John H Armstrong

Why Should Christians and Churches Act Together?

One of the best known contributions on unity that has powerfully helped in the modern development of ecumenism is called the Lund Principle. It is commonly believed that this principle says, very simply, that “whatever we can do together we should do together.” While this statement is partially right, if you read it in the original context it is not entirely right. Let me explain. 

On August 27, 1952, the third world conference on Faith and Order held a meeting at Lund, Sweden. The delegates gathered there agreed on a text titled: “A Word to the Churches.” This text was released to the press immediately for world-wide publication. A key sentence posed the following question:

Should not our churches ask themselves whether they are showing sufficient eagerness to enter into conversation with other churches, and whether they should not act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately?

It is the second half of this question that evolved into what is now called the Lund Principle in ecumenism. Morris West, writing in The Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement (Eerdmans, 1991), notes that “this is probably the most quoted (and sometimes misquoted!) sentence from any F & O document.” It is also provided one of the most compelling questions for Christians that was asked in the twentieth century: "Why should we act together rather than separately?"

The Lund Principle is often misunderstood because it is taken as an exhortation rather than, as is clearly evident in its original context, a question. The original intention was to challenge the churches to talk together so that they could act together as widely and effectively as possible. 

The historical context of Lund is important if we are to grasp the context of the Lund Principle. In 1947 several historic churches in South India came together to form a new union that became known as the Church of South India (1947). The momentum for this was the persistent question of mission and its relationship to unity. The churches in India believed that their divisions were an open scandal to their particular culture. Their new union was a result of deep missiological concern. The first bishop of the new Church of South India was none other than Lesslie Newbigin, my personal patron saint of missional theology. I use Newbigin more than any single source to introduce church leaders to missional-ecumenism. 

Different interpretations of the Lund Principle arose quickly after this oft cited paper was read. Morris West believes that some of these interpretations “weakened its impact.” As an example, it became a favorite quotation for ecumenical orators who used it rhetorically, somewhat like a general principle. If you check out the one line entry on this at Wikipedia you find the following: “The Lund Principle is an important principle in ecumenical relations between Christian churches. It affirms that churches should act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately.” 

While this statement is true it misses some of the nuance found in the original context. Many churches, particularly in local contexts, took this statement as the basis for limited and occasional relationships that avoided the full scope of the original question. Such Christians thought/think in terms of the annual Week of Prayer for Christian Unity (January) and believe that by sharing in it they have done their part in pursuing unity. As good as this week is, and it is very good and very important, it is not what the Lund Principle envisioned at all. 

The Lund Principle was intended “to be applied to the ongoing, day-to-day life of the churches,” adds Morris West. If the question is answered affirmatively, whether we have in view the church nationally or locally, the concern was for more permanent change. 

But isn’t this a mere “pipe dream” for unity? I would argue that you have to dream before you wake and when you dream deeply and then awake truly refreshed you are ready to act in significant ways. The reason so few of us are interested in deep ecumenism is because we have not dreamed about it deeply enough, at least not yet. We are still in a state of fitful sleep. In local situations, where churches and people really live and do Christ's mission, the possibilities are endless. By developing relationships (understood in biblical terms as "covenantal relationships") we can then determine how to answer the question put to us by the Lund Principle. 

I would further argue that this “pipe dream” is alive and well. More churches and leaders are now asking this question than I’ve known in my own lifetime, at least in America. And younger Christians are asking it with greater urgency and understanding than was done by my generation. This is one reason why I believe that missional-ecumenism provides a strong and compelling answer to the question posed by the Lund Principle. 

 

Who Should Become an ACT 3 Cohort Member?

The most important question you should ask, if you have any interest in our new ACT 3 Missional-Ecumenical Cohort program, is this: "Who should invest the time and money in this process and apply to join an ACT 3 Cohort group?"

Alcoholics Anonymous operates on a rather simple philosophy with a bare bones amount of structure. To join an AA Group you must have a problem, namely the abuse of alcohol. Second, you must be willing to pay the price to change your behavior by investing your time, and thus to some extent your money, in a group process where there is real learning, accountability and life-long change. Finally, you must be willing to use the famous Twelve Steps to grow toward sobriety and then to maintain that sobriety. 

The ACT 3 Missional-Ecumenical Cohort groups operate in much the same way. To join a group you must have a recognized need. You must know that you need to grow deeper in your interior spiritual life. If you have this need then you must desire to join a group that will seek to help you improve your practice of spiritual life in the Trinity. Second, you must desire to enter into the prayer of Jesus in John 17 in order to become an answer, not a barrier, to his expressed intention for unity. Third, you must desire to understand missional theology (our "sentness" which comes from God the Father) and want to learn how to live this theology out very practically in your personal and corporate lifestyle. 

The Cohort model is thus built on these three core principles. We call these our "Three Steps." 

1. You must desire to develop your interior life in a rich texture of spiritual formation that draws from the whole Christian tradition so that you can learn how to intentionally seek after God with your whole heart, mind, soul and strength (Matthew 22:37). 

2. You must enter into the unity prayer of our Lord Jesus (John 17:20-23), a prayer for our relational oneness, and strive with all your heart to truly and faithfully love all your brothers and sisters as modeled by Jesus (John 13:34-35). 

3. You must seek to grasp what is meant by missional theology and grow into a clear understanding of why it is vitally important in order that you will practice the spiritual art of missional leadership in your local church or mission context (John 20:21).

Each ACT 3 Cohort meets around these three core principles and the curriculum is built upon it. Those who are mentored in an ACT 3 Missional-Ecumenical Cohort group will continue to learn after their eight month training process is completed. Some will be called and trained to become mentors who can facilitate new ACT 3 Cohort groups as the Lord raises them up in the coming years. The mentors will be coached and then paid to lead a group(s) and thus they will become a part of the extended mission of ACT 3. 

You can learn more about these newly forming ACT 3 Cohort groups on our home page.

 

When Jesus Met Mary: A Conference on Friendship with a Unique (and Controversial) Emphasis on Friendship with the Opposite Sex

Can men and women be close friends without the sex part getting in the way?

Can men and women who are married enjoy opposite sex friendships?

What would our marriages, our friendships, our churches, and our communities look like if men and women were not afraid of connecting with each other in deep ways?

What would male-female relationships look like in marriages and friendship if every man and woman could know the spiritual richness and beauty of oneness between genders?

These are the kinds of questions that grew out of my reading of a fine book I reviewed extensively on this site, December 21-24, 2010. I wrote long blogs about Sacred Unions, Sacred Passions, a ground-breaking and courageous book written by my good friend Dan Brennan. I believed then that it had something extremely important to say about real friendship to our modern over-sexualized culture, especially inside the Christian church. I believed, and believe even more now, that the absence of real friendship is destroying the life of the Spirit among us. This book is an important work that addresses the need for healing in this area of life together. 

Dan and I go back a very long way. I was his pastor in the 1980s. Quite honestly we had a tragic break in our relationship. That break lasted for more than a decade but after some years this broken friendship was beautifully healed. We were totally and completely reconciled and thus have enjoyed, for several years, a great (and very healthy) friendship. I tell you this story because it underscores an important point about my friend Dan Brennan. He practices what he preaches/writes! He is so refreshingly honest that some people do not like him for it. Plus, his understanding of a controversial subject is truly unique. But Dan is a man who makes friends and values his relationships very deeply. Like me he can be, and has been, hurt by friends who have turned against him. He has proven to be a true friend to me. I hope this friendship will continue to be the treasured by him as well. It is a powerful evidence of the kingdom to celebrate friendship with a person you once loved and then lost, only to regain that relationship with much greater depth and richness. 

This weekend I have the great privilege of sharing in a one-of-a-kind conference that Dan has planned for some months: When Jesus Met Mary: A Conference Exploring Friendship Between Men & Women. The event publicity says that it will seek to promote understanding, demystify the opposite sex (as if that were entirely possible, eh?), desexualize interactions between men and women, guide us in overcoming sexism, help us to tap into our deep longing to reflect the image of God and help us to enter into the deep unity and communion that God desires. 

I will speak on unity at the end of the event on Saturday afternoon and assist in serving the eucharist in the closing session at 3:40 p.m. The event begins with dinner at 6 p.m. this Friday evening, April 27. The speaker lineup includes some wonderful writers and thinkers, a few I know and more new people that I look forward to meeting. The meeting place for the conference is Life on the Vine, located at 5105 RFD, Arlington Heights Road, Long Grove, Illinois. 

You can register now. I urge you to do so and then attend this weekend. I'd love to see many of my Chicago friends. I do not believe that you will regret coming to this event. Even if the topic frightens you, and it does for many great people, come and learn. Listen, ask questions, think deeply. The price is reasonable and the fellowship and topic will both be truly unique. 

 

The Lund Principle

On August 27, 1953, at the third world conference on Faith and Order, meeting in Lund, Sweden, a text was agreed upon titled: "A Word to the Churches." This text was released to the press for worldwide publication almost immediately. A part of this statement eventually became known (in ecumenical circles) as "The Lund Principle." The statement comes from a sentence which asks: 

"Should not our churches ask themsevles whether they are showing sufficient eagerness to enter into conversation with other churches, and whether they should not act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately?" 

The final part of this question, which I've put in italics, subsequently became known as The Lund Principle. This may be the most often quoted statement in the history of the Faith & Order Commission. It is often used as an exhortation but in the original context you can readily see that it is a question. The intention was to challenge the churches to talk together so that they could more effectively act together. 

Lund was held after the union of churches in South India in 1947. This immensely successful venture, led in large part by Lesslie Newbigin who became the first bishop of the new Church of South India, created a high level of desire for further church unions. Following Lund interpretations of the Lund Principle arose which weakened its original impact. For example, it was used oratorically as a general principle to encourage limited and "spasmodic relationships" (Morris West), such as the annual Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. This is a time of prayer for unity that I deeply support. But the writers of this statement intended that their question be applied to the ongoing, day-to-day life of the churches. If answered affirmatively, which the writers hoped for, it would press the question of more permanent change, both locally and nationally. Churches would be required to act, not passively talk about unity. 

There are growing signs, admittedly small ones here and there, that a new movement for unity is beginning to happen. This time it is less about a union of churches and more about the mission of Christ carried out in real unity. This is particularly true in local contexts where covenantal partnerships are forming on the ground level where people and churches actually live and function. It seems to me that the Lund Principle is alive and well. The question should still be asked today. Simply put, not as a question but as a statement of principle: "What we can do together we must do together." 

I believe this question is more vital than ever, especially in the West where the church is declining in all its historical expressions. I believe the 21st century will see the further decline of Christianity in the West, unless we see a great renewal. I believe that a true renewal will include a renewed emphasis upon the Lund Principle. This principle affirms that churches should act together in all matters except those in which deep differences of conviction compel them to act separately. If you want to understand my deep and personal resolve to work for unity remember the Lund Principle is behind my actions. I believe this principle is a burning, prophetic and Spirit-directed question for us more than ever. 

Christian Identity & the Place of Trinitarian Ecumenism

Christian faith is about the alternatives of life and death rather than about abstract doctrinal and philosophical forms. This does not mean doctrine is unimportant. It simply means it is not life itself. The church is where divine life is to be lived on earth by the outpoured Spirit who creates in us the living prayer of Christ who is the Son of the eternal Father. To be a Christian is thus to participate in the life of the Trinity, not simply to give mental assent to doctrines or emotional loyalty to a form of religion. 

If this is true then faithfulness to the church is not the same as loyalty to our national or cultural identities. We are not American Christians, German Christians, Greek Christians or French Christians. We are Christians! We must not become prisoners to national, local or ethnic identities. Such identities have their place in the human reality and realm. They are not inherently evil. But the catholic identity of the body of Christ means that we love and serve the whole Christian community, not one small part of it. The Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew declared in an address in 1993 at the British Museum, "It is time for us to begin to reconcile nationalism and ecumenism." Amen!

This requires, the Patriarch said, an honest engaging in historical memory, both celebrating the heritage of our past and looking at that same past with a critical eye for what needs repentance. We must never sit easy with our past or present but bring all of it under Christ's authority and into communion with all our brothers and sisters as we seek to become the public expression of the Trinity through our life together. 

Speaking at St. Peter's Basilica in 1997 Patriarch Bartholomew said we must learn how to share as Christians, not as something that we can exploit in order to reproach one another but rather as a commitment to learn how to responsibly serve each other in the body of Christ. This requires you and me to give sacrificially of ourselves to further collaboration while we continue to work for deeper expressions of unity. 

One Person's Report on the Conversation on Unity

One of my Missional-Ecumenical Cohort members, in the class of April 2012, is Kevin Jesmer. Kevin is a lay-missionary with UBF serving in DeKalb, Illinois. I am impressed with how well Kevin listened to the conversation last Monday (March 26). On his personal blog he wrote an account of what he heard. I share it here so that my readers can hear about the event through the eyes and ears of someone else. Interestingly Kevin grew up in the Catholic Church but came to personal faith through a UBF Bible Study group. He is learning how to love and respect Catholics and the Catholic Church with new eyes and ears. This is one of my many goals in having such an event. 

Before you read Kevin's report let me remind you that the entire event is now available for viewing on our ACT 3 home page. 

Here is Kevin's blog about the March 26 event:

On Monday, March 26, 2012, ACT 3 ministry hosted an event at Wheaton College, in the Edman Chapel. It was a called, “A Conversation On Unity In Christ’s Mission.” It entailed a discussion between Francis Cardinal George O.M.I., the Archbishop of Chicago and Dr. John Armstrong, President of ACT 3. The invitation card stated, “An evening of dialogue exploring the common ground and current challenges that face Catholics and evangelical Protestants in Christian faith and mission.” We were all, “cordially invited to share in a Christ centered conversation on unity in the mission of our Lord Jesus Christ in our generation.” In the body of Christ, Catholics and Evangelicals have one Father in heaven and one Savior Jesus. We share common creeds and a common history. We share the Bible and the gospel. We are like siblings in the family of God. But can we serve Jesus together? Yes, we can serve society together, but can we preach the gospel together? Yes we can preach the gospel, but it will take greater efforts at dialoguing. We can unofficially work together to be salt and light. The Holy Spirit is helping us to do this even now. We must also be careful in our dialoguing, that we don’t become so strong headed, that we talk past each other and come to loggerheads. But we must not become so open minded that our brains fall out of your heads and we don’t think any more. We need to find ways to continue the conversation based on the gospel, coupled with mutual respect, love and honor.

Many people say that they love the church. But what they are saying is that they love their particular church and their own people whom they live out their Christian lives with. But their church experience is only a “postage stamp” piece of the Body of Christ. The question that we should be asking ourselves is, “Do we love the entire body of Christ?” There are children of God in other denominations, in other countries, even living down my street, who are children of God. If these folks are His people then they should be my people too. I should have a greater sense of ecumenism and an increased frequency of conversation and dialogue on these matters. There is so much that we don’t agree on, but there is so much that we do agree on. The bottom line is, Jesus Christ is Lord and all of his people make up the body of Christ.

Concerning the greater body, Cardinal George stated that we must set out to repair the wounds that we have inflicted on the body of Christ. We must enter into dialogue and not simply impose our views. We must build friendships and partnerships in dialogue. When we do we can then be the people that the Lord can use to bring peace to the world.

Dr. Armstrong brought up the fact that there are many similarities between us. He defined evangelicalism by the four core markers used by historian David Bebbington. 1. There is a commitment to conversion; 2. There is a commitment to activism; 3. There is a commitment to Bible centeredness; and, 4. There is a commitment to cruc-i-centeredness (The death and resurrection of Jesus). The two groups are not nearly as dissimilar as we might think. Even today we are seeing both evangelicals and Catholics attending joint Bible studies.

I found the Cardinal’s statement, that in the evangelical world, it is hard to find one person to officially talk with about “faith matters” quite compelling. This, he noted, is a structural matter. I believe it also has to do with our mindset about leadership. We don’t submit to the leaders of other churches and sometimes even to our own leadership. But in the Catholic Church leaders are (generally) more respected and listened to by Catholics. Almost all the Catholics at the Conversation on Unity were subjecting their hearts and their minds to what the Cardinal was saying. I think Billy Graham got close to becoming that person for the Evangelical world. Who will it be now? I don’t know, but I thank God for the dialogue that occurred at this conversation. It seems like a small event, but it was the Cardinal’s prayer that God may use it for a greater purpose. (Editor's Note: About 1,200 people attended the event.)

The question is, “What will be the form of unity that Christ wants?” One time, while flying on an airplane, a Pentecostal believer asked the Cardinal if he was saved. He thought this over and said, “Objectively…yes. Subjectively…I am saved but within the community of the church.”

I realized, during this answer, that Catholics equate faith and living out the Christian life with, not only faith in Jesus, but also life in the church. I saw this as a real difference between Catholics and Protestants. Catholics love Jesus and the gospel and the Church. Protestants love Jesus and the gospel, but not necessarily the church. There is a growing trend among Christian young people to bypass the church. A must read on this subject is “You Lost Me.” I am amazed that even those who go to church seem to get in and out as soon as possible. A friend of mine was disillusioned by the fact that people don’t want to stay and talk about the message after the worship service. They just want to leave. If that is the case, why even have a church building? Rent a hall for Saturday and Sunday.

Concerning evangelization, the Cardinal stated that evangelization is done at the individual level and also at the societal level. Catholics think about evangelizing the culture itself. The problem is that we speak of a pre-modern faith in a post-modern culture. How can Catholics now proclaim that Jesus is Lord in this post-modern, post-Christian society? In a secularized world, the church can be a club to motivate people to do good but never mention Jesus to others. The Cardinal conceded that Evangelicals have done a good job at slowing the secularization of America. They kept proclaiming the gospel fervently and kept the voice of the gospel “strong.” He stated that this has a lot to do with the history of Catholics in America. Due to social and political pressures they kept their heads down. For the longest time they thought that they could not freely practice their faith in America. But now things are changing.

I really admired the Q & A section on societal transformation. The church is where we can gather in Christ’s name. But the church must be involved in evangelizing culture. The culture is a normative system. It dictates what to think, how to perceive things and what to prioritize. It even governs certain matters of faith. There are two kingdoms…the kingdom of this world and the Kingdom of God. The two can never blend into each other. But they can approach each other so that communication can occur. One purpose of the implementation of the church is a part of that. Today cultures are secularizing. They are dialoguing less with the Church. But still the Church stands as a source of hope and life in trying circumstances within every culture.

I realize that we must go beyond just seeking to convert the individual. Catholics have it right. We need to transform societies and cultures. It was the Catholics that changed holidays from Roman/pagan celebrations to Christian celebrations. (i.e. Christmas, Valentine’s Day, etc.) They changed society so that the Gospel may interface with the secular world and communicate. Have Protestants given up on the idea of changing culture itself? I think most have, if they ever had that vision in the first place. We must lift up our eyes and have a greater vision.

There was a discussion on faith alone, “Sola Fide.” This is a topic that most people don’t really understand. This issue of faith is linked to our common Augustinian heritage. Cardinal George led the discussion by stating the faith is the beginning of our salvation. (Council of Trent). Faith must go beyond knowledge. Even the devil has knowledge about God, but is he saved? No! Faith must include actions, like trusting God and loving God and loving others. Faith is also a gift of God.

Dr Armstrong confirmed this idea using a reference from the book of James. James 2:17 (and verse 24) reads, “In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” Instead of stopping at the word, “faith” (alone) we should talk about true and living faith. Then when we frame faith in this way we can continue in meaingful dialogue.

Next, there was a discussion concerning sharing our faith. The Cardinal stated that faith is a gift. If you don’t share the faith, then you will loose it. We can’t rest easy receiving the gift. We must share it. His statement on mission seems to be more based on the morality nestled within human relationships. Dr. Armstrong stated that the sharing of our faith is mission. Just as fire is for burning so the church is for mission. The sharing of our faith is based more on truth and how we are created. It is not as “warm” a definition as the Cardinal’s.

The next topic of discussion had to do with our response to God’s impulses and are we active agents or not in his impulses. I confess that I was lost on this discussion. I don’t know the differences on this issue between the two branches of Christianity. I hope this gets clarified.

I was sold on the idea of liturgy. Liturgy is important. Dr Armstrong grew weary with his 35 years of devotionals. He needed more that a few minutes of quiet time in the mornings. His response appeared to be delving deeper into the books of many Christian authors. I also know that he is part of church with liturgy. Coming from a Catholic background, I remembered the peace I felt as a boy going through the liturgy, smelling the incense, hearing the bell ringing of the altar boys, listening to the ancient songs, listening to the simple homilies and looking at the stations of the cross on the walls and imaging the stories in my mind. It was peaceful and edifying and I didn’t have to always engage my mind. I was resting in the things of God. The years spent experiencing the liturgy left me with some basics about faith, like; 1. Jesus is God 2. The Bible is God’s word, 3. I should go to church, 4. Jesus is the way to go to heaven. These basics helped me to accept Bible study. The Protestants should grow in a greater appreciation of liturgy. This could help them to not always focus and concentrate on Bible study as an intellectual exercise. We need to get back to the mystery of the gospel with the whole church.

What would full unity look like? Dr Armstrong stated that today, the idea of unity is not first about the union or reunion of the church. We will see complete union when Jesus comes again. We should strive for it now. But we must take steps right now that move us to what God might be pleased with in the future. The Cardinal stated that unity is a gift. Christ will bring it about. We must think about the opportunities that our present state of disunity can bring about, as a gift from God. If we think of this in positive terms (rather than as the work of the devil), then we can be excited about what God is going to bring about. The Cardinal believes that the Church contains all the gifts from God. The gifts that are present in the Church may not be visible to all, but they will be revealed and shared through continued conversation. Jesus will make all gifts visible. If there is enough love then all things will work out. We can see this principle at work in marriages between Protestant and Catholic spouses. We must realize that the truths of the two faiths don’t completely mesh. But with continued dialogue we can continue to navigate the complexities of our differences with respect, love and honor. Then Jesus prayer in John 17:23 can be further realized among us, “I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.” (NIV 1984)

 

The Life and Witness of Brother Roger: An Icon of Love and Unity

Yesterday I wrote about Brother Roger of Taizé in my post. I confess that Brother Roger was one of my genuine spiritual role models in helping form my view of life, love and ecumenism. 

There were a number of things about him I found attractive. For example, he believed that the spiritual leader should always keep a low profile. He rarely gave interviews and refused to permit any personality "cult" to grow up around himself. (How refreshing is that?) Prior to his death in 2005, he was due to give up his community functions because of his advanced age and ill-health. He had begun to suffer from incredible fatigue and often used a wheelchair.

Brother Roger was awarded a number of honors and wrote many books on prayer and reflection, always asking young people to be confident in God and committed to their local church community and to humanity. He also wrote books about Christian spirituality and prayer, some together with Mother Teresa with whom he shared a very cordial friendship.

Brother Roger devoted himself to ecumenism in a remarkable way, seeking to reconcile the different Christian churches in every way possible. He especially loved younger Christians whom he addressed often. During a Taizé gathering in Paris in 1995 Brother Roger spoke to more than 100,000 young people who were sitting on the floor of an exhibition hall. His words at this gathering reveal his approach, one that some evangelicals will find unacceptable because of their strong stress upon formal preaching in a church context. He said: "We have come here to search," he said, "or to go on searching through silence and prayer, to get in touch with our inner life. Christ always said, Do not worry, give yourself." 

The monks at Taizé included members of Lutheran, Anglican, Evangelical, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox communions. He always worked to create greater unity among Christian churches, but his focus for more than sixty years was to awaken spirituality among young people in Europe who were growing up in a secular world. This is how he particularly touched my life. I began ACT 3, under a different name, in 1991. My goal was reformation and spiritual renewal. As I grew in this work I saw the connection with unity powerfully. This led to my adopting and teaching what I now call missional-ecumenism. Brother Roger thus became a huge influence in my own journey. 

When he died in 2005 an obituary, published in the New York Times after his untimely death in a Taizé service at the hands of a deranged person who slit his throat, said:

Before the fall of Communism, he and his group had quietly created prayer circles among Catholics in Poland and Hungary and Protestants in East Germany that proved influential during protests in those countries. The Taizé prayer groups with their message of peace and conciliation eventually also reached into the United States - he has followers in New York - as well as Canada, Brazil, South Korea and elsewhere.

He became well known as both a mystic and a realist, a man with a humble personal style who was able to attract tens of thousands of followers. He also became a driving force behind the annual World Youth Day, being held this week in Cologne, Germany.

The Taizé center and Brother Roger drew tens of thousands of pilgrims a year. Although he was seen by many as a guru, he preferred to use the phrase, "My brothers and I want to be seen as people who listen, never as spiritual masters."

When Brother Roger’s health became more frail he named Brother Alois, a German Roman Catholic, to succeed him. The Taizé community is still led by Brother Alois.

From a Protestant background, Brother Roger undertook a step that was without precedent since the Reformation. He entered progressively into a full communion with the faith of the Catholic Church without a “conversion” that would imply a break with his origins. I want to make this point as clearly as I know how. I have discussed this with many Catholics, some of whom refuse to believe that this is the truth of the matter but I have become convinced beyond any reasonable doubt of the facts of the case.

In 1980, during a European Meeting in Rome, he said in St. Peter’s Basilica in the presence of Pope John Paul II: “I have found my own identity as a Christian by reconciling within myself the faith of my origins with the mystery of the Catholic faith, without breaking fellowship with anyone.” (Please read this again. It is both remarkably uncommon and virtually unknown!)

Brother Roger then took the Catholic sacrament of the Eucharist every morning at the Catholic Mass in Taizé, and he received the sacrament from both the current and former Pope. This seems to be in contravention of canonical prohibitions on administering the sacrament to those not in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. According to Cardinal Walter Kasper this was accomplished as though there was a tacit understanding between Brother Roger and the Catholic Church "crossing certain confessional" and canonical barriers through what brother Roger called a gradual enrichment of his faith with the foundations of the Catholic Church including "the ministry of unity exercised by the bishop of Rome."

I wrote in my book, Your Church Is Too Small, of Cardinal Ratzinger serving the Eucharist to Brother Roger at the funeral Mass of John Paul II. I have had a number of responses to this statement, many claiming that Cardinal Ratzinger was “caught off guard” when Brother Roger was wheeled forward to the altar area after the service had already begun. With him very near the bishops there was a sense that they had to serve him the Eucharist rather than create offense. I have asked members of the Taizé community about the facts of this case and I am persuaded that I now know the truth. 

The answer as follows. Brother Roger went to Rome for the funeral but did not plan to go when the day of the service came because he had arisen that morning so weak and tired. He was even late in arriving. Because he was so widely known and loved he was wheeled forward to a place where the cardinals were near to the altar. When the time came to distribute the sacred meal it is true that there was little choice but to serve Brother Roger. But what those who insist that a Protestant minister could not be communed fail to realize is that this was gladly done because it had been done for many years before this Mass seen by millions of viewers the world over. Brother Roger did not force anyone’s hand in the matter. He did not create a problem. He was placed there, by Catholic leaders, out of love. He would not have been there in the first place had others not have taken him there. But the simple fact is that he acknowledged the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, remained a Protestant minister his entire life and was routinely communed by Catholic priests, including the last two Popes. 

In an unusual way Brother Roger was an icon and Taizé remains an iconic community of love and unity. This is one of the many reasons I encourage you to learn more about this remarkable mission. It is also why I encourage you, if you are between 18-35 years of age, to attend the Memorial Day Taizé conference at DePaul University. 

 

Chicago Taizé: An Event You Should Know About

The Taizé Community was begun after World War II by a young Reformed minister by the name of Frère Roger, or Brother Roger as we know his name in English. Roger Louis Schütz-Marsauche (1915-2005) was the ninth and youngest child of Karl Ulrich Schütz, a Reformed pastor from Bachs in the Swiss Lowlands. His mother was Amélie Henriette, a French Protestant from Burgundy (France). 

From 1937 to 1940, Roger studied Reformed theology in Strasbourg and Lausanne. He was a leader in the Swiss Student Christian Movement, part of the World Student Christian Federation.

In 1940, Roger rode a bicycle from Geneva to Taizé, a very small town about 240 miles southeast of Paris. Taizé was just beyond the line of demarcation to the zone occupied by German troops. For two years Brother Roger hid Jewish refugees before being forced to leave Taizé. In 1944, he returned to Taizé to found a Christian monastic community which was initially a group of young men living together in poverty and obedience. Today Taizé is an ecumenical order composed of about one hundred brothers, from Protestant and Catholic traditions. These bothers originate from thirty countries across the world. The order has a strong devotion to peace and justice through prayer and meditation. 

In 1945, a young lawyer from the region set up an association to take charge of children who had lost their parents in the war. He suggested to the brothers that they welcome a certain number of them in Taizé. A men’s community could not receive children. So Brother Roger asked his sister Genevieve to come back to take care of them and become their mother. On Sundays, the brothers also welcomed German prisoners-of-war interned in a camp nearby Taizé.

On Easter Day 1949, seven brothers committed themselves together for their whole life in celibacy and to live a life together in great simplicity. Thus began this now famous mission in a small town in France.

Today the community has become one of the world's most important sites of Christian pilgrimage. Over 100,000 young people from around the world make pilgrimages to Taizé each year for prayer, Bible study, sharing, and communal work. Through the community's ecumenical outlook, they are encouraged to live in the spirit of kindness, simplicity and reconciliation. Some of you know about Taizé because of hymns and simple songs that you use in worship or you have attended a unique Taizé service. 

I tell this short account of Brother Roger’s life, and of the work of the Taizé community, because there is a Taizé mission coming to America in May of this year. This is, so far as I can tell, a first. The brothers of Taizé have quietly served in a few urban centers among the poor but today they have no regular presence in the U.S. Consistent with their desire to reach young adults they have now planned a Memorial Day weekend gathering for Chicago, May 25-28. Because of my deep interest in missional-ecumenism among young adults I met with two Taizé brothers on Friday, March 23. My purpose was to learn how I could actively support their work. Here is the most recent email they have sent to those who are supporting their May mission.

 

Chicago, March 23, 2012

Dear Friends,

We are now in Chicago and, since we last wrote to you two months ago, a great deal has happened. Three Taizé brothers are now living in a house near DePaul University, just a minute away from the student chapel where, from Monday to Saturday, we have our midday prayer at 12.30 pm. Stopping for twenty-five minutes of prayer and silence in the middle of the day is unusual for busy people, but little by little some of our friends are realizing that such moments of silence and prayer are important.

We have been in contact with a number of parishes and congregations in Chicagoland. Many of them have dynamic young adult groups. We will be meeting many more in April. It is still too early to tell how many host families will open their doors to participants , but the positive response that we have encountered so far is encouraging.

Invitations from various places outside Chicago have also led us to travel: Canada, Indiana, Tennessee are some of the places we have been so far. Soon we will be in Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska and further away. People are planning to come to Chicago from all of these places and some have already registered from as far away as California and western Canada.

Each Friday during Lent we go to a different church for prayer around the cross: http://www.taize.fr/en_article13514.html We plan to continue these kinds of prayers after Easter.

A number of new resources are available on www.taize.fr/Chicago, among them an 11 x 17 poster: http://www.taize.fr/IMG/pdf/poster_chicago.pdf
and a flyer: http://www.taize.fr/IMG/pdf/half-sheet_postcard_wfb2902.pdf  These resources can be downloaded and printed and could be useful to invite others to the gathering.

To help spread word about the Pilgrimage of Trust in Chicago some have also been active on Facebook, telling their friends about it, sending them the link to the video http://www.taize.fr/en_article13195.html (often very effective to generate interest).

It is now possible to register online: http://taizechicago2012.eventbrite.com Each participant will be asked to contribute just over 52 dollars for the entire weekend.You should plan on an additional 20 dollars for public transportation in Chicago.

Don't forget that registration closes on April 30^th.

We very much look forward to seeing you in Chicago in May!

In communion,

Br John          Br Emile

 

I profoundly enjoyed my 90 minute conversation and prayer time with Brother John and Brother Emile last Friday. I invited Brother Emile to lead the benediction at our Conversation on Unity in Christ’s Mission on Monday evening, March 26, at Wheaton College. I invited him to specifically promote this event to Wheaton College students and scores of Catholic young adults who joined us for our large event. I will say more about Taizé, and Brother Roger, tomorrow. I believe this is one of God’s greatest living models of missional-ecumenism, which is why I wrote about Taizé on page 187 of my book, Your Church Is Too Small.

A Catholic Reflection on Your Church Is Too Small: A Brief Reply to a Gracious Former-Atheist I Love and Respect

Catholic apologist, and former-atheist, Devin Rose is a conservative thinker, a clear writer and an extremely gracious Christ-like brother. He has written a recent book titled: If Catholicism Is True: The Reformation Meets Rome. (I have not yet read his book but I will attempt to do so.) Devin Rose has corresponded with me via Facebook in recent months and has recently read my book, Your Church Is Too Small. I respect him as a person, a brother and a man who I believe reviewed my work with a gentle spirit and a good faith argument. I want everyone who cares about this subject to read his review. I will offer a few salient comments below but do not plan to offer an extensive counter-review. I do not desire to enter into the combat zone of Catholic and evangelical apologetics. (There are hundreds, likely thousands, of blogs, tracts and books that do this in various ways and with various styles and approaches. I am not called to this polemical zone!) I'd love to have my Catholic readers respond, whether you agree with Devin or not. I'd also love for Protestants to respond so long as you are kind to Devin and fair in your comments about him and me. My guiding principles are found in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 and in Ephesians 4:1-7.

I am not suggesting that Devin does not share these same Pauline principles. I believe that he does. I just do not have a divine vocation to serve in the same space that he feels called to work within, namely one committed to the apologetical defense of various inter-church debates that, in my estimation, hinder missonal-ecumenism. My space is one of bridge building with people who have faith in Christ so that we can find new/old pathways that could lead to peace without compromise, in so far as this is possible! (I believe it is more possible than any of us can imagine because Christ loves all his people and prays for their "relational" oneness.)

Devin understands my arguments fairly well, at least at most points. Yet he misses some major points of mine at several critical junctures. Devin seems to believe that my ecumenism is rooted in the kind of effort that embraces a very low threshold of faith which threatens the real catholicity that I actually believe in and practice. Of course we do not agree on what catholicity actually "is" since he sees it as coterminous with the Roman Catholic Church and the magisterium. A friend has written (correctly I think) that "[In] Rose's very good and engaging book review he seems to use apostolic succession as traditional Catholics do as a wedge for separation (unless you convert and come home to mother church) you are not truly catholic." I believe this is an accurate understanding of what you will see in Devin's review, but this is not because Devin has a bad spirit. He is defending the Catholic Church as he understands it. He is not alone in this understanding or this kind of defense. I prefer, however, to speak of apostolic traditions (East and West) as possessing core doctrines ("mere Christianity") that can unify the whole global church, not fully in terms of perfect union, but in terms of the mission of Christ's one kingdom. (This I believe is very clearly stated in my book!) My blogger friend further wrote that: "Rose [in this review] really shows his bias against Protestants when he says that even if Protestants agree with Catholics on the doctrine of apostolic succession, it doesn't matter since they don't possess it. Even if Protestants agree with Catholics, they are still wrong!" This is the rub for all evangelical ecumenists like me. Telling one side in this sadly divided state with a response that says "You are wrong and we are right" is not the type of ecumenism that will lead us to deeper (experienced and shared) Spirit-given relational unity. As gracious as Rose is in his style and person this kind of argument will not help foster what I envision. Disagree with my thesis if you will, and many readers of this blog will disagree, but I am not alone in this thesis. I believe it is both ancient and wise. Rose and I thus have a different vision of unity, at least in terms of the first steps that we should take in this process toward the greater fullness of how we can actually express our inherent unity because we are already one in Christ and share in common Christian baptism. 

In Rose's understanding the way to unity is simple and straightforward. I should come home to Rome! Yet in the practice of post-Vatican II ecumenism, and the teaching and practice of the last five popes, this is not what I see nor is it what I have experienced in my thousands of hours of conversation with Catholics. The lone exception to my experience usually comes from converts who have left Protestantism and seem to feel a deep need to do a kind of apologetics that shows why Rome is the "true church." Through this approach they conclude that everyone else is outside the true church though somehow we are all mysteriously inside that church in an incomplete way that keeps us, the "separated brothers," from the Table. But even here I have scores of Catholic friends who do not adopt Rose's view. These are not untaught or rebellious (liberal) Catholics. Conservative Catholic apologists take the supposed high ground by using the official teaching of the church on most matters but they seem to miss that there is a continued unfolding of what their church is also saying about unity with non-Catholics, especially since Vatican II. Having spent time inside the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity I speak from firsthand experience, not simply from books and documents. (I have read scores of these books and documents as well and find in these a rich treasury that calls us to new ecumenism!) Having read and discussed ecumenism in inter-church contexts, both in and outside of the United States, I have a perspective which clearly is not the same as Devin's. This doesn't make me better than Devin, just different in my viewpoint. 

Much more problematic for me, and for serious ecumenism to truly advance, is the practice of the Catholic Church with regard to baptism and eucharist. While the Catholic Church accepts my baptism they do not, in most contexts, commune me. Am I the only person who finds this stance in-congruent? Ecumenists, including many Catholic theologians who teach ecumenism inside the Vatican and on the faculty of Rome's famous Vatican universities, see this as a problem to be ultimately overcome in new ecumenical ways. (This may happen first with the Orthodox Church but then no one can say if they would reciprocate since they also exclude all other Christians from the Table!) My friend who writes in response to Devin Rose on my blog says, "What is amazing from an ecumenist's viewpoint [is] that one doctrine makes us one in Christ while the other keeps us separated." Sadly, this is my conclusion as well.  

Finally, Devin Rose does not seem to recognize some of the very official agreements that the Vatican has signed that are game changers in terms of using "old" arguments and recognizing "new" groundbreaking agreements that we now have at many levels. I think especially of The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (1999). There is no way around the fact that this is a document agreed to by both the Vatican and the Lutheran World Federation. It is a major step toward the new unity I speak about. And there is no doubt that this agreement answers most of the much debated 16th century questions well. 

Catholics and Protestants continue to have real disagreements. On this Rose and I completely agree. It would have been best, however, if he had also underscored that I agree with this point rather than to write as if I did not see this as an ongoing problem. He lists several huge issues where we still disagree. He and I concur that we still disagree on these; e.g. the magisterium, the meaning of the Mass in terms of ontology, etc. Yet as my friend Chris wrote in his comments on Rose's review, "You would think none of this [the formal and significant agreements] has happened and everything is the same under the conditions of the 16th century break on this issue [justification] . . ."

For all who care about my work and love me as a brother I want you to have the opportunity to read this very fine man's review at the Called to Communion website. It can help us all, especially if we do not stop here but pursue, in genuine Christian love, a growing and deepening conversation about our differences and our agreements. The unity Rose prays for is, at least in spirit, the one I also pray for. We do not agree (yet) about how this will come about but we must never stop loving and listening. Rose shows he desires this path. We may not ever have the full union of all churches but we can strive prayerfully together for what I call missional-ecumenism. We cannot do this without one another. In this spirit I welcome Devin Rose's critical review of my book and encourage you to read it. 

An Invitation to the Conversation on Unity in Christ's Mission

Untitled from Jake Mater on Vimeo.