this may sound. as one of the obstacles facing the mission to the Native Americans. Here is what was said: "Hospitality was a marlc.ed virtue in the race. The lodge was never closed, or the last morsel of food ever refused to th: needy. The richest man was not he who possessed the most. but he who had given away ~e,~os!, ThiS deeply rOOled principle of giving is a great obstacle in the way of civilizing the lndians. as CIVIlizatIOn depends so largely upon the accumulation of property," 10 O!.te . delega,te., a Buddhist fro~ <:erIon. having. eJ(pe,rienced this attitude first-hand. reported: "The ~Ionary IS mtol~ant and ,selfISh. And ~ ~dlan Hindu noted, "The religion of a conquering nation (WI~ an e~aspefallng C:O~lousnes of supenonty, cond~ndingly offered to the conquered) must ever be disgustmg to the recipient. however good it may be." Anoth~r p,articipant from Ccrlo~, a Mr, Mozoomdar. was more irenic. He said, "In the west. work is your WOrship; In the easl, worship IS our work, Pemaps one day the western and eastern wi!! combine to support each other's strengths and 10 supply each other's deficiencies,13 Swami Vive~ananda, a Hindu from India, was Ihe most popular personage at the 1893 Parliament. always drawlJlg large crowds whenever he spoke and wherever h' H I 26 Id b,' ·• h b h' brill' h' w-,..... , ewasony yean; 0 h I is e sto e Ule s ow y lance, C ansma' and oralo"'".~. And" '.,Ul 1993 gaUlenng..' ••u,cre was group of persons present w h 0 represented a society that had as its sole purpo th 'fh ' 'd d the publication of his writings. se e perpetualJon 0 IS I eas an In his final appearance at Ihe podium. he said: "Much has been said of the common ground of religious unity, But if anyone here hopes that this unity 53 i would come by, the ~ump~ of anyone of these religions and the destruction of Ihe other to rum I 'Brother, yours IS an unposslble hope.' . say, "00 I wish that the, ~tian WOuld, become Hindu? God forbid! Do I wish that the Hindu or Buddhist would become Chrisllan? God forbid'" 14 In the printed vo~um~ thai carried thaI speech, the editor added this comment, ·Swami Vivekananda was always heard With mterest by the Parliament. but very linle approval was shown to some of the sentiments expressed in his closing address." IS This Swami provides the bridge, maybe even the link. between the Parliaments. The first Parliament was seminal and significant. but it was theologically flawed and deficient. Ironically. even though co~~ toward non-Christian religions, it did in a dramatic way introduce eastern religions to this conunenl and Ul that sense gave them some legitimacy. In Ibis regard. it might also be worth noting that the Parliament served as a kind of coming-out paly fOf American Jews and Roman Catholics. Re-read today. the speeches of the Jews, Catholics and Asian repre5ef1tative5 are clearly morc .sensitive than most of the Proteslant homilies. For example, here is what His Eminencc James, Cardinal GibboruJ of Baltimore (who, like Schaff, had corne in spite of illness) said. 'There is one platform on which we all stand united. It is the platform of charity, of humanity, of benevolence .. .! trust we shall all leave this hall animated by a greater love for one another, for love knows no distinction of faith ... Wc canno t work the miracles which Christ wrought; but there are other miracles far morc beneficial to ourselves that we are all in the measure of our lives capable of working. and these arc the miracles of charity. of mercy. and o f love to our fellow-man.' 16 I have taken time to describe this Parliament in order 10 draw contrlSlS between il and ilS 1993 daughler, 10 indicate the d ifferent spirit in wnich these evenlS wae conducted and to help us see the distinctive religious settings in which they occurred. The 1993 Parliament We tum now to the 1993 Parliament, conceived as the centennial celebration of the 1893 assembly. In contrast to its predecessor, the 20th cenlury event was neither planned nor attended by mainline Protestant leade~. Vinually no lOp official of a mainline church was present. For example. there are scores of Mclhodist and Episcopal bishops in the United States. I think not one was present in Cnicago. Who was there? An interesting and heady mix! There were 7.000 participants from 56 nations, and it was CO-sponsored by 125 d ifferent religious bodies (including the Illinois Conferencc and the Chicago Merropolitan Association of me United Churcn of Christ), thus making it, as I indicated earlier, the most broadly-represented interreligious gathering in history. After some friends (in high places!) teamed that I was planning to attend. they asked me 10 "represent" the United Chwcll of Christ. But such "representation" was largely empty of meaning. Through spotting name· tags and by happenstance, I identified some fiftooen or twenty other UCC persons. lhe most notable of whom was the Re v. Dr. Yvone Delk. who came as the Executive Director of me Community Renewal Society in Chicago, and who led one of the plenary sessions. Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago opened ttte Parliament and ~as present when ttte Dalai Lama gave ~e concluding address. The Vatican was represented by a Bishop, and several other R.oman Catholic bisllops from Latin America were present. Other attendees included.: Metropolitan Greg0!10s. head of ttte Syrian Onhodox Church. from India. and formerly President of the World Council ?f Church~; Syngman Rhee. President, and Joan CampbeU, General SeaelM}', (respectively) of the Nal1ona1 . Co~il of Cbw-ches; Abdullah Oman Nassef, Secretary General of the World Muslim League, froll! Saudi .Arabl&; Homi DhalJ. world leader of Zoroasuianism. of India; Hans Kung and Harvey Cox. mtemauonalty- 54 known Roman Camolic and Baptist meoiogians: Robert Muller, Chancellor of ~e Uni~ Natio~ University of Peace in Costa Rica and fOIi"et'ly Depuly Secretary General of, lhe Uruted Na~ : Lows FlUTakhan, leader of me Nation o f Islam: and Thich l'oo'hat Hanh, well-known Vietnamese Buddhist monk. There were scorcs of univcr5ity professors, scholars and Iheolgians, monks and nuns from many different fai!h comunities, lay men and women, and hundreds of ~n:s ",::ho, represented only lhemse1vcs. One man, known only by the words on his name-tag, "Peace PJlgnm, ~ IS ,Ie ~al name, wandcr5 the country quietly speaking o f peace, harmony and non-violence 10 any and aU mdlVlduals and groups who pause 10 engage nim in COflvcr5l1lion, Four Fascinating Women As an example of me tremendous variel:y and vitality of !he Parliament's participants, let me cite a young woman who introduced herself to a group of us woo were waiting for an elevlltor. We were all dressed differently: I. in a suit: a Sikh wi!h a wnite turban: an Indian woman in a sari: ct cetera. But me woman now coming toward us seemed vastly diUerent than we were. She sparklOO, She shone. Seeing us all turned toward h«, she volunteered. "I guess you wonder who I am. I' m OIIe-half Native Ameri<:an, one quarter African American, and one- It was II pleasant surprise to sec !he large number of women who were present, In addition to those wno served ancient Egyptian deities. there were many, many others. especially Wiccas, witches. They claim, although I nave no way of substantiating their assertion. that Wiccan is the gastest growing religion in the United States. 1bere are doz.cns of o rganized covens (church-like local cells) allover the country. Basically, they're earth religions. tracing their roots to a variety of folk religions in Europe and Asia from me dawn of history. In many ways their religion is similar to mat of Native Americans. They say. "Mother Earth, is dying;" or ratha, that we are killing ha. These women and men (but the women are more prominenr) worship, serve and seek 10 save Mother- Earth. Let me introduce o ne of their leaders, Pn yllis Curon, a graduate of N.Y.U. Law Scnool and a practicing anomey in New York City. She is a Wiccan High Priestess and President of the Covenant of the Goddess, Founder and High Priestess of the Circle of Ara and a Priestess o f the Minoan Sisterhood. I ane.nded se ver~ ?pen ~formational ~sions where these women and men explained their beliefs and practIces. One IS Imme(iJately struck WIth the fact that they are highly intelligent, well-educated and articulate. Often they have been either alienated from or bored by the Jewish or Christian trad itions in whicn many of !hem nave been reared. And they are not without humor. , heard Ms. Curott declare , - I'm a witch,---a witch who has come OUI of the closet---the broom closet." !hey ref~ to th~~lvcs as " neo - pag~ ." explaining that .!he word "pagan- comes from the Latin paganus, meaning a country person, They are at-one-wlth the good earth, and their ritcs revolve around nature and the natural world. Ano.ther interesting but far different woman was Ma-Parte, a Hindu minisler and a member of the Indian Parhamcn,l, w"h~ exud~ trcmen,d,ous energy and total commitment. "I went into preaching." she said, "to help ~e ncb. ,'we~t IOto polil1cs to help the poor." Did sne think that women arc equal to men? "No way •. s n~ rephod. That would ~ a demol1on, Women are superior to men. Men are not cost effocl1ve. ~ I sh?uld add that ,evCf s~ I reported that comment to my wife sne has reminded me on many OCCasIons Just how cosllllCffecove I am.) Then there was Dr. Ray, a Ro man C.alhoLic nun who spoke of many groups of Roman Catholic women. often led by nWlS, who are celebralUlg the sacraments in meir homes "Should , _ 55 of a practicing Roman Catholic nun, someone inquired, ~ How do you slay in the church?" · Wl' lh difficulty: she responded, "cspedaly since 1 was in charge of lay education for m diocese ~; charged my Bishop with sex d iscrimination!" y w en Thich tI.'hal Hahn ~e o.f the most impressivc persons at. thc ~arliamen l was Thich Nhat Harm. a Buddhist monk living in exile. LfI France, .unable to return to h iS ~atlve ~i etn am. It .was Thich Nhat Hanh who had pet'Suaded MartLfl Luther Kmg. Jr. to speak out agamst Umted States LfIvolvemcnt in the Vietnam War and later ~ nominated the n,tOnk for the Nobel Peace Prize, saying he kIlew of ' no one more deserving.· (lncidefl!ally, recently LfI our local Borders Bookstore I noticed two o f his books prominently displayed: so he must be known and read by some of my neighbors here in Lancaster.) When Thich f\.'hat Hanh enlered the room, everyone sensed thai here was somoone special. We all kIlew we were in the presence of a pef'SOn of depth. Thae was no pretense or arrogance. No posturing, No acting. We had met integrity. absolute truthfulness. The session was entitled "A Meditation on Mindfulness: and the monk sat on a cushion and spoke in a calm. quiet, conversational tone. Let me try to recapitulate SOfIlCthing of what he said, but--alas··without the force of his gentle but powerful presem:e. "Mindfulness," he said, "is being present. fully alive in the here and now. Mindfulness is touching life at every point. This prepares us for social engagement. Meditation is looking deeply and calmly within, and all around. "Ah! The betll" (An assistant, occasionally, and gently, rang a pleasant-sounding bell.) "Ab, the bell; it is the voice of me Buddha calling me back to the present. 1 then say to myself. 'listen.' Listen! Listen 10 your Tradition. Let your Tradition be present to you, with you. for you. If you don't louch your ancestors. if they arc not present with you, you will be rootless, homeless and unhappy. Bring your ancestors and your chilru-en and your friends togema in your home. Help them all to come home and to be at horne with you. "I have piclUfes of the Buddha and of Jcsus (my ancestors) on my home altar. I touch the pictures and talk to them. I say. 'I'm home. I'm glad to be back.---Jane is getting married. Uncle John has cancer. It's sisler Sue's birthday.' "Ab, the bell! It·s the Buddha again calling me home, calling me back to my Tradition, back 10 the prescnl. May 1 suggest that you too turn or return to your Tradition to come alive, to be fully present. Once, a Jewish rabbi attended one of my retreats in Sanra Barbara and left telling me. 'I feel more Jewish than ever.' This is what I mean by 'Mindfulness.' listening 10 your own Tradition. We should not uproot people from their Tradition." "But don't misunderstand. Try other foods. Try pizza. Eat some Chinese food. Jewels arc found in other religions. in all Traditions. When I meet one Christian who embodies the spirit of Jesus, I touch the whole Christian Tradition, and that adds to and illumines my own Tradition. But kIlow where your home is. That's wh ere you belong." "What is the Ho ly Spirit?" someone asked. "Energy sen! by God." he replied .•'!~ the Holy Spirit as a door 10 enter the Trinity and the whole Christian Tradition. ~oug~ the Hol.y Splnt you can touch Go:d. pure love. truth and goodness. The Holy Spirit animated Chnst and It can animate us. And my BuddhISt Tradition is enlarged by this insight.' "What about Buddha?" SOmcQne else asked. "Buddha is the Always-Awake One. When we practice ~ulncss. we practice Awakeness, Buddhaness. Practice Mindfu ~ full-time and you'D. be a full Iune BUddha. Practice Mindfulness pan-tUne, and you'll be a part-tunC Buddha. In the Uruted Sl:ates 56 people talk aboul 'Heallh Mainlenance Syslems.' Practice Mindfulness: thai's the Buddhist 'Health Maintenance System'." -Ah! The heU!- AfIef an hour of conversation, I feel paralyzed.- Hans Kung Hans Kung of Tubingen, Getmany, was the besl-known Roman Ca~~ th~logian ~ anend~ce. He had been asked to prepare a document entitled -Toward a Global E~, . which was diSClIs~ed ttl c~ed ses.sklns fOt five days. amcndod, and presented as a resource for all religiOns to use as a gwde to which, presumabty, all penons of good will could subscribe. In his public lecture, Kung called Ihe Parliament -a sign of hope, a demonstration of a new future, ~ an anticipation of what could be." He challenged all religions to be open to change and transfonnatlOn. saying, "Each religion can find wilhin its own Tradition reason fOt new understand~g . " "Thef'e will be no peare among nations," he suggested, -until we find peace among religions: addmg, "' never speak about the 'unity' of religions: I speak only about 'peace' among religions. That would be enough: The foundational premise on which Ihe "global elhic" rested was a1anningly simple, "treat every human being in a truly humane way." But for me, and , think for many olhers. both the fonnat and the full treatise were disappointing. I thought it unfortunate as well as insensitive that Kung used the Ten Comrnandments-reformulated. of course- as a kind o f outline: and the document itself was too wordy and too obtuse. Raimundo Panikkar Among the more remarkable and appealing participants. to me, was Raimundo Panikkar, born in Barcelona of a Roman Catholic Spanish mother and an Indian Hindu father. He has a Ph.D. in phiJosopby, a Ph.D in chemistry, and a Ph.D. in theology and is the author of thirty books and hundreds of scholarly articles. He has been a Roman Catholic priest since 1946 and is professor emeritus at the University of California. Santa Barbara. Panjkkar, with great depth and self-effacing modesty, began his address wilh Ihis startling profession: "' am a Ouistian. I am a Hindu. I am a Buddhist: And with a wry smile added. "I am the Spaniard who found the East Indies: (Remember. he's speaking at the centennial of the Columbian Exposition!) He continued: "I am a Christian whom Christ has pellllitled 10 sit at the feet of the Buddha to become Buddhist. So, who am 11 What label shall ' use? I have a pluralistic identity. My religion has many sources. Our pluralistic make-up becomes obvious when we realize our contingency. Pluralism emt'fges and becomes acceptable when we understand the multiple sources of our religious life.· He. ~us!tated the way in .~jc~ n:'an,Y religi~us ~ces were inlegrated into his own singular being by POlIlung U.!IIO the great MlSSlSSlPPI River, whICh In fact is not only the confluence of the Missouri and the Mississippi. but has also integrated into its waters countless other streams and innumerable, nameless rivulets. All. ~~, .combined and co-joined. become that one great river. Even though they look one name, th~ MislSSIPt:'I. we can hardly say that all the tributaries simply "disappeared.· They merged, They were alllIltegrated mto one body of water. and for convenience they are now called by one name. And ~urely the Gre~1 Misiss,ippi cannot claim to be in New Orleans what it was in St. Louis. or what it had been 1ft the mountams of MlMesota 01' the plains of Kansas. Panikklr continued to .explain, h~ rel ig~ly.plural life by saying. "' who am one person speak several lang~cs. and ( do thIS by thinkm~ Wlthl~ the cultural and linguistic framcwOl'k of each language, as 1 U9C II. And rm persuaded that by Iftlegralmg all these different languages and their underlying cultural , ~tinctiorui . I as ~ ~n have become different. changed by these differences which I have inlegraled moo my whole bemg. "My personal goal: he said, "is 10 realize the fullness of my humanity by searching out the rivulets in religious identity: my Panik~ar spoke of the Parliament as -a c ru c ib~c for conv~alion" and offered that as the proper attitude we nught take toward each other and o ur varymg percepUOns of reality. The Parliament in his mind was nol a pla<:c for confro~lIation and conversion, but for conversation and transformation. Hec halleng~ us to see thai the world IS not an arena (a battlefield) but an agora (a meeting place for dialog) where we may contribute to and s!Iengthen each other's faith oomilments. Scyyed " ossein Nasr- Before moving on to orner aspects of the cong.ress, let me introduce one finaJlowering intellect: Seyyed lIossein Nasr. He was born in lran and had been professor of philosophy at Tehran University. Since coming to this country. he has taught al Temple University and is al present Univer5ity Professor of Islamic Sludies al George Washington Univcr:sity in Washington, D.C. He is the only Muslim, to date, to deliver the GiffOl"d Lectures, the world's moSt distinguished lectureship in philosophy and religion. Nasr began by quoting the fifth chapter in the Koran, which rerers to the wide variety of faiths seen on the religious landscape. The Koran asks, rhetorically. ~Why are there so many religions?" The answer is: "God put you here to vie with one another in good works!" If we must compete with one another. let us compere in doing good. (That introduction to Islam and the Koran sccmcd singularly apt since earlier I had been in a seminar where the speaker contended that on that very day. Sept. 1. 1993. there were about 120 wars wocld-wide and thai 80% of them had a religious dimension to them.) Dr. Nasr went on 10 deal with the fact that no one can live as a "universalist." Each of us is a particular person. Each of us is rOOted in a particular place and grounded in a part icular culture and religion. While each religion is addressod. to and roccived by a particular individual. all religions also seem to call their adherents to universality-that is. to transcend their particularities (such as lime and place, gender and race. social levels and cultural settings). But that vision cannot be fully realized. It is a goal that exceeds our grasp. To be a particular person in a particular place. commined by birth or culture or personal decision. is the essence, and often the agony. of being human. Nasr then turned his attention to the tendency we all have. as particular pcBOfIS confined to a specific time and place and thus of limited knowledge and perspective, for absolutizing the relative. !or ~inking that somehow we can see from our singular. particular vantage point the whole show or the big picture or the entire ItUth. He suggested that we all need to learn how to live with the "relatively absolute." As an example. he turned our anention to the sun. which appears to us 10 be an absolute. To the earth bound unaided eye. it seems to be unique, the only one, singular. There seems no doubt that from the sun come light. heat, energy and life itself. From our place in space. and from the way the sun blesses us, it seems to be the one true sourcc of all. From our perspcctive. the sun is without a peer. But wait! The sun. while smiling on us, is not unique. Modem astronomy tells us there are b~lli?n.s of suns shining Of! "only God knows what or whom." Just because we ~c far. maybe even mflfiltelr removed. from the5e suns. just because we are not in the least. or very linle, affecllxl by them doesn I mean they don't exist. From the galactic perspeaive. from God's point of view. so to speak, our sun is ani! relatively absolute. By looking at the lighl of our sun we bocomc so blinded by it Ih at we canOl sec Ihe lighl of Ihe olhcl' suns " beyond it. Seeing is doc.eptive! Don't absolutize the relative. Plenary Sessions Metroplitan Paulos Mar Gregorios, leader of the Syrian Orthodox Church. made a sirn.ilar point at one of the Plenary Sessions. He pled with us humankind to seek a wnew enlightenment"--a pl~y ag~ on Ii~t and its source. the sun. Gregorios mused, "Sometimes I think we have too much light, like haVIng sunlighltwenty-four hours a day. If we were to have continuous sunlight, we wouldn't be a?le. to see the galaxies. Ironic i.!in't it. thaI our sun, the source of light. obscures the other s~ ~re th~ It lights them up! " He seemed to be suggesting that Jesus and the light that emanates from tum rrught bJ.ind some of us Christians to the life-giving light and energy of other Sons and Daughters of God that shme on us from on High, and from on earth. The plenary (Of more formal sessions) were held severaltimcs eaeh day. often in the context of worship. Usually. they began with an invocation, and by the time ten or twelve different religious groups had offered their prayers o r salutations, the invocation was forty-five to sixty minutes long. It was never boring and usually mind-stretching. At one plenary we heard the "Voices of the Di.!ipossessed." a long litany from recent immigrants to Chicago who reported the discrimination. degradation and humiliation 10 which they had been subjected. As one partieipant remarked, "The suffering have and must have a hermeneutical privilege." That is. by their reportS they are preaching to us. They are telling us something about ourselves. if we wiU but listen. The Parliament was not without its problems and conflicts. Several Hindus and Sikhs literally came to blows in the midst of the plenary on which I just reported. The entire Greek Orthodox contingent walked out permanently when they found so many witches and neo-pagans in their midst. And when Louis Farakkhan came in. the Jews left. The New Religious Landscape in America Lest we think !his wide variety of religious faith-commitrncnts is 10 be found only at special occasions like the Parliament, or that it is simply a phenomenon o n a global scale. I'd like briefly 10 look at the new religious landscape in this country as described at the Parliament by a scholar who is doing seminal research in this fanile field. Diana uk. a professor of comparative religions at Harvard University, has attracted large grants from foundations to study the American religious scene. For the past six years she has had scores of students fan oul across the country to learn first-hand what the religious demographics are. The J?Ost surpris~g sta~tic you may have already seen reported, namely that in the U.S. there are more Musluns than EpISCOpalians. There are now over 1,100 mosques. 80% of which were constructed since 1980. ~ 1973 there were 12 mosqucs in the GTeater New York City area. Today there are over 250. The Chicago ~ea has 70 mo~ues and 500,000 Muslims (more Muslims than Jews). Los Angeles has 300,000 M~hms. and 50 Mushm Ce~ters. There are 5 mosques in Oklahoma, 21 in New England, and 40,000 Muslims lfl Houston. Th~c IS even a Muslim Association mooting regularly here in Lancaster! Some expens suggest that Islam I5 the fastest growing religion in the country and indeed in the world. Today there are almost onc billion Muslims. onc-fifth of the world's population.' • Bu?dhists too, especially since World W~ II, have become a major religious body in the country, Eck estImates that there are over 1,500 Buddhist Temples and Centers in the USA In Den !her e eleven Bud~t temples. In Chicago there ar~ twenty; there are more Buddhists th~ Episcov;~ianscinar that city. In ad?iIlon, Eck says, there ~e 400 Hmdu temples. 100 Jain temples, as well as Sikhs and Zoroastrians. The list goes on and on. growmg every day. 59 -~~-... The dramatic growth of th~ non-Christian religions is only half the picture in our changing religious 1~. ~ .obv~ mvolv~ ~ .mo~emem of the mainline Protestant denominations to !he sidelines. which Implies a dramallc diminullon of their membeB, money and influence. One example win sufrlCe. AI the .189~ P~li.ament .it w~ reported that '~rdinfsto the United Stales census for 1890 no Protestant denommatlOn IS mcreasmg U\ number's more rapidly' than the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). II was estimated that th~ Disciples w:ere b~i[din~ ~ne new church every day (365 new churches every year), Compare, thai drarnatlc growth With, thIS prOClplto~ docline: From 2,2 million in 1949 to 1.9 in 19~ to 998,000 U\ 1969 to 666,000 (an ommous number) ill 1992. a loss of over 50% in less dtan 30 years. A Personal Digression This might be an appropriate time for me to reveal that I have had the privilege of obsefving fust-hand another faith community. For len ycars. while retaining my standing as a uce minisle£. and wiah !he blessing of my Conference Minister. Mineo Katagiri. who had been raised a Buddhist. r was Director of Development of the Buddhist Churches of America Endowmcnt Foundation. Having been established about 100 years ago and with hcadquaners in San Francisco. thc Buddhist Churches of America is 95% Japanese American. thc first and the largest Buddhist institution in the United States. The person I worked most closely with. Seigen Yamaoka, their first American·bom Bishop, spokc Japanese and English fluently and had two earned degrees from Pacific School of Religion, the closely related UCC seminary in Berkclcy, Californ ia, where I had served as Vice President for Development for ten years before my work with the Buddhists. I include this personal refc£ence because I saw close-up the struggle that non-Otristian religions in America have as they seck to practice their traditions and to pass them on 10 their children. While with the Buddhisl Churches of America, we helped to raise over ten and a half million dollars. Much of thai moncy went toward a building and endowment for the Institute of Buddhist Studies, their seminary and graduale school which in 1985 became affiliated with the Graduate Theological Union. a consortium of nine Protestant and Roman Catholic theological schools in Berkcly. The Buddhist participation in this rclationship made the GT U the only consortium in thc world 10 include under one umbreUa both western and eastern religious traditions and institu tions. The Buddhist Churches of Amcrica also fought hard for the right to have the symbol of the Wheel on thc hcadstones of ilS youg men who died in battle and are buried in military cemeteries. Until 1?~6 there was for them only the Hobson's choice of a cross or a star. Soon after this favorable decISion. thc government also made room for Buddhist min isters 10 become military chaplains. The Dalai Lama The final session of the Parliament was held in Grant Park in ordce for the general public to anend. It ~ from I I noon until after 10 p.m. on Saturday, Sept. 4 and wa..;; filled w,i~ m~ic. ~oe><.i and ~~. His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and livmg Ifl exile m India smce 1959. was thc principal speaker. (Will you forgive anothcr personal note? I had the pleasure of havin~ thc older brother of the ,Dalai Lama. Lobsang Samden, in my religion class for the 1960·61 acade~c year when I was teaching at Ursinus CoUege, Lobsang. who died several years ago, came to UrslllUS ~o ugh. the good graces of Church World Service, UCC moncy and the influence of ' Reginald Helffench. Lobsang later acted u a kind of Secrelary of Slate for his brother,) His Holiness completely disarms you. Hc's channing. humble and humorous. No pr~ . You get whaI you see. Even though his English wu remarkably good. he had I tranSlator by his Side and would 60 occasionally consult with him. bow and thank him. and tum to conlinue his address 10 us. From his somewhat stooped. lop-sided stance. he looked out and said. rather hes.i~tl y, "When you listen 10 the Dalai Lama's broken English. watch oul; it could be dangerous.· After c.lung some of the world's iUs. he said. "Bul \e( us not blame othccs. Only ourselves. Let us check up on ourselves before we check up on others: Turning 10 religion. he opined. "One is not a genuine practictioner if religion is only in ~e head ~d.not in the heart. Without the hean there is only pomp and ceremony. We must pcacllce our religIon; including myself. When religion radiates from the hean. it will create a positive atmosphere and provide benefits to others. including the birds and insects. And we have a right to abandon religion if it does not benefit us or others: Acknowledging the fact of religious pluralism. he noted that "differences are built into life. The body has. for example. many different senses: smell. taste. touch. We all vary in our preferences; some like things soft or hard. or sweet or sour. And the mind is much more sophisticated than the body. It is tremendously varied in its thoughts. beliefs and ideas. One religion. the same religion. cannot satisfy everyone." "As a Buddhist." he continued. "f might want everyone to be a Buddhist. but that's wishful thinking. Just because Buddhism is best for me doesn't mean it's best for everyone. AI! religions are helping humanity. strengthening good qualities and carrying a similar message ..the message of love and peace and compassion. While there are fundamental differences. religions have much in common. and they nood to be in contact with each other as they serve the neMs of humanity." With this ringing endorsement of intcrreligous dialogue and cooperation. the Parliamenl came to a close after a series of moving songs by a chorus of several hundred children. a sign if not a guarantee of hope. Four Personal Observations As I have reOected on this experience in Chicago two years ago. I have four observations which lie as foundation stones to infonn my attitude toward the reality of religious pluralism. I. The Parliam~n. t pr~nted us panicipants with a level praying field. By its example. it suggested that we ~bandon reitglous tnumphalism and imperialism and work alleveling out the praying fields wherever we live. R.eligion. the natural res~nse to Ultimate Reality. is as varied and colorful as an English garden. its d~erences often detem,nned by the particular psychological needs and the particular cultural soil in wh ICh those neMS g~~te. It seems 10 me unacceptable. therefore. 10 suggest which religious flowers are JIf"C.ferred by t?c DlVme Gardener. God doesn't take sides. I must. then. resist the tendency to ahsoluille ~~ relattve or to ~ ~al the Absolute Ultimate Reality give a special blessing at the expense of other religions 10 my very limited and relati ve perception of that Reality. 2. ~~ Parliament encouraged participants 10 express forcefully and clearly their own religious conVictIOns. We were never asked to compromise our own faith commitments. I should lik; 10 ~ope ~at. all ~f us. v.:i~ our widely divergent perspectives, will ieam to accept each other as partners m thlS conttnUUlg mtefTehgLOus dialog. where we may all express wh at we believe. Without embarrassment. without fear of contradiction Of" a feeling of superiority, let us invite each other to sit in similar chairs at the religious round-table. 6J -----. J: AI the Parliament we learned to listen to others whose beliefs were different but JUSt as deeply-fell and stnCere as our own. We were encouraged to be accepting of differences 10 make distinctions 'tho ~~ jud~menta1 .. to ask qu~tions and to PfObI? without being hostile Of ~ing to entrap. 10 res~d : mqUlf)' wL1hou1 bemg defensive, and to affum Without being arrogant or presumptuous. I ~ convinced thai in this inlC1Tcligious and intercultural environment, we should converse without seeking 10 convert. 4. The Parliament taught us '? be open to truth wherever it is found. to accept criticism of our faith and works from whatever sourcc It may come, and to be partners in a mutually-transforming experience. I am persuaded that all of us who have rcsronded to the call of reality from our own cultural setting can leam from each other. enlarge our own vie ws of beauty and frUth, and integrate into our own religious li fe the insights that come from other faim communities. in this increasingly interdependent world. the encounter and interpenetration of religious traditions enlarges and enriches our own faith and helps to transfonn us into more accepting and acceplable persons. Wilhin commitment, encounter and exchange produce change and growth. The Reunion of Religions We tum now to the reunion of religions. a phrase thai echoes Schafrs "the reunion of ChrislCndom." I use the tCffil "reunion" in the sense of "family reunion." Acknowledging our relationship as blood brothers and sisters, we come together 10 celebrate our common humanity and to receive each other's religious traditions as gifts. Even as Schaff posited a union before a reunion, so must we think of our common humanity which lies beneath our varied perceptions of reality. For th is reason. I would prefer to speak more inclusively of "the reunion of humanity." Before all else. and after all else. we are united as persons. Between the beginning and the end of humankind. we are one in being and substance while alme same time different in color and culture. history and habit. nation and religion. Throughout history. and before historical consciousness. all persons everywhere heard a summons from beyond. a sense of the mystery of reality. and responded to that call in ways that we recognize as "religious." It is (ony. even presumptuous. to ask ourselves. "What would Schaff think and say about the cUITen t religious SCCfle?" On one side we could quote his Christological statements to support the view that he would continue to hold onlO Christ as the only way to salvation. But we could as easily argue that Schaff was always pushing beyond the edge of the ecumenical envelope and would. therefore. dou~ ticss be leading the troops toward interreligious dialogue and mutual recognition. interpcnetralJ.on and transformation. As a recent biographer of Schaff notes "He was the presiding geniUS of international theology and pioneered the internalization of theology t!l His whole career may be called a nincteenth To illusratc where this biographer thought Schaff was headed, we ncod only read the quotalion on the dedicatory page of his book. a quotation from Schlciermacher: IT unconstrained universality of the sense is the rust and original co.n?ition of religion. and also, as is natural. its ripest fruit, you can sucely see th~t , ~ . relig.to n advances and piety is purified. the whole religious world must appear as an indiVlSible Whole. 62 The impulse to abstract. in so far as it proceeds 10 ri g i~ separati?n. is a pro:of ~f imperfection. The highest and most cultured always see a universal union. and. seemg II. establish it. 24 Schaff thought of Christianity as a garden with a variety of individual flowers, and as a mosaic ~ith each piece important and complementary to the others .. Are not .these "metaphors ?Qually applicable. to describing loday's religious scene? Even as & haff viewed reuruon as a oonscrvali?n. nOI an absorptive union." SO we do not suggest that anyone religion will abso.rb the others. nor wi? ~ere ~ a gcn~al amalgamation. nor a religion of the lowest common denonunator. Rather. all Will I~v~ side . by sld~, mtcq>enetrating and mutually transfonning each other. Regardless of how other religiOns view thell' relationship 10 Otristianity, this is the attitude I believe we should take toward them. Hard Questions Remain There is no doubt that hard. but hardly inswmounlable. questions arise; ~o r us Christians who take. ~ is stance of mutual accepIanCe. of conversation nOI conversion, of olher religiOUS persons and commurulles. Some historians will say. "What's so different about today's religious scene? Even in New Testament times there was a pietllora of religions.· Paul even.,rluggesled in his spcoch on the Areopagus that the people of Athens wc£e "in every way very religious. In the Roman Empire the early church was surrounded by Greek and Roman gods. mystery cults. gnost~. Imperial Religion. Egyptian deities. and Mother goddesses of Asia Minor. 10 name a few of the religious options in the first century. The difference today is not only an even greater number of faith commitments and communities. but also the shrinking of the globe because of instant and constant communications. and of personal mobility. In the same day, anyone on earth may go anywhere else on earth! And we are all caught in. or caught up in. Ihe Intemcl. Technology has impacted and drastically affected theology. The new fact is th ai the people of the world live very. very close together. The new reality is thaI in many countries. including our own, there &fe adherents of many different religious persuasions living next door to each other. Just ring your neighbor's door bell and you'll find out. It is. therefore, the responsibility of leadccs of civilized soclelLes to guide their people toward an acceptance and a rapprochement of die various rciigious communities within their orbit of influence. And among these leaders I would include dioologians. politicians. philosophers. social scientists. economists and educators. It is also the responsibili ty of the citizens in dicse communities to seek 10 mold, develop, elevate. elect and applaud such leaders. Failure to produce such. leaders and such an informed and enlightened citizenry win only result in continuing intolerance. an attitude of arrogant superiority and. possibly. acls of violence. Admittedly. ~ous theological issues emerge as we recognize all religions as more or less equal. (Remember Eisettho wc::r'~ off the curt ~u~ from the heart remark diat ~ Dcmocracy in the United Statcs makes no sense unless It IS based on religion, and I don't care what religion it is!") The Christological Problem: God's "Only· Son The P?mary Christological problem revolves &found Jesus as The Only Son of God. The Sole Source of Salvalion. Notice how ':"C use superlatives as we testify to .our faith in Christ. He is the best and the brightest. the grea~t. the IIlcomparabl ~ one. 70afrum anything less seems ludicrous: Is any of us willing to say that Jcs"s IS seoon::t best or almost 11.1 the top of our list of God's children? Krister StcndahI. long-time professor of New Testament and Dean at the Harvard Divinity School. and more recently, beforc his .3 retit~t. a Bishop in the Lutheran Church in Sweden. finesses this dilemma by talking of our use of superlatives as "love language." 26 ~en we speak of?ur spouse or lover. we say. ".You are the one and only." "You are the grealeSt" You arc 1M best. But any reasonable .reflocuon upon such a relationship could conclude Ihat somewhere there may have been or may SlLU be anolher person wilh whom I could have established s~ar feelings .of trust an~ ~mmi~t. and thll!' m~de an identical profession of love. (A disgruntled SUItor o f my WIfe oru:c satd. Love IS 95% propmqUity." He was correct. He was in Cambridge and I was in Collegeville: and that made all 1M difference!) On a dresser in our bedroom we have two inch -high plastic figurines given to us by our daughter. They say. "# 1 Dad" and "#1 Mom." I look at Ihcse every day and accept what they say. seldom thinking that there are perhaps half a million of these little objects in households throughout the country. Our daughter is right: Despite our imperfections. we are the best mother and father she has had first-hand. long-term experience with. And we receive and appreciate these sentiments expressed by our daughter's "love language ." Stcndahl's introductio n o f "love language" into our theolog ical vocabulary is helpful in understanding how faithful and committed persons of all religious groups address their respective objeclS of belief when they are II worship o r in prayer. When I say the creed. which in fact should be sung. I am doing this within my own community. To confess Jesus as "the only-begotten Son of 000"27 is to me more like using poetic license than expressing doctrinal truth. Early in the Christian era this metaphor was transformed by the church into a metaphysical statement We should consider understanding this truth again more as a figure of speech than as an incontrovertible theological fact. We get into real trouble when we begin using our love language. our intimate language of worship. QUt in the street--in our ne ighbor's face. Our daughter would be in deep doo doo if she tried to defend her position publicly. Similarly. we get into theological hot water when we use our "love language" outside our own faith community. I'm prepared to argue that while this confessio n o f faith makes sense to some of us who have been born into the culture of Western civilization. with roots and antec.cdents in Near Eastern religions (with their multitudes of d ivine "sons." the time seemed ri pe for the coming of an "only Son"). the cultural accident of my having been born in this particular religious stream docs not pemlit me to impose ~y. cul~e. ~y religion. my "only Son" on persons who because of their particular cultural sening and religiOUS Idenllty fmd this term puzzling. foreign and unhelpful. Helpful Comments from Wink. Crossan, ltick, Eck and Samartha Anumber of prominent seholars have tackled the "only Son of God" subject. offe~g a wide . v~ety of helpful commenlS. Some suggest that many "incarnatio ns" in varying forms are subjects of bebef In b?th Eastern and Weslem traditions. Some ask whether the incarnation shouldn't be ex~ded to al1 humanIty. "Isn't that the task of every person: to embody Christlike qualities?" is a questIon I heard Professor Walter Wink ask at a public lecture at Union Seminary in N. V.C in 1994. John Dominic Crossan and others in the Jesus Seminar bold that Jesus himself never claimod to be God's only Son. Jesus' self-image was that of a counter-cultural revolutionary peasant. The title "Son of God" was conferred by the church. John Hick, the British scholar, insislS thai we ask ourselves, "Was C~tiani.ty alone founded by God in person on the only occasion on which he h as e Ve!" become incarnate In ~ workl [and ~ at th~efo.rel Christianity has a unique status as the way of salvation provided and apPO inted by God h~,? HH:k answers his own question with a reso~ DO, adding, "The historical Jesus almost CCJ1a.mly did not m fact teach !hat he was in any sense God.· 64 In his Gifford Lectures, Hick says, "It is also possible to understand the idea of divine ~amalion in the life of Jesus Christ mythologically, as indicating an eKtraordinary openness to the dn:m.e presence in vinlte of which Jesus' life and teachings have mediated the reality and love of God to millions of people in successive centuries," 29 During bel: years of study in India, Diana Eclc found that it is .customary for Hindus to believe ~ many incarnations (avataras, divine descents) of the supreme Lord VIShnU, and she notes that these stones deal with rescuing the righteous and protecting the faith. "In the sequence of avataras, God weaves his saving power through all the realms of creation: 30 she writes. "The problem in India is not with notion of incarnatio n ," says Eck, "but with the seem~gly impossible notion that the incarnation is an event in the singular--- "Ah ha," I bear some readers respond, "I've caught Schellhase with his relativistic slip showing." Of course! I readily admit to my "relative absolute" stance. Remember Nasr: "Don't absolutize the relative," I also take refuge in Emerson's observation that "a foolish consistenc y is the hobgoblin of linle minds." When we define too tighdy what the truth is. when we talk so confidently about absolutes. we might recall the story of the judge who. after listening to the prosecutio n said, "By God. I think you're right." Then after lisrening to the defense. he scratched his head and said. "By God. I think yo u're right.. A person in the courtroom immediately jumped up and said. "Judge. you can't belie ve that both are right." Wbereupon the j udge replied. "By God, I think you're right· It is the Indian Christian. Stanley Samartha, who best responds to the question of the absolule being compromised by the relative. "Through the incarnation in Jesus Christ." he writes, "God had relativized God's self in history: Christian theologians should therefore ask themselves whether they are justified in absolutizing in doccrine him whom God has relativizcd in history." 14 By Their Fruits You Shall Judge Them Related to the accusation of relativism is the companion charge that by advocating a "le vel praying f ield ~ one ~us t . th~. ~P t !Il religions as equ~. My interlocutor might well ask. "Isn't thaI what your 'level praymg field Lmplles? ,:,"es and no . . ~llLle I feel we must refrain from making final judgments about other truth-seekers and fll.1th commurulLes, we can make some observations and distinctions. We might ask o ur:e~ves and others, "Does my/your religion promote the transformation of persons from egocentrLc~m .10 Other (!he highest Reality or Good)-centerodncss. and of societies from a jingoistic ethnocenUlC tnbe to a community that recognizes and seeks peaceful commerce and cooperation wi!h o!her peoples and nations?" Yes. ~e must ~ limits ~o accepting all religions as equally true. good and beautiful! But let us not wave thIS red hemng SO ~L? len t1y in front of us !hal we become distracted from the main issue. namely. th~t .most.of, ~e great religiOns arc more or less equal. If we wanl II. yardstick 10 measure the claims of ~hg l on. ISnl. L ~ more r~asonable 10 look at the moral fruits ra!her !han at the epislomological roots? Ha.ve. the re~glon and lis adherents done ~re good than harm?" is II. question worth pondering. If we ~~~. !hink hard and deep about this query. we might become a linle nervous, maybe even g :"=~r~n!e o;f~ r~o~ be::;in that Christ. is. the Only Son and the Sole Saviour. arrives II.! non-Christian ma' '1 of the°h as n to mak~ ChrislLans foci uniquely privileged in contrast to !he JOn Y uman race and accordingly free to patronize them religiously, exploit them 65 , eoouvmn.=y---,--" an d d ommate. th em politlcally.-. , 35 Ir: short. ~uch. an absolute claim leads to superiority, arrogance, colonialism, imperialism, subjugation. tnumphalism, mtolerance and many of the other sins that flesh is heir to. No wonder we believe in grace. Our "good works" are contradicted by oue evil deeds and contaminated by our self-serving motives. Theology as Thoughtfulness While raising obvious questions, and indicating the difficulties in espousing the pluralistic position--a level praying field--I am suggesting that il might be more helpful to adopt a common-sense attitude toward the religious reality of our day. rather than either to look the other way or to take a hard-nosed ideological and strictly logical stance. At its CCf\!er r believe that sound theology is simply thoughdulness; sensitive and sensible reflection on the mystery and activity of Divine Reality. MTheological discourse must be sensitive--sympathctic to the ills, the hurts. the desires, the hopes, the rights and the beliefs of others. And it must be scnsible--wi!ling to wrestle with all the intellectual POWcf at its command to addr-ess the issues of faith and works comon to humankind. In fact. sometimes a common·sense response that combines compassion with reason might be the proper, if not the perfectly logical. path to travel. Often, a real-life experience triggers such a response. 1 recall being mildly, but pleasantly. surprised when listening to a sermon preached some years ago in the First Congregational Church (UCC) in Berkeley. California, by Dr. Barbara Brown Zikmund. at that time profCSSOi' and dean at the Pacific &hool of Religion. now President of the Hartford Theological Seminary. BBZ had recently returned from a trip to Africa. and her sermon was a reflection on this visit. Here is what she said. "I am coming to believe that there is really no justification for taking some religions more seriously than others. When a religious tradition provides a meaningful world-view and makes sense to ilS followers. it must be taken as seriously as the most sophisticated Christian theology .~7 Increasingly, my karma is running over my dogma; my life's experiences. and reflection upon them in the light of Divine Mystery and Providence. are mehing the hard. cold docrines that were once part of my theological position. I am leaming better to live with uncertainty. inconsistency and theologically-driven cognitive dissonance. Along with evincing sensllLvlty. theologians and all of us think seriously about the meaning and implications of our faith need to make sense of our religion. Faith does seek understanding. and 1 heanily support those men and women. colleagues in reflecting upon the meaning of life'sjoumey. who apply their minds in hard reasoning to the continuing task of clarifying our Christian response to the Divine Reality while listening to and learning from the religious experiences and insights of other traditions. We who seek to live as Christians while espousing the pluralistic stance suggested in this ~ay carry with us a full basket of theological problems. But I see no alternative--for me. 1 am conscious that 1 am frequently going the wrong wayan a one-way street, and often I find myself turning left in a right handed and theologically right-minded world. Grappling with these issues takes more than a lifetime to resolve. But 1 continue to struggle, 10 learn and 10 re-learn, to conf~ and to proclaim, and to live in gratitude and joy as a child of God in Christ. I often think of Panikkar, that saintly little man. that scholar of the first order. who in my view is both sensitive and sensible. Isn't he true to God and to Chrisl and to himself when he talks movingly and appreciatively of the many religious rivulets that have flowed into his life? Isn't it natura! and good for him 10 say, "I am a Christian whom Christ has permitted to sit at the feet of the Buddha to become Buddhist?" Isn't it true to think that he is now, because of these varied interreligious experiences. an even more deeply aware and commiltod Christian? An enlightenM Christian! 66 -', 'morrow millions of today's children's children's children will live in a Tomorrow. an d th e d ay III er 0 • • .' th . time when the world's religious settings and dispositio~ will, ~ wlllmg. give them e expenence and love and operu1es5 to join Panikkar in a similar confession of fiUth. Intertwined Interrelated Interdependent We all are interdependent. We arc all intertwined. W.e ~e all interrelated. We are not one but many. A thousand years ago an anonymous Chinese woman said It well: I take a lump of clay. make a figurine of you and a figurine of me. Then I take the figurine of you and the figurine of me, crush them together and make them into another lump of clay. Again I make a figurine of you and a figurine of me out of this lump of clay. There is now 'You in Me' and "I in You." 38 Is it not true that we are aU inextricably "bound together in this bundle of life,· all experiencing the same Ultimate Reality differently, and each affecting each as together we live out our earthly pilgrimage? Forward with Schaff I return to Schaff, oue Reformed and reforming father in the faith. In his Foreword in the most recent book on Schaff, Martin Marty makes this comment on oue faithful father's appearance at the 1893 World's Parliament of Religions: "Schaff was a pioneer who ventured into the places where high risk religious encounters were not yet taken for granted.« 39 I keep wondering whether &haffs flexible theology would not lead him and us deep into the heart of interreligious dialog and experience. Sometimes I seem 10 hear Schaff say, "Remember, ScheJIhase, we can allieam to live as one flock without being housed in one fold." 40 Conclusion Reiigous diversity is a fact. It is here to stay. And the praying field must be kept level. Therefo.r~, I believe it is n~~ to see each other's finnly-held religious convictions not only as valid and legllimate but also as sllmuh to reformulate and to recast oue own beliefs and behavior. A never-closed conclusiveness coupled with an ever-copen inclusiveness is I believe the only way to move with faith and hope and love into the twenty-fIrst century. ' , 67 , ENDNOTES 1. John Henry Barrows, Editor. "The World's Parliamcn! of Religions" (Chicago: The Parliament Publishing company, 1893) Vol. 1. viii 2. Ibid .. 107 J. Ibid" Vol. 11, 1511-14 4. Ibid., Vol. I, 138 5. Ibid .. Vol. 11. 1199·120J 6. Ibid .. Vol. 1,8 7. Ibid .. Vol. II, 927 8. Ibid .. Vol. 1,650 9. Ibid .. Vol. 1. 26-8 10. Ibid .. Vol. 11. 1079 11. [bid .. Vol. 11. 1093 12. Ibid .. Vol. 11, 1094 13. Ibid .. Vol. J 1. 1092 14. Ibid., Vol. I, 170 15. Ibid .. Vol. 1. 171 16. Ibid .. Vol. I. 80·' 17. All quotations between pageS55 and59 are taken from extensive personal notes which I look during the 1993 Parliament. 18. Ibid .. Vol. 11. 1438 19. The Christian Century. August 1l ~18. 1993. p. 764 20. Klaus Penre!. "Philip &haff: Historian and Ambassador of the Universal Church" (Macon. Georgia: Mercer UnivCfSity Press, 1991) LXViii 21. Ibid .. LXViii 22. Ibid., 213 23. Ibid., XV 24. Ibid., Viii; from Friedrich Schleiennacher. "On Religion. Speeches to its Cultured De!tpi.sers." trans. John Oman. (New York, N.Y.: Harper Torchbooks, 1958) 154 68 25. Acts 17:22 26 Krisler Stendahl. "NOles for Three Bible Srudies," Quist's Lordship. pp. 14. 15; cited by Paul F. ~ittef. No O!:her Name. Orbis Books. Mary Knoll. J'I.'Y. 1985, footnote. pp. 185. 261 27. The NiceneCreed 28. lohn Hick. "The Christian Century.- January 21. 1981. 48 29. John H.iclc."An Introduction of Religion: Human Responses to the Transcendent" (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1989) 372 30. Diana L Ec.k, "Encountering God: A Spirirual Journey from Bozeman to 8anares." (Boston: Beacon Press. 1993) 81-2 31.lbid.. g3 32.lbid .. 84 33.lbid .. 87 34. Stanley 1. Samartha, "The Cross and the Rainbow. Ch.rist in a Multireligious Cul t ure.~ in 1. Hick and P. Knittet. Eds.. "The Myth of Christian Uniqueness: Toward a Pluralistic Theology in Religions" (Maryknoll. N.Y.: Orbis Books. 1988), 69 35. Hick, "An Interpretation of Religionk" 371-2 36. Richard T. Schellhase, "Helping 10 Ho ld the World Togeth~ by Making Sense of the Divine Mystery and Activity," in "Prism. a Theological Fo rum for the United Church of Christ," (Spring 1993) 18-37 37. A seUlIon by Barbara Brown Zikmund preached on August 31. 1986 in First Congregational Church (UCC), Berkely. CA and printed by the church. 38. Choan-Seng Song, "Third Eye Theology," rev. ed. (Maryknoll. N.Y.: Orbis Books. 1990) 105 39. Scepben R, Graham, "Cosmos in the Chaos: Philip Schafrs lnlClpretation of Nineteenth Century Religion" (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995) Xiii 40, A refeteoce to Schafrs insistence that there would be "one flock, not o ne fo ld." Schaff. of course, was speaking of the Christian tradition. but 1 am purposely enlarging his "one flock, many folds" image to include penons of other religious persuasions. Schaff writes, "The famous passage, lohn 10:16, has been mistranslaled by the Latin Vulgate, and the enor has been passed into the King James's Version, Christ's flock is one, but there are many folds, and there will be 'many mansions in heaven;." Philip Schaff, "The Reunion of Christendom," (New York City: Evangelical Alliance, 1893) Document XXXiii, 15 69 , FREDERR:J( AUGUS'I1JS RAUCH: msr AMERICAN IIEGI!LiAN by Ijnden I. MBio:; Ridw .. ood. New ks:scy In Ihe Fall of 1984 a review appeared in The Owl of Minerva, the biannual journal of the Hegel Society of America. The editor. Lawrence S. Stcpe[evich, allowed the review, in spite of its being wholly unonhodox. In fact. Stepelevich begged the indulgence of his readers, acknowledging the review's novelty and recommending it as a new genre, "the 'historical' book review." The need for the new classification, remarked the editor in an opening "note," arose from the book's date, 1840. Not that the book's rll"St appearance under the litle, Psychology; or, a View of the Human Soul, Including AnlhTopoJOBY. by Frederick Augustus Rauch went without notice.! In facI, it created quite a stir and was generally welcomed. even if most reviewers confessed being at a loss \0 understand il. Still, the editor of the Owl wisely SUSpel;;led that few modem Hegelians knew of it and even less had read it, and since the Psych%gy was the firs! work of Hcgelian idealism published in America--its review by a less hostile. Hegelian journal was bener late than never. TIlE CONTROVERSY The minor controversy surrounding the appearance of the review in the Owl might shed light on why Rauch's major work had fallen into obscurity and needed such a late review. The author of the book review, who is myseU, received a letter shortly after itspublication from one Lloyd Easlon. author of Hegel's Fir.;/ American Followers: The Ohio Hegelians. Easton took exception to my suggestion that Rauch ·could be called the father of American Hegelianism for it was he before all others who introduced the Hegelian system to Americans in their language with the publication of his Psychology." Obviously Easton would prefer that the later, Ohio Hegelians. be acknowledged as the first source of American Hegelianism. and the fact that his views are widely accepted has cenainly oontributed to the general feeling that Ohio was the source of original Hegelianismus in America. Thus Rauch and what would become known as the Mercersburg Theology were rarely considered the first American home of Hegel's philosophy. In his letter to me Easton insisted that Rauch's religious orthodoxy excluded him from the distinction of being America's first Hegelian. It was a reiteration of his argument thaI, although Rauch is an early source of Hegelian idealism in America. and while his philosophical system "is pnly narrowly removed from its source: Rauch's book is nOI a defense or exposition of Hegel's views. Easton is certainly correcl in one sense. In his Psychology Rauch declared his intent to integrate Gennan and English philosophy. That supports Easton's oonclusion that the Psychology is not an "exposition of Hegel's views." But most importantly, suggested Easlon. Rauch differs from Hegel on the crucial issue of religion. Easton wrote: Rauch did nOI follow Hegel on the difference between truth in religion and philosophy. namely. that in the fanner truth takes the form of 'imaginative presentation·.... 4 Furthermore, Easlon believed thaI Rauch strayed from the Hegelian method in which "reason moves through opposition and conflict from an incomplete position toward greater unity and wholeness." Still. the mark of Hegel is clear enough in Rauch for Easton to conclude, somewhat evasively. that Rauch was not an "enthusiastic Hegelian."S 70 • All of this is in stark contrasl 10 the earlier book by Howard Ziegler. Frederick ~ugustw Rauch. American Heselian, which was published in 1953 al Franklin and Marshall College 10 Lan~ ter. PA. Ziegler does a masterful job in describing h~w Rauch's Psych% gy reproduced. the th~d pan. of Hegel's system. With painstaking delail, Ziegler lays Rauch s adapt~ EnglISh Phil~.sophlcal tenninology and conceptual matrix as if a transparency placed over the thrrd part of Hegel s system. The match is undeniable. IRE MYCIA11NG AI'I'IlOACH So. again. we are pnossed to ask--was Rauch a Hegelian or nOI? Are w~ 10 take the s5de of ,UslOn or Ziegler? My suggestion is that there is a third. more reasonable a1temalJve. What neither Ziegler nor Easton emphasize is the cultural phenomenon occurring in Germ~y at th~ time.. ;Uter the;: ~eath of Kant and the eclipse of rationalism in the wake of Hchte. renewed IOteresl 10 traditional religion rose with the influence of Hegel and Scleiermacher. Eventually thai new interest would result in a movement called neo-Pietism and, more generally, a conservalive thrust in Prussian political and religious life. By 181 5 the influence of Hegel and Sch1eiennacher was itself fading. The resulting philosophical fragmentation of scholars into an assortment of reactions to Hegel and Schleiennacher created a loose confederation of idealist philosophers and theologians. They became kno wn as the Mediating &boo!. Generally, the Mediating School of thought sought to mediate a path between Christian traditionalism and German idealism. More specifically, they accepted the authority and authenticity of Scripture. but their approach to Scripture was both scientific and historic. In addition. they aplied a hermeneutical approach derived from Hegel. who believed that the idea or spirit of history develops itself in a logical manner ac.ording to dialectical principles. The Mediating scholars were spread throughoul Prussia and had widely differing views aboul religion and philosophy. Yet they were unmistakably united in the idealism that was forged in reaction to Kant and Fichte, and developed by Hegel. Schelling and Schleiermacher. among others, It was deftnitively marked by a preference for phenomenological investigation. Whether this be in the fie ld of history, as was the case with Augustus Neander, or philosophy as with Karl Daub, or with theology as with Tholuck and Domer, or ecclesiology as with the von Gerlach brothers. phenomenological idealism and a rerum to traditional faith were unifying characteristics of the Mediating School. And even beyond the mediating agenda, where, on the one hand, a social radicalism was being forged and, on the other. a patriotic nationalism was taking hold. virtually all Genuan thinkers were reacting 10 the enormous influence of Hegel. Some of these scholars were as near to the master as could be. for example, Daub and F.C. Baur, while others made it a point to distance themselves fro m their fonner colleague or teacher, for example, Schelling and Karl Marx. (Schelling restructured his philosophy and became a mediating philosopher best loved by the post·Hegelian Roman Catholic theologians.) The Mediating School formed a continuum upon which one could identify o neself literally in relation 10 the dis:tance one was from J:legel and ~eiennacher, each and all moving out in concentric circles f~ their mas~, some tumIDg 10 the nght, others 10 the left, II was upon this conlinuum thai you wtU frod F~enck Augustus Rauch .aIong with the rest of his contemporaries in Prussia in the middle part of the nlOeteenth century, and. ID reference to Easton. Rauch's orbit is oo1y slightly out and 10 the right of Hegel. RAOCH'S BACKGROUND Rauch was born in 1 ~06 •.1O a Gt:.. uan Refonhed minister's family in Frankfurt am Main. He graduated from th.e U";'verslty of ~ I essen, and received his doctorate in 1827 from Marburg. He sought a .lectureship VylOg ~ fOl"e NlCtzsche for the honor of being the youngest privardozeat(s) ever 10 teac:h ~ Germany, In Heidelberg he mel Karl Daub who was likely the guide in his sojourn with Hegellarusm, Although he never studied wilh Daub. Rauch relied on him to guide him through his 71 reconciliation of philosophy and theology. There is ~re th.an enough evi.dence to su~est that Daub was a Hegelian at Heidelberg. Hegel had entrusted him WIth the correcting and reVISing of the second edition of his EnzycJopadie, 1827. It SCC1U'> clear thaI Hegel considered Daub a Hegelian. in spire of Daub's unmistakable sympathies with the Mediating School. Likewise. Rauch must have appeared 10 Daub a Hegelian. After- all. it was natural mat Rauch would look 10 Daub as a direcl source of Hegelian learning given me close relationship of the two. given Hegel's enormous influence over and trusl in Daub, and given the facl that. much later. Rauch would write as a phenomenologist. Thai Rauch would tum 10 Daub as his mentor. secures the fact mal he favored Daub's approach 10 philosophy and theology. IS Wilh respect 10 Easton. we can only speculate that Rauch wooid have begun his career in Gumany teaching in the Hegelian idiom. Unfortunately Rauch was overly ambitious and pushed hard for a lectureship. so hard that he embroiled himself in a controversy that led to a legal sui!. Upon the prudent advice of his friends that an academic career in Gennany was unlikely, Rauch resolved to come 10 American hoping for a fresh start. 7 RAUCH. HEGEUAN OF 1lIE MEDIATING SCHOOL Rauch was eminently quaJi(ied to teach in a country anxious for culMa! maturily. His Cuman classical learning was in great demand by the Gennan immigrants and their institutions in America, and Rauch lost no time preparing a completely German cuniculum for th e preparatory school over which he presided. In 1837 the preparatory school became Manlhall Collcge and was joined by the seminary of the CUlhan Reformed Church which had moved to Mercersburg. Rauch was teacher, administrator and lIS first presiden!. He was responsible for both school and seminary. It was during this period (IS37-I S4O) thai he wrote and published his Psychology. Like his friend and teacher in Heidelbers. Rauch was a member of the Mediating School. Unlike Hegel. Rauch shared with Daub a preference for theology over philosophy and an orthodox piely. His churchmanship was evident and frequently commented on. as was his evangelical faith. a faith Hegel might be construed as minimizing in preference to the higher expressions of rational thought. Rauch apparently believed in the ontological places of heaven and hell. as well as the perwn of God. He taught that evil was incarnate. and wrote as if the Church was the source o f salvation for men and women by means of the Word and Sacraments. As Easton is quick to point out. we have no evidence that Rauch with Hegel described religion in Iem1s of sensuous pictorialization realized and overcome in philosophic reflection. Still. il was within idealism's grand view o f life and history. ilS organic relatedness. and ilS purposeful direction. that Rauch confidently wrote. Those central ideas cenainly resl on the syslem developed by Hegel. and. in some measure. rely on the system's logical consistency. Whether these central ideas could be applied piecemeal to the problems of history, theology and the social sciences without remaining loyal to the underlying logic is an intriguing question. However, il is a question beyond the purview of this Papef. What is certain is that the mediators did borrow--some carefully, others carelessly. as al.I were united in believing in the fundamental truth and insights o f the "new" cuman approach. They considered this approach infmiteJy superior to the Lockean system of empirical truth as hardened by Hume. adapted and made both positive and practical by Reid and Stewart and. where they bothered to read American philo.sophy at all, imponed to America by Princeton's Witherspoon. Rauch is unique in that he had intimate understanding o f what Americans thought. and in spite of his claiming 10 have united Coman and American mental philosophy. il is clear that the Psychology is evuwhere at war with American common-sense realism. 8 Not that Rauch was not sensitive to his predominately English schooled audience. BUI even as a young headmaster, his aggressive gennanizing rolled over his mild-mannered colleague at the 72 serrUnlll)'. Lewis Mayer. by foisting his all GOIllan program on the .sen io~ mem~ of faculty. His patience with Ma)'er appears to have been inconsiderable. so also hIS patience ~th :onunon-sense ree1ism. All those who read him from thai idiom agreed. ~. ~au~ preferred the ~eal. 10. the. merely ·phenomenal: They said his orientation was to the "subJec.uve rather than. ~ ob~ve.. ~at they meanl was Ihal Rauch was concerned with Ihe inward life .of the w~r1d. ~Is Idea or lis pnnClple. For Rauch. as wilh all Hegelians. il is this life principle that consUMes reality. RAUCH'S NEW APPROAOI Americans in contrast were characterized as more interesled in practical questions of sense exvaience'. Thus Rauch's determinatio n was to reorient American philos oph~ away from the "phenomenal" world to the "real" world of ideas. Hllis plan. was.to awaken. America to the cultural impoverishmenl brought by a philosophy that b.ifurcates Ihmgs mto o pposmg worlds of sense and Spiril, supposing lhat Ihe fltSt is practical and reliable. and Ihe second hidden and .therefore SUSpec.l. Yet rath« Ihan use the Psychology to dismantle faculty psychology. Rauch Simply offered hIS alternative in what he tCimed a unified psychology_ In Iypical Hegelian fashion, he observed thaI the fruit of a psychology thaI distinguishes Ihings according to sense impressions restriCIs human knowledge and historically has led to skepticism and agnosticism: the religion of deism. To Rauch's supporters in Ihe German Reformed Church his approach breathed a brealh of fresh air. First. il solidly affI.mIed a Chrilliian world-view. Second. it addressed the issues of the faltering Calvinistic system. And. finally. it was wonderfully Gennan for immigranls who recognized the growing marginalization of their cultural heritage in the face of the Anglo-domination of American life. MONISM VERSUS DUAl $M So Rauch's was not a synlhesis of IWO philosophies, nor was it a new philosophical system, and while Rauch's evangelical idealism as America's fmll Mediating theologian was unique. it was not the result of his struggle with common-sense realism. Rather it was the natural e xpression of his German background placed in a new cultural context and language. Certainly Rauch's conservative retigious demeanor endeared him to what might have been a hostile philosophical establishment, but even as the pious apologist for Ihe GWlLan Reformed Church. his Mediating theology was immediately suspec!. That suspicion grew from Rauch's emphasis on reason. As a Mediating theologian Rauch considered reason absolutely trustworthy and capable of comprehending the wo£id of nature and its laws. as long as reason was in harmonious agreernclII with the mind and the senses. Indeed. it is because of reason that science is able to grasp the world of sense. But as science must contend with the passions. reason is ~?' in!a1Iible. neither is r~ason always reliable when it comes to matters pertaining to morality and spirituality. Here the PlISSJons are especi.a1ly potent. and while reason is an autonomous, living. univmal reality, in close relationship with the mind of God, il still has its limils. Reason, as it comes to full expression in human consciousness, is. by fact of its taking form in nature_ limited to knowledge of the world of nature. 'Therefore, reason cannot replace faith for knowledge of the unseen world of spirit. This is not to s~y that reasC?n and faith ~ antagonistic. In fact, they are each essential and fuifili lhe pwpose for which they eXlS!. Reason eXlSts to provide knowledge of the natural world. Faith exists to provide knowledge of the spiritual world. This perspective w~ very differenl f~m the system of facuily psychology practiced by American common -~ realISts. In facl_ one might say it's jusl the reverse. Facully psychology begins with sense ~peil ence as. the .fltS! .prerequisite to knowledge. Rauch argued, sounding very much like the PIatorusts (rom which Ideahsm emerged, thai reason, in concert with faith. is the swting point. 73 because re/lSOQ. represents the unily of sense and spirit. Where both positions can be seen as modem paspoctives is in !heir anthropomorphic chllfaCtel>. Human experience is the swting point for both, in contrasl 10 the old, dogmatic views of Christian uadition. However. Rauch was quick 10 point out that in spite of the fael that conunon-sense reali.m appropriately began where the search for knowledge must begin. i.e. real human experience. it was doomed evenlUalIy to spiral into skepticism and deism. Without reason, there is a dialectical imbalance that leads to one-sided knOWledge. and knowledge that has only one side is simply knowledge of whal is not known. This characteristic of the Mediating approach reveals the influence of Hegel. Of course. with strict Hegelian thinking. reason is supreme. Rauch will only go so far as to say reason is supreme in the realm of narw-e. However. nature, wilh man. is fallen and reason with il. Yet as much as il would appear Rauch has retwned 10 Ihe d ualism of the dogmaticians. his argwncnt is cle81ly conditioned by Ce""4fl idealism. so much so thai Ihe influence of Hegel dominates il al every level. Knowledge of the world of spiril as much as knowledge of Ihe world of flesh is given by reason. Reason supplies the ~force~ of the argument for Ihe existence of the WI.SCefI world of spiril. Reason infer.; that world by participating in nature's organic connectedness. IRE ORGANIC PRINCIPLE Says Rauch. a le/os. which is Ihe power bringing lhings 10 their end, is apprehended by reason in aU o f organic life. in the acorn Ihal when planted and properly nunured must become the oak, in the unscrulable design o f things to become what they must become. That unseen power leads inevitably 10 a pre-exislerll form Ihat is somehow pre-figured from the very embryonic stage. Still. reason cannot apprehend or locale Ihe force of fe/os that moves things and gives !hem !heir direction. The lesson of Kant is welileamed. There is no lranscendenl object of perception. Reason can only supply the knowledge that whatever drives organic objects to develop is missing from experience. Therefore reason merely recognizes Ihat something essential for experience is missing from experience. At that point. says Rauch, faith mUSI take over. Faith provides experience of the invisible world of which reason has only an inkling. This is what Rauch says of the experience whereby reason discovers its limitations: From this phenomena we conclude upon the power itself. though our own sense cannot perceive it, nor reason demonstrate il. Here. then. begins the sphere of faith - nOI of Ihe faith of the Christian but o f common faith. II This organic principle is equally applied to psychology. As each of us longs for an end th;ll lransccnds our existence or al least provides the "fulfillmenl" o f which we oflen speak:. we Iherem recognize Ihe impulse Ihat becomes a force or power moli vating us to Ihat end. The anticipation of a home for the soul. a place of etemal rest or happiness. expocts a place ber0nd the realm of sense called heaven. To recognize this as a fact of life "is to believe in Ihe home." 9ne faith that exercises belief in the pursuit of thai home is a power of the soul whose source, in some measure. is the Holy Spirit. The real existence of invisible power.; or forces in organic life, as well as social and psychological life. provides Rauch evidence of an unseen world of spirit. and it gives him his 81gumcnl from reason to faith. Because we must "believe" in Ihe force that brings nature to its pre-detcrmined end, thus exercising faith even in the visible world, so also musl a Sirnil81 failh be exercised in oblaining knowledge of the world of spiri!. 74 11iE MIND IS ONE Rauch's direction was unique in America. Common~sense r~a1 ists w~e ~~nflned .t~ knowledge of the world derived from sense experience. Where realists sustalfled an Inv~lbl e, spmtual world. a ~ divide exisled. The wOl"ld of spirit was not so much apprehended as It w~ reveale? by God.. ~ nature's design 'and.' 'or,' in the witness of Scripture. ~ contrast, Rau~h s rom~llc, h.uma.:us~c idealism was undivided. Reality is a unified whole, which In human consciousness IS maRifest m Its parts. Both physical and spiritual manifestations are apprehended by consciousness, while something of the Absolute remains a mystery. In this, Rauch is more like Schleiermachcr than Hegel. The soW"Ce of spiritual reality comes from beyond experience. Yet its intent is to participate in humanity. As a theologian of the Mediating School. Rauch identifies this phenomenon in the Incarnation of Jesus. Raudl insists thai without the incarnation. the spiritual world has no meaning for human beings. FOI" although narural reason must issue in a negative faith. i.e .. a faith thai arises from ignorance of spiritual fOl"ces. thai faith cannot provide knowledge of the spiritual world. Only Christ can provide that knowledge. Where Rauch remains very much a Hegelian. and the fllSt of his kind. was thai he became an American who offered his fellow Americans the principle of organic unity as the solution to the perceived problem of the age, which was the breach of faith and reason. Rauch's colleague at the seminary. the brilliant American theologian John Williamson Nevin. observed thai while Rauch appeared a fotlower of Hegel to his American readers. his stamp was really of the later. more orthodox Getman philosophers and theologians. Nevin implied that Rauch's place among Ihese more orthodox scholan is evidence of his departure from Hegel. Rauch spoke of God as a person, and of the soul as immortal. Nevin believed !hat the pantheist Hegel held no such theories, 13 Nevin was also the first 10 point out that Rauch's Psychology engages American philosophy in only the most limiled sense. or course. Rauch would tend 10 see English and American skepticism as s l?~gin~ hom the same ~t: apples and apples. not apples and oranges. There is no attempt to dlSttnguish Uv=ke from Reid and Stewart. and from Kant. Thus, observes Nevin, Rauch's depatture is from the 7sential COTe of skepticism and its common-sense psychology, which is the defmition of the human mind, For Lockean realists the mind was considered a coUection of mental faculties with various functions. ~ ~mmon-~ ~alism'~ d~y.elopment In co.ntrasf. Ra~ 'proposed an organic mode1 of the mind, as a process of self-developing COfI.SCIOUSneSS. This IS what Nevin wrole of Rauch's model: It (the mind] is oru;: always, and yet manifold at the same time. It developes Isic] itself throu~ a s~esslOn of .faculties. the higher still infolded (sic] in the 10wC1", always ~~g differen~ as It expands and reaches toward heaven, and et always conllllUUlg substanllally the Same. It fmds its image in the life of the Plant 14 Prin""miI°~ds.mm1. ~~~se;sGement of Ra~ch 's piety matched Nevin's. They believed him to be of the more ,ater "'...... 0 rman philosophy The re . J Al only is Rauch's faith urun tched b Ameli . . . Vlewer, ames exander, remarked that not theology which .we" had ~ , ~t . ~ IS mdebtec!- to Rauch for directly providing a system of lefrible. J,lfxander WIOIe that ~enlng ~ tlr from ed!~rs and t;ansl.ators, the quality of which was tosether,. e maten received was either uruntelligible or barbarous. if nOi both The interesting observation that Alexander mak . th. . approaches more nearly to the Scottish than the I"'~~ at. we ~ve that President ~auc.h vc."1 75 critical. for what he has unmasked is !he real streng!h of Rauch's PsycholoBY. namely. his reconceptualization and translation into English of !he difficult Getman idealist philosophy. To some degree he had to re!hink German ideas in terms !hat Americans could understand--a difficult chore. indeed! For that is exactly the characteristic indictment of the "new German learning." The complex philosophical language and systems of Gennany were positively vexing to American readers. as much today as !hen. Yet Rauch found a way of lifting a difficult Gennan conceptual system out of its linguistic setting and adapting it to his American context. and he did it without a 101 of jargon. In !his regard. Rauch produced an original English work, in terms of its philosophical vocabulary, and a thoroughly Goillan work: , in terms of its philosophical ideas. Alexander notes two significant "depanures" from common-sense realism. He benevolently acknowledges Rauch's right to dissent in his unusual description of what Rauch calls "General Feeling." It's a good example of Rauch's style, because it betrays both idealism's crucial organic principle and its d ialectical thought. As an experience, General Feeling is not identified with any faculty of the mind, but. rather. writes Alexander, is the inner 5O\UCe of all senses, employing no distinct organ, and applying itself to no object without, but reponing to the living being, as such. the comfort or discomfort of the entire organism. But a second observation of Alexander provides the best example of Rauch's unique position in America. It is his unmistakable rejection of dualism and wi!h it. reali.s m. Scottish philosophy was adamant in keeping distinct will and reason. But Alexander quotes Rauch; It is usuill to consider Reason and will as wholly d ifferent activities. and to speak of mental and moral faculties. But the mind is one.... 17 It is none 0!hCf" !han !he dialectic o f identify. It is reason as will with a 'prevailing consciousness." and will as reason wi!h a "prevailing practical tendency.· CONO..USlON With a tenacity characteristic o f many young Gelillan scholars, Rauch worked himself into a Slate of physical and mental e xhaustion and died at the age of thirty-five in Ig41. This leaves open the question of Rauch's ultimate direction as America's frnst Hegelian and member of the German Mediating School o f theology. Mediators were free to express their new found science in a variety of ways. As an educator freed from his administrative duties by his new colleague at the seminary. John W. Nevin. Rauch could have pursued any of a number of fields of inquiry. It is likely that a volume on Christian ethics was next. However, it is equally likely that his position as leader in a Calvinistic and confe-ssionally conservative denomination with a high regard for the Church and her sacraments would have kepi Rauch on par with many of his conservative. former countrymen. namely Tholuck. Domer and Ullmann. Interestingly. the politics of the time would allow none of these men to call themselves Hegelian. They o wed as much to Schleiennacher, and believed they were the culmination of a line of inquiry which in modem times began wi!h Kant. However. each would have acknowledged his course led straight from Hegel and towards a ne w. scientific theology hased both in dialectical science and Church tradition. 76 ENDNOTES 1. F"1lS1 Edition: New York: M. W. Dodd, 1840. 2. Easlan. Loyd D.. Hegel's rl(St American Follower.;: The Ohio Hegclians (Athens. Ohio: Ohio Univenity Press). 1966. 3. EasIOfl. Hesel's First. p. 9. While there is no e~licit defense or commentary on the method of He8el by Rauch. Rauch's use of the Hegelian method would render a defense redundant. 4. EasIOll, Hegel's Firs/. p. II. 5. Easton. Hegel's First, p. 12. 6. John W. Nevin. -Eulogy on the Life and Characle£ of Dr. Rauch: In Addressns and £Sseys. ~( Sc1Wf. Nevin. and Cle. (Mercersburg), n.p .• n.d. This is the autograph copy of a bound book of Philip Schaff housed in lhe Albert Spear Library of Princeton Seminary . 7. Howllld J.B. Ziegler. Frederick Augustus Rauch. American Hegelian (Lancasle£. PA: Franklin and Marshall College). 1953. p. 17. 8. Rauch. Psychology. p. v. 9. Good. James L History of the RefOjjjjed Church in the U.s. in the Nincreenth Cenrwy (New York: The &ard of Publication of the Refo, ... ed Church in America). 1911. p. 106. 10. Apple. Theodore. The Life and Wolk of John Williamson Nevin (Philadelphia: Refolliled Church Publication House). 1889. p. 107. 11. Rauch. Frederick Augustus, "Faith and Reason." a sermon preached al Mercersburg Chapel. Mercersburg. PA (1838). Mercersburg Review. 8 (1856). pp. 88. 12. Rauch. "Faith." p. 89. 13. This demonstraICS an immature reading of Hegel. Hegel would not dispute God's personhood nor would he disagree that the soul is immonal. It is to miss the point of Hegel that these issues would be rai""'" at all. God's identity requires. at once. immanence and transcendence: personality and its negation in absolute being. So aLso the soul of mankind. 14. John WHliam.'K)ll Nevin. ftRauch's Psychology." rev. of Psychology: or II View of the Human Soul by Frederid:: Randl.. Weekly Mf'i"engCf' of the Getman Reformed Church,S (New Series), No. 38 (840). n.p. I S. J~ W. Alexan~,"Rauch's Psychology; rev. of Psychology; or a View of the Human Soul. by Frederick A. Rauch, BIblical Rcptlrory and Princeton Review. 12 (1840). 16. Alexander, ·Psychology." p. 396. 17. Alexander, ·Psychology." p. 409. n - - THE MrnCERSBURG SCCIEI"'i '!be ~cersbJrg Society has t -en tOLlied to uphold the coocept of the OlUrch as the Body of Olrist, EVangelical RefOllled, catholic, Apostolic, organic, deve.1opuental and cx:nnectional. It affinns the ecurrenical crEe1s as witnesses to its faith am the El\charist as the liturgical act fran which all other acts of worship and service etI'Ial'\ate. 'Ibi! society ?1I"sues contelpJrary theology in the OlUrch and the world within the cmtext of MercersWrg 'Iheo!ogy. In effectir19 its purp:::lSe the SOCiety provides q:J(X)rtunities for fel~hip and study for persons interested in Marcersb.lrg '1lleo!ogy, sponsors an annual cawocaticn, engages in the publ1catioo of articles and txx>k.s, stimulates research and corresp::ndenoe among scholars CIl tcJpics of theology, liturgy, the sacranents and ecurren.ism. The New Merce.rsblrg Review is desiglL2:1 to ~l1sh the pto-:edings of the annual Cbnvocatioo as well as other articles 00 subjects pertinent to the aims ard interests of the Society. Ml!mtership in the Society 1s sustained by 525.00 per aMum for general .. e"ership, and $10.00 per ann\ml for stud Its, payable to the Treasurer: The Rev. John Bonebreak 2245 Spri ng field Dri ve Chambe r s burg, FA 17201 MAWSClUPTS AND to:ICS Fat Rf.Vll)I Mam'9*dpts sul:rnitted for ~licat1on and booI Manll8Cripts shculd be typoa-itten an::! double_spaced. 'Ihree copies of each manuscript are required, ala19 with a self addressed and stamped envelope for tlw:!ir return if found unacceptable. ~ first paC}e of the manuscript should carry the proposed title and the author's name. Under the name should appear the "identification line," giving the title or position, the institutioo, and tlw:! location. Superior nurerals in the text shCAlld iOOicate the plaC&tent of footnotes. 'lbe footnotes tha"selves should be typed separately at the end of the manuscript. ~les of for references may be found in a past issue of ~ New