DOCSLIB.ORG

Steckel on UCC Ecclesiology at Fifty

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Steckel on UCC Ecclesiology at Fifty UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST ECCLESIOLOGY AT FIFTY Clyde J. Steckel, Emeritus Professor of Theology United Theological Seminary of the Twin Cities I. Ecclesiology—how the church is understood theologically—has received less attention than polity in the fifty-year history of the United Church of Christ. Polity figured prominently in the founders’ deliberations. They formulated a system of governance, which is what polity means, affirming both the principle of local church autonomy honored by Congregational-Christians and at the same time incorporating the principle of synodical governance of the Evangelical and Reformed Church. This blended polity is we now call a polity of covenant. Meanwhile ecclesiology was a major focus only in the forties and fifties of the last century when the founding documents were being written and adopted, and then again in 1991 with the work of an ecclesiology subcommittee of the General Synod Committee on Structure. To be sure ecclesiological questions emerged along the way, particularly around the development of a covenantal polity. But ecclesiology did not often become a church-wide concern. It is puzzling that this United Church of Christ neglect of ecclesiology should have occurred in the same half-century when there was so much ecclesiological work in Roman Catholic, Protestant, and ecumenical theological circles. For Roman Catholics the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Church was a fresh statement of Catholic theological teaching about the church as a “sacrament or sign of an intimate union with 1 God,”1 rather than the church as institution, which was the emphasis at the first Vatican Council. Protestant ecclesiological work was driven both by ecumenical engagements (The Consultation on Church Union, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, bilateral and multi-lateral engagements such as the Formula of Agreement involving Reformed and Lutheran churches) and by a growing Protestant consensus that an ecclesiology of mission in the world could bring churches together without having to settle church- dividing conflicts. Ecumenically the 1950 Toronto statement of the World Council Central Committee on the churches and unity,2 documents such as the Consultation on Church Union (1967), Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (1982), and Churches in Covenant Communion (1988) contained important ecclesiological work. Even the growing partnership between the UCC and Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) seemed to rest on commonalities of polity and justice action in society but to neglect real differences in the theology and practice of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, clearly ecclesiological issues. It is also puzzling that the United Church of Christ should have neglected ecclesiology in the same half-century in which so many important scholarly works on ecclesiology were published. To name just a few, books like Paul Minear’s Images of the Church in the New Testament (Augsburg, 1960), Avery Dulles’ Models of the Church (Doubleday, 1987), Letty Russell’s Church in the Round: Feminist Interpretation of the Church (Westminster/John Knox, 1993), and Edward Schillebeeckx’s Church: the Human Story of God (Crossroad, 1991), appeared in those years. 1 The Documents of Vatican II, Walter M. Abbott, General Editor (New York: the America Press, 1966), 15. 2 The Ecumenical Movement, An Anthology of Key Texts and Voices, Michael Kinnamon and Brian E. Cope, Editors (Geneva: WCC Publications, 1997), 463-468. 2 I have been speaking of ecclesiological neglect, but a stronger word may be required. Avery Post, president of the UCC in the eighties, coined the phrase, “ecclesiological deficit,” to describe what many were calling a crisis of faith in the church in those years. Louis Gunnemann, in United and Uniting, used Post’s phrase3 to argue for changing the language of paragraph 15 (now paragraph 18 in the revisions of 1999) of the UCC Constitution from what he called sociological language to theological language when speaking of the church. Gunnemann believed that the language of voluntary associations and the whole Enlightenment philosophical understanding of the autonomous self and autonomous voluntary organizations did not properly represent what should be a theological understanding of the church as, first of all, part of the gift of divine grace, and only secondarily a humanly devised institution. As long as paragraph 15, with its language about the absolute rights of the local church remained in place, Gunnemann argued4, any wider ecclesial communion would be impossible, because other church bodies could not discern the wholeness or fullness of the church (understood theologically) in the United Church of Christ. I will discuss the questions of whether that was a sound judgment and a politically viable option in the conclusion of this article. Another reason for this ecclesiological deficit could surely be traced to the current low esteem in which religious institutions or “organized religion” in general are held. Polls show that while most Americans believe in God and in a spiritual life, many of the same people are not attached to any religious institution, or view them with mistrust. These attitudes not only reflect the individualism and anti-institutionalism of American society, but also the fear that institutional religion inherently tends to become rigid and 3 Louis H. Gunnemann, United and Uniting (New York: United Church Press, 1987), 195. 4 Ibid., 144. 3 dogmatic, fundamentalist, and in the end, violent. Even in liberal or progressive denominations welcoming diverse theological viewpoints, like the United Church of Christ, many participants value a local church as a useful adjunct to personal and family religious life, but they might hesitate if faced with the claim that believing in the church and participating in its life are core requirements of the gift and responsibility of divine grace. The foregoing observations about the ecclesiological situation in the United Church of Christ lead me to proceed as follows in the rest of this article: First I will outline foundational UCC ecclesiological developments. Next I will describe three subsequent ecclesiologies emerging in the fifty-year history of the United Church of Christ, namely the ecclesiology implied in covenantal relations, the ecclesiology of a church focused on the mission of God, and the ecclesiological implications of the radical hospitality of the still-speaking God initiative. Finally I will conclude with an assessment of this history, the tendencies of these ecclesiological emphases, and what the ecclesiological future may hold. II. The founding (and enduring) ecclesiological affirmations of the United Church of Christ appear in the Basis of Union (1947, 1949), the Statement of Faith (1959), and the Preamble to the Constitution (1961). The Basis and the Constitution were voted by the Congregational-Christian congregations and Evangelical and Reformed synods as part of the uniting process. These votes give the Basis of Union and Preamble to the Constitution a formal and juridical standing in the United Church of Christ unlike any other statements—a standing also unlikely to be granted to future statements. More typically 4 the Statement of Faith was formally approved only by the General Synod but commended to the churches. Though these three documents have their own distinctive theological accents, an ecclesiology anchored in confessing Jesus Christ is shared by all three. This foundation is most clearly expressed in the Preamble’s words, “. [The United Church of Christ] acknowledges as its sole head, Jesus Christ, Son of God and Savior.” The church consists of all those who “. share in this confession.” Beyond the Preamble, in paragraph 10 of the Constitution, a local church is defined as a body “. composed of persons who, believing in God as Heavenly Father, and accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and depending on the guidance of the Holy Spirit, are organized for Christian worship, for the furtherance of Christian fellowship, and for the ongoing work of Christian witness.” The Basis of Union (1947) statements on the church do not begin with the headship of Christ or confessing Christ, but with these words: “We acknowledge one holy catholic Church, the innumerable company of those who, in every age and nation, are united by the Holy Spirit to God in Christ, are one body in Christ, and have communion with Him and with one another. We acknowledge as part of this universal fellowship all throughout the world who profess this faith in Jesus Christ and follow Him as Lord and Saviour.”(Sic) The confession of Jesus Christ as the foundation of the church is clear in this section of the Basis, though it appears in the second, not the first sentence. In the Statement of Faith (1959, revision of 1981) the parallel ecclesiological affirmation appears in the section on the Holy Spirit: “You bestow upon us your Holy Spirit, creating and renewing the church of Jesus Christ, binding in covenant faithful people of all ages, tongues, and races.” While this sentence may not seem as 5 confessionally explicit as those in the Preamble and Basis, it is set within a larger statement of the deeds of God “to which we testify,” thus giving the Statement of Faith a confessional character. These three testimonies, appearing in the Preamble, the Basis, and the Statement, set forth the ecclesiological foundation of the whole church, including the United Church of Christ, in confessing Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. But an ecclesiology requires
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UNDER CALL from SYNOD COUNCIL OR ELCA CHURCH COUNCIL Information on This Form May Be Shared with Other Synod Staff Persons During the Mobility Process
    PLEASE SAVE A COPY OF THIS FORM TO YOUR DESKTOP, OPEN THE SAVED COPY, FILL IT OUT, SAVE IT ONCE MORE, AND EMAIL THE SAVED COPY TO THE BISHOP. THANK YOU SAINT PAUL AREA SYNOD 2019 REPORT FOR MINISTERS OF WORD AND SACRAMENT (PASTOR) UNDER CALL FROM SYNOD COUNCIL OR ELCA CHURCH COUNCIL Information on this form may be shared with other synod staff persons during the mobility process Full name: _______________________________________________________ Date: _____________________ Info below is same as last year (if checked, skip the following section):__ Date of Ordination:____________________________ Date of Birth: _________________________________ Home mailing address: ______________________________________________________________________ City: _____________________ State: _______ Zip Code: _________________ Country: ________________ Home Phone: _______________ Cell Phone: _________________ Email: _____________________________ Work mailing address: _______________________________________________________________________ City: _____________________ State: _______ Zip Code: _________________ Country: ________________ Work Phone: _________________________ Work Email: __________________________________________ Preferred Mailing Address: Home Work Preferred Email: Home Work Preferred Phone: Home Cell Work Full name of spouse: _________________________________ Date of marriage: ______________________ Children: Full Name Relationship Date of Birth _____________________________ _______ _________________________ ________________________ _____________________________
    [Show full text]
  • The Synod Process
    The Synod Process I Convocation and Preparation of the Synod 2 Preparatory Commission 1 The bishop convenes the synod with the consultation of the • Members of the preparatory commission are chosen by the bishop. Presbyteral Council. • The preparatory commission assists the bishop in organizing and preparing for the synod. • The bishop establishes a synodal secretariat and possibly a press office. 1 2 4 Preparatory phases of synod • Spiritual, catechetical and formational preparation 4 1. All are invited to pray for the ongoing intention of the synod and its results, that it might become an authentic 3 event of grace for the Church. 3 Publication of the Synodal 2. All should be informed on the nature and Directory purpose of the synod and the scope of its The Synodal Directory includes: deliberations. 1. composition of the synod; • Diocesan Consultation 2. norms by which elections of synodal members are to be conducted; 1. The faithful and the clergy of the Diocese 3. various offices to be exercised by the synod; are encouraged to express their needs, 4. procedural norms of the synod meetings. desires, challenges and opinions regarding the synod topics. 2. Meetings will take place at each parish, then deanery, to discuss synod topics. II Conducting the Synod • Determining the questions 1. The bishop determines the • The actual synod consists of the synodal sessions, questions on which the synodal typically in the cathedral. debate will concentrate. • Members of the synod make the profession of the faith before commencing synodal discussions. • Themes to be examined are introduced from a brief report; discussion begins.
    [Show full text]
  • The Preservation of Scripture
    DBSJ 5 (Fall 2000): 3–44 THE PRESERVATION OF SCRIPTURE by William W. Combs∗ ne of the many issues in the current debate about Greek manuscript Otext-types and English versions is the question of the preservation of Scripture. In fact, as one analyzes the arguments for the King James- only, Textus Receptus (TR), and Majority Text (MT) positions, it soon becomes obvious that the doctrine of the preservation of Scripture is at the heart of many of these viewpoints. It may be helpful, at the outset, to note the major differences among these three perspectives. The MT position differs from the TR position in that it argues that the text of the autographs is more perfectly preserved in the thousands of manuscripts that are part of the Byzantine text-type. Since, therefore, these manuscripts represent a majority of all extant Greek manuscripts, a Greek text derived from a consensus of these manuscripts can be called the Majority Text.1 The TR viewpoint, on the other hand, suggests that the various printed editions of the Greek New Testament, beginning with Erasmus in 1516, more perfectly preserve the autographs. The name Textus Receptus was not formally attached to these printed editions until 1633.2 Though the TR is Byzantine in char- acter, yet, because it is based on only about seven out of the thousands of Byzantine-type manuscripts, it differs from the more broadly based MT. Daniel Wallace has counted 1,838 differences between the TR and the Majority Text of Hodges and Farstad.3 There has been no English translation based on the MT.
    [Show full text]
  • The Synod for the Amazon
    THE SYNOD FOR THE AMAZON Marcelo Barros • The divine revelation that arrives late1 • ABSTRACT It is good news that the Synod of Catholic Bishops from around the world, convened by Pope Francis and which will take place in October in Rome, has been prepared with extensive consultation with Amazonian communities and civil organizations working with them. The novelty of this Synod is the call for the Church, instead of acting as a teacher, to listen and hear the voice of the Amazon. In doing so, the Church will discover how to confront the challenges and new possibilities for its mission; a new vision and in opposition to the colonization in which it was complicit. KEYWORDS Spiritual listening | Catholic Church | Earth cry | Amazon peoples | Walk together • SUR 29 - v.16 n.29 • 133 - 138 | 2019 133 THE SYNOD FOR THE AMAZON There is no doubt that for the peoples of the Amazon, the news that Pope Francis convoked a Synod of Roman-Catholic Bishops from around the world to reflect about the appeals that the Amazon is making to the Universal Church (the body of Christian churches worldwide) was well-received. As Dom Roque Paloschi, president of the Indigenist Missionary Council in Brazil (Conselho Indigenista Missionário - CIMI), affirmed, “the Synod for the Amazon practically began in January of 2018, in Puerto Maldonado (Peru), during the Pope’s meeting with Amazonian people.”2 The Synod of Bishops is an institution that continues an old church custom and enacts the Church’s vocation as a sign and instrument of unity for all of humanity.
    [Show full text]
  • “Predestination, a Conduit for Blessings” Ephesians 1:11 I. Predestination Is Included in Paul's Ephesian 1 List of Those
    I preached last Sunday on the doctrine of predestination. I preached on Ephesians 1:11 which tells us – In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, (Ephesians 1:11 NKJ) I felt God was with me as I preached. I received good comments from my hearers after the sermon. However, by the providence of He Who controls all things this sermon was not successfully recorded. What should I suppose that means? This Sunday, I will be re-preaching a sermon I had preached before that was not recorded, people asked me to preach it again. Is it God’s will I preach this sermon again also? Here is the sermon outline – “Predestination, a Conduit for Blessings” Ephesians 1:11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, (Ephesians 1:11 NKJ) I still remember the first sermon I heard on the doctrine of Predestination, the pastor read Romans 9, and then said … “This passage isn’t teaching what it seems to be teaching, it is really teaching free will” Let’s go on to chapter 10! I never went to chapter 10 of Romans that day; I just kept reading and re-reading Romans 9 the entire time that pastor preached. Romans 9 was teaching what it seemed to be teaching, and my pastor’s less than 20 word sermon on that passage, avoiding its truth, convinced me he was wrong and the word of God, was and is God’s Word, whether we like everything it teaches or not! Predestination is a blessing, not an evil doctrine - I.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Trinity, Filioque and Semantic Ascent Christians Believe That The
    Trinity, Filioque and Semantic Ascent1 Christians believe that the Persons of the Trinity are distinct but in every respect equal. We believe also that the Son and Holy Spirit proceed from the Father. It is difficult to reconcile claims about the Father’s role as the progenitor of Trinitarian Persons with commitment to the equality of the persons, a problem that is especially acute for Social Trinitarians. I propose a metatheological account of the doctrine of the Trinity that facilitates the reconciliation of these two claims. On the proposed account, “Father” is systematically ambiguous. Within economic contexts, those which characterize God’s relation to the world, “Father” refers to the First Person of the Trinity; within theological contexts, which purport to describe intra-Trinitarian relations, it refers to the Trinity in toto-- thus in holding that the Son and Holy Spirit proceed from the Father we affirm that the Trinity is the source and unifying principle of Trinitarian Persons. While this account solves a nagging problem for Social Trinitarians it is theologically minimalist to the extent that it is compatible with both Social Trinitarianism and Latin Trinitarianism, and with heterodox Modalist and Tri-theist doctrines as well. Its only theological cost is incompatibility with the Filioque Clause, the doctrine that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son—and arguably that may be a benefit. 1. Problem: the equality of Persons and asymmetry of processions In addition to the usual logical worries about apparent violations of transitivity of identity, the doctrine of the Trinity poses theological problems because it commits us to holding that there are asymmetrical quasi-causal relations amongst the Persons: the Father “begets” the Son and “spirates” the Holy Spirit.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Timothy Trumper Interview
    Together for Adoption Interview with Dr. Tim J. R. Trumper Dr. Tim J. R. Trumper (Ph.D., University of Edinburgh) is Senior Minister of Seventh Reformed Church, Grand Rapids, Michigan. A native of Wales, he has preached internationally, taught systematic theology at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, and pastored in south-east Pennsylvania. One of your desires for the church is that she soteriology did not become a subject of would recover the doctrine of adoption. You’ve sustained investigation until the Reformation. The written elsewhere that adoption has not major concerns of the early church were received its due attention within the history of Trinitarian and Christological. The protracted the church. Why do you believe that adoption Roman Catholic/Protestant disputes over has been overshadowed by other doctrines? justification ensured that soteriology came into its own as a major discussion point of the Christian Yes, that’s right Dan. The recovery of adoption is church. Ironically, the interest in justification that a passionate desire of mine, and has been for created possibilities for the development of the some fifteen years now. Surprisingly, there have doctrine of adoption became the chief reason it been real challenges in persuading Christian folk continued to be neglected. Simply put, adoption that this recovery is necessary. A number of became thoroughly overshadowed by the factors have obscured the neglect of adoption. controversies over justification. I’m thinking especially of: Calvin’s interest in adoption stands out as a 1. The prevalence of the language of adoption in notable exception (note, for example, his claim prayer (note in this regard that every true that, “the gift of adoption bestows salvation believer possesses the Spirit of adoption entire”).
    [Show full text]
  • Synodality” – Results and Challenges of the Theological Dialogue Between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church
    “SYNODALITY” – RESULTS AND CHALLENGES OF THE THEOLOGICAL DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH Archbishop Job of Telmessos I. The results of the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church The Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church has been focusing on the topic of “Primacy and Synodality” over the last twelve years. This is not surprising, since the issue of the exercise of papal primacy has been an object of disagreement between Orthodox and Catholics over a millennium. The Orthodox contribution has been to point out that primacy and synodality are both inseparable: there cannot be a gathering (synodos) without a president (protos), and no one cannot be first (protos) if there is no gathering (synodos). As the Metropolitan of Pergamon, John Zizioulas, pointed out: “The logic of synodality leads to primacy”, since “synods without primates never existed in the Orthodox Church, and this indicates clearly that if synodality is an ecclesiological, that is, dogmatical, necessity so must primacy [be]”1. The Ravenna Document (2007) The document of the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, referred as the “Ravenna Document” (2007), speaks of synodality and conciliarity as synonyms, “as signifying that each member of the Body of Christ, by virtue of baptism, has his or her place and proper responsibility in eucharistic koinonia (communio in Latin)”. It then affirms that “conciliarity reflects the Trinitarian mystery and finds therein its ultimate foundation”2 and from there, considers that “the Eucharist manifests the Trinitarian koinônia actualized in the faithful as an organic unity of several members each of whom has a charism, a service or a proper ministry, necessary in their variety and diversity for the edification of all in the one ecclesial Body of Christ”3.
    [Show full text]
  • Adoption & Orphan Care
    A GUIDE TO Adoption & Orphan Care Russell D. Moore, Editor GUIDE BOOK NO. oo. 2 A GUIDE TO Adoption & Orphan Care A Guide to Adoption and Orphan Care: Guide Book No. 002 Copyright © 2012 by SBTS Press. SBTS Press c/o Communications 2825 Lexington Ave. Louisville, KY 40280 SBTS Press is a division of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided by United States copyright law. Printed in the United States of America. Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-0615619194 A GUIDE TO Adoption & Orphan Care Russell D. Moore, Editor GUIDE BOOK NO. oo. 2 A GUIDE TO ADOPTION AND ORPHAN CARE Table of Contents Biblical and Theological Foundations 8 Abba Changes Everything: Why every Christian is called to rescue orphans by Russell D. Moore 13 A Picture of Adoption: Adoption and orphan care in Scripture and Christian thought by Timothy Paul Jones 26 Our Paper Pregnancy: God, the gospel and the global cause of Christ by David A. Gundersen For Parents 34 Don’t You Already Have Kids? Adding to your existing family through adoption by Randy Stinson 38 Adoption Road Map: Navigating the often winding road of adoption by Dan Dumas 49 Should We Sterilize Ourselves? A false dichotomy in a right-minded question by Russell D.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE a Study of Antichrist
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE A Study of Antichrist Typology in Six Biblical Dramas of 17th Century Spain A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Spanish by Jason Allen Wells December 2014 Dissertation Committee: Dr. James Parr, Chairperson Dr. David Herzberger Dr. Benjamin Liu Copyright Jason Allen Wells 2014 The Dissertation of Jason Allen Wells is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION A Study of Antichrist Typology in Six Biblical Dramas of 17th Century Spain by Jason Allen Wells Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in Spanish University of California, Riverside, December 2014 Dr. James Parr, Chairperson This dissertation examines Antichrist types manifested in the primary antagonists of six biblical dramas of seventeenth century Spanish theater. After researching the topic of biblical typology in the works of theologians Sir Robert Anderson, G.H. Pember, Arthur W. Pink, and Peter S. Ruckman, who propose various personages of both the Old and New Testaments that adumbrate the Antichrist, I devise a reduced list based on extant plays of the Spanish Golden Age whose main characters match the scriptural counterparts of my register. These characters are Cain, Absalom, Haman, Herod the Great, Judas Iscariot, and the Antichrist himself. I consult the Bible to provide the reader with pertinent background information about these foreshadowings of the Son of Perdition and then I compare and contrast these characteristics with those provided by the playwrights in their respective works. By making these comparisons and contrasts the reader is able to observe the poets’ embellishments of the source material, artistic contributions that in many instances probably satisfy the reader’s desire for details not found in the biblical iv narratives.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary History of the Synod of the West
    Summary History of the Synod of the West By Joseph L. Mihelic, and Lightly edited by Joel L. Samuels Introduction German Presbyterianism in the Upper Mississippi Valley may be said to have begun with the coming of the Rev. and Mrs. Peter Flury to Dubuque, Iowa in the fall of 1846. Peter Flury was a Swiss-German and his wife Sophie Jackson Flury was English from Brighton, England. After serving a pastorate in Schiers, Switzerland, Pastor Flury and his wife decided to come to America as missionaries to American Indians, and applied to the American Mission Board for an assignment. The Board, however, commissioned him in October 1846 and sent him to Dubuque, Iowa where there was a colony of Swiss-German immigrants who had asked the American Mission Board for a pastor. The Flurys came to Dubuque in the fall of 1846 and rented a house in which they began a school for the children and adults of the Swiss immigrants, as well as anyone who was interested in learning German and English and the Christian religion. The school was free and open to Protestants and Roman Catholics. On Christmas Day of 1847, Flury organized a congregation of thirty-five charter members and called this congregation the German Evangelical Church. He provided it also with a Constitution which he modeled after the Reform Church of Switzerland, the Church which he served at Schiers, Switzerland. This constitution has been preserved in the Kirchenbuch (“church-book”) of the congregation and shows Flurys’ concern for the correct order in the operation of the congregation's business, as well as his interest in education of both children and adults.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Dissident Sacramental Theology
    A REVIEW OF DISSIDENT SACRAMENTAL THEOLOGY Five years ago it was my privilege to address this Society, making a cursory review of the main points on which Catholics and Orthodox disagree in the realm of dogmatic theology. These points are neither too numerous nor too difficult to preclude a harmonious solution. The most fundamental issue is the primacy of the pope. But even here, since the Orthodox already believe in the infallibility of the Church and in an honorary primacy of the Bishop of Rome in that Church, it might not be too sanguine to posit the possibility of arriving at an understanding of the pope as the mouthpiece of the infallible Church. This year the officers of the Society have requested a review of Orthodox sacramental practice in the hope that this might furnish some summary of Orthodox moral theology by providing a glimpse of the actual religious life in an Orthodox parish, as well as bring- ing our Catholic theologians up to date on the practical questions they must face regarding intercommunion if any reunion should ever be achieved. At the outset we should express the caution that in this practical as well as in the theoretical sphere, we must beware of absolute predications—because there is apt to be a divergency of practice between the various national groups of Orthodox and even within the same national group. The chief bodies of Orthodox—at least as far as theological leadership is concerned—are the Greeks and the Russians. Usually the Syrian and Albanian Orthodox will follow Greek practice, while the various Slav groups like the Serbs, Bulgars and Ukrainians will be content to follow the hegemony of the Russian Orthodox Church.
    [Show full text]