Book Reviews / Exchange 36 (2007) 215-230 217

Tim and Ivana Noble, Martien E. Brinkman and Jochen Hilberath (eds.), Charting Churches in a Changing . Charta Oecumenica and the Process of Ecumenical Encounter, Currents of Encounter 28, Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi 2006, 222 p., ISBN 90-420-2009-1, price € 46.00.

Today in Europe the Churches fail to make a strong impression, particularly when measured by their own claims. Economically, Europe is a gigantic success. Yet churches wrestle with their own self-understanding. When these churches produce common directives in order to pro- mote cooperation in Europe, it is very exciting to examine what exactly this Charta Oecu- menica contains and what aspects of this vision will influence the quality of European unity. ‘Charting the Churches’ is a fruit of the 13th consultation of the Societas Oecumenica in 2004 in Sibiu in Romania, with as theme: ‘On the Way to Koinonia: Communion in Transition’. In this volume a worthwhile effort is made to digest theCharta Oecumenica, in which the Conference of European Churches and the Council of European ’ Confer- ences made declarations on these issues. I was not encouraged by their statements. Th e dis- tance between the ecclesiastical dialogues and the concerns of people in Europe is enormous. Nevertheless, I also read some beautiful things. Th e editors of ‘Charting the Churches’ chose, first to have four different theologians react, each from their own specific tradition. eTh great disadvantage of this approach is that the reader has to wrestle with ecclesiastical peculiarities, before more inclusive interpretations come to light. Th us Kajsa Ahlstrand suggests that a Protestant emphasis on individuality and the related acceptance in many Protestant churches of same-sex relations, limits the value of the Charta, indeed of ecumenical relations as such. Th e Roman theologian Peter de Mey gives an extended analysis of the draft ing process of the Charta, in his eyes a miracle. He deplores the fact that in the final version no clear statement is embodied that plurality and diversity are legitimate qualities of the church. He argues that the pulling apart of doctrine and practice, so oft en a problem with detrimental results, will have dramatic consequences. I agree, but how far De Mey can be considered representative for his own church, remains an open question. Th e Orthodox author Dorin Oancea articulates the well known Orthodox point of view that the gradual growing together of concentrating on one Table of the Lord, is in fact, impossible. In the Orthodox mind it is all or nothing. Confession, liturgy, church understanding, and theology of creation are a seamless whole, as a result of which the Orthodox position remains inevitably locked in exclusiveness. Still, Oancea dares, with regard to church communion, to speak about differences between minimum and maximum stan- dards. Regretfully, he does not fill this out concretely. Oliver Schuegraf shows that the Lutheran model is in fact capable of allowing a gradual growing to church communion, step by step, as a gift from God. Aft er all these inner churchly aspects, which in this regard and in their extensiveness, appear to me rather annoying and excessively inward looking, in part two, Europe is finally the focus. Martien Brinkman and Anton Houtepen make exciting contributions on the much debated concept ‘’, which do justice to the present situation. Brinkman successfully consid- ers the qualities of a church functioning in society by emphasising the significance of the local church to catholicity. Th is stresses the importance of attending to context. Because of this perspective he expects the ecumenical movement to gain much from the contributions of the

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2007 DOI: 10.1163/157254307X177092

EExchangexchange 336,2_f8_215-230.indd6,2_f8_215-230.indd 217217 33/16/07/16/07 11:36:3111:36:31 AMAM 218 Book Reviews / Exchange 36 (2007) 215-230

churches in the Southern hemisphere. Houtepen presupposes a shared matrix of faith and life, handed to us by the Jewish-. In his understanding of catholicity the con- ciliar principle represents a central key. A church that does not take into consideration devel- opments visible in ecumenical councils and assemblies, places itself outside the Christian matrix and Houtepen suggests this would suspend any legitimate ecclesial pluriformity. Th is understanding of catholicity in terms of conciliar decision making, does not only allow for solidarity and hospitality, makes them mandatory. Catholicity becomes an eschatological ecu- menical quality of the church, a longing more authentically to be the church exactly through the contribution of other streams of tradition. Th is ensues that the churches are directed to the coming of God’s Kingdom in the world. I believe this describes the context of Europe and can be applied to its problems. Eddy van der Borght looks for inspiration in the thinking of the Oxford 1937 Life and Work Conference with its theme ‘Church, Community and State’. I do not agree with his conclusion that the ecumenical movement never felt the challenge to set up a programme opposing nationalism. In the Life and Work study programme in the aft ermath of the Oxford Conference disentangling patriotism and religion played a big part. Time and again during and aft er the Second World War excessive nationalism was criticised in ecumenical study groups. A qualitative highly developed thinking was encouraged concerning questions of international unity, with regard to the world, and, aft er some hesitation, also with regard to Europe. (E.g. the Commission on Christian Responsibility for European Cooperation, 1950- 1954.) Something like this is necessary today. Johanes Oeldemann continues the plea for church communion through gradual steps. He shows that developments in the Roman Catho- lic Church and the Orthodox churches. Have moved in the opposite direction. Oeldemann does not want to strain relations in terms of intercommunion or an exclusive focus on bap- tism. Rather he sees the results of ecumenical dialogue so far digested in liturgy and other aspects of ecclesiastical life as intermediate phases on the road to koinonia. Once again, we are far removed from Europe’s workshop. In part three, Maria Bingemer and Ivana Noble treat the question of a more inclusive unity from the angle of sacramental theology. A new religiosity is analysed by Bingemer as a seduc- tive post-modern phenomenon. She sees new paradigms and a frantic search for mystical expe- riences. Charismatic power provides for attraction of new religious forms, not hampered by critical theologies which limit people believing whatever they want. She ascertains (with Karl Rahner) a fatal gap between the priorities traditional churches hold on to in their (mutual) dialogues on the one hand and on the other the mystical experiences of God that mobilise post-modern people in their daily lives. Bingemer challenges our present day theology to take a vulnerable position and questions the part oft en played in this regard by reason, which she sees as submissive to mystery. In the sacramentality of the Roman with the as act of both and of his community on earth, she sees the most impor- tant contribution this church can make today. Ivana Noble makes use of the thinking on sacramentality of A. Schmemann and L.-M. Chauvet. Orthodox liturgy (Schmemann) is prin- cipally concerned with the entire cosmos and the entire world history. Replenished with a dialectical approach where the presence and absence of God (Chauvet) are concerned, Noble arrives at a vision of (liturgical) symbols that coincide with their reality. Th ese are profound approaches that, however, in all their erudition stand far from daily European routine of poli-

EExchangexchange 336,2_f8_215-230.indd6,2_f8_215-230.indd 218218 33/16/07/16/07 11:36:3111:36:31 AMAM