ANGLICAN-BAPTIST CONVERSATIONS

The Lambeth conference of 1988 invited the Baptist World Alliance* to enter into conversations with the Anglican Consultative Council,* which the general council of the BWA in 1991 unanimously agreed to do. Further encouraged by the Lambeth conference of 1998, these conversations in fact began in 2000.

In an innovative procedure, the small permanent team from each side is joined for particular meetings by representatives from the country and region in which the gathering takes place (in England, with Britain and Europe; in Myanmar, with India, Korea and Australia; in Kenya, with Uganda, Zimbabwe, South Africa and Nigeria).

L.A. CUPIT

ANGLICAN-MORAVIAN CONVERSATIONS

In 1986 the Moravian Church in England invited the Church of England to explore the possibility of moving into full communion. Official conversations were set up after reaching a clear understanding of how each church views the notion of full communion. A distinction was made between the goal of full, visible unity, which is sought with all Christians everywhere, visible unity as a relationship in faith, sacraments, ministry, structures and mission, to be lived with one church in any particular place, and significant steps and stages which can be taken on the way to visible unity.

The 1995 report of the conversations, The Fetter Lane Common Statement, sets out a portrait of full visible unity drawing on many ecumenical texts, including the 1991 Canberra statement, The Unity of the Church as Koinonia: Gift and Calling. Next come agreements in faith, harvesting the results of international, bilateral and multilateral dialogues, made relevant to the very particular history and relationships of Anglicans and Moravians. The text then outlines issues that still need to be faced, including the reconciliation of ministries (both bodies have a threefold ministry* but Anglicans have not recognized Moravian orders on account of an historic interruption in episcopacy*) and how minority and majority churches can move to visible unity without the smaller church losing its own distinctive ethos and tradition. On the basis of the agreements set out, both churches affirmed in the summer of 1996 The Fetter Lane Declaration, consisting of a series of mutual recognitions and commitments. A Moravian contact group has been established to give oversight to the new relationship. Wherever there is a Moravian congregation in England, the intention is to establish a formal Local Ecumenical Partnership.* In this way Anglican-Moravian relations in England will take on a distinctive intensive quality. Although the Moravians are numerically small in England, this new official relationship represents an important step on the way to the visible unity of the two churches and marks the first time the Church of England has formally committed itself to another partner within England.

See also Moravians.

MARY TANNER

■ Anglican-Moravian Conversations: The Fetter Lane Common Statement, with Essays in Anglican and Moravian History, London, Church of England, Council for Christian Unity, 1996.

ANTHROPOLOGY, CULTURAL

In recent years cultural anthropology has emerged as one of the major paradigms for understanding human beings and the mission of the church. Its particular contribution is deep ethnographic studies of different peoples in order to build bridges of understanding between them, and the use of intercultural comparison to develop broad theories of human organization.

Anthropology in Britain had its origins in the broad Christian humanitarian movement of the 19th century, which was concerned with the welfare of natives in the colonies. In 1843 there was a split over how to protect their rights between those who wanted to grant them immediately the full privileges of Western civilization and those who wanted to study them before seeking to raise and protect them. The latter party formed the Anthropological Association in 1863, and eventually found their home in universities.

In the late 19th/early 20th century, anthropologists such as E.B. Tylor (1832-1917), Sir James Frazer (1854-1941) and Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-81) postulated the evolution of societies from savagery to civilization, attributing this to the growth of human rationality from pre-logical to logical. Influenced by this theory, many missionaries assumed the superiority of Western civilization and saw their task as civilizing as well as Christianizing the people they served.

After 1930 the theory of evolution came under attack and, after a fierce battle, the term civilization was replaced by culture. Cultures were assumed to be sui generis, and their preservation an unquestioned good. Introducing change from the outside was condemned.

Two schools of thought emerged after the first world war: social anthropology, pioneered in Britain by A.R. Redcliffe-Brown (1881-1955) and Bronislaw Malinowski (1884-1942), and cultural anthropology, emerging in North America under the leadership of Franz Boas (1858-1942), A.L. Kroeber (1876-1960) and their followers. Redcliffe-Brown and Malinowski, who both did anthropological fieldwork, learned to know other peoples personally as fully human beings. Drawing on Durkheim, they argued that systems of relationships are the foundation for human life, and that these obey laws discoverable by empirical observation and human reason.

Social anthropologists studied tribes in Africa and the South Pacific islands which were living, functioning realities. They saw each society as unique, bound in more or less successful adaptation to a particular environment. Each was homogeneous, and could be explained fully in terms of social facts. Each was made up of parts that function to maintain a harmonious, balanced whole. Societies were seen as morally neutral. Religions and other belief systems were seen as social constructs needed to maintain the social order. For people in one society to judge those in another would be ethnocentric and imperialistic, for there are no moral or cognitive universals by which to evaluate cultures. Social anthropology tends towards social reductionism, and a static view of societies that sees change and conflict as pathological. It has a weak view of history and culture and has to wrestle with its own view of cultural relativism.

Social anthropology has had a deep impact on missions. Liberation theology, the church growth* movement, and the emphasis on people groups, mass movements and receptivity/resistance show how social dynamics play a major role in the growth and organization of the church.

The pioneers of cultural anthropology studied the North American Indians whose cultures had been scattered. The questions they faced had to do with cultural change and collapse. For these scholars, culture - the beliefs and practices of a people - was the basis for human organization. Cultures were not seen as bounded, tightly integrated units, but as dynamic systems of symbols, rituals, myths, beliefs and world-views. They saw culture as constantly changing, and change as potentially good. This gave rise to the field of applied anthropology which seeks to introduce change with a minimum of cultural dislocation. Christian missions have drawn widely on its insights in developing culturally sensitive outreach and church planting.

Cultural anthropology in turn gave birth to descriptive linguistics, which has enabled scholars to analyze oral languages. In mission, this led to new methods of language learning and dynamic-equivalent Bible translations. Other offspring were the in-depth study of cultures as seen by the people themselves and analysis of cross-cultural communication. In mission this led to a growing rejection of colonial attitudes, to training culturally incarnational missionaries and to working towards partnership in mission. It also led to concern for the contextualization of the gospel not only in worship forms, church polity and evangelistic methods, but also in the development of local theologies.

See also anthropology, theological.

PAUL G. HIEBERT

■ L.J. Luzbetak, Church and Cultures: New Perspectives in Missiological Anthropology, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1988 ■ W.A. Smalley ed., Readings in Missionary Anthropology II, 2nd ed., South Pasadena CA, William Carey, 1978 ■ C.R. Taber, The World Is Too Much With Us: Culture in Modern Protestant Missions, Macon GA, Mercer UP, 1991.

ASSEMBLIES OF GOD

Founded in Hot Springs, Arkansas, USA, in April 1914, the Assemblies of God (AofG) is probably the largest of the classical Pentecostal denominations with nearly 28 million members and adherents in 1996. Pentecostals* generally trace their origins to the work of Charles Fox Parham (1901-1906) and William Joseph Seymour and the Apostolic Faith Mission at 312 Azusa Street in Los Angeles (1906-1909). Parham viewed himself as an apostle of unity and Seymour proclaimed that one of the goals of the Apostolic Faith Mission was Christian unity everywhere.

At its organizational meeting, the AofG stated through its general council that it had no intention of ever becoming a human organization that legislates or forms laws and articles of faith and has unscriptural jurisdiction over its members and creates unscriptural lines of fellowship and disfellowship. Such actions were contrary to Christs prayer in St John 17, and Pauls teaching in Eph. 4:1-16. However, in 1916 the AofG adopted a statement of fundamental truths which clearly located it within the historic Trinitarian Christian faith. Emphasis would be placed on evangelism and mission: the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. The AofG, like other Pentecostal groups, viewed itself as part of a greater restoration in which God was actively participating, and therefore as standing at the threshold of eternity.

In keeping with its missionary concerns, the AofG joined the Foreign Missions Conference of North America (Fmcna) in 1920, thereby becoming also members of the International Missionary Council (IMC)*in 1921.

In 1941, the AofG became a founding member of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) in the United States. Membership in the NAE precluded membership in the National Council of Churches (Ncccusa) when it was formed in 1950, but the AofG continued to work with a variety of programmes in the NCC, including Church World Service. After the second world war the AofG, through its European field secretary, also worked closely with the offices of the WCC even before the first assembly (1948).

With the rise of the cold war, many Pentecostals, fundamentalists* and Evangelicals* came to link efforts towards visible Christian unity with communism as signs of apostasy and of the imminent return of the Lord. While the AofG maintained relations with both the NCC and the WCC, it did so largely through its Division of Foreign Missions (DFM) and did not keep its larger constituency fully informed  a pragmatic approach that would work only as long as it was not discovered. And while the DFM was working closely with the larger ecumenical community, the AofGs weekly Pentecostal Evangel was moving the denomination towards Evangelicalism; a steady flow of articles and news items from the NAE spoke of the ecumenical movement in increasingly suspicious terms.

In 1961 fundamentalist preacher Carl McIntire accused the AofG and its superintendent Thomas F. Zimmerman of duplicity and compromise with the ecumenical movement. Zimmerman, at that time president of the Pentecostal World Conference* (PWC) and of the NAE, was further embarrassed by the very visible itinerant ministry of an AofG minister, South African David Du Plessis, who was actively involved with a burgeoning charismatic movement* within the historic churches and publicly endorsed the ecumenical movement as a work of the Holy Spirit. In response, the AofG broke all ties with ecumenical partners, it defrocked Du Plessis and enacted a bylaw which disapproves of ministers or churches participating in any of the modern ecumenical organizations... in such a manner as to promote the ecumenical movement.

By 1965 the AofG had chosen a narrowly defined form of ecumenism: identifying with other Pentecostals in the PWC, with US Evangelicals through the NAE, joining with other white US Pentecostals to form the Pentecostal Fellowship of North America (1948-94) and subsequently with African-American Pentecostals in the Pentecostal/Charismatic Churches of North America (1994- ). All these groups held the primary conviction that Christian unity is spiritual, though each has appealed to John 17:21 and argued for visible unity as part of its raison detre. Issues of class, culture, training, doctrine and priorities still separate the AofG from many other Christians; in the NAE, however, they now constitute about 65% of the membership.

Despite this history, a number of AofG scholars and ministers are quietly rebuilding bridges to the larger ecumenical world. Much of the initiative has taken place under the auspices of the Society for Pentecostal Studies. While AofG members must participate in all ecumenical functions as individuals, they now take part regularly in the international Pentecostal-Roman Catholic dialogue,* the international Pentecostal-Reformed dialogue,* the NCC-Pentecostal dialogue in the US, various consultations of the NCC and the WCC, and in a dialogue with Roman Catholics in Springfield, Missouri, where the denomination is headquartered.

AofG members have served on the commissions on Faith and Order of the NCC since 1983 and of the WCC since 1991, and have represented Pentecostal interests among the secretaries of Christian World Communions* since 1993. The AofG has also been represented at the North American Academy of Ecumenists* since 1989.

In 1996, the AofG in Korea joined the National Council of Churches in Korea. Whether this bold and controversial move will encourage other national bodies to follow suit remains to be seen. Many within the AofG still suspect that anything suggesting movement towards some form of global Christian unity is a humanly contrived plan based on the lowest common denominator which will ultimately be used by some anti-Christian figure. But the rise of the charismatic renewal and the changes brought about by Vatican II* have opened others in the AofG to the possibilities which present themselves. Many AofG leaders are listening.

CECIL M. ROBECK, Jr

■ “The Assemblies of God and Ecumenical Cooperation: 1920-1965”, in W.M. & R.P. Menzies eds, Pentecostalism in Context, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 1997 ■ E.L. Blumhofer, Restoring the Faith, Urbana IL, Univ. of Illinois Press, 1993 ■ David Du Plessis, A Man Called Mr Pentecost, Plainfield NJ, Logos International, 1977 ■ C.M. Robeck, Jr, “A Pentecostal Looks at the World Council of Churches”, ER, 47, 1995 ■ J.L. Sandidge, Roman Catholic-Pentecostal Dialogue (1977-1982), Frankfurt, Lang, 1987.

ASSYRIAN CHURCH OF THE EAST

The official name of this church is the Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East (ACE). Assyrian indicates that its liturgical and theological language is the east Syrian of Nisibis; Church of the East denotes its non-Graeco-Roman cultural identity and its political allegiances (it was originally the church of the Persian Sassanid empire, constantly at war with the Roman empire). While other Christians have often called it Nestorian, the ACE itself has never liked being designated by the name of the patriarch of Constantinople whose Christology, condemned at the council of Ephesus (431), it nevertheless received.

The ACEs geographical position helps to explain its distancing itself from the churches of the Roman empire. In 410 it established a structure with a catholicos, or supreme head; in 424 it prohibited appeals to the Western churches; in 484 it received the Antiochene Christology, thereby breaking communion with those churches. All these acts betokened its loyalty to a ruling power by which it was nevertheless persecuted.

Although the Assyrian Church never enjoyed the support of a state, its missionary outreach was exceptional. By the 3rd century it was already present in south India; by 635 it had penetrated as far as Tibet and even China. At its apotheosis in the 13th century, at the time of the Mongol patriarch Yahballaha III, it had 250 dioceses from Cyprus to Manchuria and from Turkestan to Kerala and Java. But a combination of circumstances in the 14th century - a change of dynasty in China, and above all the conversion of the Mongols to Islam and Tamerlanes savage persecution - led to the near annihilation of this church, which sought refuge in Hakkari (Kurdistan). In the 16th century, a group of its members attached themselves to Rome, giving birth to the Chaldean Church, while in India the faithful were largely Latinized (synod of Diamper). When they regained their autonomy, they attached themselves to the west Syrian Church, which belonged to an opposing Christological tradition.

The tragedy has continued in the 20th century. The 1914-18 war decimated the membership. Following difficulties in Iraq in 1933, Patriarch Shimun XXIII went into exile in the USA. A reform of the liturgical calendar in 1964 provoked a lasting schism, with two opposing leaders, Mar Addaï (Baghdad) and Mar Dinkha (Iranian, resident in Chicago) gathering the majority of members. The church now has a membership of between 150,000 and 200,000, more than half of whom have left the Middle East.

The ACE joined the WCC in 1950 and sent observers to Vatican II. It has been a member of the Middle East Council of Churches* since 1995. The Christological declaration signed by Mar Dinkha and John Paul II (1994), followed by the setting up of a commission for dialogue between the two churches, shows that, though alone in its confession, the ACE is moving to break its isolation. The discussions with its partners will concern its shorter canon of scripture (which does not include 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and the Book of Revelation), the absence of icons, its rejection of original sin, and the number of the sacraments. The Orthodox churches do not agree with its practice of allowing marriage after ordination.

In protest against the hereditary succession to the patriarchate (which was passed down from uncle to nephew - a system which lasted up to and including Mar Shimun XXIII), one part of the Assyrian Church attached itself to Rome in 1552, taking the name Chaldean Church. The main centre of its 400,000 members is Iraq, with lesser centres in Iran and Turkey, but there has been large-scale emigration to the West.

See also Assyrian Church of the East-Roman Catholic dialogue.

HERVÉ LEGRAND

■ P.G. Badger, The Nestorians and Their Rituals, London, 1852 (1960) ■ R. Le Coz, Histoire de l’Eglise d’Orient: Chrétiens d’Irak, d’Iran et de Turquie, Paris, Cerf, 1995 ■ R.G. Roberson, The Eastern Christian Churches, 5th ed., Rome, Orientalia Christiana, 1995 ■ E. Tisserant, Eastern Christianity in India: A History of the Syro-Malabar Church from the Earliest Time to the Present Day, London, Longmans Green, 1957 ■ E. Tisserant, Eglise nestorienne, D. Th.C. XI-1, 157-323 (bibliography), 1931 ■ Syriac Dialogue, First Non-official Consultation on Dialogue within the Syriac Tradition, Vienna, Pro Oriente, 1994.

ASSYRIAN CHURCH OF THE EAST-ROMAN CATHOLIC DIALOGUE

The Assyrian Church of the East* is the modern continuation of the ancient church of the Persian empire which fell out of communion with the rest of the Christian world in the 5th century when, for political as well as theological reasons, it officially adopted Nestorian Christology. Thus it accepts only the first two ecumenical councils.* There were only sporadic contacts with Rome until the 13th century. In the 16th century a large section of the Assyrian Church of the East sought union with Rome and eventually formed what is now known as the Chaldean Catholic Church (see Eastern Catholic churches). Today the non-Catholic Assyrians are not in communion with any other church.

After many centuries of isolation, however, relations with the Catholic Church began to improve dramatically in the 1980s. The present patriarch, Mar Dinkha IV, visited Pope John Paul II in Rome in 1984 and participated in the day of prayer for peace at Assisi in 1986. In 1994 Mar Dinkha and Pope John Paul II signed a common declaration in the Vatican. The text affirms that Catholics and Assyrians are united today in the confession of the same faith in the Son of God and envisages broad pastoral cooperation between the two churches, especially in the areas of catechesis and the formation of future priests. The pope and the patriarch also established a mixed committee for theological dialogue and charged it with overcoming the obstacles that still prevent full communion.

The dialogue has been meeting annually since 1995. The first phase of its work, which concentrated on sacramental theology, concluded with the October 2000 meeting in Arezzo, Italy, and the approval of a common text, Common Statement on Sacramental Life. At the same meeting the commission began the dialogues second phase, which was to focus on the constitution of the church and other ecclesiological questions.

d the apostolic succession, sacraments and Christian witness of the other. The text also spelled out the central concerns of both sides in the dialogue. It says that while both churches wanted to preserve the Aramaic language and culture, the Assyrians were intent on preserving their freedom and self-governance, while the Chaldeans affirmed that the preservation of full communion with Rome was among its basic principles.

RONALD G. ROBERSON

■ S.H. Moffet, History of Christianity in Asia, vol. 1: “Beginnings to 1500”, San Francisco, Harper, 1992 ■ Syriac Dialogue: Non-Official Consultations on Dialogue within the Syriac Tradition, Vienna, Pro Oriente, vol. 1, 1994, vol. 2, 1997 ■ J.-P. Valognes, Vie et mort des Chrétiens dOrient: des origines à nos jours, Paris, Fayard, 1994.

BAPTIST-ORTHODOX RELATIONS

Baptist relations and contacts with the Orthodox church began in the 1860s and 1870s in Russia. During this period various religious groups influenced the Russian Baptist movement. The German Mennonites* emphasized Bible study during their worship hours (Stunden), as did the Molokans, a group similar to the Quakers.* With the concurrence of the Orthodox church, the British and Foreign Bible Society received permission to distribute scriptures, which resulted in the formation of Bible study groups in homes, and many people deserted the church in favour of these hours of Bible study. The influence of these groups, centred on the study of scripture, eventually led a group of young believers to form the first Russian Baptist Union in 1884. The Czarist secret police persecuted the groups, but this made them grow even more. Baptist leaders were imprisoned and their leaders were exiled to Siberia and the Caucasus like common criminals, according to Baptist historian R.A. Torbet. Similar stories of early Baptist contact with the Orthodox came from Romania, the Ukraine and Bulgaria.

After the victory of Lenin and the Communist Party in 1917, Orthodox and Baptists suddenly found themselves imprisoned and suffering together. A certain understanding and cooperation developed during the period of communist persecution. However, in 1989 when the Berlin wall fell and freedom came to the former Orthodox countries of Eastern Europe, the relationship of Baptists and Orthodox reverted to an almost Czarist-like period of hostility. Hundreds of para-church evangelistic organizations based in Western countries entered the former communist countries. Although most of these groups were not related to the historic Baptist movement, they were described as sectarian proselytizers and Baptistic. This resulted in further tension between Baptists and Orthodox, particularly in Bulgaria, Romania, Russia and the Ukraine.

Baptist leaders in these countries sought for dialogue and conversations with Orthodox leaders. Out of concern for Christian understanding, the Baptist World Alliance (BWA)* was asked to initiate official conversations with the Orthodox churches, through the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In 1994 a BWA delegation travelled to Istanbul and was received graciously by the synodical committee on inter-Christian affairs. Pre-conversations continue to be held, and it is hoped that these will eventually lead to full conversations. Discussions at Regents College, Oxford, in 1997 centred on the question of whether evangelism and missions are part of the nature of the church or task of the church.

Although ecclesiologically divided, Baptists and Orthodox theologically share a common faith in the Triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. As one Baptist leader said, What the Baptists like about the Orthodox is that they are orthodox! Both Orthodox and Baptist leaders pray that theological conversations will issue in a better understanding and mutual appreciation of each other’s traditions and faith in Christ.

DENTON LOTZ

■ R.A. Torbet, A History of the Baptists, rev. ed., Philadelphia, Judson, 1973.

BARTHOLOMEW (Dimitrios Arhondonis)

B. 29 Feb. 1940, Imvros, Turkey. Bartholomew was enthroned as 270th ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople on 2 Nov. 1991.

Arhondonis was given his ecclesiastical name of Bartholomew on the day of his ordination as deacon, shortly before graduating from the theological school of Halki in 1961 with honours. After further years of study in Rome, Bossey and Munich, he returned to Halki as assistant dean. Shortly after his ordination to the priesthood in 1969, Patriarch Dimitrios named him director to the private patriarchal office, then metropolitan of the ancient see of Philadelphia in Asia Minor. He served on the holy and sacred synod and in the private patriarchal office until acceding to the position of metropolitan of Chalcedon in 1990.

A member of the WCCs Faith and Order commission for 15 years, Bartholomew was a delegate to the Uppsala, Vancouver and Canberra assemblies of the WCC: at Canberra he was elected a member of the central and executive committees, posts he resigned on becoming patriarch. In 1990 he presided over the preparatory inter-Orthodox committee for the holy and great synod, which discussed the Orthodox diaspora. And after his accession to the position of patriarch, he convened the primates of the autocephalous Eastern Orthodox churches to the Phanar in March 1992: the gathering issued a statement covering a variety of issues, and was the first of a series  two others were held in 1995 and 2000.

Bartholomew has a particular interest in the environment: he gave the keynote address at the International Summit on Religions and Conservation in Japan in 1995, organized in cooperation with the European Union the second international symposium on the Black Sea in 1997, and has overseen several international environmental seminars on the island of Halki. He issues an annual encyclical on the environment every 1 Sept., which was designated by the 1992 summit as a day of prayer for the preservation of Gods creation.

In the aftermath of the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City on 11 Sept. 2001, Bartholomew, in cooperation with the European Community, convened an international gathering on the peaceful coexistence and collaboration of the three monotheistic religions, which took place in Brussels.

Yorgo Lemopoulos

BennetT, JOHN C.

B. 1902; d. 27 April 1995. Bennett was for 35 years a foremost contributor to ecumenical social ethics and a pioneer in the field. He studied theology and ethics at Oxford university, and his first role in the ecumenical movement was as secretary of the Oxford conference (1937) section on Church, Community and State in Relation to the Economic Order.

Drawn into the work of the newly established WCC in process of formation, Bennett was a member of the planning committee for the first assembly (Amsterdam 1948), with responsibility for the preparation of the assembly programme area on The Church and the Disorder of Society, chaired by Reinhold Niebuhr. He became the principal drafter of the assemblys report on this theme. In 1949 he wrote a detailed statement on the meaning of the responsible society, a theme which was to be further developed at the WCCs second assembly (Evanston 1954), where he was vice-chairman of the preparatory commission on social issues. In 1954 he was appointed vice-chairman of the newly created WCC department on Church and Society. In this role he helped guide the Church and Society study on the Common Christian Responsibility towards Areas of Rapid Social Change in Asia, Africa and Latin America, from 1956 to 1959.

In 1962 the central committee meeting in Paris agreed that a world conference on Church and Society be held in 1966. Bennett became one of the leaders of the planning group, editing the pre-conference study book on Christian Social Ethics in a Changing World: he perceived this assignment as an endeavour to hear new and creative theological thinkers on Christian social ethics. At the conference itself, he co-chaired the section on Structures of International Cooperation: Living Together in Peace in a Pluralistic World Society. The conference provoked controversy but the reports on it by Bennett and others at the Uppala assembly (1968) were received with appreciation. This was Bennetts last official action as a leader of the WCC programme on Church and Society.

For Bennett, one of the most important consultations of his ecumenical career, and one which deeply influenced his further thinking about the Christian witness in relation to developing countries, was that on the theology of development, convened by the WCC-Vatican exploratory group on Society, Development and Peace (Sodepax*) in 1971.

PAUL ABRECHT

■ J. Bennett, Christian Ethics and Social Policy, New York, Scribner, 1946 ■ Christianity and Communism, New York, Association Press, 1948 ■ The Radical Imperative, New York, Westminster, 1975 ■ J. Bennett & H. Seiffert, US Foreign Policy and Christian Ethics, 1977.

CATHOLIC BIBLICAL FEDERATION

The Catholic Biblical Federation (CBF) is a world fellowship of administratively distinct international and local Roman Catholic organizations committed to biblical-pastoral ministry. The CBF is responsible to the Pontificial Council for Promoting Christian Unity* (formerly SPCU).

Because the Second Vatican Council* had required that easy access to sacred scripture be provided for all the Christian faithful (Dei Verbum 22), Cardinal Augustin Bea, SPCU president, set up an SPCU office for common Bible work. In 1968 he convened a meeting of representatives of Catholic biblical associations, episcopal biblical commissions and religious publishing houses; on their urging, the SPCU, under its new president Cardinal Johannes Willebrands, founded in 1969 the World Catholic Federation for the Biblical Apostolate. In 1990 its name was changed to Catholic Biblical Federation.

In supporting the work of Catholic organizations for biblical-pastoral ministry, the CBF promotes translations and distribution of the scriptures; use, understanding and study of the Bible among clergy and laity; and pastoral care solidly founded on the scriptures. It also organizes, assists and maintains coordination centres for biblical-pastoral ministry and interdiocesan and international sharing of biblical courses, study materials and lectures. It cooperates in matters of mutual concern with the United Bible Societies and with organizations of other churches (see Bible Societies).

The CBF has two membership categories: full members are organizations officially entrusted by bishops conferences; associate members are other Catholic organizations in the biblical-pastoral ministry. Headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany, the CBF has 90 full members and 215 associate members in 126 countries. Its quarterly Bulletin Dei Verbum appears in English, French, German and Spanish. Its fifth plenary assembly was held in 1996 in Hong Kong.

CLARA MARÍA DÍAZ

■ Dei Verbum, 30th ann., nos 52-53, 1999.

CENTRE SAINT-IRÉNÉE

The Centre Saint-Irénée (CSI) is an interconfessional association, founded in Lyons, France, in 1953, for the reconciliation of Christians and the promotion of the ecumenical movement. The centre organizes correspondence courses in ecumenical formation of clergy and laity on historical, theological and biblical subjects; pastoral care of couples in mixed marriages* (interchurch families) in French-speaking countries, through catechesis, weekend retreats and group sessions; and ecumenical tours (in more than 60 countries), through which clergy and laity can experience the life of the local churches. CSI has two publications: Foyer mixtes ministers to interchurch couples, Catholic-Protestant and Orthodox-Catholic; Chrétiens en marche circulates in 40 countries. The Centre maintains a library in Lyons, open to the public, with more than 25,000 books and 1000 periodicals.

RENÉ BEAUPÈRE

CENTRO PRO UNIONE

The Centro Pro Unione (CPU), located in the heart of Rome, was founded by the Franciscan Friars of the Atonement as an ecumenical research and action centre. Its purpose is to offer space for dialogue, study, research and formation in ecumenism.

In 1948 the Friars began collaboration with the Jesuit Charles Boyer, founder of the Unitas Association, and in 1950 with the (Dutch) Ladies of Bethany at Foyer Unitas, in welcoming (non-Catholic) Christians who were pilgrims in Rome for the Holy Year. In 1956 the League of Prayer Pro Unione was inaugurated to promote prayer for Christian unity; Paul Wattson, who initiated the Church Unity Octave in 1908, was the founder of the Atonement Friars (see Week of Prayer for Christian Unity).

During the Second Vatican Council* the CPU was the privileged location for conferences, press briefings and the weekly discussions between the Anglican, Protestant and Orthodox delegated observers and Catholic experts (periti) organized by the Secretariat (now Pontifical Council) for Promoting Christian Unity.*

The CPU organizes an annual lecture series, a summer course on the ecumenical and inter-religious movements and scientific research projects. Pro Unione ecumenical gatherings welcome people from other Christian traditions. The semi-annual Centro Pro Unione Bulletin contains a multilingual bibliography on interchurch and interconfessional dialogues, both national and international, as well as the texts of conferences given at the CPU.

The CPU has over 18,000 books and pamphlets, 300 periodicals (catalogued on-line through URBE, the Roman Union of Ecclesiastical Libraries), and 25,400 records relating to theological dialogues. It maintains a web site that contains the texts of agreed statements from bilateral dialogues.

Since its foundation the CPU has welcomed over 16,000 students and scholars to its facilities.

JAMES F. PUGLISI

CHAMBÉSY

The Orthodox centre of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, located at Chambésy, near Geneva, was founded in 1966 on the initiative of Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras and by decision of the holy synod. Originally housed in an old mansion overlooking the lake of Geneva, it moved in 1975 to new premises equipped with modern conference facilities.

The focal point of the centres liturgical and spiritual life is the patriarchal church of St Paul, which hosts the Greek Orthodox parish of Geneva; other chapels are used by Arabic-, Romanian- and French-speaking communities.

The centres constitutional purpose is to strengthen inter-Orthodox unity, promote Orthodox theology, worship and spirituality, facilitate ecumenical dialogue and cooperation, and foster interfaith understanding. Among its regular programmes are annual post-graduate seminars dealing with contemporary theological and socio-ethical issues. Their findings are published in the series Etudes théologiques de Chambésy.

Also located in Chambésy is the secretariat in charge of the preparation of the holy and great council of the Orthodox church. Chambésy has hosted eight pan-Orthodox pre-conciliar conferences, as well as numerous meetings and consultations related to the bilateral dialogues of the Orthodox church with the Roman Catholic Church, Old Catholic Church, Oriental Orthodox churches, Lutheran World Federation and World Alliance of Reformed Churches.

During the academic year 1997-98 a post-graduate Orthodox theological institute was inaugurated at Chambésy, associated with the theological faculty of the University of Fribourg and in cooperation with the autonomous theological faculty of the University of Geneva.

GEORGES TSETSIS

CHRISTMAS

Christmas is the annual celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. This feast of the nativity is kept by almost all churches on 25 December. Its celebration in some Orthodox churches 13 days later than elsewhere is due to the current gap between the Julian or old-style calendar and the Gregorian calendar followed in other churches and in the civil sphere (see church calendar).

The origins of the feast and its date are contested among historians. While there is some evidence that Christs birth (and baptism) were earlier celebrated on 6 January (a date still kept for the feast among the Armenians), the date of 25 December for the nativity is attested from the 4th century (first in Rome, for the year 336). Two types of theory, not mutually exclusive, have been advanced for the fixing of this date. One is based on the supposed date of Christs passion on 25 March; if the earthly life of the Incarnate Son was to last a number of complete years, his conception must have occurred on 25 March and thus his birth on 25 December. The other assumes a Christian take-over of a pagan festival of the winter solstice, with Christ as Sun of Righteousness replacing the Unconquered Sun, the name used in the solar celebration instituted by the Roman emperor Aurelian in 274. Although Origen had earlier dismissed the keeping of birthdays as a pagan affair, 4th-century Christians may in this case have been led by their own reflection on the mystery of the incarnation,* rather than simply imitating their pagan neighbours.

January 6 was left as the feast of the Epiphany, or manifestation. In the Eastern churches, this is the feast of Christs baptism, at which he was manifested as the Son of God (Matt. 3:13-17 and par.). In the West, the Epiphany is kept as the manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles, in the persons of the wise men or three kings (Matt. 2:1-12). Further liturgical associations of the feast bring in the wedding at Cana, where Christs turning of the water into wine was the first of his signs to manifest his glory (John 2:1-11).

Historically, Christmas (and its twelve days) has been a popular feast around which many folk customs have grown up. Today it is perhaps the most widely observed holiday in the world, kept also by many who are not Christian. Seasonal sentiments of peace on earth are expressed (cf. Luke 2:14). Gifts are exchanged (cf. John 3:16).

The year 2000 was promoted as the focus of a jubilee celebration of Christs nativity (see, e.g., Pope John Paul IIs apostolic letter of 1994, Tertio Millennio Adveniente).

GEOFFREY WAINWRIGHT

■ H. Förster, Die Feier der Geburt Christi in der Alten Kirche, Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck, 2000 ■ R. Hutton, The Stations of the Sun: A History of the Ritual Year in Britain, Oxford, Oxford UP, 1996 ■ S.K. Roll, Towards the Origins of Christmas, Kampen, Kok Pharos, 1995.

CHURCH BUILDINGS, SHARED USE OF

Christian congregations in every locality normally seek to meet on a regular basis, if possible in a building of their own, designed to enable and enhance their particular style of worship. Such church buildings are usually reserved for the worship and related activities of that particular denomination. Legal trusts may limit their use in this way. However, in some places church buildings are used by two or more distinct congregations from different Christian traditions. This represents good Christian stewardship and should be encouraged, especially where a church building is under-used and there are other Christian groups with inadequate premises. This may require special legislation.

For example, in the 1960s the churches in England and Wales secured an act of parliament enabling a church building of one denomination to be used on a regular basis as if it were a building of another. There are now many such formal sharing agreements in the United Kingdom. Usually a joint council comprising equal numbers of each denomination involved is formed to settle acceptable patterns of use and appropriate financial contributions. Capital money can be contributed by the guest church on the understanding that if the building is sold, an agreed percentage of the sale price will be reimbursed.

Even if no sharing agreement exists, sharing congregations are encouraged to meet to increase understanding. Tensions can arise between a locally drawn and a more widely gathered congregation. Cultural and language differences may re-inforce denominational ones. It is noticeable that the opportunity to share a building often promotes integration of worship, ministry and congregational life. In England sharing agreements under the sharing of church buildings act are regarded as a form of local ecumenical partnership (see local ecumenical partnerships).

JENNifer Mary CARPENTER

■ “A Drama: The Church Hall”, IRM, 354, 2000 ■ “The Sharing and Sale of Church Buildings: Report of a Working Party for Churches Together in England, 1994”, London, CTE, 1993 ■ “Stewards of God’s House”, London, BCC, 1987 ■ “Under the Same Roof: Guidelines to the Sharing of Church Buildings Act, 1969, London, CCBI/CTE/CYTUN, 1994.

CIVIL SOCIETY

The original use of the term civil society in modern philosophy was intended to contrast civil society with natural society  the former being a well-ordered political society or state, the latter being a society without an effective political order. It is used in this sense, for example, by John Locke (1632-1704).

The fact that in current usage the state is not only not identified with civil society, but contrasted with it, suggests that (1) the term has been expanded and has undergone a shift of meaning in the history of thought; (2) having various connotations, it is liable to be used loosely or manipulatively; (3) care should be taken when using it to set it in its discursive context.

It is the first point which interests us here. The opposition of civil and natural in the early development of bourgeois society was easily associated with the distinction between civilized and primitive or barbaric, reflecting a philosophy of history which saw capitalist organization of the economy as the supreme expression of the development of the human spirit and everything non-capitalist as inferior and everything anti-capitalist as chaos. The next step was to locate the superiority of the capitalist order, not in its economic relations but in the sphere of government. This is found in Rousseau (1712-78) and above all Hegel (1770-1831). Rousseau distinguishes between natural society, civil society (still not adequately political) and political society or the state. Hegel saw the state in categorical terms as superseding the civil society, from which by implication it drew its power. In all these versions, civil society is to be understood as the well-ordered bourgeois society. The difference lies in the emphases placed on the factors in the relation between economy and politics.

Following Marxs prologue to his Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (not necessarily correctly understood), civil society came to be identified with the economy or the sphere of particular interests - something quite different from what it originally meant. The situation became more complicated, even within the Marxist tradition, when Gramsci (1891-1937) categorized the notion in relation to the state function of hegemony.

The most widely used sense of civil society today distinguishes it from government and the state, defining it as the sphere of particular interests, organized to some degree, and not necessarily in conflict with political institutions. (In some literature on the subject in English, civil society is simply synonymous with society; some Latin American writers close to this tradition make the same transposition.)

With the increase of globalization under the neo-liberalism of the 1980s, the term civil society once again returned to socio-political discourse and analysis. The anti-state rhetoric of neo-liberalism developed a Manichean dualism of state and market, presenting the latter as the basis of social relations. Within this framework, civil society can be held up as the sphere in which enterprises, including informal workers, can be strengthened and express themselves. It is the arena of liberty, free of political or party-political corruption (intervention). From another angle, the opening up of the markets under the neo-liberal project increased the impoverishment and exclusion of the labour force and gave a new form to social tensions and conflicts. Against this background came the collapse of the societies living under historical socialism and renewed talk of the end of ideologies. As a reaction to this, the attention to civil society reflects a quest for new social forces and actors who might bring about the changes that are needed, at least by Latin American societies. In its extreme form, civil society is seen as the sphere of the alternative, of New Historical Subject; more moderately, it is a space where the many new actors on the social scene (feminists, ecologists, etc.) can organize and assert their identity alongside the traditional ones (trade unionists, farmers, etc.). Many saw the uprising in Chiapas, Mexico (1994), as a sign of the vitality of this new civil society.

Analytically, civil society is to be understood as a humanly well-ordered society. It refers to the differing needs of the diverse social groups and the forms of reasoning, spirituality, structures and institutions that link and empower them as a community. Civil society, then, is the space where both the diverse needs and the will for a constructive linkage of differences are expressed. By definition, civil society is plural in nature.

To the extent that civil society included the tendency to respond to all the needs without exclusion, it is also an ecumenical space. This implies a tendency towards the absence of domination and hegemony. Civil society can thus be associated with a category like the people of God* - a people in which everyone appreciates and values other cultures and other religions as manifestations of the richness of the one God of life.

Slowly the churches are becoming aware that (as Israel Batista has put it) whatever we call civil society, be it an old idea, a new paradigm or an easy slogan, society is becoming a testing place for alternatives, the reorganization of social movements and the space for the healing witness of local churches and ecumenical groups in the face of the predominance of the market economy and the weakness of the state. In June 1995, in cooperation with the Evangelical Academy at Loccum (Germany), the WCC called a consultation on theology and civil society and published the preparatory papers and a booklet of testimonies on “Witnesses of Faith Communities in Changing Societies”.

HELIO GALLARDO

■ I. Batista ed., Churches in Civil Society, WCC, 1996 ■ H. Gallardo, “Notas sobre la sociedad civil”, in Pasos, 57, 1995 ■ G.W.F. Hegel, “The Philosophy of Right”, in Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought, A.W. Wood ed., Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1991 ■ Loccumer Protokolle 23/95, God’s People in Civil Society: Ecclesiological Implications, Loccum, Evangelical Academy, 1996 ■ J. Locke, Two Treatises on Government, ed. Laslett, Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1988 ■ J.-J. Rousseau, The Social Contract, J.H. Brumfit & J.C. Hall eds, London, Everymans Universal Library, 1973.

CRUSADES

The crusades were a series of military expeditions of the Western church, supported by royal, knightly aristocratic and popular pieties, and organized to liberate Jerusalem from the Muslims, and to help defend the Eastern church and the shrunken Byzantine empire against further Islamic encroachments. They took place between Pope Urban IIs call at the synod of Clermont (France) in November 1095 and the fall of Acre (todays Akko, on the coast of northern Israel) in May 1291.

The original expeditions were called pilgrimages or the Jerusalem journey. The pilgrims were Gods soldiers in a holy war, meriting special papal indulgences (the journey will be reckoned in place of all penance, Urban II). Much later do the terms crusade and crusader appear, from the cross (crux) sewn on the outer garment of the soldier-pilgrim. Whatever their European country of origin, for the Easterners all crusaders were Franks (Franj).

Historians debate over the interplay of religious motivations and justifications, pragmatic political and economic interests, and crusaders relations with local Christians, Muslims and Jews which developed. But today selective memories and negative images still rule, even as we outline the ecumenical and inter-religious consequences, principally in the Middle East.

Eastern churches. Despite the 1054 mutual excommunications of the pope of Rome and the patriarch of Constantinople, the Eastern Christians initially welcomed the Western pilgrims, expecting them to be a well-disciplined conventional army. But that welcome quickly faded in face of the crusaders plundering conduct. Their disdain for fellow Christians of the East was expressed, above all, in taking over (1099) the Holy Sepulchre church in Jerusalem, and expelling from the city all the Orthodox clergy of different rites  Greek, Georgian, Armenian, Syrian and Coptic. The Eastern Christians welcomed Salāh al-Din when he brought Jerusalem once more under Muslim control (1187).

The hostile anger culminated in 1204. Pope Innocent III’s well-intentioned fourth crusade to restore Jerusalem to Christian sovereignty turned into sheer lust for conquest and blind treacheries. The Venetian-led army detoured to Constantinople, looted the city, slaughtered its Christian inhabitants, and desecrated Hagia Sophia, the pride church of the East. As already had been done in Edessa/Armenia, Antioch and Jerusalem, a feudal kingdom was established, the Latin kingdom of Constantinople. As a final blow, the pope replaced the Eastern with a Latin patriarch, something which had already been done in Antioch and Jerusalem. This was in direct violation of the canons of the council of Chalcedon* (451).

The humiliation and rancour are expressed in the popular Christian slogan, Better to come under the turban [the sultans head-dress] than under the tiara [the popes crown]. Prior to Pope John Paul IIs trip to Greece in 2001, many Orthodox bishops, monks and laity in Greece would condition at least their tolerance of his visit on his pre-arrival explicit apology for 1204.

The almost two centuries of crusader presence symbolized Western Christian triumphalism. The Easterners fear and distrust of Western unconditional subjugation of their empire to the Latins and their church to the pope helped support resistance to sincere papal, patriarchal and imperial attempts of reunion, a non-reception of the reunion decrees of the general councils of Lyons in 1272 and of Florence in 1439. The perception of a more subtle crusading spirit prompted anxious opposition among the Orthodox churches when later the Uniate (see Eastern Catholic churches) and Latin Catholic missionary expeditions were to proselytize in the midst of vulnerable flocks.

Muslims. The Muslim historian Abul-Fida, a young soldier in  the final defeat of the crusaders at Acre in 1291, concludes his chronicle: All the lands were fully restored to the Muslims... God grant that the Franj will never set foot there again! The list of vivid unforgettables is long: above all, the blasphemy against Muhammad and Islam, and the ridicule of Muslims as a vile and abominable race absolutely alien to God. Of special example is the difference between the peaceful captures of Jerusalem and the respect towards Christians and Jews by Caliph Omar in 688 and Salāh al-Din in 1187, and the crusaders’ conduct in 1099 when they murdered all 40,000 of the city’s Muslim men, women and children. The memory of the massacre blocked any future permanent modus vivendi.

The crusades only strengthened the Muslims resolve, through their own holy war (jihad), to conquer Europe itself. Intermittent attempts to stop the Turks failed disastrously at Nicopoli (Bulgaria) in 1396. In 1453 the Muslims took Constantinople. By 1529 their army was on the hills overlooking the walls of Vienna.

Islamic historians trace the interwoven factors which led the Muslim Middle East to turn in on itself, to be wary of the road to modernization, and still to see the West as a natural enemy, whether hostile acts are political, military, oil-based, cultural or religious. Amin Maalouf states in no uncertain terms: There can be no doubt that the schism between these two worlds dated from the crusades, deeply felt, even today, as an act of rape.

The analogies are in the vocabulary. Some Muslims label Israel as a new crusader state. Arab political and religious leaders refer to the 1187 re-capture of Jerusalem as a sign of hope in the present pessimism about Jerusalems political future. Radical Muslim Palestinians, in the jihad against Israel, find comfort in the patient wait for the Israelis, like the crusaders, also eventually to be driven into the sea. Saddam Husseins Iraqi rhetoric during the Persian Gulf war period (early 1990s) repeatedly referred to the American/English/French joint forces as crusaders. Mehmet Ali Agca, who tried to assassinate John Paul II (1981), considered the pope the supreme commander of the crusades.

Jews. Jewish chroniclers call Clermont, where in 1095 Urban II had first called for military expeditions, the mountain of gloom (Har Afel). In hindsight the period is singled out as the start of, and explanation for, the severe persecution of Jews by Christians, even though the excesses were only symptomatic of a prior process of church antisemitism.*

If the pilgrimage of holy war were to defeat the Muslims who had stolen Christs tomb in Jerusalem, why not begin by punishing the Jews who had killed him? A blessed vengeance. So even before the first expedition met its official enemies, undisciplined crusading mobs in the spring of 1096 stormed through the German cities of Speyer, Worms, Mainz, Cologne, Trier and Regensburg, and through other cities en route, e.g. Prague. The pilgrims harassed or killed the Jews (if they would not convert and be baptized), destroyed their synagogues and Torah scrolls, and desecrated their cemeteries. Such pogroms continued in part in later expeditions, often despite the harsh protests of local bishops. When the crusaders entered Jerusalem (15 July 1099), the Jews sought refuge in synagogues which their attackers then set on fire. The few surviving Jews were sold into slavery.

Pope Innocent convened the fourth Lateran council in 1215, in his words, to correct faults and reform morals,... to get rid of oppression and foster liberty. The canon (68) most remembered by Jews today prescribed distinctive dress or marking for them (and for Muslims), primarily to prevent concubinage or intermarriage with Christians. The marks varied, but the yellow badge of shame stands out, the predecessor of Hitlers yellow star for the Jews not yet exterminated.

These series of crusading events, in Europe and in Jerusalem, have fused into a single symbol for the Jews  the first holocaust (Shapiro).

Ethics. The crusades went beyond the just-war tradition initiated by Augustine (see just war). For the official church, not only was the war not offensive but it was positively pleasing to God. It was Christs business (negotium Christi, fourth Lateran), a virtuous act which merited the commutation of penance for all ones sins. The new tradition of canonized violence justified the church crusades against the Moors and Jews in Spain, against the heretical Cathars and Albigenses in France, and the Hussites in Bohemia.

Nevertheless, during the crusade period itself, public criticisms on ethical grounds were not muted and enter the history of moral theology: not returning evil by evil; those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword; the boundaries that limit blameless acts of self-defence; the conditions for an offensive just war; conscientious objection by non-officers; the conversion of the non-Christian by peaceful persuasion, not by force or bribery.

TOM STRANSKY

■ C. Cahen, Orient et occident au temps des croisades, Paris, Aubier-Montaigne, 1983 ■ C. Hillenbrand, The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives, Edinburgh, Edinburgh UP, 1999 ■ A. Maalouf, Les croisades vues par les Arabes (ET: The Crusades through Arab Eyes, New York, Schocken, 1984) ■ J. Riley-Smith, The Crusades, New Haven CT, Yale UP, 1987 ■ F.H. Russell, The Just War in the Middle Ages, Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1975 ■ A. Shapiro, “Jews and Christians in the Period of the Crusades”, in JES, 9, 1972, 4.

DAY, DOROTHY

B. 8 Nov. 1897, New York; d. 29 Nov. 1980, New York. A journalist and pacifist, Dorothy Day was co-founder in 1933 of the Catholic Worker movement, a community of laypeople from all walks of life who embrace evangelical poverty and serve in urban places of welcome (friendship houses) for the homeless, runaways and persons recently released from prison.

Day, who herself spent time in jail for protesting at government sites, communicated in both words and deeds her radical convictions on Catholic pacifism, conscientious objection and creative non-violence as the response to war. Her best-seller The Long Loneliness described her early non-religious adult life as a confirmed Marxist with an erratic life-style before her conversion and baptism in the Catholic church (1927)  a decision that resulted in the break-up of her common-law marriage with an anarchist who considered the RCC to be one of the worlds most oppressive structures.

Influencing her life and thought was her Catholic Worker Movement co-founder, the self-educated philosopher Peter Maurin, an immigrant of French peasant origins who lived in careless simplicity. Maurin and Day shared belief in Christian personalism, a philosophical orientation that stresses the value and dignity of each human person. US Catholic prelates, including New Yorks influential Cardinal Spellman, who opposed her pacifist views which rejected the Catholic just-war position, strongly defended her right to speak out and supported her ministry to the urban poor.

To the end, Days stubborn piety was very traditional Catholic - daily mass, rosary, breviary. But her own person and example drew equal attention and affection from Protestants, some of whom have supported the appeal for her canonization. She herself said, Dont call me a saint - I dont want to be dismissed so easily, and considered her monuments to be the more than 80 houses of hospitality set up from Los Angeles to Oxford and Amsterdam as a result of her work. If have achieved anything in my life, she said, “it is because I have not been embarrassed to talk about God.” Just before he died in 1999, Cardinal John O’Connor of New York introduced her cause for official sainthood and commented, “She was not a gingerbread or holy card saint.”

TOM STRANSKY

■ D. Day, The Long Loneliness, New York, Harper, 1952 ■ “Dorothy Day”, in Ecumenical Pioneers, I. Bria & D. Heller eds, WCC, 1995 ■ R. Ellsberg ed., Dorothy Day, Selected Writings, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1992 ■ J. Forest, Love Is the Measure: A Biography of Dorothy Day, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1994.

EAST-WEST CONFRONTATION

Orthodox participants in the 1927 world conference on Faith and Order* in Lausanne vigorously expressed the view that the apostolic Tradition* is the source of all Christian churches and confessions, which thus share a common history. The undivided church is not an abstraction, but the church of the apostles, the fathers and the ecumenical councils.* The schism* and subsequent tensions between East and West were caused by ecclesiastical and political factors that divided the church into two regions: Rome and Byzantium, East and West, Old Rome and New Rome.

After centuries of estrangement, hostility and mutual ignorance, described by Henry Chadwick as a succession of failures in mutual comprehension, divided Christians are seeking through the ecumenical movement to speak together about the visible restoration of the one undivided church.* Without the presence of the Eastern churches, the WCC would represent only the Western fraction of Christianity. Roman Catholicism and the Reformation are often seen by Eastern Christians as two variants of the same theological system, which was initiated by Augustine of Hippo, accepted by the Latin church tradition and continued by the reformers.

Most of the controversial doctrinal, liturgical and canonical issues on the ecumenical agenda are rooted in or related to the broad historic East-West confrontation. They appear most clearly in the bilateral dialogues which the Orthodox churches have established with the Roman Catholic and Reformation churches.

An example is the Wests ambiguous reception* (as the East sees it) of the decrees and decisions of the early ecumenical councils, as exemplified in the discussion concerning the council of Constantinople (381)* and the attitude of Pope Leo in dealing with the council of Chalcedon (451).* Rome and the Orthodox take opposing views concerning the status of councils held in 869-70 and in 879-80. Thus the reception of ecumenical councils remains a matter for dialogue.

In Orthodox eyes, the acceptance by both Roman Catholics and the Reformation of the theological system of Augustine shows that the West was largely indifferent to the soteriological presuppositions of the Christological heresies rejected by the ecumenical councils. The Augustinian doctrines that fallen humanity is saved by a created grace, that only justification* but not glorification (theosis) takes place in this life, and of the similarity between the created and the uncreated (analogia entis), appear to constitute the basis of Western theology and spirituality. The council of Constantinople in 1341 condemned, in the person of Balaam the Calabrian, the teaching of created grace, and accepted the distinction made by St Gregory Palamas between the ineffable essence of God and the communicated uncreated energies as source of the human beings theosis. This correction of Augustinian theology was never received in the West.

The confrontation within Western Christianity itself between the Franco-Latin powers and the Roman popes, which was turned against the New Rome for political reasons, led to the schism between East and West in 1054.

The sola scriptura of the Protestant Reformers can be seen as a non-reception of the binding common Tradition* of the ecumenical councils held in the East. The long conciliar experience of ecumenical interpretations and doctrinal development of the gospel message seems to be devaluated on the basis that the church* is a sinful and fallible human body. Here modern ecumenical dialogue has played a very positive role. The world conference on Faith and Order in Montreal (1963) declared that by the Tradition is meant the gospel itself, transmitted from generation to generation in and by the church. Sola scriptura is thus placed in the context of the Tradition of the church.

Later the universal primacy* and jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome and the infallibility* of the pope were declared matters of divine revelation* and not of canon law.* The First Vatican Council* (1870) demonstrated to the East that the West had lost the conciliar system. The Orthodox continued to maintain the tradition of the pentarchy, according to which the Old Rome is equal and in the line with Eastern patriarchates.

For the East the critical issue here is the uncanonical substitution of authorities - the papacy for the ecumenical councils - which had the strange consequence that the Orthodox are seen as heretics and the Uniates* as orthodox. On this view, the only way for the New Rome to be accepted was Uniatism. Consequently, the dialogue between Orthodoxy and Catholicism is an essential part of the ecumenical movement (see Orthodox-Roman Catholic dialogue). This bilateral dialogue was initiated by the late Pope John XXIII and the late Patriarch Athenagoras I and led to the lifting of the anathemas* (though communion was not restored) of 1054. The Balamand agreement of 1993 opened a way for the mutual ecclesiological recognition of the sacraments* and the removal of Uniatism as a legitimate model for restoring unity among sister churches. The dialogue initiated by the WCC led to the elaboration of the document on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry* (1982) with the full participation of the Roman Catholic Church. Patriarch Dimitrios I of Constantinople said on his visit to Geneva in 1987 that we hope that the complete inclusion [of the Roman Catholic Church] in the Council will be speedy, and that negotiations in this direction will have a happy end. For the Orthodox the East-West confrontation cannot be comprehended fully and rapprochement achieved unless the Roman Catholic Church joins the ecumenical quest for a conciliar fellowship of all local churches. In historical terms, the catholicity* of the church demands a fuller and more organic integration of the Eastern and Western traditions, especially because the serious dangers of deviation in each tradition can be avoided only if there is integration and synthesis.

ION BRIA

■ M.R. Barnes, “Augustine in Contemporary Trinitarian Theology”, in Theological Studies, 56, 1995 ■ I. Bria, The Sense of Ecumenical Tradition, WCC, 1991 ■ H. Chadwick, The Early Church, Harmondsworth, UK, Penguin, 1977 ■ H. Fries & K. Rahner, Unity of the Churches: An Actual Possibility, Philadelphia, Fortress, 1985 ■ J. Meyendorff, The Byzantine Legacy in the Orthodox Church, Crestwood NY, St Vladimir’s Seminary, 1982 ■ J. Pelikan, A History of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), Univ. of Chicago Press, 1974 ■ J.S. Romanides, “Church Synods and Civilization”, Theologia, 63, 3, 1992.

ECCLESIOLOGY AND ETHICS

From the very foundation of the church it has been believed that some styles of behaviour are compatible with discipleship and membership of the church, while notorious immorality, if persisted in, involves exclusion from fellowship. The ecumenical movement has all along wrestled with the relationship between ethics* and the being and unity of the church. Sometimes the distinction between Faith and Order and Life and Work made it possible to treat the issues of ecclesiology and ethics separately, but crises such as the German church struggle of the 1930s and subsequently the question of apartheid made the issue unavoidable: it was clear to most people that the integrity, unity and faith of the church were fundamentally compromised if it took a false stance in relation to the claims and actions of Nazism or the racist system of apartheid. The Barmen theological declaration of 1934, which was a foundation document of the Confessing Church,* challenged both the theology and the ethics of the German Christians who supported Hitler. And declarations by the Lutheran World Federation, the World Alliance of Reformed Churches* and the WCC that apartheid was a confessional issue led to the breaking of fellowship with several white churches in South Africa because of their support of the apartheid regime.

W.A. Visser t Hooft spoke at the WCCs Uppsala assembly in 1968 of moral heresies - a reminder that some ethical issues are church-dividing matters, for ethics and faith are inseparably intertwined. But struggles for justice and peace can also lead to a new and vital sense of being church. Archbishop Desmond Tutu often said that apartheid was too strong for divided churches; but in the struggle against apartheid and in other moral struggles there has often been a new experience of unity, a costly, gracious unity. Some have found that involvement in the conciliar process for Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation (JPIC) was for them a rich experience of what it is to be church, suggesting that the church grows and finds its unity in and through moral struggle, although paradoxically moral issues can also be church-dividing. Unity is a precious gift which requires a costly response; the world in which the church is called to manifest this unity is full of division, hostility, suspicion and injustice. The road to the true unity in love and truth which is Gods purpose is thus sometimes the painful way of division.

The conciliar process for JPIC to which the WCC called the churches in 1983 reached its rather confusing culmination in the world convocation on JPIC in Seoul in 1990. The Seoul gathering rested on a strong conviction that ecclesiology and ethics belong together, that the being of the church is implicated in ethical action, but there was continuing uncertainty how this might best be articulated. As a result, the WCC set up a study on ecclesiology and ethics which sought to clarify the issues involved and reflect on the lessons to be learned from the churches involvement in struggles for justice, liberation and ecological responsibility. The first meeting at Rønde, Denmark, in 1993 explored ways in which discipleship means costly involvement in the pain, brokenness and struggles of the world and also involvement in a koinonia which overcomes divisions and hostilities many of which are ancient and deep-seated. These two commitments are often in acute tension. But the Rønde consultation in its report Costly Unity sought to point the way to a fresh approach which offers new inspiration for the churches search for unity, and for their costly, reconciling and healing witness in the world. Costly unity, the report declared, is discovering the churches unity as a gift of pursuing justice and peace.

The Rønde consultation had a considerable impact on the fifth world conference on F&O (Santiago de Compostela 1993). The report of section IV affirmed that in many places and at different levels, koinonia-generating involvement in the struggles of humanity is taking place. We recognize in these common involvements an urgent, real, but imperfect koinonia, and urge the Faith and Order commission to give priority to lifting up and clarifying their ecclesiological implications. The report also declared that the being and mission of the church... are at stake in witness through proclamation and concrete actions for justice, peace and integrity of creation. This is a defining mark of koinonia and central to our understanding of ecclesiology. The urgency of these issues makes it manifest that our theological reflection on the proper unity of Christs church is inevitably related to ethics.

Two further consultations on ecclesiology and ethics took place, in Jerusalem in 1994, and in Johannesburg in 1996. Their reports and working papers helped to clarify the issues, which are certain to remain high on the ecumenical agenda for some time to come.

DUNCAN FORRESTER

■ T.F. Best & M. Robra eds, Ecclesiology and Ethics: Ecumenical Ethical Engagement, Moral Formation and the Nature of the Church, WCC, 1997 ■ “The Ecumenical Dialogue on Moral Issues: Potential Sources of Common Witness or of Divisions”, JWG document, ER, 48, 1996 ■ D. Forrester, The True Church and Morality: Reflections on Ecclesiology and Ethics, WCC, 1997.

ETHNIC CONFLICT

Although ethnicity derives etymologically from the Greek ethnos (ethnikos), people or nation, its use is of recent origin. An ethnic community is a group of individuals who are bound together by language, historical and cultural tradition and religion, which identifies itself and/or is identified by others as such and, but not always, by a well-defined territory. In some cases, ethnic territorial boundaries coincide with the frontiers of a nation state, but most of the time they do not. Ethnic groups can constitute minorities or majorities within a nation state or across boundaries. They can be politically and economically dominant or dominated.

nt repression.

Ethnic conflicts are a troublesome factor to the ecumenical movement and to inter-religious dialogue, because in many situations religion is itself a source of tension. There are memories of past wars of religion, forced conversion or genocide (e.g., crusades,* colonial conquest, antisemitism* leading to the holocaust). While racism was long a major ecumenical concern, ethnicity has rapidly become a central issue (the two elements cannot, at any rate, be readily distinguished), especially as churches are often identified with their ethnic communities at the expense of universal conceptions of faith. Under the impact of ethnic wars in Bosnia and Rwanda, an ecumenical consultation held in 1994 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, on Ethnicity and Nationalism: A Challenge to the Churches judged the role of the churches to be difficult and often ambiguous. The consultation suggested that the theological concept of the kingdom of God in the various church traditions be explored afresh, because it might provide a key to help the churches reassess their history critically and to evaluate their own inadvertent support for nationalist/ethnicist ambitions. During a 1996 encounter of the WCC working group in Berlin on Racism, Indigenous Peoples and Ethnicity it was stated that while the support of churches to nations under oppression was fully appreciated, the undue legitimation given to certain ethnic and national values and dominant elites was seriously questioned, especially if these became the pretext for threatening other ethnicities. Such religious involvement has often contributed to the fragmentation of nation states, to oppression and to the disruption of community.

If religion, with Christianity bearing a major historic share, has been a source of ethnic conflict, it can also become an instrument for peace and reconciliation. Some of the principal elements for such re-thinking are: (1) religion demands unconditional obedience to a supreme and universal deity; (2) this deity is not limited to one single territory or to certain ethnic groups; (3) the Creator of the universe is the father and the mother of all human beings; (4) this implies that all human beings are called upon to treat each other and the life-giving earth with love and respect; (5) the organization of life together has to be structured by justice, the respect for human rights, ecological sustainability and life in community; (6) its basis cannot but be in accord with a profound understanding of lifes origins (creation) and historys fulfilment (kingdom of God, eternity), which provide meaning for life above and beyond geographical, ethnic and other temporary confines.

THEO TSCHUY

■ Christian Conference of Asia and National Council of Sri Lanka, Hopelessness and Challenge: The Mission of the Church in Situations of Conflict, Colombo, n.d. ■ I.M. Cuthbertson & J. Leibowitz eds, Minorities: The New Europe’s Old Issue, Prague, Budapest, Warsaw, Atlanta, Institute for East-West Studies, 1993 ■ Middle East Council of Churches, The Role of Religion in Conflict Situations, Uppsala, Life & Peace Institute, 1991 ■ R.J. Rummel, Death by Government: Genocide and Mass Murder since 1900, New Brunswick NJ, Transaction Publishers, 1994 ■ N. Smart, Religion and Nationalism: The Urgency of Transnational Spirituality and Toleration, Rome, Centre for Indian and Inter-Religious Studies, 1994 ■ T. Tschuy, Ethnic Conflict and Religion: Challenge to the Churches, WCC, 1997.

EVANGELICAL ECUMENICAL CONCERNS

While evangelical and ecumenical are often used as mutually exclusive labels, Evangelicalism was originally ecumenical, though limited to inter-Protestant. Already in 1846 the Worlds Evangelical Alliance* was born, a new thing in church history - a definite organization for the expression of unity among Christian individuals belonging to different churches (Ruth Rouse). Thus before Evangelicalism had ecumenical concerns, it was an ecumenical concern.

Nor do Evangelicals* and ecumenicals occupy two isolated worlds today. Many members of the World Evangelical Fellowship* (WEF), the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization,* and evangelical para-church organizations belong to churches that are members of the WCC and of national and regional councils of churches.* The WEF participates in the annual conference of secretaries of Christian World Communions,* and its theological commission has a task force on ecumenical issues which responded to the WCC Faith and Order documents on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry* and Confessing the One Faith.

Commitment to ecumenism on the part of Evangelicals is also evident in the newly developing Evangelical-Roman Catholic relations* of various kinds and at various levels. Furthermore, if one takes into account the ecumenical involvement of Pentecostals* who in many countries are members of national evangelical alliances, it is obvious that a simple disjunction between evangelical and ecumenical is a myth. The 1985 Evangelical-Roman Catholic Dialogue on Mission (Ercdom) statement sums up the ecumenical commitment of many Evangelicals: Fidelity to Jesus Christ today requires that we take his will for his followers with new seriousness. He prayed for the truth, holiness, mission and unity of his people. We believe that these dimensions of the churchs renewal belong together (see Evangelical-Roman Catholic relations).

Yet, the common use of evangelical and ecumenical as mutually exclusive is not without ground. For many Evangelicals ecumenism has become a pejorative term. They associate the ecumenical movement with the implicit goal of a super-church, and are convinced that in the dominant quest for the visible unity of the church, institutional and structural issues are displacing the confession and propagation of the central message of the gospel of salvation.

The association of modern ecumenism with a super-church strikes at the very heart of Evangelicalism and its origins in spiritual revivals or awakenings. Inherent in most of these was a critique of established (sometimes state) churches for perpetuating a form of godliness without its power, and for eclipsing the power of the gospel by hoary traditions, staid rites and clerical privilege. Evangelicalism continues to rejoice in the recovery of the central truths of the faith, such as the supreme authority of the infallible scriptures, the vicarious and atoning death of Jesus Christ and his bodily resurrection, the salvation of the lost through the shed blood of Christ and personal regeneration by the Holy Spirit.

These apprehensions about institutional forms of church unity run very deep when coupled with what is perceived as an affirmation of sacramental efficacy at the expense of the gospel call for personal conversion. Corollary to the Evangelicals emphasis on personal regeneration (born-again) and the experience of conversion that comes to expression in a personal commitment to Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord is a pointed critique of the role of evangelism* in the ecumenical movement. This critique is twofold: the urgency to reach the lost with the gospel and the priority of evangelism over social responsibility.

Evangelical ecumenical engagement directly relates to the understanding and role of mission* and evangelism in WCC circles. Many Evangelicals had mixed feelings about the 1961 integration into the WCC of the International Missionary Council (IMC).* While this was seen as a golden opportunity for the WCC to recover and incorporate the passion for mission, the danger was real that absorption into the complex and multi-pronged WCC structure would blunt the IMCs missionary-evangelistic edge. Ironically, to the degree that the merger did dissipate the missionary thrust of the former IMC, these evangelical fears may have been self-fulfilling: the decision of many Evangelicals not to participate in the WCCs department for world mission and evangelism  which carried on the IMCs work - significantly weakened its evangelical missionary insight and fervour.

Instead, much of the evangelical passion for mission came to be diverted into the alternative Lausanne movement. The Lausanne covenant* (1974) laid the theological foundation and framework for evangelization in affirming the authority and power of the Bible (art. 2), the uniqueness and universality of Christ who is the only mediator (3), and the return of Christ (15). But as the full name of the Lausanne Committee makes clear, these evangelical dynamics converge in a single thrust: for world evangelization. The term evangelism was deliberately chosen over mission because of the perception that when all activities of the church in the world are called mission (see missio Dei), the specific meaning, urgency and primacy of evangelism is lost: the proclamation of the historical, biblical Christ as Saviour and Lord, with a view to persuading people to come to him personally and to be reconciled to God (4).

This insistence on the primacy of evangelism, and its urgency in the churchs mission of sacrificial service, implicitly stands in critique of the perceived penchant for social, political activism by the ecumenical movement in general and by the WCC in particular. True, evangelism and socio-political involvement are both part of our Christian duty as necessary expressions of our doctrines of God and man, our love for our neighbour and our obedience to Jesus Christ (Lausanne, 5). But they are not on a par, they relate as root and fruit (H. Berkhof). World evangelization requires the whole church to take the whole gospel to the whole world (6). From this perspective, wholeness is subverted at every point if the centre of gravity of the churchs mission shifts away from evangelization to social action.

Nevertheless, in part as the result of the evangelical critique and the permanence of the Lausanne movement, a degree of convergence between Evangelicals and ecumenicals appears, reaching its high point in the statement Confessing Christ Today of the WCC assembly in Nairobi, 1975, and in the 1982 WCC landmark Mission and Evangelism: An Ecumenical Affirmation. Simultaneously, the evangelical movement embarked on a journey that moves beyond the incipient dualism that lurks in juxtaposing evangelism to social responsibility, coupling them with an and, while giving primacy to the former. For a deepened sense of the integrity of holistic mission, the evangelical movement is indebted to insights gained in the ecumenical movement.

These mutual learnings and convergences have not yet laid to rest the concerns of Evangelicals about the nature and place of evangelism among ecumenicals. This can be demonstrated by the continuing tension within the WCC between its two major forming tributaries: the Faith and Order* stream which bends all its efforts to the visible unity of the church - at the expense, some charge, of service in and to the world; and the Life and Work* stream which concentrates its energies on the struggle for justice and peace - at the expense, others claim, of theological and ecclesiological depth. Although the major WCC study project on ecclesiology and ethics* (1993-96) sought to address this debilitating internal tension, it may be irresolvable as long as the major source from which all of the ecumenical tributaries spring remains hidden from view: mission and evangelism.

The evangelical ecumenical concern, both within and outside the WCC, points to the transcendental dimension of the message of good news in Jesus Christ. Authentic missionary evangelism fundamentally names this Name and calls all people, with their cultures and institutions, to find shalom, true peace, in his name. It moves into the highways and byways of daily life and breaks through the intramural encapsulation of church and world, ecclesiology and ethics. As good news-telling, evangelism reaches into life that has run stuck and into human lives that are at a loss and lost in an often bewildering and pain-wracked world.

The WCCs Mission and Evangelism statement affirms the churchs task to call all people to repentance, to announce forgiveness of sin and a new beginning in relations with God and with neighbours through Jesus Christ. This evangelistic task is intrinsically linked to the social dimensions of the good news of Christs reign, which calls for conversion. Similar emphases are in evangelical documents such as the WEF Wheaton statement, Transformation: The Church in Response to Human Need (1983).

Yet for Evangelicals, the crux remains the universal call to all people to believe in Jesus Christ as the only way of salvation. Evangelicals are heartened by the pledge made at the 1996 conference on world mission and evangelism (Salvador, Brazil): We... commit ourselves to unequivocal and cooperative witness to the gospel of hope in Jesus Christ in all contexts. At the same time, Evangelicals ask whether this commitment is amenable to the addition suggested by an Evangelical ecumenist at this conference, so that all may come to know and love Jesus.

Expressed in terms of conversion,* evangelical concern about the ecumenical movement is inextricably ecumenical. Vatican Council IIs Decree on Ecumenism* rightly discerned that there can be no ecumenism worthy of the name without a change of heart, metanoia, conversion. Conversely, there can be no true conversion to Jesus Christ without a re-discovery of his indivisible body, his church, and thus a conversion to its unity. As Evangelicals acknowledge, the needed emphasis on personal conversion has come needlessly at the cost of a weak ecclesiology, undermined as it is by our evangelical tendency to individualism and empire-building (J. Stott). Conversion cuts deeply - in all directions.

To express evangelical ecumenical concerns is not to repudiate but to engage the ecumenical movement. The costs of lack of such engagement are inestimable. If this ecumenical/non-ecumenical divide is not addressed and bridged, the Christian world could end up as divided as ever, even if major headway is made between churches within the ecumenical camp (P. Hocken).

GEORGE VANDERVELDE

■ G. Fackre, Ecumenical Faith in Evangelical Perspective, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1993 ■ P. Hocken, “The Importance of Dialogue with Evangelicals and Pentecostals”, OC, 30, 1994 ■ B.J. Nicholls & B.R. Ro eds, Beyond Canberra: Evangelical Responses to Contemporary Ecumenical Issues, Oxford, Regnum Books, 1993 ■J. Stott, “Twenty Years after Lausanne”, IBMR, 19, 1995 ■ G. Vandervelde, “Costly Communion: Mission between Ecclesiology and Ethics”, ER, 49, 1997 ■ M. VanElderen & W. Granberg-Michaelson, A Kairos for Evangelical-Ecumenical Relations? Reflections after Canberra, IRM, 81, 1992.

EVANGELICAL-ROMAN CATHOLIC RELATIONS

The increase in contacts between Evangelicals* and Roman Catholics is not only rather recent but also rather startling. For these developments mark a 180 degree turn from the hostile stance that characterized earlier periods (and continues in many sectors of Evangelicalism today).

Even past unitive efforts by Evangelicals stopped well short of RCC doors. The Worlds Evangelical Alliance* was founded in 1846, designed in large part to form a united front against the RCC. Evangelical Christendom, a journal closely associated with the new Alliance, articulated the antithetical front of evangelical consolidation in an editorial in its first issue (1847): [Evangelical Christendom] enters upon the theatre of public life, the friend of all truly Christian communions and the adversary of none. Its only controversy will be with Romanism and Infidelity - identified in the next sentence as these common foes.  From the RC side the developing contacts with Evangelicals and Pentecostals* (see Pentecostal-Roman Catholic dialogue) was equally surprising. Although in 1964 the Second Vatican Councils Decree on Ecumenism* opened the windows to all other willing churches and ecclesial communities, it did not envision on the horizon any positive relations with Pentecostal and Evangelical communions.

Rather than regarding Catholicism as its chief opponent, Evangelicals increasingly look to the RC communion as an ally and preferred discussion partner. Despite the many significant differences between the two groups, considerable affinity exists on many ethical issues (e.g., abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering and justice). Accordingly, in many countries, regional or national Roman Catholic and Evangelical bodies cooperate directly in the public sphere. Similarly, confronted with many historic Protestant churches that appear to call into question central tenets of the faith, Evangelicals welcome the unswerving commitment by the RCC to the core of orthodoxy as expressed in the historic creeds, as well as to the continuing mandate for mission, as expressed, for example, in papal encyclicals - Paul VIs Evangelii Nuntiandi (1975) and John Paul IIs Redemptoris Missio (1990).

At the international level, the first significant evidence of the changed attitude on the part of Evangelicals towards Roman Catholicism took the form of a dialogue. In a series of three meetings, held from 1977 to 1984, theologians and missiologists named by the Vatican Secretariat (now Pontifical Council) for Promoting Christian Unity* and Evangelical participants from denominations both within and outside the WCC and from para-church mission organizations took part in an Evangelical-Roman Catholic Dialogue on Mission (Ercdom). Although the Evangelicals did not officially represent any international body, all were associated with the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization.* Moreover, they were convened by John Stott of the Church of England, a chief drafter of the 1974 Lausanne covenant.*

The topics on which the Ercdom report outlined both agreement and serious, sometimes contradictory, understandings of biblical teaching were (1) revelation,* the Bible, the formulation of truth; the Bible vis-a-vis the teaching authority* of the church; (2) the basis and authority of mission, direct evangelism* and socio-political responsibility; (3) Gods workings outside the Christian community; (4) the gospel of salvation* and the uniqueness* and universality of Jesus Christ; the role of Mary* in salvation; (5) conversion* and baptism,* church membership and the assurance of salvation; (6) the church* as part, fruit, embodiment and agent of the gospel; (7) the gospel and culture;* (8) our unity* and disunity, possibilities of common witness* and avoidance of unworthy witness or proselytism.*

Especially the issue of proselytism presents considerable difficulty. Evangelical constituencies range from those who appear to regard all RCs as unbelievers in need of conversion to those who desire a very full cooperation with RCs in mission efforts. Since the Ercdom report, the rapid growth of evangelical churches in predominantly RC areas such as Latin America, the Philippines, Spain, Italy, Poland and France has made the pastoral and missionary issues of worthy and unworthy witness and of cooperation or common witness more critical, as well as more divisive among Evangelicals themselves.

More fundamentally, the many points of consensus* are linked with deep differences, particularly around the nature and purpose of the church. The Ercdom report acknowledged that further conversations would be required before it would be possible to arrive at greater clarity and common terms of ecclesiological discourse.

The international dialogue in which Evangelicals are currently engaged with the RCC paradoxically has its roots in controversy with and about that church.  At the general assembly of the World Evangelical Fellowship (WEF),* held in Hoddesdon, England, in 1980, two RCC representatives were invited as observers and brought greetings to the assembly. As a result of the controversy arising from their presence, the WEF theological commission created a 17-member  ecumenical issues task force, which developed a statement that was published in 1988 as Roman Catholicism: A Contemporary Evangelical Perspective. It dealt with topics such as other churches, religious liberty, the place of Mary, authority in the church, the pope and infallibility, justification by faith, and the sacraments. The publication of this product of what was a monologue demonstrated the need for dialogue. For the first time, Evangelicals representing an international body, the WEF, would engage RC representatives to seek greater understanding and to develop better relations.

After preparatory work by a small group of Evangelicals and RC representatives at the secretaries of Christian World Communions* meetings in 1988 and 1990, the first consultation took place in Venice in 1993. This meeting focused on scripture and Tradition and on justification by faith, exploring both serious differences and significant commonalities. The consultation engaged the reciprocal challenge entailed, on the one hand, in the privileged role Roman Catholicism overtly attributes to Tradition and the official teaching authority (magisterium), and, on the other, the role that Tradition covertly plays in Evangelicalism, as evidenced in the place accorded to justification by faith in the interpretation of the scriptures. At the Venice meeting, it became clear that issues surrounding the nature and mission of the church required further exploration. These issues were taken up at the next meeting, which was held in 1997 at the Tantur Ecumenical Institute* in Jerusalem.

At the Tantur meeting the question of real but imperfect communion, which the RCC says exists between it and other Christian communities, became prominent, as well as the issue of evangelism and proselytism. Discussion of these themes continued at Williams Bay, Wisconsin, in 1999, and at Mundelein, Illinois, in 2001. In fact, these themes proved to be at once fruitful fields worthy of deeper probing, as well as areas of major differences.  While both sides share the conviction that all who are in Christ are one, and thus share a deep communion, rather divergent understandings of what it means to be in communion with Christ as well as diverse criteria of determining the marks of belonging to Christ prove to be operative. As a result, subsequent meetings of the consultation continue to work on these issues.

While the differences between Evangelicals and RCs on the issues discussed in this consultation have by no means vanished, marked progress may be noted in the mode and regularity of the discussions. In the initial phase of this consultation, the meetings took place somewhat sporadically. Unlike the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, the WEF task force was unable to commit itself to annual or even bi-annual meetings. Slowly this began to change, until at the most recent meetings annual sessions of the consultation have been planned. In addition to the increased frequency of the meetings, changes in the manner of preparation and type of product of the consultation shifted. Not until the second and subsequent meetings were joint communiques issued. As to preparation, for the first three meetings, representatives of each team prepared parallel papers on the assigned topics. At the third meeting, in Williams Bay, a beginning was made on the collaborative preparation of papers. These papers probe for a deeper understanding of what is shared in common, while at the same time exploring the nature and degree of the differences that divide the two traditions. The consultation is now moving into a phase at which an attempt will be made to prepare joint statements. The focus of these consultations, however, is not the quest for unity as such, but  better mutual understanding of, and improved relations between, RCs and Evangelicals.

Another international development in which Evangelicals are informally involved is the exploration of a global forum of churches and ecumenical organizations. This venture is of course broader than Evangelical and Roman Catholic communions. Yet, the RC and Evangelical (together with the Pentecostal) groups are the most prominent, since their involvement is crucial for the viability of a venture that seeks to be more inclusive than the WCC.

In addition to these international developments, significant movement in the last three decades is also evident at the regional level. In the USA, the National Council of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention were involved for some thirty years in official consultations on topics such as grace, scripture and mission. This was a conversation with no intention to produce unity or even convergence but rather to clarify commonalities and differences in the faith.

At a regional level, another venture sparked both enthusiasm and controversy. In 1994 a North American group of Evangelicals and RCs, who had been cooperating informally for some time on the social-political front, issued the declaration Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium. While recognizing important differences, this statement focused on significant areas of convergence: We Affirm Together (the content of the faith as expressed in the Apostolic Creed), We Hope Together (for greater unity and commitment to mission), We Search Together (for a deeper and clearer discernment of nature and weight of differences), We Contend Together (for the role of truth in the public arena), and We Witness Together (evangelism that avoids proselytism). Although this collaborative effort was entirely unofficial, both the content of the statement and the ensuing controversy, especially among Evangelicals and Pentecostals, gave it a prominence that belied its informal character. Furthermore, rather than retreating from the controversial and controverted sections regarding theological convergences, this same group produced a statement focusing entirely on theological matters. In the 1998 statement, The Gift of Salvation, the Evangelicals-and-Catholics-together group delineated areas of agreement and disagreement regarding salvation and, more specifically, justification by faith. These statements have caused considerable debate among Evangelicals and precipitated internal dialogue and statements of Evangelical solidarity.

While Evangelical-Roman Catholic relations continue to be surrounded by tension, even turbulence and setbacks (in 2001, for example, the Southern Baptist Convention terminated the official conversations with the Roman Catholic Church, in which it had been engaged for thirty years), the steps taken in dialogue and collaboration are unlikely to be reversed in the present century.

See also evangelical ecumenical concerns.

GEORGE VANDERVELDE

■ C. Colson & R.J. Neuhaus eds, Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission, London, Word Publ., 1995 ■ N.L. Geisler & R.E. MacKenzie eds, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences, Grand Rapids MI, Baker Book House, 1995 ■ “The Gift of Salvation”, First Things, 79, Jan. 1998 ■ B. Meeking & J. Stott eds, The Evangelical-Roman Catholic Dialogue on Mission 1977-1984: A Report, Exeter, Paternoster, 1986 ■ T.P. Rausch ed., Catholics and Evangelicals: Do They Share a Common Future?, Downers Grove IL, InterVarsity Press, 1999 ■ P.G. Schrotenboer ed., Roman Catholicism: A Contemporary Evangelical Perspective, Grand Rapids MI, Baker, 1987 ■ World Evangelical-Roman Catholic consultation: for reports and papers, see Evangelical Review of Theology, 21, 1997:101-153; 23, 1999:6-91; and OC, 35, 1999, 11-92.

FIRST AND RADICAL REFORMATION CHURCHES

These terms have emerged in ecumenical discourse since 1950. The term first Reformation was coined by scholars associated with the Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren to characterize reforming movements within medieval Catholicism from the 12th through the 15th centuries. The leading religious bodies formed from these movements are the Waldensian Church, the Unity of Brethren (Unitas Fratrum), the Renewed Moravian Church (which considered itself to be the direct continuation of the Unity of Brethren), and several Hussite-based churches. These churches were marked by emphasis on the synoptic gospels (especially the sermon on the mount) as a rule of life. The impetus behind the formulation first Reformation seems to have been the felt need to consider the reforming energies of these bodies as significant in their own right, over against the customary perception that they were a prelude or prologue to the mainstream Protestant Reformation.

The term radical Reformation was popularized through the seminal work of this title by George H. Williams (1962). He applied the concept to a wide range of dissenters, who had in common the rejection of Catholicism as well as Lutheranism and the Reformed. Williams used the term magisterial Reformation to characterize these latter two communions - along with Anglicanism - to highlight their linkage with the state as well as their arrogation of the teaching authority* of the official church. Religious groups emerging from the radical Reformation have also been called Believers churches or Free churches because of their championing of separation of church and state* and of religious liberty.*

Although discussion continues on how inclusive the term radical Reformation should be, there is agreement that it can always apply to the various manifestations of Anabaptism around the world; most of these churches currently use some form of the name Mennonite,* although Taufgesinnten and the Dutch form Doopsgezinden are also found. Also stemming from 16th-century Anabaptism are the communally based Hutterian Brethren, now found in the north-western states and provinces of the USA and Canada. In some association with the Hutterian Brethren is the Society of Brothers or Bruderhof, formed in Germany after the first world war.

Other religious movements inspired by Anabaptism but not organically related to it are several Brethren* bodies of 18th-century Pietist origin, of which the largest is the Church of the Brethren. Many Baptist historians have found the historical antecedents of their numerous denominations within Anabaptism, although other scholars firmly maintain that their original matrix within left-wing English Puritanism of the 17th century provides sufficient derivation. Also connected with Radical Puritanism was the Religious Society of Friends,* nicknamed Quakers, who have often felt kinship with Mennonite and Brethren groups, in particular because of their shared peace* testimony (see Friends/Quakers, historic peace churches).

Representatives of all the denominations mentioned above took part in a series of meetings, often called the Prague Conferences after the site of the first three (1986, 1987, 1989), hosted by the Comenius Theological Faculty. These meetings sought respectively to define concepts, to study eschatology* and social transformation, and to search for economic implications. A fourth conference was held in Geneva in 1994, with the participation of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches,* the Lutheran World Federation* and the Mennonite World Conference.* This meeting gave particular attention to the import and impact of the sermon on the mount for personal and social ethics.

The fifth conference in the Prague series was again held in Geneva in 1998. Marked by the expansion of dialogue participants to include church leaders from Asia and Africa, it took as its focus the classic theological doctrines of justification and sanctification. This had been suggested by the current discussions on these themes between Lutherans and Reformed, on the one hand, and Lutherans and Roman Catholics, on the other. The same focus was continued in the sixth conference, held in Strasbourg, France, in 2000, with the intent to take up neglected aspects, in particular how dissenting bodies approach justification and sanctification. This perspective was signalled by the title of the consultation, New Life in Christ. Although some voices were there raised asking whether the consultation series had run its course, those attending “Prague VI” agreed that further conferences should be held, with Prague again as the site.

DONALD F. DURNBAUGH

■ J. Driver, Radical Faith: An Alternative History of the Christian Church, Scottdale PA, Herald, 1999 ■ D.F. Durnbaugh, The Believers Church: The History and Character of Radical Protestantism, 2nd ed., Scottdale PA, Herald, 1985 ■ W.R. Estep, The Anabaptist Story: An Introduction to Sixteenth-Century Anabaptism, 3rd ed., Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1996 ■ M. Opočenský ed., Towards Renewed Dialogue: The First and Second Reformations, Geneva, WARC, 1996 ■ M. Opočenský & P. Réamonn eds, Justification and Sanctification: In the Traditions of the Reformation, Geneva, WARC, 1999 ■ D.L. Slabaugh ed., “Special issue on Prague I and II”, Brethren Life and Thought 35, 1990 ■ G.H. Williams, The Radical Reformation, 3rd ed., Kirksville MO, Sixteenth Century Journal, 1992.

GLOBALIZATION, ECONOMIC

The political, economic, technological and social forces that seem to bind the worlds nations into an increasingly interdependent whole are referred to as globalization. Although these processes had been emerging for years, it was during the decade of the 1990s that globalization became the dominant feature of world order as the demise of communism, together with rapid innovations in telecommunications and electronically stored information, facilitated the global expansion of capitalism* as the definitive world economic system.

Names such as global village and spaceship earth have been used to describe these processes, but others like information society, global shopping mall and global factory more accurately typify the meaning of globalization. The principal forces driving globalization are: innovations in telecommunications, electronically stored information, and transportation; transnational finance, commerce and investment; and component production centres transcending national boundaries. These forces are so closely identified with transnational corporations* (TNC) that globalization often appears to be the name for the activities of these companies.

The expansiveness of these driving forces is made possible by international agreements establishing free or laissez-faire trade. This concept understands tariffs and other regulations, including those for protecting health or the environment and for ensuring social justice, or subsidies to protect national industries, as barriers to trade. Proponents assert that economic conditions will be improved in both wealthy and poor nations if international commerce is not regulated because this creates favourable conditions for foreign investment, trade and worldwide economic growth.

This global free trade system is governed by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Geneva. Composed of over 140 member nations, the WTO has legal jurisdiction to enforce trading agreements and to impose sanctions on nations that violate them. In cases of violation, the WTO orders the offending country to remove or weaken the barrier. The WTO deliberates in secret and the reasons for its decisions are not made public. Non-governmental and non-commercial organizations are specifically excluded, and only member nations directly involved can appeal a WTO decision.

These internal processes assure that only the official viewpoint of governments - and the transnational economic interests they often represent - are considered. Rarely are WTO decisions favourable to poor countries when their policies conflict with TNCs and first-world economic interests. Likewise, environmental and health regulations, as well as linking social justice to trade policy, consistently have been ruled as undue interference with free trade, thus mandating their removal or reduction to the lowest common denominator.

Globalization has generated significant increases in the volume of world trade and has rapidly accelerated capital accumulation, yet it has also deeply widened the gap between the rich and poor nations and the gap between rich and poor within nations. One practical result has been the creation of a global division of labour in which poor economies: provide cheap labour for TNCs while offering their territory as tax-free production sites and as exotic tourist destinations; sell raw materials and nationally owned industries at bargain prices; and provide markets for technology and licenses for its use as well as consumer products and fast food options. Net economic benefits accrue to the wealthy, owner economies. This, in turn, has tended to create a three level social order: those integrated into the global economy as well-paid executives, consultants and highly skilled workers; minimally remunerated employees of globalized factories and commercial firms; and chronically unemployed or under-employed workers (see unemployment).

Internal, structural adjustments are often required of poor nations for their integration into the global economy, or to qualify for debt relief and financial assistance as well as to create internal conditions favourable to foreign investment. Nations refusing to make such adjustments risk isolation from the world economic community. These structural adjustments have privatized government industries and services; increased taxation; weakened the negotiating power of labour unions; cut wages; increased prices of basic goods; left sectors of the public behind, bypassed by the new economy; forced unemployment; and caused retrenchments in health, education and welfare services. Such measures have contributed to capital accumulation among the wealthy and established select countries as credit-worthy but have adversely affected the standard of living of other social sectors, especially the middle classes.

Women particularly have been affected, not only because the structural adjustments often adversely impact traditional womens concerns such as the home and family health but also because of the global system itself. For example, the global factory - especially those that assemble products such as computer parts, toys or clothing - incorporates large numbers of young women as low-wage, unorganized labour. Among other social consequences, young women are attracted from their rural homes to the cities. However, many hopeful women are forced into menial employment or exploitative jobs in unofficial industries, e.g. prostitution.

Another consequence of globalization is urban growth. Jobs attracting rural migrants to cities are but one reason for this. The global factory and shopping mall benefit from large concentrations of consumers, many suppliers, providers of services, financial institutions, port and transportation facilities, and quick access to specialized information and telecommunications technology, among other needs.

Advocates of globalization argue that economic growth is stimulated mainly through exports. This theory de-emphasizes the national market and urges countries to orient economic production towards exports. In turn, countries are encouraged to rely on imports, even for basic foods.

This export-import dynamic is believed to improve economic efficiency, drive down prices, and provide basic needs. However, only a few national industries can survive in the worldwide market. Transnational corporations buy many and others go out of business, thus undermining the internal, self-replicating foundation of the national economy. The provision of basic needs becomes dependent on external economies. Finally, success in the global economy depends on a countrys ability to occupy sophisticated, high-value industrial niches. However, this presupposes an educational and technological infrastructure as well as financial and natural resources that most poor nations do not have, and strategic geographic locations that permit ready access to major markets.

Globalization is an uneven process with some countries benefiting far more than others. The poorest nations are simply left out, the middle poor become suppliers and buyers, while the wealthy nations capture the greater part of the profits and control the process.

The idea fostered in the West that everyone has access to the fruits of globalization is scarcely reality. These benefits are limited to relatively small sectors of the worlds population. Even the image of the global factory as de-territorialized is deceiving; there is nothing de-territorialized about their first-world corporate headquarters and profit repatriation.

Because of the changes that are occurring, the eighth assembly of the WCC in Harare (1998) called globalization a pastoral, ethical, theological and spiritual challenge to the churches. Indeed, globalization has generated much ethical debate.

Those affirming globalization emphasize the ethical importance of a world bound together by trade and communication. In their view, this promotes dialogue and world peace. These voices also argue that the TNCs and the free market are forces for technological innovation and for the rapid and expansive production of needed goods and services. Some argue that globalizing forces can be understood as instruments of co-creation as God uses them to re-shape world order. Thus, through the opportunities afforded them by free trade, the TNCs are viewed as establishing covenant relationships with stakeholders across the globe. Although recognizing that TNCs can abuse the free market and their economic power, this viewpoint sees globalization as a positive development.

Many others, including the WCC, take strongly critical positions. Since its inception in 1948, the WCC has criticized laissez-faire capitalism and the economic and social injustices of the international order. The critique of globalization is not of international trade itself, but rather the terms and conditions of world trade, its administration by the WTO, and its effects on people, especially the weakest social sectors, and the environment. This viewpoint indicates especially the enormous power of the TNCs, the brutal competitiveness of the world economy, and the quest for economic growth without concern for equity or the welfare of the environment. As one ecumenical study concludes, economic globalization is about the increasing concentration of economic power, coupled with increasing dependency of the poor on the decisions of the powerful (Dickinson, p.5).

The Harare assembly referred to these aspects of globalization as a new form of domination, whose driving forces are economic powers as insidious as political colonizers, having caused and fuelled fragmentation of the social fabric of societies. It pointed especially to the unequal distribution of power and wealth, and to poverty and exclusion and the worsening situation of the poor - manifested in massive immigration to the economically stronger North - as evidence that globalization hardly signifies a unified, world community. In addition, it criticized global telecommunications for fostering a consumerist monoculture. Finally, the assembly noted that the global economic system is blind to its destructive social and ecological consequences. According to the assembly, these factors oppose the vision of oikoumene, the unity of humankind and the whole inhabited earth that motivates and energizes the ecumenical movement.

Finally, ecumenical thought on globalization is mindful that the churches and the ecumenical movement uphold the affirmations of God´s grace to all human beings and all creation as imperative to life-centred ethics (Mshana, pp.3-4).

Throughout the world, many groups, both secular and religious, have organized campaigns against globalization and orchestrated protests at gatherings of international leaders.

See also development, economics.

ROY H. MAY, Jr

■ H.E. Daly & J.B. Cobb, For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future, 2nd ed., Boston, Beacon, 1994 ■ R. Dickinson, Economic Globalization: Deepening Challenge for Christians, WCC, 1998 ■ D.R. Finn, Just Trading: On the Ethics of International Trade, Nashville TN, Abingdon, 1996 ■ O. Ianni, Teorías de globalización, Mexico, Siglo Veintiuno, 1996 ■ Diane Kessler ed., Together on the Way, WCC, 1999 ■ J.H. Mittleman ed., Globalization: Critical Reflections, Boulder CO, Lynne Rienner, 1996 ■ R. Mshana, Lead Us Not Into Temptation: Churches’ Response to the Policies of International Financial Institutions, A Background Document, WCC, 2001 ■ J. de Santa Ana ed., Sustainability and Globalization, WCC, 1998 ■ S. Sassen, Globalization and Its Discontents, New York, New Press, 1998 ■ M.L. Stackhouse, D.P. Dennis P. McCann, S.J. Roels & P.N. Williams eds, On Moral Business: Classical and Contemporary Resources for Ethics in Economic Life, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1995 ■ L. Wallach & M. Sforza, The WTO: Five Years of Reasons to Resist Corporate Globalization, New York, Seven Stories, 1999.

GOSPEL AND CULTURE

As a focused way of addressing the issues with which it deals, gospel and culture is a relatively recent theme in WCC conversations. Although mandated by the sixth assembly (Vancouver 1983), intensive study of the issue was especially precipitated by the address given at the seventh assembly (Canberra 1991) by Korean theologian Chung Hyun-Kyung and the controversies it stirred. Soon after the assembly, the theme Called to One Hope: The Gospel in Diverse Cultures was set for the Salvador, Brazil, conference on world mission and evangelism in 1996. A three-year preparatory study included a series of consultations, gathered the reflections of local study groups from all around the world, produced 18 monographs on the interaction of gospel and culture in particular contexts, and gave shape to a document which guided work at the conference on four sub-themes: authentic witness within each culture;* gospel and identity in community; local congregations in pluralist societies; and one gospel - diverse expressions.

While this focus in the 1990s was new in the WCC, the issues were not. Wesley Ariarajah has suggested that although no evolution of the discussion in ecumenical history can be traced, the subject has arisen in a number of ways in major WCC conferences and assemblies. He identifies five central areas of discussion in which the issues have been present: gospel and religions; church, kingdom, world; universality and particularity; theologies in context; and the church and the churches.

Several factors have led to the increase of concern about the dynamic interaction between the gospel and cultures. First, there has been a shift in the Western worlds appreciation for the inherent value and dignity of all human cultures, displacing the dominant 19th-century attitude that linked Christianizing with civilizing. Second, the dismantling of the colonial holdings of the Western nations following the second world war spurred on movements towards independence on the part of the so-called younger churches over against the missionary structures. Third, the churches of the non-Western world increasingly recognized that their indigenous character includes selfhood not only in the areas of governance, support and mission, but also theologizing. By the time of the Bangkok conference on world mission and evangelism in 1973, the sentiment would be expressed that culture shapes the human voice that answers the voice of Christ and the need to engage that affirmation more directly and fully has continued to build ever since. The patterns of domination in new global economic forces, the hungers for communal identity and the tragedies of re-tribalization, and the challenges of holding and commending a particular faith amidst a pluralist world have sharpened the urgency to address the issues.

In wider ecumenical circles the issues have been addressed explicitly for a much longer period than in the WCC, particularly in connection with the crossing of cultural frontiers in mission. The Roman Catholic Church, for example, has had a long history of engagement with issues of adaptation and acculturation that can be traced from Roberto de Nobili and Matteo Ricci in the early 17th century to the present. Following the Second Vatican Council* and the shift to what many Roman Catholic observers call the epoch of the world church, the term inculturation has come into use to indicate an approach that envisions a more whole and fruitful interchange between the gospel and the cultures of its recipients.

Conservative evangelical missiologists have carried on a fruitful and extensive dialogue as well. In journals such as Practical Anthropology and its successor, Missiology: An International Review, they gave early leadership among Protestants in the field. Their particular interest in the cross-cultural dynamics of missionary presence and communication was jointly expressed in the Willowbank report, developed at a consultation held by the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization* in 1978.

In the ecumenical reflections brought into focus at Salvador, several features of an emerging perspective are evident. First, the gospel, it is understood, is and always must be expressed in the terms of some human cultures way of understanding and stating it. Language and culture are such that a culture-free gospel is a contradiction in terms and inconsistent with an appreciation for the incarnation. Second, the gospel encounters the cultures of the churches where the missionary enterprise originates as much as it does the cultures with which it has contact. The churches of the West are having to re-learn that it is of the missionary essence of every church that the gospel is encountering the culture in which it participates, its own framework for understanding the world and living in it. Third, there is in the gospel-culture dynamic both an encounter calling for conversion and an affirmation of the cultures dignity. That is, as was said at Salvador, the gospel illumines and transforms a culture, and cultures illumine and incarnate the gospel. As Lamin Sanneh has pointed out, this means that every human culture is de-stigmatized and revitalized by the gospel, and every human culture is at the same time de-absolutized and relativized by it. All cultures are the true destiny of the gospels expression, and no culture can claim to be its sole final expression.

GEORGE R. HUNSBERGER

■ S.W. Ariarajah, Gospel and Culture: An Ongoing Discussion within the Ecumenical Movement, WCC, 1994 ■ S. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1992 ■ C. Duraisingh ed., Called to One Hope: The Gospel in Diverse Cultures, WCC, 1998 ■ G.R. Hunsberger & C. Van Gelder eds, The Church between Gospel and Culture: Emerging Mission in North America, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1996 ■ L. Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, WCC, 1989 ■ L. Sanneh, Translating the Message: The Missionary Impact on Culture, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1989 ■ P. Schineller, A Handbook on Inculturation, Mahwah NJ, Paulist, 1990 ■ R.J. Schreiter, Constructing Local Theologies, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1985 ■ J.R.W. Stott & R. Coote eds, Down to Earth: Studies in Christianity and Culture, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1980 ■ A. Walker, Telling the Story: Gospel, Mission and Culture, London, SPCK, 1996.

HISTORIC PEACE CHURCHES

Historic Peace Churches (HPC) is a term popularized in 1935 to refer to the Church of the Brethren,* the Religious Society of Friends* (Quakers), and the Mennonite* churches which share a common witness against war. The three traditions date from different times, the Mennonites from the radical Reformation in the 16th century, the Friends from radical puritanism in the 17th century, and the Brethren from radical pietism in the 18th century. Yet all have held an official witness that peace is an essential aspect of the gospel and all have rejected the use of force and violence. Their common position on peace has brought the three traditions into many cooperative relationships, not only during times of war but also in worldwide service and relief projects.

In 1935 the conference of historic peace churches in North America, was held at North Newton, Kansas, USA, one in a series of meetings of pacifist denominations. The term historic peace churches was coined in part to distinguish biblical-based peaceful non-resistance from political pacifism, which was becoming a popular movement during the time between the two world wars. At the Newton meeting, which included both theological and political concerns, participants felt that cooperation was urgent because of the growing international crisis, and that they had an obligation to share their message with other Christian bodies and with the United States government. Delegations were formed to visit different denominations and President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and a continuation committee was set up to promote peace concerns cooperatively. With the advent of military conscription in the USA in 1940, peace-church leaders worked to set up an alternative to military service for their members who were conscientious objectors: civilian public service.  The work of the continuation committee was extended to Europe after the second world war, most notably through the series of conferences on The Lordship of Christ over Church and State, often referred to as the Puidoux conferences after the site of the first meeting in Switzerland.

When the World Council of Churches (WCC) was formed in Amsterdam in 1948, several of the HPC were founding members  the Church of the Brethren, Five Years Meeting (now Friends United Meeting), Friends General Conference (all from the USA), Canadian Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, Algemene Doopsgezinde Societeit (Dutch Mennonites) and the Vereinigung der Deutschen Mennonitengemeinden (German Mennonites). The first WCC assembly stated that war is contrary to the will of God, described three varying positions held by Christians, and urged theological reflections on the issues involved. The continuation committee took seriously this call, especially when a request came specifically from the WCC general secretary, W. A. Visser t Hooft. In the booklet War Is Contrary to the Will of God (1951) each tradition submitted its statement, adding a fourth from the International Fellowship of Reconciliation.* Ecumenical leaders expressed appreciation for the statements but challenged the peace church leaders again. If the HPC could not formulate a common position, they could hardly expect a body as diverse as the WCC to come to agreement. The continuation committee went back to work and in 1953 presented a joint statement, Peace Is the Will of God. This was replaced in 1991 by the HPC in the USA, joined by the Fellowship of Reconciliation, in A Declaration on Peace: In Gods People the Worlds Renewal Has Begun.

Service agencies of the HPC were instrumental in organizing Eirene to provide openings for alternative service for European conscientious objectors, especially in developing countries. Volunteers from the HPC have served in many peace and service-oriented organizations in both Western and Eastern Europe. Members of these churches continue to be active in ecumenical activities, in particular through the WCC Programme to Overcome Violence and the Decade to Overcome Violence (DOV). In 2001, an HPC consultation was held in Bienenberg, Switzerland, on Theology and Culture: Peace-making in a Globalized World as a theological contribution to the DOV and an important marker in continuing ecumenical dialogue among the three HPC traditions and with the wider Christian fellowship.

See also first and radical Reformation churches.

SARA SPEICHER and DONALD F. DURNBAUGH

■ D.F. Durnbaugh ed., On Earth Peace: Discussions on War/Peace Issues between Friends, Mennonites, Brethren and European Churches, 1935-1975, Elgin IL, Brethren, 1978 ■ D.F. Durnbaugh, Fruit of the Vine: A History of the Brethren, 1708-1995, Elgin IL, Brethren, 1997 ■ F. Enns, Friedenskirche in der Ökumene: Ekklesiologische Wurzeln einer Ethik der Gewaltfreiheit, Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2002 ■ M.E. Miller & B.N. Gingerich eds, The Church’s Peace Witness, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1994.

HUMANUM STUDIES

The Humanum Studies, undertaken in the WCC between 1969 and 1975, were launched by the Uppsala assembly (1968) and grew out of the concern of the Geneva 1966 conference about the meaning of humanization. Within the context of theological trends in the 1960s they may be seen as (1) a consequence of re-defining the mission of the church in terms of the agenda of the world in the light of missio Dei;* (2) an ecumenical response to the rapidity of changes and developments, particularly in Western societies, as a result of technological and social progress; (3) a first attempt to develop an interdisciplinary methodology of ecumenical study and social thought in the light of a new appreciation of disciplines like sociology, psychology and anthropology.

The Humanum Studies were closely linked with the name of David Jenkins, a British theologian (later Anglican bishop of Durham) who contributed most of the 25 articles found in the WCC librarys portfolio on Humanum Studies. The study was carried out in close cooperation with other contemporary WCC studies, including The Future of Man and Society in a World of Science-based Technology (Church and Society), The Unity of the Church and the Unity of Mankind (Faith and Order), Humanization and Mission: The Role of Christians in Changing Institutions  all reflecting the shift in interest to the social and human dimension of the gospel in the 1960s. The contributions - most of them published in Study Encounter and Anticipation  covered a wide range of issues from the theology of development and the understanding of human rights to problems of biotechnology and human criteria of health care. This reflected the twofold emphasis of the Humanum Studies - a survey of the secular, trying to discern the contemporary frontiers where human dignity was at stake, and a search for a theological interpretation of the problem area involved which could provide a meaningful orientation and bridge the gap between Christian tradition and contemporary experience.

However, the final report of the study, presented to the WCC central committee in Berlin 1974 under the title The Anguish of Man, the Praise of God and the Repentance of the Church, centred on fundamental issues of theological methodology, reflecting a remarkable shift in emphasis from the question What is man? to the question How do we do theology? Rather than producing a deductive and universally applicable Christian doctrine of the human, the studies thus led to a passionate plea for methodologically taking seriously the social context and contemporary struggles to be human in all their anguish and richness. The question of what the human really is led to a fundamental critique of detached ways of doing theology which, according to the study, have not yet been overcome in the churches and can in themselves be dehumanizing. A realistic account of both human suffering and liberation was seen as vital for any genuine theological study. Christological insights formed the basis for this approach: The true motivating forces for understanding and coming to grips with the Humanum are, as we have called them, the anguish of man and the praise of God uniquely united and reconciled with one another in Jesus Christ. This inter-relation of a Christology of incarnation and a theological methodology of contextuality constituted the long-term importance of the Humanum Studies for ecumenical social ethics. The final report affirmed: The incarnation of Jesus Christ declares to us that the nearer we come to reality the nearer we come to God, and that the more accurately we achieve an analysis of reality the more closely we come to suffering and sharing with God in his redemptive and creative work.

The Humanum Studies thus provided the theological and methodological rationale for the immense widening of the horizon of ecumenical social thinking in the action-oriented period after Uppsala, with the WCC initiating programmes on development,* racism,* sexism,* human rights.* Without reducing theology to anthropology, they made it clear that the contemporary quest for the human is a crucial way of asking for God and is thus the theological question of modern times. They also paved the way for the development of contextual theologies in non-Western countries by clearly criticizing Western cultural particularism and enquiring into the sources of indigenous cultural energies in the development of responsible indigenous theologies for the non-Western world (see Humanum Studies: A Collection of Documents, pp.45f. and 97ff.). Finally, they produced new insights with regard to interdisciplinary and cooperative methodologies in applying social sciences to ecumenical social ethics.

The Humanum Studies remain relevant in this respect, even though they came only at the beginning of the process of re-formulating Christian anthropology and the meaning of humanization in an age of ecological awareness. Jenkinss far-reaching recommendations about the structure and inter-relation of the WCCs programmes (made in his final paper, Implications of the Humanum Studies for the Future Programmes of the WCC) are still pertinent. A continuation of the theological concerns of the Humanum Studies is reflected in both the WCC study on The Unity of the Church and the Renewal of Humankind and the Lutheran World Federation study on The Identity of the Church and Its Service to the Whole Human Being.

DIETRICH WERNER

■ D.J. Coles, The Search for Methods in Contemporary Ecumenical Social Ethics, thesis, Univ. of Manchester, England, 1973 ■ Humanum Studies 1969-1975: A Collection of Documents, WCC, 1975 ■ D. Jenkins, “Man’s Inhumanity to Man: The Direction and Purpose of the Humanum Studies”, ER, 25, 1, 1973 ■ K. Raiser, “Prozess für den Menschen: Das Humanum-Studienprojekt des ÖRK”, in Ev. Komm, 6, 1973 ■ P.A. Stauffer, The Meaning of Humanization: An Emerging Understanding of Man in WCC Discussions 1965-1970, Ann Arbor MI, University Microfilms, 1972.

IONA COMMUNITY

The Iona Community was founded in 1938 by George MacLeod (1895-1991), then a parish minister in Glasgow, who was concerned at the lack of impact of the church and Christianity on the lives of working people. MacLeod gathered a group of young ministers and craftsmen, joined by many volunteer workers, and raised money to re-build the ruined buildings of a 13th-century Benedictine abbey on the small island of Iona, off the west coast of Scotland, where Columba had formed a monastic community on coming from Ireland in 563. The re-building - begun as a sign of hope in times of high unemployment and impending war, and as an experiment in mission and ministerial formation affirming the relevance of faith to the whole of life, through the integration of work and worship, prayer and politics - was completed in 1967.

Alongside the work on Iona, where many came each year to visit the abbey and youth camp and to find inspiration and fellowship, the communitys activities also developed on the mainland - through political commitment, particularly in peace-making and nuclear disarmament; through the work of community members, many of them parish ministers and industrial chaplains in difficult situations; and through the opening of Community House in central Glasgow, with a range of activities in education and politics, drama and film, and social services.

In 1951 the community was formally integrated within the life and organization of the Church of Scotland, although from the outset it has maintained a thoroughly ecumenical dimension.

There are now around 240 members, mostly in Britain but a few serving overseas, drawn from most of the branches of the church, with the Church of Scotland still the largest single tradition. The community remains committed to the process of re-building the lives of individuals, of the church and of society through seeking new ways of living and expressing the gospel in todays world. There have been significant changes since the early years, particularly with the admission of women to full membership from 1969 and increasing numbers of lay members who are now in the majority.

The members share a commitment to the communitys fivefold rule, involving, within a framework of mutual accountability, a spiritual discipline of daily prayer and Bible reading, an economic discipline of tithing for the work of the community and other causes, the planning and balanced use of time, action for peace and justice in society, and regular meeting together (in local family groups, normally meeting monthly, and quarterly plenaries). A wider constituency of around 1500 associate members and over 1500 friends also provides much valued support.

The community maintains two centres on Iona - Iona abbey and the MacLeod centre, which has special facilities for young people, families and people with disabilities  and Camas adventure camp, a former salmon-fishing station in a remote location on the nearby Ross of Mull, a peninsula on the adjoining Isle of Mull. These centres are staffed by a resident staff group, assisted by volunteers, who provide hospitality for over 100 guests each week from March to October.

Besides what members do locally to live out their commitment to the communitys aims and concerns, there is also a range of corporate activities on the mainland, based in the communitys administrative headquarters in Glasgow. The Wild Goose resource group promotes and explores new and participatory approaches to worship through producing liturgical material, holding workshops and leading worship at ecumenical and local events. The community also supports a youth development worker, publishes the bi-monthly magazine Coracle and funds Wild Goose Publications, which produces worship resources and books and pamphlets relating to the communitys concerns.

In recent years there has been a strong commitment to peace-making and opposing nuclear weapons, promoting social justice through supporting the cause of the poor and the exploited in Britain and abroad, political activity to combat racism, and engagement with environmental and constitutional issues. Other concerns relate to the strengthening of interdenominational understanding and the sharing of communion, the encouragement of inter-religious relations, and the development of the ministry of healing. Undergirding all the communitys work is a concern for the re-discovery of an integrated approach to spirituality which recognizes the social dimension and expression of spirituality, affirms that God is to be encountered in engagement with rather than withdrawal from the struggles and issues of everyday life, and reflects the links between work and worship, prayer and politics, based in the conviction that Gods Spirit permeates, as George MacLeod put it, every blessed thing.

NORMAN SHANKS

■ R. Ferguson, Chasing the Wild Goose, Glasgow, Wild Goose Pubs, 1998 ■ N. Shanks, Iona – God’s Energy: The Vision and Spirituality of the Iona Community, London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1999 ■ What Is the Iona Community?, Glasgow, Wild Goose Pubs, 2000.

JERUSALEM

For over 4000 years the chosen city of God (Ps. 48:2) has been a religious palimpsest of political control  pagan, Jewish, Roman, Christian, Muslim, again Christian, again Muslim, and again Jewish. For all three Abrahamic faith communities the city remains central to their sacred geography, an echo of eternity (A. Heschel).

King David made Jerusalem his capital (c.1000 B.C.) and his son Solomon built the first temple, home of the special Presence of the covenantal God. The Babylonians destroyed it (586 B.C.) and exiled the Jews, prompting the prayer, If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither! (Ps. 137:5). Herod re-built the temple, the Romans razed it (A.D. 70), levelled the city (135), and the Jews again dispersed. After Israel had declared itself a state in 1948, it proclaimed Jerusalem the restored and eternal capital. For religious Jews it is the holiest focus of messianic hopes. It awaits that redemption which will come only when Yahwehs Annointed One chooses to arrive.

For the Muslims Jerusalem is the last of their three holiest cities, after Mecca and Medina. They believe that on the mount where Abraham had offered to sacrifice his beloved son (Ishmael) and where the former Jewish temple had stood, Muhammad ascended a ladder to the throne of Allah. This ascension confirmed the continuity between Muhammad and all previous prophets and divine messengers, including Jesus of Nazareth. The entire esplanade is a mosque, the noble sanctuary of prayer, the centre of the final judgment. The Arabs prefer to call the city al-Quds (The Holy), and to claim it as the capital of the new Palestine.

Christian medieval maps place Jerusalem at the centre of the earth, indeed of the universe. The city witnessed the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus the Messiah and Son of the Triune God. Jerusalem also birthed the mother church, the locus of the first-born (Gal. 4:26; Heb. 12:22), and the mother of all churches of all nations: Every Christian is born in Jerusalem.

As elsewhere in the holy land (Israel/Palestine), the number of Jerusalem Christians is decreasing. In 1948 they were around 32,000, or 19%, of the urban population; at the end of 2001, primarily because of forced or voluntary emigration, they were 12,000, or 2%, of the 650,000 city-dwellers  62% Jewish, 36% mostly Muslim Arabs. Some are concerned that Jerusalem and nearby Bethlehem will become bereft of the Christian living stones, a museum for pilgrims.

Jerusalem Christians may be small in number but they are many in churches: Orthodox  Greek (including Russian and Romanian), Armenian, Syrian, Coptic, Ethiopian; Catholic, in full communion with the see of Rome  Melchite, Syrian, Coptic, Ethiopian, Maronite (see Eastern Catholic churches), Latin; Protestant  Anglican, Lutheran, Baptist, Pentecostal; non-denominational  Messianic Jews and foreign Zionist fundamentalists.* Eighty percent are of the Eastern churches, 15% Latin Catholic.

The mother church still bears the not yet fully healed wounds of internecine divisions, long focused on control of the holy sites and, since the 19th century, on practices of crude proselytism.* With some success, Latin missionaries converted Orthodox, and even lured Eastern Catholics into the Latin fold. Through the Anglo-Prussian first Reformation church in the Middle East (Jerusalem 1842), Anglican and Lutheran missionaries converted Latin and Eastern Christians. Memories linger as a warning: a few Orthodox leaders wonder whether ecumenism is not in fact a new, more subtle missionary attempt to soften up vulnerable flocks.

As a very small minority vis-à-vis Jewish and Muslim majorities, since the Palestinian uprising (intifada 1987) Christian laity, clergy and hierarchs are overly conscious of necessary common witness in conflictual Jerusalem, called to be what its Hebrew name means  city of peace. Ecumenical and inter-religious sensitivities are becoming pervasive, e.g. in Christian schools and hospitals, and in groups of human rights activists, environmentalists, women, youth leaders and teachers. A spectrum of instruments gather a variety of willing constituents, such as the Ecumenical Fraternity, the Sabeel Centre of Palestinian liberation, the Interfaith Association, and the Tantur Ecumenical Institute.*

Although there is no local council of churches, twelve church leaders, including the three patriarchs  Greek, Armenian and Latin  try to meet monthly. Occasionally they issue widely publicized joint statements. Their 1994 Memorandum on the Significance of Jerusalem for Christians joined the Vatican in proposing for the walled old city a special juridical and political statute which the international community would guarantee. At least in the old city, Jewish, Christian and Muslim dwellers, visitors and pilgrims could say, its ours, and should not claim, its ours, not yours.

See also Middle East.

TOM STRANSKY

■ L. Levine ed., Jerusalem: Its Sanctity and Centrality to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, New York, Continuum 1998 ■ A. O’Mahoney, G. Gunner & K. Hintlian eds, Christian Heritage in the Holy Land, London, Scorpion Cavendish, 1995 ■ P. Walker ed., Jerusalem: Purposes of God, Cambridge, Tyndale House, 1992 ■ B. Wasserstein, Divided Jerusalem, New Haven CT, Yale UP, 2001.

KAIROS DOCUMENTS

Inspired by the South African Kairos document* of 1985, many similar kairos documents were drafted, accepted and published in different forms, by a large number of diverse groups and in different contexts, in the years to follow. Some of the well-known documents or initiatives include the following.

Kairos Central America: A Challenge to the Churches of the World was published in 1988. A variety of Christian groups in countries of Central America cooperated. The signatories, from different denominations and backgrounds, included laypeople, members of religious orders, Protestant pastors, Catholic priests and three bishops. Some North Americans living and working in Central America also signed, but because of the controversial content the names of most of the participants from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras were omitted in order to protect them. Other countries represented included Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Mexico and Belize. The document consisted of three parts. The first described the reality we live in, reflecting on life and specifically on geopolitical presence in Central America. The second part was an attempt at seeing this historic hour in Central America from a perspective of faith: signs of the kingdom and of the anti-kingdom were discerned, in what was described as constituting a kairos, posing concrete challenges and calling for specific responses. In the final part, on acting today, different audiences were challenged directly, including the ecumenical church, Latin American communities, the United States government, Latin American governments, the United Nations, multilateral organizations, churches and Christians worldwide, all in the name of the urgent need for a new order with justice and peace.

During 1989, on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the triumph of the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua, The Road to Damascus: Kairos and Conversion was issued as a joint effort by people in Africa, Central America and Asia, following a two-year process of reflection and consultation. The signatories included people from Korea, the Philippines, Namibia, South Africa, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua. In spite of the difficulties of communication and geographical distance, the preamble claimed that hundreds of people had been involved in the preparation and that thousands to whom it had been circulated agreed to sign it. Although this document also contained social and historical analysis, the main focus was on a struggle perceived within churches, between two antagonistic forms of Christianity. What they had in common was not only a situation of violent political conflict, but also the phenomenon of Christians on both sides of the conflict. The one form was seen as a deep commitment to the liberation of the poor. The other, different according to context, was seen as seeking to use church and theology to protect and serve the interests of the rich and powerful. The documents four chapters laid bare the historical and political roots of the conflict; affirmed the faith of poor and oppressed Christians; condemned the sins of those who oppress, exploit, persecute and kill people; and called to conversion those who have strayed from the truth of Christian faith and commitment. The term conversion in the title, therefore, refers to a need for continuous conversion on the part of the signatories, but even more to the conversion of those who use Christian faith to sanction the evils of injustice. The sense of historical urgency in the original South African Kairos document is again present: The time for us has come to take a stand and to speak out.

Already in the late 1980s many individuals and groups in the USA were asking whether it was time for a Kairos USA document, and initiatives through a number of networks led to many consultations, drafts and publications. In 1989 conferences at Kirkridge, Pennsylvania, and Minneapolis, Minnesota, attempted to discern the signs of the times characteristic of their situation. An important question was whether there was a need for confession of their historical complicity in ruptures of the social good. The multiple and even contradictory agendas of diverse groups in the USA raised the question whether a single Kairos document would indeed be possible and meaningful. The anniversary in 1992 of the arrival of Columbus became the occasion for intense discussion of a 1992/Kairos USA. As many as 500 groups were participating in grassroots theological discussion, in local congregations, denominational and ecumenical bodies, and especially among movements for justice and peace. Both internal conflicts, like racism, and international policies and conflicts further fuelled these initiatives to repent, remember, renew. A racially, ethnically and geographically diverse steering committee issued a Call to the Work of Repentance, urging discernment of the Kairos. A draft was discussed at a gathering of Kairos participants in Washington, DC, in 1993, where the theme of Jubilee came to the fore. A final document, On the Way: From Kairos to Jubilee, was published at Pentecost 1994.

In 1995, at a celebration of the tenth anniversary of the South African Kairos document in Chicago, with people from the Netherlands and the WCC, Geneva, also present, the issue of land was added and the theme of Jubilee justice developed, which led to a new statement of purpose, Jubilee Justice - Free the Land. This became the focus of an international network of groups and meetings, until a new mission statement was adopted in 1999.

Similar processes were taking place in Europe, through a grassroots network of justice initiatives, cooperating with social movements, churches, trade unions, and NGOs in and outside Europe, called Kairos Europa. In 1992, after five days in Strasbourg, 800 people, calling themselves Parliament of Peoples, agreed on a Kairos declaration for Europe, also addressed to the European Parliament, claiming: We do not accept this Europe, it is destroying us and our future! We do not accept this economy, it is plundering our planet! We do not accept politicians, who despise the people they are supposed to serve. No to a Fortress Europe perpetuating the old colonial claims to domination. Yes to a Europe of justice with borders open to all continents as part of a humane society worldwide!

There have been many foci in this complex alliance-building process, but resistance against what is called neo-liberal globalization started to play a crucial role. A European Kairos document was published in 1998, calling for a socially just, life-sustaining and democratic Europe. It consisted of two parts. The first saw the truth of the situation, recognized the causes, made a judgment with our hearts and minds, and finally offered alternatives for acting together, which included resistance through boycotts, designing a new vision, developing small-scale alternatives at local and regional levels, and building alliances to push for the political regaining control of transnational capital. In the second part, the focus is on churches and theology, including criticism of superficial reconciliation in church theology and a call for prophetic theology. An open letter is offered in summary.

Through the campaign starting from the United Kingdom called Jubilee 2000, the concept of a Jubilee was popularized throughout Europe. Soon calls were made for moving beyond Jubilee 2000. The Kairos 2000 project declared 1999 a year of reflection for liberation, 2000 a year of action for liberation and 2001 a time of liberation. The purpose was to build alliances for liberating people from the stranglehold of the globalized deregulated economy and its culture of competition, by developing concrete alternatives in a double strategy, strengthening local economies, communities and a new spirituality of solidarity, resistance and identity among people, as well as promoting proposals for politically re-regulating the economy at all levels according to more social, ecological and democratic criteria.

In post-independent Africa kairos theology has also found expression. Shortly before the WCCs eighth assembly in Harare, Zimbabwe, in 1998, a group of Zimbabwean Christians published a Zimbabwean Kairos document, denouncing poverty, ill-health, bad governance, corruption, fear and hopelessness in their country. The document, in preparation since 1996, was produced by the Ecumenical Support Services. It explicitly employed the methodology of the South African Kairos document, arguing that the Zimbabwean nation had been plunged into a political, economic, and above all moral crisis shaking its very foundation. It particularly criticized the ruling ZANU (PF) party of President Robert Mugabe, claiming that despite our hopes and expectations (at independence and the end of white minority rule) in 1980, today we find new black political and economic elites within the same structures. The churches were also criticized, since while some have constantly challenged injustice, both before and after independence, many have failed to educate their members about abuses of power by authorities. The Zimbabwean Kairos document responded not only to the political situation, but also to the economic system and the marginalization and poverty it caused. It was intended to encourage debate among Christians and as a guideline for those who want to engage in prophetic action.

During the eighth assembly itself a plenary session dealt with ubuntu and the African kairos. Ubuntu refers to an African sense of belonging and sharing and finding identity in being with and for others. Well-known African ecumenical theologians Barney Pityana (South Africa) and Mercy Oduyoye (Nigeria) gave introductions, linking the lived experience of African believers with the global context. Oduyoye concluded her presentation with a prayer-like call to conversion and commitment. The session ended with a liturgical act of commitment to a journey of hope by all Africans from the continent and diaspora to work for a better Africa, saying never again to the many forms of suffering and humiliation that the continents people have known, and joining in an act of covenant with God. The assembly was called to accompany them on their journey of hope and the delegates sang Nkosi Zikilela Africa as a symbol of mutual ecumenical solidarity.

All these documents and initiatives share characteristics, based on a common methodology which is often described as kairos theology.

It always begins from a sense of extreme urgency, irrespective of the deep differences between contexts and the diverse foci of the analyses of causes and consequences. It is always described as an either/or situation. The moment is decisive. The stakes are immeasurably high. They concern matters of life and death. Neutrality is no longer possible. One must be for or against. Everyone should be challenged to make this choice, to take an option. Prophetic action is called for.

All the documents and initiatives claim to be the result of group processes, over a long period of time, and representing the masses or popular, grassroots movements. They are never official, institutional documents, commissioned by authoritative bodies. The signers always claim to represent a wide variety of faith convictions, church memberships, races, classes, colours and degrees of learning.

Although in different ways, they all begin by analyzing a particular situation in the present, using diverse forms and tools of social analysis, whether concentrating on violence, exploitation, injustice, oppression, exclusion, class struggles or corruption, and regard theological reflection as a second-order activity, preceded by active engagement with and commitment to poor, suffering, oppressed and marginalized people.

All these documents take the role of churches in these historical struggles very seriously, often by being very critical, challenging others and calling them to conversion and radical change; but mostly they are self-critical and aware of their own complicity in the historical development of the evils, injustices and spirals of violence.

They all prophetically dare to name a concrete historical enemy and to locate the major causes of destruction in their respective contexts. Attempts to unmask contemporary forms of idolatry are common.

They all affirm hope, historical and social hope for those often without hope, as a major contribution of the gospel, and conclude with often detailed and specific calls for a variety of practical steps and actions, always controversial and challenging.

D.J. SMIT

■ R. Hinz, K. Lefringhausen & J. Schroer eds, Das “Damaskus Dokument” - Stimmen zu einer ökumenischen Anfrage der Armen an die Reichen, Stuttgart, Dienste in Übersee, 1993 ■ R. McAfee Brown, ed., Kairos: Three Prophetic Challenges to the Church, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1990.

LEUENBERG CHURCH FELLOWSHIP

The Leuenberg Church Fellowship (LCF) comprises over 100 churches  Lutheran, Reformed, United, Hussite, Waldensian, and Czech Brethren  which have by now endorsed the original Leuenberg agreement of 1973 (see Lutheran-Reformed dialogue) or, as with the Methodists, signed a joint declaration of church fellowship. Located principally in Europe (though including some South American churches earlier founded by German immigrants), these churches with different confessional positions accord each other fellowship in word and sacrament and strive for the fullest possible cooperation in witness and service to the world (LA 29). The relationship includes mutual recognition of ordination and the practice of reciprocal presidency at the Lords table.

GEOFFREY WAINWRIGHT

LITURGY AFTER THE LITURGY

The concept of mission* as liturgy after the Liturgy, which emerged as an Orthodox contribution to the ecumenical debate on mission in the early 1970s, centres on the double liturgical rhythm of the local Christian community: gathered for worship* and eucharist* on Sunday, then dispersed for everyday life, mission, sacrifice and witness* in the world. It draws on the insight of St John Chrysostom that outside the temple, in the public market-place, compassion for the poor* is a sacred liturgy in which the faithful are the priests.

In the eucharistic celebration the worshipping community is prepared to become an evangelizing community, and vice versa. Within this liturgical venue the faithful are both recipients of Gods gifts and agents who share these gifts with others. Eucharist is the pilgrim bread (Melbourne 1980), food for missionaries. The words let us go forth in peace at the end of the liturgy signify the sending of the people on an apostolic journey into the oikoumene, to become martyrs (witnesses; see martyrdom) of the resurrection of the crucified Christ.

There is a variety of extensions and communications of the eucharistic liturgy in the world in diverse ministries and forms, which touch mission, ethics,* culture* and society.* Evangelism* means not only oral proclamation of the gospel but also public celebration of faith, sanctification of creation, glorification of the name of God among nations. It is linked to moral and religious experience, diakonia,* spirituality* and renewal.

The dynamics of liturgy in mission include the mutual recognition of various missiologies in the ecumenical movement, in which the tendency to intellectualism in the sola scriptura (preaching) tradition and the tendency to ritualism in the sacramental (ex opere operato) tradition can be corrected.

The resistance of liturgical communities in the face of restrictions and persecution under atheistic regimes constitutes a solid basis and hope for pursuing mission in this way. The liturgical-sacramental model is not absolute, but within this context the church creates a new culture, ethos, and spirituality of receiving and sharing the gospel.

The question of how the life of the eucharistic community contributes to the life of the world, of how churches mediate the eucharistic bread of life so that it can reach and nourish the whole world is one for the whole ecumenical community. Certainly it involves the communitys life-style: the quality of life of the communion of saints* is essential for mission. As an early Christian apologist declared, See how these Christians love one another! But the potentialities of eucharistic and non-eucharistic worship need to be unfolded and their implications for wider moral, social and cultural issues cultivated.

ION BRIA

■ I. Bria, The Liturgy after the Liturgy, Geneva, 1996 ■ E. Clapsis, “The Eucharist as Missionary Event”, in Orthodoxy in Mission, G. Lemopoulos ed., WCC, 1988 ■ G. Limouris ed., Orthodox Visions of Ecumenism, Geneva, 1994 ■ I. Sauca ed., Orthodoxy and Cultures, Geneva, 1996 ■ P. Vassiliades & I. Bria, Orthodox Christian Martyria, Thessaloniki, 1989.

MEYENDORFF, JOHN B.

B. 17 Feb. 1926, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France; d. 22 July 1992, Montreal, Canada. An outstanding Russian Orthodox theologian, church historian, patristic and Byzantine scholar, Meyendorff made a significant contribution to the ecumenical movement. He studied at St Sergius Orthodox Institute and the Sorbonne in Paris, where he defended his doctoral thesis on Gregory Palamas in 1958. Ordained in 1959, he left Europe for New York to teach patristics* and church history in the faculty of St Vladimirs Orthodox Theological Seminary. He became a member of the senior fellows committee of Dumbarton Oaks (Harvards Byzantine research centre) and taught Byzantine history at Fordham University, and in 1984 took up the post of dean of St Vladimirs, following two other prominent figures from St Sergius in that capacity: Georges Florovsky and Alexander Schmemann. He retired only three weeks before his untimely death.

His ecumenical activity was exercised both within the Orthodox church and in the Christian world at large, thanks to his international reputation as a scholar and writer and his tireless commitment, engaging personality and exceptional intellectual honesty. He devoted much time and energy to the task of reconciling the Orthodox and, together with Florovsky and Schmemann, took a prominent part in achieving the establishment of the autocephalous Orthodox Church in America in 1970. However, he never ceased to work for pan-Orthodox unity, travelling to Constantinople as well as to Russia (when that became possible in the last years of his life). He became a trusted friend of Patriarch Alexis II.

After retirement he intended to adapt his many books and his teaching to the dire needs of the Russian Orthodox Church. He was also active on the ecumenical scene, and received honorary doctorates from Notre Dame University, the General Theological Seminary in New York, and the Theological Academy of St Petersburg. He was moderator of the WCCs commission on Faith and Order* (1971-75) and a member of the WCCs central committee. His most important contribution to the ecumenical movement was to be found in the open manner in which, in his countless books, lectures and articles and in his personal contacts, he witnessed to an Orthodoxy* at once traditional, in the noblest sense of the word, and attentive to the needs of today, understood as a constant distinction between what is fundamental and what is secondary under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.*

NICHOLAS LOSSKY

■ D. Obolensky, “John Meyendorff (1926-92)”, Sobornost incorporating Eastern Churches Review, 15, 2, 1993.

MIGRANT CHURCHES

The multiplication of migrant churches is a new development in the history of European Christianity and deeply changes its constituency. Whereas the first waves of immigrants after the second world war were mostly adherents of wellknown world religions such as Islam and Hinduism, today the majority of immigrants from the Caribbean, Africa and Asia to Europe are Christians. There is a growing black Christianity affirmed as such on a previously white continent. This new balance of immigrants reflects exponential church growth in the countries of origin during the past decades, whereas the urge to emigrate in general arises from the collapse of social, economic and political systems. It is strengthened by the hope of finding better living conditions in Europe.

Integration of Christian immigrants from the South in European historical churches occurs in many ways, but there is a general preference for the creation of independent prayer cells and local congregations, for several reasons: the initiative of migrant leaders who cannot meet the Western canons of church ministry or who simply claim to have received a special calling; ethnic and linguistic affinities; loyalty to a modern Christian denomination (mainly with Pentecostal or Evangelical leanings); and, most significantly, love for a specific inculturation of Christianity dearly obtained in the original African, Caribbean or Asian context. Another incentive is the example of and competition with nonChristian networks and organizations of immigrants accepted by the civil society and sometimes recognized by the state. Christian immigrants do not want to be left behind.

Some observers explain the creation of migrant churches as a reaction to white European racism. As a matter of fact, black Christian foreigners are not always welcome in European congregations, despite official exhortations or motions by synods against racism (Netherlands Reformed Church, general synod 1992: Racism Is Sin; Reformed Church of France, national synod 1998: Welcoming Foreigners). However, the frustrating experience of racism does not in itself provide believers with strong enough institutional incentives. To found a church requires a definite church model, for instance congregationalism, which is sustained by a high cultural selfconsciousness.

Many ecumenical problems arise from the multiplication of migrant churches in Europe. Mainline churches accustomed to ecumenical dialogue with wellknown partners will be forced to open new consultations with unknown church bodies belonging to other Christian traditions, often imbued with high missionary principles. The Roman Catholic episcopates have set up a pastoral network for migrants, whereas Protestant churches tend to accept migrant churches as new organizations in their own right (Evangelical Church in Germany, pastoral note on ecumenical cooperation with congregations of foreign origin or language, 1996; Federation of Evangelical Churches in Italy, Being the Church Together project, 199098). On their part, migrant churches have created national and international networks in order to foster cooperation, organize ministerial formation, and strengthen their identity (SKIN in the Netherlands; European meetings of the African Christian diaspora*).

MARC SPINDLER

■ R. Gerloff ed., “Open Space: The African Christian Diaspora in Europe and the Quest for Human Community” (IRM, 89, 354, 2000) ■ M. Spindler & A. LenobleBart eds, Chrétiens d’outremer en Europe: Un autre visage de l’immigration, Paris, Karthala, 2000 ■ G. ter Haar, Halfway to Paradise: African Christians in Europe, Cardiff, Cardiff Academic Press, 1998.

MILLENNIALISM

In Christian eschatology* millennialism refers to belief in a millennium (Latin), a thousand years of the last days on earth before the final judgment. The conviction is based on biblical prophecies interpreted as predictions, e.g. Dan. 2 and, with the only explicit mention of the number 1000, Rev. 20:1-6.

Terms

The questions are perennial, but today virtually only Protestant Evangelicals* and Pentecostals,* especially fundamentalists,* highlight them and dispute over the answers: In the relation between historical time and Gods eternal realm, how does a Christian read Gods plan according to Gods calendar? When and where will be Christs second coming, the parousia? What will be the condition then of the world and the human community? What is the nature of the thousand years and the reign of Christ with his saints?

The prefixes to the word millennium indicate general responses in church history. In the post-millennial view, Christ returns after the historical thousand years; for pre-millennialists, Christ returns before, to introduce the earthly millennium. Advocates study world events and trends, reacting either in benevolent optimism (post-millennialists) or in dire pessimism (pre-millennialists) to the fulfilments each sees of biblical predictions. A third position is inaugurated eschatology, non- or, most used, a-millennialism. It disclaims the earthly thousand years, and believes the reign of God is here in an already/not yet tension until the Sons second coming. When? Nobody knows except the Father (Mark 13:32). God reveals no clues.

History

With strong roots in Jewish apocalyptic ideas, images and movements, the early church, according to many scholars, derived its initial élan from radical millennialism (Y. Talmon). The second and third generations of Christians had to face the non-appearance of the parousia, a crisis already faced by Paul (1 Thess. 4:13-5:11) and by Peter (2 Pet. 3:3-4). Keeping alive millennial hopes of earthly crisis or judgment or vindication were writers such as Samaria-born Justin Martyr (d.165), Irenaeus of Lyons (d.202), Hippolytus of Rome (d.235), Tertullian of Carthage (d.230) and Lactantius (d.320?). Pre-millennialism in extreme practice and piety first appeared in Asia Minor. In the 170s the Montanist New Prophecy group believed Christs return so imminent that they structured their personal and communal life in bizarre, ecstatic ways. Although local Eastern synods and Pope Zephyrinus (199-217) condemned the movement, Montanism continued to move across the East and in North Africa, until severe legislation by Emperor Justinian (ruled 527-67) all but destroyed it.

Influenced by the favoured status of the church in the Roman empire, the a-millennialist position then became prevalent. Augustine of Hippo (d. 430) was its leading authority. In his City of God, he gives only allegorical or spiritual interpretations to the relevant biblical texts. The thousand years symbolize the entire finite period between Christs birth and his return  the age of the church.

Augustines prevailing position could not quiet sporadic millennialistic expectations. Many local gatherings expected the millennium in 1000 (looking back at the incarnation) and then in 1033 (looking at the passion). In the middle ages persistent demands arose for church reforms, especially of the papacy. Abbot Joachim of Fiore (d.1202) introduced the attractive theme of consecutive Trinitarian eras of history. In the third era, that of the Spirit, God intervenes through the Angelic Pope, who thoroughly reforms the church, and transfers the holy see to Jerusalem, where he holds several councils for the conversion of the world. The church witnesses a Pentecost-like outpouring of the Spirit, who spiritually illumines the believers everywhere.

In a Europe troubled by locals wars and plagues and by Muslim Turk encroachments, apocalyptic prophets were rife. Girolamo Savonarola (d.1498) tapped the gloom and hope in Florence with his accusatory prophecies, as did the Taborites, a group of Hussites in Bohemia. With Bible in hand, they had become militant revolutionaries against the established church and Catholic imperial armies, before they gathered in five divinely chosen cities to await the day of wrath and the coming of Christ during February 1420.

The magisterial Reformers opted for a-millennialism, as evidenced in the Lutheran Augsburg confession of 1530 (art. 17), the Church of Englands Thirty-nine Articles of 1571 (art. 4), the Calvinist Belgic Confession of 1619 (art. 37) and the Westminster confession of 1647 (chs 32-33). Nevertheless, the Reformation did introduce shifts which would condition the revivals of post- and pre-millennialism: a dominant literal reading of biblical texts, the viability of schisms within the church of the West and designations of the antichrist,* e.g. the popes or any religious or political leader(s) of territorial Protestantism who tried to suppress more radical reforming impulses.

Post-millennialism became articulate in the 1800s, in pietistic awakenings, which gave rise to European and American Protestant mission activities at home and in foreign lands (see missionary societies). The optimistic signs of the times indicated that the papacy was at its last gasp, and other peoples were more open than ever to receive the good news of their salvation. Gods kingdom would reach fruition by preaching that good news to everyone everywhere, through the consequent global expansion of the true church of true believers, and by civilizing all peoples based on gospel principles enfleshed in societies and personal behaviour. For Alexander Campbell, a founder of the American Disciples of Christ (1832), Christians coming together in unity is indispensable to the millennial dawning. With sin and evil brought to a minimum, the church will triumph for a thousand years (some use the number symbolically). This preparation closes with Christs return, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment.

This vision fuelled the manifest destiny of nations with global intents, namely, Britain, Protestant Europe and the USA. For example, the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (1819) judged America the new Eden, Gods agent to usher in the last days.

Pre-millennialism would have its comeback, with differences in the sub-plots, today propagated by articulate evangelists who skilfully use radio and television. These proponents highlight biblically identified signs of the times which forewarn of Christs return. These signs include the great apostasy of secularists and the resurgence of Islam, the increase of local wars, famines, earthquakes, floods and global warming. Some see on the near horizon the nuclear holocaust. Hal Lindsey, in his Late Great Planet Earth (1973) and later updated books (which have sold over 30 million copies), designates in his life-time over 500 fulfilled prophecies which begin the countdown. Soon the antichrist will appear, deceive the nations and persecute the saints. Finally, when the nations gather for the great battle of Armageddon, Christ returns to rescue his saints, crush his enemies and bind Satan. Then with his living and resurrected saints, Christ reigns in Jerusalem for a thousand years of righteousness and prosperity on earth, freed from the prior curse upon it. At the close, Christ briefly unleashes Satan and destroys him, before all will be judged and the eternal states of heaven and hell established.

A species of this apocalyptic pre-millennialism is dispensationalism. It was popularized by Plymouth Brethren John Nelson Darby (1800-92) and by the still best-selling Scofield Reference Bible (1909, rev. 1969), widely used in fundamentalist schools and seminaries. It argues that God has divided history into seven consecutive dispensations. The sixth, the present church age, will soon end, when Christ comes for his saints by the rapture or invisibly taking them from the earth, before the final tribulation, and with his saints after it. In Israels Jerusalem, for a thousand years Christ reigns as the priest, law-giver and judge.

In such calendar-fixing, problems constantly arise as predictions of precise time and/or place turn out to be mistaken, and the sincere believers, who had been expecting Christs imminent return and earthly rewards, return to day-to-day life. In 1534 militant Anabaptists flocked to their captured city of Münster, the new Jerusalem, expelled or executed its Catholics and Lutherans, and waited for the rest of the world to perish in the upcoming parousia. In April 1689 the Huguenot Camisards gathered to experience Christs coming in the Cévennes (Languedoc France). The English prophets expected the end on 25 March and their final resurrection on 25 May 1707. More recently, some prophets announced that the Y2K computer bug would devastate the world at midnight, 1 January 2000.

The churches today

Groups either fade or discover faults in their calculations, as did the adventist Millerites after the great disappointment of 1843 and 1844 (22 Oct.). Learning from that embarrassment, the now worldwide pre-millennialist Seventh-day Adventist Church* adjusted by extending the time of the final events.

The fundamentalist Jehovah Witnesses, founded in the 1870s, have a unique premillennial teaching. Christ returned spiritually in 1914 and is now overthrowing Satans projects. After the Armageddon battle he will set up a theocratic kingdom of resurrected true believers, with his more select 140,000 ruling with him in heaven.

Churches which continue the pre-millennial heritage of the European pietists and Anabaptists include the Church of the Brethren,* the Mennonites,* and the Hutterites. Baptist churches virtually ignore the subject in their confessions of faith. Individual Baptists may be pre-millennial, post-millennial or a-millenial, with the last probably the most common among the rank-and-file.

Pre-millennialist Pentecostals, one of the fastest-growing group, view the present outpouring of the Spirit as the latter rain from heaven, which profusely restores the spiritual gifts and the fruits of the Spirit (as in the Pauline lists). The outpouring is itself a fulfilment of end-time prophecy. But Pentecostal leaders repeatedly warn against setting dates for Christs return, a condition for which is the fulfilment of his prophetic command that the gospel be preached and new disciples ingathered to the end of the earth (Matt. 24:24, 28:19-20).

Such churches form but a visible crest on the wide wave of a current millennial mood or sensibility (H. Cox). Varieties are in almost every church whose members are uneasy about the assumptions and conduct of our times, as confirmed by secular commentators who foresee history ending in a spiral of ever-increasing suffering and violence, with environmental and starvation disasters. These Christians are attracted to a blueprinted hope which promises the earthly alternative of a future heaven-like city to replace the present one, too damaged and worn out to be repaired.

The Roman Catholic stance is clearly a-millennial. The official Catechism of the Catholic Church (1993) judges that the antichrists deception is the claim to realize within history [a] messianic hope; the church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism (para. 676). Yet thousands of Catholics who pay serious attention to pre-millennialist media evangelists absorb their general contents into eclectic types of a vague Catholic apocalypticism which foresees the approaching chastisement of the entire world. Aberrations are severely condemned, especially when Mary becomes the Vengeful Virgin who, through a prophet-leader,  imparts to her holy elites detailed messages of world catastrophe, punishment and damnation, and of excommunication of those church authorities who dare ignore them.

The early church experience of the anti-hierarchical Montanists who believed in the Spirits direct guidance in biblical prophecy helped to feed the Eastern bishops with questions about the apostolic authorship of Revelation; and longer than in the West, bishops excluded the book from canonical lists. Although the Greek Orthodox church accepts the book in the canon,* it continues to omit Revelation in liturgical lectionaries; pastorally, the unveiling yet concealing and puzzling book is too dangerous. Perhaps for the same reason, the Oriental Chaldean and Syrian churches never accepted Revelation (see Oriental Orthodox churches). This long tradition may explain the absence in the Eastern churches today of serious public pre-millennialist exponents or movements.

TOM STRANSKY

■ R.G. Clouse ed., The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views, Downers Grove IL, InterVarsity, 1979 ■ H. Cox, Fire from Heaven: The Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the Reshaping of Religion in the Twenty-first Century, Reading MA, Addison-Wesley, 1995 ■ M. Cuneo, The Smoke of Satan, New York, Oxford UP, 1997 (within the Catholic church) ■ R. Landes, “Millennialism”, in Encyclopedia of World Religions, Springfield MA, Merriam-Webster, 1999 ■ R.A. Landes ed., Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millennial Movements, New York, Routledge, 2000 ■ M. St Clair, Millenarian Movements in Historical Context, New York, Garland, 1992.

OPPRESSION, ECUMENICAL CONSEQUENCES OF

The support of the ecumenical movement for those struggling for liberation from oppression has been a noteworthy aspect of ecumenism during much of the 20th century. Although not perfectly and not unanimously, the ecumenical movement has in many ways been the conscience of the Christian church as it has sought to express solidarity with the oppressed and those struggling for justice. This role was particularly evident during the struggle against apartheid* in South Africa, as both inside and outside the country the ecumenical church played a key role in ending the oppressive system.

Through sharing in such endeavours, churches and Christians have often discovered the reality of their unity in Jesus Christ, despite the fact of denominational and confessional differences. Such experiences of Christian unity have been rooted in a common commitment to Jesus Christ, expressed in worship and embodied in social action. Although traditional issues of faith and order may not be discussed explicitly, the unity experienced is based implicitly on a deep faith in Gods justice, love and liberating power revealed in Jesus Christ.

However, the achievement of liberation and the transition to democracy has often coincided, in South Africa and elsewhere, with a back-tracking on ecumenical commitment and a concomitant strengthening of denominational identity and resolve. This resurgence of denominationalism* may not be surprising in hindsight because ecumenical commitment during the years of the struggle may not have fundamentally altered denominational allegiance for the vast majority within the churches. Ecumenical participation in the struggle for justice and liberation has often been limited to those who have been prepared to take a stand for the truth and accept the cost of prophetic witness. Nonetheless, it remains ecumenically tragic when Christians and churches who were engaged together in such struggles fail to build on that experience once the transition to a more just social order is achieved.

We cannot lightly dismiss the value of denominational identity, for in times of social change and crisis it has often proved a source of security and empowerment. Yet denominationalism (i.e. a failure to recognize the provisionality of denominations) is clearly a major stumbling block to the full life of the ecumenical church, making any movement beyond denominational boundaries seem threatening to the experience of koinonia, meaningful identity and relationships, and often effectiveness in mission. When denominational priorities are placed above the ecumenical mandate, and therefore above the call to the church of Jesus Christ to witness to the reign of God, then what should be a cause for mutual enrichment becomes a source of division which undermines the witness of the church.

The search for Christian unity and the struggle for justice in the world belong together, as has been amply demonstrated in many contexts. That is, the unity of the church is not simply a matter of uniting denominations in common structures and institutions but of developing koinonia* within a broken and divided world. Moreover, since the major sources of division within the church are often more social, cultural, sexual and political than theological, the search for unity must deal with these divisive realities if it is to be an authentic expression of the unity we have in Jesus Christ.

Christian unity which is culturally or socially homogeneous, even if it involves the overcoming of historic divisions, is not really an adequate expression of the Trinitarian koinonia which is given in Christ through the Spirit. Sharing the common life of the Spirit respects and yet finds a way to overcome the limitations of natural relationships with others who are not of the same culture, race, nation, gender or class. By such sharing, the church witnesses to the reign of God in Jesus Christ through the power of the Spirit.

Until the reign of God is revealed in all its fullness, both the struggle for justice and the search to express Christian unity more faithfully remain an ongoing responsibility of the Christian church. The ending of apartheid did not mean a final victory over injustice, but it ushered in a new era in the struggle against racism, poverty and the oppression of women. So the struggle for justice continues. Central to this struggle is the need to deal with the past in a way which will bring the truth into the open and lead to healing and reconciliation. Such goals are central to the ecumenical ministry of the church. How tragic it will be if now, when the witness and ministry of the church are so crucial, the church withdraws into its denominational shells and fails in being a laboratory of reconciliation and koinonia within its own life, and an agent for the healing of the nations.

See also violence, religious roots of.

JOHN W. DE GRUCHY

■ W. Boesak, God’s Wrathful Children: Political Oppression and Christian Ethics, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1995.

ORIENTAL ORTHODOX-REFORMED DIALOGUE

Informal conversations and contact among the Reformed and the Oriental Orthodox churches* during ecumenical gatherings eventually paved the way for officially organizing dialogues between these two Christian communions. A formal letter of invitation was sent by the general secretary of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches* (WARC) to the head of each of the five Oriental Orthodox churches in 1991, which led to a first meeting in 1992 among a group of authorized representatives of the Oriental Orthodox churches and representatives of the WARC at the Ecumenical Centre, Geneva. This meeting was co–chaired by Pope Shenouda III of Alexandria and Milan Opočenský, general secretary of the WARC.

Pope Shenouda III extended an invitation to hold the first dialogue session in 1993 at Anba Bishoy monastery, Wadi ElNatroun, Egypt. The mutual edification and enrichment experienced at the Anba Bishoy monastery dialogue led to a commitment by both families to pursue the dialogue on a regular basis. Subsequent meetings were held at Driebergen, Netherlands (1994); Kottayam, India (1997); Richmond, Virginia, USA (1998); Damascus, Syria (1999); Musselburgh, Scotland (2000); and Beirut, Lebanon (2001), which concluded the first phase of dialogue.

The dialogue began by dealing with the understanding of scripture* and Tradition* in each others churches, with this discussion connected to the mission and ministry of the church today. The progress has been slow but productive. The session at Richmond began a process of developing a common statement on the theological issues discussed so far.

A highlight of these dialogues was the adoption at the session in Driebergen of the agreed statement on Christology, which emerged from the biblical traditions and the patristic roots to which both the partners in dialogue owe their allegiance. The dialogues have helped these two families of churches to understand and appreciate each others theological positions and traditions and acknowledge the need for greater ecumenical cooperation in dealing with the common contemporary challenges facing Christians, humanity and creation itself.

H.S. WILSON

■ H.S. Wilson ed., Oriental Orthodox-Reformed Dialogue: The First Four Sessions, Geneva, WARC, 1998.

PENTECOSTAL-REFORMED DIALOGUE

The bilateral dialogue between the Pentecostal movement and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches* (WARC), presently in its early stages, is the first official ecumenical conversation by Pentecostals* with a Protestant world communion. Dating from the turn of the 20th century, Pentecostalism is best known for its emphasis on the ongoing sanctification* and empowerment of the Holy Spirit* in the life of the church* and its mission* in the world.

The general council of the WARC proposed the possibility of dialogue with Pentecostals at the request of its Korean members during its meeting in 1989 in Seoul, South Korea. A series of contacts followed between WARC theology secretary Henry Wilson (India) and Pentecostal theologian Cecil M. Robeck, Jr, (Pasadena, CA). Wilson and Robeck convened the organizational meeting in Mattersey, England, in 1994. Delegates reviewed the current state of Reformed-Pentecostal relations around the world, taking note of various regional discussions between their members in the Netherlands, South Africa and, to a lesser extent, the US. It was proposed that the first round of international discussions centre on the issue of spirituality* in the two traditions.

The first dialogue was hosted by the Waldensian Church on behalf of the WARC at Torre Pelice, Italy, in 1996. It was proposed that the dialogue between the two traditions seek to increase mutual understanding and respect, identify areas of theological agreement, convergence or disagreement, and explore possibilities for common witness.* Discussions revolved around the issue of spirituality in relation to biblical interpretation, justice and ecumenism. The discussions focused on the mutual challenge implied in the centrality of the Word in the Reformed tradition and the Pentecostal emphasis on the Spirit. All agreed, however, on the central role that both the Bible and the Holy Spirit play in the churchs obedience to Christ through proclamation and praxis. Delegates from both sides of the dialogue were challenged by the diversity of their respective traditions in arriving at common affirmations concerning spirituality.

The second round of talks occurred in 1997 in Chicago at McCormick Theological Seminary with the theme The Role of the Holy Spirit in the Church. Papers were offered on the relation of the Holy Spirit to scripture* and the role of the Spirit in both proclamation and spiritual gifts. Most significantly, the issue of the nature and role of prophecy* in the church today was discussed, especially in relation to the role of scripture as the criterion for discerning the apostolic witness. Both teams concurred that prophecy was vital as a means of making the apostolic voice in scripture dynamic and relevant for today, but the Reformed team tended to accent the role of prophecy in social criticism. The Pentecostals, while not discounting the importance of social criticism, emphasized prophecy as an inspired utterance for personal and ecclesial edification. Both teams confessed together that the Spirit is necessary for the function of the Bible as the word of God* for the church, for it is only by the Holy Spirit that the scriptures become the living Word of God for the church (Word and Spirit, Church and World, para. 33).

The third round took place the following year at Kappel, Switzerland, focusing on The Holy Spirit and Mission in Eschatological Perspective. Dominant attention was given to the issue of the relationship between the gospel and culture.* The Reformed team affirmed the historic commitment of Reformed churches to Jesus Christ as the way of salvation,* but in agreement with the world conference on mission and evangelism at San Antonio, Texas (1989), also noted that we cannot set limits to the saving power of God (ibid., para. 72). The Pentecostals noted their historic hesitance to recognize any possibility for salvation outside of faith in Jesus Christ. Both sides were able to confess together that the gospel implies first the salvation of humanity, but also the enhancement of human dignity and liberation (para. 70).

The fourth round of talks occurred in 1999 at Seoul, Korea, with the theme The Holy Spirit, Charisma and the Kingdom of God. Major attention was placed on the nature and function of spiritual gifts in the church. Pentecostals noted their historic emphasis on the extraordinary gifts discussed in 1 Cor. 12-14 and asked the Reformed team why such little attention is paid to these gifts in the mainstream life of many of their churches. The Reformed team noted that Reformed churches are sometimes too casual in exercising spiritual gifts and do not encourage or even sanction many of those listed in 1 Cor. 12-14. But they also resisted the notion that any one gift (like glossolalia) or set of gifts can become normative for Christian experience. Both teams agreed that no biblical listing of gifts is a template to be laid over the entire church (ibid., para. 55) and affirmed that all segments of the church need to broaden their understanding of the spiritual gifts.

The fifth meeting in Brazil was occupied with the writing of the final report for the first five years of talks, which has now been published. Discussions are underway concerning the possibility of another five years of conversation. Regardless of what the future holds for the dialogue, the talks since 1996 have helped to build bridges of understanding between these two significant families of Christians.

FRANK D. MACCHIA

■ F.D. Macchia, “Spirit, Word, and Kingdom: Theological Reflections on the Reformed/Pentecostal Dialogue”, Ecumenical Trends, 30, 3, 2001 ■ “Word and Spirit, Church and World: The Final Report of the International Dialogue between Representatives of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches and Some Classical Pentecostal Churches and Leaders, 1996-2000, Pneuma: Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, 23, 1, 2001.

PORVOO COMMUNION

The Porvoo communion comprises those episcopally ordered churches of Northern Europe which are in communion by virtue of their approval of the 1992 Porvoo Declaration. As of 2000 these were the Anglican churches in England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales; and the Lutheran churches in Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Lithuania, Norway and Sweden.

See also Anglican-Lutheran dialogue.

DAVID TUSTIN

PROSTITUTION, CHILD

Children have been used in organized prostitution in Europe, Asia and the Middle East from earliest times. The practice became less common at the beginning of the 20th century, but the last decade has seen an alarming increase in the number of children used in prostitution. Estimates from Unicef and governments indicate that there could be as many as 2 million children under the age of 16 years in forced prostitution worldwide. The growth has been attributed, inter alia, to fear of HIV/AIDS, a resurgence of patriarchal power, confused morality and the growth of tourism.

In May 1990 the Ecumenical Coalition on Third World Tourism convened an ecumenical consultation on Asian child prostitution in Chiang Mai, Thailand. This meeting received research documents prepared by national councils of churches which pointed to widespread use of children in prostitution in Thailand, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, India and Taiwan. It also concluded that foreign travellers were helping to fuel the demand for children as sex partners. The meeting set up a continuation committee which established an international non-governmental agency to be known as End Child Prostitution in Asian Tourism (Ecpat).

The new agency was initially funded by ecumenical development agencies in Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Australia, and headquarters were established in Thailand. The issue soon became international, and within three years Ecpat had 26 offices around the world. Initial success came with the decision of a number of governments to amend their extra-territorial laws to make possible the conviction of child sex abusers for crimes overseas: Germany passed the new law in 1993; France and Australia in 1994; the USA, Belgium and New Zealand in 1995.

Interpol set up a special branch to deal with child prostitution, and for the first time the issue was being seen as an international matter. By 1996 Ecpat had moved beyond Asia to become an international agency and had changed the meaning of its acronym to End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and Trafficking in Children for Sexual Purposes, following the three areas of child sex abuse listed in the UN convention on the rights of the child.

The first world congress against the commercial sexual exploitation of children was held in 1996 in Stockholm. The meeting was unique because it brought together government delegates with representatives of non-governmental organizations and churches working on the issue. Official delegations from 119 governments attended and adopted a declaration and an agenda for action which undertook to put in place by the year 2000 strategies which would help end child prostitution. A second world congress was be held in Yokohama, Japan, in December 2001, with representatives from 134 governments participating.

RON OGRADY

■ R. O’Grady, The Hidden Shame of the Church: Sexual Abuse of Children and the Church, WCC, 2001 ■ R. O’Grady, The Rape of the Innocent: One Million Children Trapped in the Slavery of Prostitution, Bangkok, Ecpat, 1994.

RADIO

Radio has sometimes served as a catalyst for ecumenical understanding, especially in countries where broadcasting has been a state monopoly and where the various Christian traditions are strongly represented. This role was particularly marked in Britain where, in the early 1920s, the English and Welsh Nonconformist churches still retained some of their 19th-century strength and where Roman Catholicism posed no numerical challenge to the established churches of England and Scotland. Despite initial misgivings by the Roman Catholic hierarchy, the main churches were soon working together in the BBC (which allowed the churches no direct control over programmes). Ecumenism was encouraged by the BBC provision of its own worship studios and even a BBC hymnbook. In 1926 the (ecumenical) Sunday committee became known as the central religious advisory committee.

Other European countries took a different route. In the north, until the 1990s, the Lutheran state churches retained control over worship broadcasts, as did the Catholic church in Spain, Italy and Portugal. In the Netherlands, each tradition has been provided with its own self-contained radio channel. Matching funding by the state has been allocated in direct proportion to the number of subscribers. One aspect of the Hungarian system (which has survived for more than 70 years) allows the state to allot religious airtime in proportion to the number of Catholic, Calvinist, Lutheran, Baptist and Methodist adherents in the population  an arrangement that is even-handed but certainly not ecumenical.

Religious programming which answers the needs of specific communities or which reflects local socio-cultural circumstances is finding a niche in countries seeking to reclaim lost histories and re-establish long-suppressed identities. We see this development in the countries of the former Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe. However, it is no less true of Western Europe, where local radio and cable TV stations offer Christian channels and where, in some countries, religious broadcasting is for a minority.

In Europe, as elsewhere, current trends towards technological convergence and globalization suggest that religious programming must simultaneously maintain its place in public service broadcasting (with its open audience) and pursue alternatives in privately funded channels (with their closed audience). Rapid digitalization of both radio and television technologies, together with the expansion of satellite and cable networks, will also offer other possibilities, such as the Internet, where there are numerous contact points for faith groups.

Radio remains the most effective means of communication in Africa. Its importance lies in the fact that it surpasses all other media in terms of audience accessibility and use. None of the churches or Christian councils owns a radio station, although a good number of them do have their own recording studios, where a variety of programmes are produced, then broadcast over the national networks. Mainline denominations have invested in transmitters within Africa, particularly ELWA (Lutheran World Federation). Evangelical radio has long been active. IBRA (Sweden) is active in East Africa.

In most sub-Saharan countries, airtime is given free to churches. The World Association for Christian Communication (WACC) has been supporting programmes in Cameroon, Sudan, Botswana and Congo. In Rwanda, WACC has long supported the radio ministry of the Protestant council, through donating production costs and sponsoring radio producers workshops.

Radio is particularly important to Christian mission in Asia. In many cases, only short-wave radio has maintained embattled Christian communities. The world service religious programmes of a number of Western countries (conspicuously Britain) have been widely influential and usually non-divisive. The effects of short-wave Evangelical broadcasts to Soviet Asia and China are still being assessed. Broadcasts from the Seychelles by FEBA (Far Eastern Broadcasting) have become well-known in India and have included a mix of programming. Locally generated Christian radio is heard predominantly in Indonesia. Radio Sion is operated by the Evangelical Christian Church (Reformed background) in Minahasa, Sulawesi province. The station broadcasts in FM on social and development issues in the region, mostly to farmers and fishermen.

Christian radio is strongest of all in the Philippines. The Development Education Media Services (DEMS) in the southern Filipino city of Davao is a non-governmental organization which was successful in broadcasting social issue-oriented dramas as a way of empowering people, especially the peasant community in Mindanao. What is unique in DEMS work is that its programmes were contributed by peasants, church workers of different religious backgrounds, and high school and college students. The production is therefore low-cost but effective.

Christian radio stations in Asia have their own training and technical challenges, as well as limitations on freedom of expression. As the pace of change in terms of both economy and politics increases dramatically in this vast and pluralistic continent, Christian radio continues to play a role in the development and the empowerment of people.

The predominantly Christian Pacific region is characterized by the active involvement of Christians in radio and TV. Kristen Redio in Lae, Papua New Guinea, provides an ecumenical presence of Christian programmes in the largest island nation in the Pacific. A United Church pastor/broadcaster works for the government radio religious programmes section. Many Christians work for the secular EM-TV in all aspects of production. Christian communicators have formed concern groups to monitor TV programmes and educate the public on issues relating to them. Media Watch is an occasional newsletter in Fiji which is produced by a group of concerned Christians on media awareness. They hold regular meetings with TV producers and government regulators.

The radio bombardment of Latin America with a radio religion that preaches a highly individualistic version of the Christian message has done little to foster ecumenical understanding. An honourable exception is KCJB Quito (The Voice of the Andes), which is involved in local broadcasting and charitable work as well as worldwide broadcasting.

The USA continues to host the single largest concentration of Christian broadcasting interests in the world. With 1328 Christian radio stations, 163 Christian television stations, assorted Christian cable channels and Internet-based Christian radio and television networks, the medium and the message seem to be thriving in a highly competitive, commercial environment.

Religious radio began in the United States. In the 1930s the new coast-to-coast radio networks relied for input from Catholic, mainline-Protestant and Jewish organizations. Under the Nixon presidency (1969-74), a process of government deregulation transformed religious broadcasting. While a commitment to provide religious programming remained a requirement in broadcast-licence applications, these religious programmes would no longer be required to be in company-provided free airtime (sustaining time). In other words, companies could now accept payment for religious programming. A number of other deregulatory measures sealed the fate of any special deal between the mainline churches and public broadcasting. From the 1960s, Evangelicals began to dominate American religious broadcasting.

The market for Christian/commercial broadcasting is finite. Large commercially driven Christian stations have begun to encounter the same commercial problems as their secular counterparts. The mainline churches have begun to compete, and all indications suggest that audiences for religious broadcasting are more discriminating in their listening than believed previously.

As the statement of global communication for justice, brought out by the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA and approved by the general board in November 1993, affirms: We understand communication to be basic to community and the right to communicate a basic human right. The right to receive and to provide information is as fundamental to the quality of life as worship, food, clothing and shelter. Christians, as citizens, have an obligation to exert whatever influence they can to ensure that the mass media in our society operate to serve the public good rather than merely commercial interests or those of individuals.

PETER ELVY

RAISER, KONRAD

B. 25 Jan. 1938, Magdeburg, Germany. General secretary of the WCC, 1993-. From a first theological degree in Tübingen in 1963 and ordination in 1964, he went on to earn a masters degree in 1965 and a doctorate in 1970. After doing industrial and social chaplaincy in Berlin and Stuttgart, Raiser spent a year at Harvard studying sociology and social psychology. His first period with the WCC was from 1969 to 1983, as study secretary in Faith and Order, then deputy general secretary. He followed this with a professorship in systematic theology and ecumenics at the Protestant theological faculty of the University of the Ruhr in Bochum, Germany, until taking up his current post. Raiser was an adviser and a member of the drafting committees at the European Ecumenical Assembly in Basel, Switzerland, in 1989, and at the WCCs world convocation on Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation in Seoul, Korea, in 1990. He also served as vice-moderator of the reference committee at the WCCs Canberra assembly in 1991, where he was a delegate of his church. He was awarded an honorary doctorate by the University of Geneva in 1996.

Pauline Webb

■ K. Raiser, For a Culture of Life, WCC, 2002 ■ Identität und Sozialität, 1971 ■ Ökumene im Übergang (ET Ecumenism in Transition, WCC, 1991) ■ To Be the Church, WCC, 1997.

ROMAN CURIA

Largely the creation of Pope Sixtus V in 1588, who sought to implement the Counter-Reformation more effectively, the Roman curia (essentially the Vatican bureaucracy) carries out, under direct authority of the pope, his governing responsibilities for the institutional, pastoral and missionary needs of the worldwide church. Paul VI legislated curial reforms in 1967, as did John Paul II in 1988.

To clarify often popularly interchangeable identifications: the apostolic see (of Rome) or holy see (of Rome) applies not only to the pope or Roman pontiff but also to the Roman curia. The Vatican is the 106 acres on one of the seven Roman hills (Vaticanus) that includes the present papal residence, some offices of the Roman curia and St Peters basilica.

The curial departments (discasteries) of various ranks have assigned tasks, supervised overall by the secretariat of state. These are congregations (among the 9: for the doctrine of the faith, for the Oriental [i.e. Eastern Catholic] churches, for bishops, for the clergy, for the evangelization of peoples, for catholic education); pontifical councils (among the 11: for the laity, for promoting Christian unity, for inter-religious dialogue, for culture [including dialogue with non-believers], for justice and peace, Cor Unum [i.e. for Catholic aid and human development projects], for social communications); and commissions (among the 11: for theology, for the Bible, for archaeology, for Vatican finances). Attached to the Roman curia are institutions such as the Vatican Radio, LOsservatore Romano, the TV Centre, Vatican Polyglot Press, the Vatican library and papal charities.

The cardinal head of a department is a member of others with overlapping concerns. For example, the cardinal president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity* is an ex officio member of the congregations for the doctrine of the faith, the evangelization of peoples, the Oriental churches, and divine worship and the discipline of the sacraments, and he is a consultant to the council for inter-religious dialogue. Most of the congregations, councils and commissions conduct plenaries every one to two years, with members and consultants attending from around the world.

In 2000 the Vatican spent US$194.4 million for curial salaries and operations, plus the cost of maintaining and operating St Peters, the library, the radio and TV stations, diplomatic embassies, and the special jubilee events. The Vatican also subsidized many overseas seminaries, other educational institutions, and health and social development facilities. In the same year, the Vatican took in about US$203 million, primarily from investments and donations from local churches, foundations and individuals.

Tensions remain between the Roman curia and national episcopal conferences over the degree of freedom deserved by the latter in decision making, and the consultative role of the occasional synods of bishops in Rome. Behind these tensions are various understandings and practices of collegiality.*

TOM STRANSKY

■ J. Lahey, “Roman Curia”, in The HarperCollins Encyclopedia of Catholicism, R. McBrien ed., San Francisco, HarperCollins, 1995 ■ P. Nichols, The Pope’s Divisions, London, Faber, 1981 ■ T. Reese, Inside the Vatican, London, Oxford UP, 1996. The offices and officials of the Roman curia are listed in the yearly Annuario Pontificio, Vatican Polyglot Press.

SANTEGIDIO COMMUNITY

In 1968 Andrea Riccardi, an Italian high school student, launched a new lay community from the small Roman church of SantEgidio (St Giles). It sought to implement Second Vatican Council demands in the light of the gospel by a common spirituality in providing service to the poor of Rome, the forgotten people. Its ministries include soup kitchens, popular schools for disadvantaged children, and care for neglected elderly and AIDS victims. At the beginning of the millennium this fast-growing new movement, a favourite of John Paul II, lists 15,000 lay members in more than 20 countries worldwide.

In October 1992 SantEgidio brokered a peace accord in Mozambique, ending a brutal civil war that had left over one million dead over almost two decades. In December 1996 the community negotiated an end to the civil war in Guatemala and paved the way for a truth commission to document 26 years of horrors. Former UN secretary-general Boutros Boutros-Ghali coined the phrase the Rome formula in reference to the powerless SantEgidios careful and honest approach with the politically powerful.

The commitment to peace led the community also to ecumenical and inter-religious relations. In the 1990s it began to sponsor annual inter-religious gatherings. In September 2000 a Lisbon summit of 250 leaders of 10 religions from 52 nations was sponsored by SantEgidio and the cardinal archbishop of Lisbon. The summit, called Oceans of Peace, agreed that struggles against poverty, war and the death penalty create zones for inter-religious cooperation without tripping anyones theological wires.

Every evening in Romes Santa Maria in Trastevere, the community offers public vespers, drawing large numbers of young Romans and pilgrims who witness the clear connection between liturgy and life.

TOM STRANSKY

SOCIOLOGY OF ECUMENISM

When the academic discipline of ecumenics was institutionalized in the form of professorships, lectureships and ecumenical institutes in the 1960s and 1970s, specialists were generally appointed from the disciplines of dogmatics, church history and biblical studies. This history explains why the sociology of ecumenism is still a rather under-developed discipline. Recent developments in the sociology of ecumenism also tend to be overlooked by ecumenists. For example, neither the Classified Catalogue of the Ecumenical Movement (1972) nor the first edition of this dictionary includes an entry on the sociology of ecumenism. Bergers seminal article A Market Model for the Analysis of Ecumenicity (1963) is not listed in the WCC catalogue, while Curries historical-sociological analysis of British Methodism (1968) appears under Methodist positions in the ecumenical movement. Nevertheless, Robert Towler (a sociologist of religion) rightly insisted in 1974 that an ideology as strong and persuasive as ecumenism deserves careful study.

The general neglect of the sociology of ecumenism in ecumenical circles can also be attributed to the fact that scholars in this relatively new sub-discipline usually discuss their findings rather with other sociologists. For example, the programmes of the Religious Research Association, the Association for the Sociology of Religion (in the USA) and the sociology of religion section of the British Sociological Association now feature at least some papers on ecumenical issues. Social scientists operating in this field also tend to publish their work in sociological journals, which are not always read by ecumenists trained in (biblical) theology and church history.

There have indeed been some contacts between ecumenists and social scientists. As early as 1929, H. Richard Niebuhr (who was profoundly influenced by the socio-theology of Troeltsch) published The Social Sources of Denominationalism to show that such sociological factors as race and social class could well explain the persistent tendency in Protestant churches towards schism and denominationalism. Hence the long debate in the ecumenical movement on The Non-Theological Factors in the Making and Unmaking of Church Unity which began in Edinburgh (1937) and continued until 1963 (Montreal). Niebuhr, however, thought that he had overstated his case in 1929, and thus he wrote The Kingdom of God in America (1937). There Niebuhr no longer treats the non-theological factors as the independent variable in the ecumenical equation but, rather, the power of theology. In short, theology is not always an epiphenomenon of the sociological factors. Sociologically speaking, however, it is still not clear whether theological or non-theological factors function as independent or dependent variables in the ecumenical process.

C.H. Dodd reopened this debate during preparations for the meeting of Faith and Order in Lund (1952) with his letter on Unavowed Motives, which explains why Nils Ehrenström and W.G. Muelder prepared a report on Institutionalism and Church Unity, discussed at Montreal (1963). It is still the only explicitly sociological report ever commissioned by F&O. Between New Delhi (1961) and Uppsala (1968), sociologists such as H.J. Margull organized the project entitled the Missionary Structure of the Congregation* at the request of the WCC Department on Studies in Evangelism. Since the 1960s, most of the work in this field (esp. the generation of market models of ecumenism) has been done in departments of sociology and/or departments of religious studies and is usually reported in sociological publications.

One of the most promising approaches is based upon the theory and practice of historical sociology. It begins with the ideals of the ecumenical pioneers, which gave rise to unofficial trans-denominational protest movements (YMCA, YWCA, SCMs, interfaith peace movements etc.). Some of their members subsequently rose through the ranks of their own denominations, hence the emergence of an official ecumenical elite which was able to officialize such ecumenical institutions as the IMC and organize the classic ecumenical conferences (F&O and L&W) to which denominations sent officially appointed delegates. Their continuation committees were amalgamated in 1948 (IMC in 1961) in order to socially construct the WCC. Meanwhile, the ecumenical elite has also socially constructed a worldwide network of councils of churches from the global to the local level, whose hubs gradually transformed themselves into ecumenical bureaucracies in the process.

Meanwhile, the application of the Lund principle* (1952) seems to have shifted the focus of ecumenical action from the social movements and international conferences towards ecumenical negotiations (dialogue), and the evaluation of consensus texts. Hence the growing gulf between the officials and the social movements which Willaime describes in terms of disjointed ecumenism (oecuménisme écartelé). In short, the ecumenical process has transformed itself into a species of ecumenical diplomacy practised by experts, and the historical phase characterized by social movements seems to have ended (ch. 1). Although some ecumenical social movements did become weaker in the 1960s (the Dutch SCM later disbanded), their alleged demise is more apparent than real; ecumenists do not always familiarize themselves with descriptions of (new) ecumenical movements in the sociological journals. Nevertheless, there are signs of a growing lack of communication between the elite and the grassroots. For example, the consensus texts of the elite are not always received at local or intermediate levels (reception*), while officials sometimes refuse to sponsor (new) ecumenical movements such as those concerned for justice, peace and the integrity of creation.

PETER STAPLES

■ J.-P. Willaime ed., Vers de nouveaux oecuménismes: Les paradoxes contemporains de loecuménisme: Recherches dunité et quêtes didentité, Paris, Cerf, 1989.

THEOLOGY OF RELIGIONS

The theology of religions involves the attempt, by Christian theologians, to reflect upon the meaning and significance of non-Christian religious beliefs and practices from the standpoint of Christian revelation. This theological discipline, which has emerged since Vatican II* among Catholics and Protestants alike, should not be confused with the history of religions (Religionsgeschichte) or the philosophy of religion. It differs from the latter two approaches by virtue of its explicit dependence upon Gods revelation in Christ as the decisive framework in which religious data are interpreted.

Questions discussed under this rubric include the following: What conditions must obtain for adherents of other religions to experience salvation (as it is understood within the Christian faith)? For example, must they express explicit faith in Christ? Are non-Christian religions to be viewed simply as expressions of unbelief, or is it possible that they play some hidden role in Gods plan of salvation* for humankind? What theological explanation can be offered of the phenomenon of human religiosity? To what end, and on what basis, should Christians enter into dialogue with adherents of other religions? Finally, to what extent can one draw upon elements of non-Christian religious traditions in building indigenous churches in missionary contexts?

Much of the debate regarding a Christian theology of religions has been shaped by the exclusivist-inclusivist-pluralist typology. Exclusivism has been associated with the position that salvation can be found only through the person and work of Jesus Christ and that saving grace* is not mediated through the teachings and practices of other religions. (Exclusivists, however, are divided regarding the necessity of explicit faith in Christ as a condition for salvation. Some prefer to take an agnostic stance on this question.) Inclusivism generally denotes the view that salvation extends beyond the witness of the church and that non-Christian religions play some positive role in Gods plan for humanity. (Inclusivists, however, are divided on the question of whether non-Christian religions, qua religions, constitute channels through which salvation is mediated.) As an interpretation of religion, pluralism* denotes the viewpoint that all religions are culturally conditioned, yet authentic, responses to a largely unknown divine ultimate Reality (cf. John Hick).

Although the exclusivist-inclusivist-pluralist typology framed this discussion for almost two decades, three important limitations beset it. First, the typology focuses almost exclusively on soteriology to the neglect of other important questions. Second, as emerging proposals have become increasingly complex, its explanatory power has diminished. Finally, as Gavin DCosta has noted, this typology implicitly veils the fact that every interpretation of religion is exclusive in that it offers a tradition-specific account of other religions (The Meeting of Religions, 22). DCosta claims that the idea of a neutral interpretation of religion is simply an Enlightenment myth.

Recent proposals

In his book, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism, the Belgian Jesuit Jacques Dupuis argues that the two hands of God, the Word and the Spirit, are universally present and active in non-Christian religions. As a result of the Spirits inspiration, revelation can be encountered in the sacred writings of non-Christian religions. For example, sacred scriptures such as the Quran can be viewed as containing the word of God (245). Building upon the foundation of Karl Rahner, Dupuis claims that non-Christian religions constitute channels of salvation through which efficacious grace is mediated to their adherents. For example, the worship of images may constitute a means of grace for Hindus: [T]he worship of sacred images can be the sacramental sign in and through which the devotee responds to the offer of divine grace; it can mediate secretly the grace offered by God in Jesus Christ and express the human response to Gods gratuitous gift in him (303). Dupuis views have come under the scrutiny of Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Mark Heim, a Protestant theologian, outlines a very different proposal in The Depth of the Riches: A Trinitarian Theology of Religious Ends. He suggests that the debate over the theology of religions has proceeded upon the largely undefended assumption that there is and can only be one religious end, one actual religious fulfilment (17). This assumption, he claims, must be rejected. Heim suggests that while Christians will experience salvation (communion with the Triune God), adherents of other religions may experience other positive ends which are not salvation. For example, while a Christian may experience communion with God, a Buddhist may experience nirvana. These various religious ends are all, in fact, rooted in an encounter with the Triune God, whether so named or not: I contend that distinctive religious ends sought and realized in other religious traditions are grounded in apprehension of and connection with specific dimensions of the divine life of the Triune God (9). According to Heim, the divine life of the Triune God generates three dimensions. Multiple religious ends obtain as a result of an intensified relation with one of these dimensions: The presence of the Triune God in creation in such varied dimensions has the perplexing effect of allowing persons to form various and even contradictory visions of God. These then can become moulds within which to construe the entire human relation with God. These form the basis for a variety of religious ends, marked by an intensification of a particular kind of relation with an aspect of the divine life (289).

Writing from a Pentecostal-charismatic perspective, Amos Yong has outlined a pneumatological theology of religions. The metaphysical foundation for his proposal is the universal divine presence of the Spirit in the world. Yong claims that Pentecostals and charismatics must learn to discern the Spirits presence in other religions by employing a pneumatological imagination. This does not entail the affirmation that the Spirit inspires every form of religious experience. Indeed, a proper Pentecostal theology of religions must be able to account not only for the transformative nature of religious experience but also the negative element produced by spiritually destructive fields of force symbolized by divine absence or the demonic (Discerning the Spirit(s), 312). To this end, Yong outlines a three-tiered process for discerning the activity of the Spirit in other religions. The first element is phenomenological-experiential, the second component is moral-ethical and the third is theological-soteriological (250). Although discerning the Spirit(s) is a complex affair, responsible Christians must engage in it.

Finally, from an Evangelical perspective, Harold Netland claims that the phenomenon of human religiosity must be viewed against the backdrop of the biblical themes of creation, revelation, sin and redemption. On the one hand, every human being possesses, no matter how limited and distorted, an awareness of God. Thus, We can think of religions as displaying, in varying degrees, a rudimentary awareness of Gods reality through creation and general revelation (Encountering Religious Pluralism, 333). As a result, one should not be surprised to encounter elements of truth in other religions; nor should one be surprised by similarities in moral teaching among religions. On the other hand, religions are not merely benign expressions of humanity reaching out to God. Every aspect of human life, including the religious dimension, has been corrupted by sin. Thus, a paradox exists: created in the image of God, human beings long for a relationship with God; however, as sinners they rebel against God and hide. While a religion can be a way of reaching out to God, it can also be a means of hiding from him (332). Because of sin, every human being stands under Gods judgment. The only remedy for this problem is the atoning work of Christ on the cross. Thus, Jesus Christ is the only Saviour for all humankind, including adherents of other religions. This is why the gospel, by nature, has a missionary orientation. Those who turn to God in faith and repentance experience salvation. Gods love and mercy extends to people everywhere, including adherents of other religions. Rather than dogmatically speculating about the fate of the unevangelized, the church should place its trust in a holy and righteous God who treats all people justly as it graciously proclaims Christ as the way, the truth and the life.

Clearly, differences in constructive proposals are, to a large degree, shaped both by differing methodological assumptions regarding the hermeneutic relation(s) of biblical teaching and religious data as well as differing theological assumptions. Ones understanding of anthropology, ecclesiology, soteriology and doctrine of God* deeply influences the content of specific proposals. Recently the doctrine of the Trinity* has played an increasing role as several theologians have attempted to employ this doctrine, albeit variously understood, as the constitutive basis for a Christian theology of religions.

See also dialogue, interfaith; mission; uniqueness of Christ.

KEITH E. JOHNSON

■ G. D’Costa, The Meeting of Religions and the Trinity, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 2000 ■ M. Dhavamony, Christian Theology of Religions: A Systematic Reflection on the Christian Understanding of World Religions, Bern, Peter Lang, 1998 ■ J. Dupuis, Toward a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism, Maryknoll NY, Orbis, 1997 ■ S.M. Heim, The Depth of the Riches: A Trinitarian Theology of Religious Ends, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 2001 ■ J. Hick, A Christian Theology of Religions: The Rainbow of Faiths, Louisville KY, Westminster John Knox, 1995 ■ H. Netland, Encountering Religious Pluralism: The Challenge to Christian Faith and Mission, Downers Grove IL, InterVarsity, 2001 ■ A. Yong, Discerning the Spirit(s): A Pentecostal-Charismatic Contribution to a Christian Theology of Religions, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2000.

THEOLOGY, PUBLIC

The term public theology first appeared in English in an analysis of the contributions of Reinhold Niebuhr by Martin Marty (1974), but it points towards a wider and deeper strand of theological reflection rooted in the interaction of biblical insight, philosophical analysis, historical discernment and social formation. In America, Martin Luther King, Jr, later became a model of public theology in its activist mode, re-invigorating a tradition, obscured temporarily by notions of inevitable secularization, that the clergy are public intellectuals. This form of discourse seeks to offer an interpretation of the common life and to provide the moral and spiritual vision to guide it, and it claims that theology is indispensable to both tasks.

The idea also appeared in German theology, especially as introduced by Wolfgang Huber, as the issues of the relationship of church preaching to public discourse was debated in the European context in the face of the powerful influence of Karl Barth and a number of ongoing discussions of the Barmen declaration and the lingering influence of the political theologies of, for example, Carl Schmitt on the right and Ernst Bloch on the left. From these sources public theology has come to signal the idea, not only that the theologian and pastor may address public matters, but in fact that they must do so, since the inner architecture of civil society always has moral and spiritual dimensions that demand attention and guidance.

The roots of such views are found in the prophets, in Jesus preaching and teaching, and in Pauls encounters at the Acropolis. Augustines City of God, Thomas Aquinass writings on justice and the reformers teachings about orders of creation, vocation, covenant and the relationship of law and gospel, and more recent developments such as Abraham Kuypers theology of the spheres, Ernst Troeltschs quest for a Christian social philosophy and Walter Rauschenbuschs theology for the social gospel variously anticipate and influence contemporary developments. All presume that theology, while always related to personal faith, particular faith communities and concrete social conditions, is at its most profound levels neither contextually determined nor an unwarranted claim about the way things are and ought to be. Public theology differs from liberation theology,* with which it otherwise shares a concern for social justice, for it resists contextualism and the use of Marxist analysis, both of which it views as reductionistic and frequently subversive of justice and truth.

The term was developed also by others. John Courtney Murray and David Tracy, for example, connected the idea to Roman Catholic teachings in the social encyclicals, from Rerum Novarum on labour by Pope Leo XIII, through Quadragesimo Anno on the ideas of subsidiarity and of solidarity by Pius XI and Pacem in Terris by John XXIII, all of which anticipated aspects of Vatican II and contemporary statements by recent popes to the UN on racism, war, human rights and more recent thought about pluralism. Tracy points out that although many today turn to human experience to find a basis for common morality and meaning, experience turns out to be even more pluralistic than doctrine and provides no means to interpret itself. Various modes of public discourse are needed to discern its meanings.

Public theologians, especially in the face of current global trends, have identified a variety of publics. They can be discovered by posing a series of questions. First, the religious public can be identified by this question: What can and should be preached and taught among those who seek faithful living and thinking according to the most holy, and thus the most comprehensive, righteous and enduring reality to which humans can point? Christians will, of course, have a ready answer, but it will have to be tested by inter-religious encounter.

Second is the political public. The question here is: What is the best vision of, and the motivation for, the just use of power, so that the common life can flourish? Public theology, in other words, not only must make sense in the faith commmunity, it must show that it can help shape viable government, precisely because it sees the public of civil society as prior to any regime or republic. It differs from political theology in so far as the latter sees politics as the comprehending institution rather than as a necessary, dependent and limited one. Public theology thus allies itself with a social theory of politics rather than a political theory of society.

Third is the academic public, found by asking: What claims can best be called true or valid because they can best withstand critical analysis and offer convincing arguments or evidence in the face of informed scrutiny? This question implies that public theology can learn from philosophy, science and the professions, and has something to contribute to them.

To these publics we must add the economic: What modes of production, finance, exchange and distribution best allow us, worldwide, to create plenty, to relieve want and drudgery, and to enable the material well-being of humanity? Furthermore, today many issues of family life, of the relations between males and females, parents and children, and nuclear and extended patterns of obligation are of public concern, for traditional guidelines are under strain or seen as problematic. Thus, what patterns of morality, relationship and care can best guide those who seek to embody love rightly and well in publicly recognized bonds of matrimony?

There are objections to public theology. Some argue that theology has nothing essential to do with these publics. Some say that theology is essentially personal, not social. Others say that it is and should be an articulation of revelation or of the faith of a particular believing community. Public theology may draw from such dogmatic and confessional emphases, but it also has an apologetic emphasis. While revelation* and faith* are gifts of God, not all claims about them are of equal validity or can shape public discourse. Public theologians hold that it is not only possible but necessary to assess them as to whether they accord with the most universal understandings of holiness, justice, truth, creativity and love we can know.

Disagreement over this matter has, however, led to two wings of public theology. One is more deeply indebted to the fideist definitions of theology and has allied itself to recent forms of post-modern thought, for both groups doubt that any universalistic arguments about such matters can be sustained. This wing calls upon believers boldly to proclaim what can only be known through the eyes of faith, for in public life everyone else is also presenting views that are based on unverified convictions. Believers claim a place at the table of incommensurable discourses on the grounds of inevitable pluralism and the justice of fair access.

A second wing argues that the purported break-up of meaning is overstated and that the capacity of humans to learn each others languages and to engage in meaningful debate about such matters as human rights, sound ecology, fair trade, good technology, quality medicine and just law suggests a deeper substratum of ecumenical commonality. While some speak of natural law, others speak of common grace that allows the claims of theology to be understood and assessed  even by those who do not share in a particular faith. This wing holds that we can, and are obligated to, give an account of the faith that is within us, in part because it is necessary for the well-being of the neighbour and in part to test our own myopia.

Public theologians differ on the interpretation of modernity. This Western development did not entirely deny that religion could be a powerful force in peoples lives, but it doubted that theological matters could be reasonably defended and were necessary for civil society.* Some saw them as the source of conflict. They were relegated to the private sphere of preferences and were denied a public role. Science, philosophy and politics were thought to have firm foundations and thus to be sufficient for interpreting and guiding civil society.

Public theologians agree among themselves that this view is mistaken, but the fideist wing tends to hold that science, philosophy and politics are governed as much by subjective, irrational preferences as is theology, while the apologetic wing tends to think that modernity has valid aspects but in fact has misunderstood its own foundations. Modern science, philosophy and politics are, in this view, more profoundly based on universally valid, reasonable, theological bases than they acknowledge. Indeed, they often irrationally obscure or deny those bases. The decisive task of an ecumenical public theology would therefore be to uncover and recast them for today in order to interpret and to guide our post-modern, emerging global civilization.

See also theology, political.

MAX L. STACKHOUSE

■ R. Benne, The Paradoxical Vision: A Public Theology for the Twenty-first Century, Philadelphia, Fortress, 1995 ■ W. Huber, Kirche und Öffentlichkeit, Stuttgart, Kaiser, 1973 ■ W. Huber et al. eds, Öffentliche Theologie, Munich, Chr. Kaiser, 1991-2000 ■ M. Marty, “Reinhold Niebuhr: Public Theology and the American Experience”, Journal of Religion, 54, 1974 ■ M.L. Stackhouse, Public Theology and Political Economy, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 1986 ■ M.L. Stackhouse et al., God and Globalization, vols 1, 2 & 3, Harrisburg PA, Trinity, 2000 and 2001 ■ M.L. Stackhouse, P. Berger, D. McCann et al., Christian Social Ethics in a Global Era, Nashville TN, Abingdon, 1996 ■ R. Thiemann, Constructing a Public Theology, Philadelphia, Westminster, 1992 ■ D. Tracy, Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism, New York, Crossroad, 1981.

UNA SANCTA

The Latin words una sancta serve as an abbreviation for the four marks attributed to the church* in the Nicene Creed (381): We believe in one [unam], holy [sanctam], catholic and apostolic church. The una sancta is thus the church as understood in the ancient professions of faith, almost all of which mention it after their article about the Holy Spirit.* Christian faith in the Triune God (see Trinity) entails also belief in Gods saving deeds, one of which is the founding of the church as the Body of Christ (Rom. 12:4-5; 1 Cor. 12:12-27; Eph. 1:22-23) and as the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 3:16-17; 2 Cor. 6:16). The church is thus an effect of Gods saving action. For patristic authors, this reality was symbolized in the blood (representing the eucharist*) and water (representing baptism*) which flowed from the pierced side of Jesus as he hung on the cross (Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmum 138, 2; John Chrysostom, Catecheses 3,16-19).

This inter-relation has been re-affirmed in ecumenical dialogues: Christians believe and confess with the creed that there is an indissoluble link between the work of God in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit and the reality of the church. This is the testimony of the scriptures (Faith and Order, Confessing the One Faith, 1991, 216; see also Old Catholic-Orthodox dialogue; Ecclesiology, 1977, III/1, 1-19; and Arcic II, The Church as Communion, 1990, 25-41). Nevertheless, the church remains human and imperfect. The unity,* holiness,* catholicity* and apostolicity* of the church are gifts which are actualized within the community on its pilgrim journey through time, but which will reach their perfection only in the eschatological reign of God.

In one of his commentaries on the creed, Augustine notes that the church must be understood as existing both in heaven and on earth (Enchiridion de fide, spe et caritate 15,56). As such, the una sancta is more extensive than simply the visible church on earth; it includes also those in heaven, and thus all of the just who have been saved in Christ from the beginning of time (ecclesia ab Abel). Christian communities relate the una sancta to the historical, visible church in different ways. The Catholic bishops at Vatican II, for example, claimed that the one, holy, catholic, apostolic church subsists in the Catholic church, but that many of its elements are also present in other communities (Lumen Gentium 8). Other churches would perhaps identify the una sancta with their own visible community, or deny that it can be so identified with any visible community. The WCC Canberra statement (1991) relates the ecumenical movement to the una sancta, when it states: The goal of the search for full communion is realized when all the churches are able to recognize in one another the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church in its fullness (The Unity of the Church as Koinonia: Gift and Calling, 2.1).

WILLIAM HENN

■ Y. Congar, L’Église une, sainte, catholique et apostolique, Paris, Cerf, 1970 ■ H. Schütte, “Die Kirche als eine, heilige, katholische und apostolische,” in idem, Kirche im ökumenischen Verständnis, Paderborn, Bonifatius, 1991, 89-123 ■ F.A. Sullivan, The Church We Believe In: One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic, New York, Paulist, 1988.

UNIATES, UNIATISM

The terms Uniates and Uniatism were originally derived from the act of union which a group of Orthodox in the Ukraine and Poland signed at Brest-Litovsk in 1596 establishing their unity with Rome. These terms, used mainly by the Orthodox who are opposed to this union, have come to include all Eastern-rite Catholics and have a definitely derogatory connotation, resented by those they are applied to.

See Eastern Catholic churches, Orthodox-Roman Catholic dialogue.

NICHOLAS LOSSKY

■ “Balamand Document: Uniatism, Method of Union of the Past, and the Present Search for Full Communion”, IS, 83, 2, 1993 ■ J. Borelli, J.E. Erickson eds, The Quest for Unity: Orthodox and Catholics in Dialogue: Documents of the Joint International Commission and Official Dialogues in the United States 1965-1995, Crestwood NY, St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996 ■ “Les Eglises orientales catholiques et l’oecuménisme, II: Aspects ecclésiologiques du thème (= IR, 65, 3, 1992).

UT UNUM SINT

Signed by Pope John Paul II on Ascension Day 1995, this encyclical* re-affirms, following Vatican II,* the irrevocable commitment of the Roman Catholic Church to ecumenism as an organic part of her life and work. Personal (at times even anecdotal) in style, passionate in tone, and pastoral in aim, the papal letter expresses gratitude and joy at what has so far been achieved in the ecumenical movement and calls for continued conversion  individual and communal, at all levels  to the cause and participation in the process of renewal. The key word is dialogue.*

Christian unity* is seen as the proper outcome of Christs reconciling death on behalf of humankind. The unity for which Christ prayed among his disciples is essential to the church* and intrinsic to the credibility of evangelization amid a needy world. The witness of the martyrs, united across confessional divisions in the selfless offering of their lives for the kingdom of God, is exemplary. The everyday path is by way of repentance (for wrongs mutually committed), prayer (esp. in common), reciprocal visitation, study (of shared faith and remaining differences) and cooperation (in mission and service to human need).

Since the search is for communion in truth, doctrine is of fundamental importance. Grounded in love, dialogue is not simply an exchange of ideas but also an exchange of gifts. It presupposes respect between the partners and a desire for reconciliation, and it includes an examination of conscience by each. The common quest for truth requires fairness, clarity, humility and charity. Sensitivity to different formulations can make surprising discoveries possible that enrich the apprehension of revealed truth. Examination of disagreements should have two essential points of reference: sacred scripture and the great Tradition of the church.

In a survey of the fruits of dialogue over the previous 30 years, the pope enumerates the recognition of other Christians as brothers and sisters linked by baptism* and faith* in the one Lord, solidarity in the service of humanity (with special mention of the WCC), ecumenical translations of the Bible, convergence in liturgical and sacramental reform and renewal (with special mention of Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry*), and growth of communion (even though the expressions of this remain limited and vary among the several partners). Then the pope rehearses the progress made in the Roman Catholic Churchs particular dialogues with the churches of the East (both the Orthodox,* which are insistently called sister churches,* and the Oriental Orthodox,* whose patriarchs are also brothers), and with other churches and ecclesial communities in the West (acknowledged as the initiators of the modern ecumenical movement).

In contemplating the road ahead, the pope foresees a continuing and deepening dialogue on the way to full visible unity among all the baptized, that full communion in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church which will be expressed in the common celebration of the eucharist. Reception* of the interim results of dialogue requires a critical analysis and testing for consistency with the apostolic tradition.* Five areas are listed where further work remains to be done towards a true consensus of faith: (1) the relationship between sacred scripture, as the highest authority in matters of faith, and sacred Tradition, as indispensable to the interpretation of the word of God (a formulation of the issue entirely in line with developments on the matter in Faith and Order* since Montreal 1963); (2) the eucharist, as the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, an offering of praise to the Father, the sacrificial memorial and real presence of Christ and the sanctifying outpouring of the Holy Spirit (again a vision consistent with the eucharistic section of Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry); (3) ordination, as a sacrament, to the threefold ministry of the episcopate, presbyterate and diaconate; (4) the magisterium of the church, entrusted to the pope and the bishops in communion with him, understood as a responsibility and an authority exercised in the name of Christ for teaching and safeguarding the faith; (5) the Virgin Mary, as mother of God and icon of the church, the spiritual mother who intercedes for Christs disciples and for all humanity.

Having already recognized that certain features of the Christian mystery have at times been more effectively emphasized in other communities than the Roman Catholic Church (para. 14), the pope repeats that the talents of each must be developed for the utility and the advantage of all (87). It is now (88-97) that the pope returns to the ministry of unity of the bishop of Rome (in the service of which he places this very encyclical). Declaring the Catholic churchs conviction that in the ministry of the bishop of Rome she has preserved, in fidelity to the apostolic Tradition and the faith of the fathers, the visible sign and guarantor of unity, John Paul II acknowledges that this ministry constitutes a difficulty for most other Christians, whose memory is marked by certain painful recollections. Yet he notes that the matter is being studied again in both bilateral and multilateral dialogues and  given the real but imperfect communion existing between us  humbly invites church leaders and their theologians to a patient and fraternal dialogue concerning the exercise of this necessary ministry.

Early ecumenical response to the encyclical was strongly positive, both for its forthright advocacy of the cause of unity and for the invitation to dialogue on the Petrine ministry (the latter doubtless helped by the widespread informal appreciation of John Paul IIs own playing of the role of universal pastor and teacher). Theologically, attention has been given to the nuances of the ecclesiology stated or implied in the encyclical: when, for example, it affirms that the one church of Christ is effectively present in other Christian communities through elements of sanctification and truth, may this new phrasing be seen as one more step by Rome away from an ecumenism of return? Or again: the official response of the United Reformed Church in the United Kingdom notes that, in regard to the magisterium* of the church and to the Virgin Mary (the fourth and fifth of the popes topics for further study), the current teaching of the Roman Catholic Church... has been developed in isolation from those other churches and ecclesial communities with which the Roman Catholic Church acknowledges a real but imperfect communion. This must have implications for what can be regarded as the starting point for continuing dialogue.”

GEOFFREY WAINWRIGHT

■ C.E. Braaten & R.W. Jenson eds, Church Unity and the Papal Office: An Ecumenical Dialogue on John Paul II’s Encyclical “Ut Unum Sint”, Grand Rapids MI, Eerdmans, 2001 ■ J.F. Puglisi ed., Petrine Ministry and the Unity of the Church, Collegeville MN, Liturgical Press, 1999 ■ “Ut Unum Sint: A Response from Faith and Order, ER, 50, 2, 1998.

VIOLENCE, DOMESTIC

Globally, domestic violence continues to be the most hidden form of violence. Still considered to be private and personal, most often there is a hesitancy on the part of family and community to interfere in what happens in the private sphere of the home. In 1993 the United Nations produced a resource manual entitled Strategies for Confronting Domestic Violence, where the term domestic violence is used to describe incidents of physical and sexual violations, such as punching, choking, stabbing, throwing boiling water or acid or setting on fire, the result of which can range from bruising to killing; what may often start out as apparently minor attacks can escalate both in intensity and frequency. Women have included in the definition psychological and mental violence, which can consist of repeated verbal abuse, harassment, confinement, and deprivation of physical, financial and personal resources. So the term domestic violence has come to include both physical and mental assault, primarily of women by husbands or partners.

Womens movements around the world have brought to public consciousness the extent and intensity of this problem. Womens refuge or crisis centres have long provided a safe space for women and children who need to be temporarily removed from a violent household. In many countries, because of the pressure exerted by the womens movement, laws exist that protect women against domestic violence; the legal term wife assault is sometimes used.

The overwhelming majority of victims or survivors of domestic violence are women, though it is estimated that about 5% of those affected by domestic violence are men. Women have also been known to retaliate violently against the pain they experience and even to kill their partners when the violence gets unbearable. In some countries women are lobbying for such responses to be legally recognized as acts of self-defence.

It is difficult to estimate the actual extent of the violence in households around the world. Communities typically deny the problem, fearing that if it is revealed a family name will suffer. In many cases the women themselves do not wish to speak about it because of the humiliation of acknowledging openly the way they have been treated. Few official records are kept, as often in police stations domestic violence is trivialized; in many places the family resorts to various forms of pressure, including financial persuasion, to ensure that the first information reports given in police stations are manipulated.

The church has tended to remain silent on this issue, apart from an occasional reference to the problem, or by supporting a womens refuge. Several major denominations, particularly in the USA, Canada and Australia, have developed resource materials and handbooks describing practical, pastoral responses to support survivors of domestic violence. Some churches in other parts of the world have dealt with specific forms of violence in the domestic sphere, but by and large the church too has tended to treat domestic violence as personal and private, particularly in a bid to safeguard the sanctity of the Christian family and church marriage. However, women in Christian homes may face the same kind of abuse as any woman faces, and increasingly such women have begun to speak out. The WCC project of team visits to all member churches, in the context of the Ecumenical Decade of the Churches in Solidarity with Women,* has recorded the voices of women speaking out against domestic violence in all regions of the world.

Particularly difficult for women to comprehend is the religious sanction given to the violence. The church, for instance, has sometimes used the theology of the cross and suffering as legitimizing the agony women experience. Women are admonished, sometimes by clergy, to see it as a salvation experience and keep silent and forgive the abuser as Christ did in the face of his ultimate sacrifice on the cross. But the silence is being broken in all regions of the world, a sign of hope that domestic violence will ultimately be overcome.

See also violence and non-violence; violence, religious roots of.

ARUNA GNANADASON

■ A. Gnanadason, No Longer a Secret, WCC, 1993 ■ A. Gnanadason, M. Kanyoro & L.A. McSpadden eds, Women, Violence and Nonviolent Change, WCC, 1996 ■ N. Nason-Clark, The Battered Wife: How Christians Confront Family Violence, Louisville KY, Westminster John Knox, 1997.

VIOLENCE, RELIGIOUS ROOTS OF

All religions claim to offer salvation. The offer of it, however, especially when accompanied by zeal, has sometimes produced intolerance and violence. Jesus of Nazareth, whose preaching of the gospel of the kingdom ultimately grew into the Christian church, became a victim of violence from religious leaders of his day, leading to his crucifixion as a rebel and impostor (Matt. 27:63).

In the 4th century A.D., when Christianity was imperialized, this story of violence rooted in religion continued, not only against non-Christians but also against other Christians, thus sundering the una sancta.* Emperor Constantine I (306-37), though proclaiming Christianity religio licita, tended more and more between the years 330 and 337 to suppress paganism, only stopping short of uprooting the imperial cult for fear of eroding popular loyalty. His suppression of centres of pagan cults included the robbery of treasures to enrich Christian churches in the second Rome he was building and the demolition of pagan temples.

Constantine also began to act in matters inside the church, suppressing heretics and schismatics and seeking to enforce unity among Christians because, as he saw it, the unity and well-being of the empire depended on the concord in common faith and worship of all citizens of the empire. These policies of suppression and enforced unity were continued by emperors and secular powers throughout the middle ages, as also were the trials and executions of supposed heretics or dissidents directly by the church or by reliance on the secular authorities. The crusades* are another expression of violence in which political, economic and religious factors were involved but that was justified on religious grounds.

The story of violence with its roots in religion seems unending. Ulster (Northern Ireland) is today synonymous with sectarian violence between Catholics and Protestants. The present crisis of a violent Roman Catholic-Protestant schism has its beginnings in the battle of the Boyne (1690) at which the Dutch king William of Orange defeated the Roman Catholic king James II. Roman Catholicism is predominant in the south (Eire), and Protestantism in the north (Ulster). The Protestants in the North are the Unionist Party, a name signifying their wish to be united with Great Britain, and the Roman Catholics in the south are the Republicans, who want a separate political identity. Though ostensibly the clash between the Roman Catholics and Protestants, it needs to be seen as the politicization or ideologization of Christian faith. In the process the una sancta is broken.

Yugoslavia too has in the 1990s been through a tunnel experience of violence in which religion was a factor, and has been notorious for ethnic cleansing. Croatia is predominantly Roman Catholic, Serbia mainly Orthodox, and Bosnia-Herzegovina mainly Muslim. Tensions arising out of ethnic identities and political interests were fuelled by conflicting religious orientations, leading to brutal wars, massacres and migration. The Conference of European Churches called a meeting at the Ecumenical Institute, Bossey, Switzerland, in an attempt to mediate dialogue between the religions in Yugoslavia, at which the Orthodox patriarch made a very significant statement: But the soldiers do not listen to us [church leaders]. This declaration could indicate that the avowals of defending Christian civilization against the Muslims were merely a cover for demonizing the opposition.

Africa too has many stories of religion as a factor in violence. In South Africa the apartheid* regime and its allies, which included the church, inflicted much violence on the coloured and blacks in the name of defending Christian civilization. The National Party, which implemented the ideology of apartheid, had its roots in the Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk. Theological legitimation was provided for segregation, separate development for different colours of peoples and even violence against the blacks. All this was done for the sake of the Christian faith. But in reality, the faith had been ideologized.

Sudan also continues to experience violence in the name of religion. In November 1995 a joint pastoral letter by the Roman Catholic bishops of Sudan reported a policy of genocide by the Sudanese government in an attempt to transform the religiously and ethnically plural Sudan into an Arab, Islamic state. The Islamic government in the north initiated a military offensive against civilians in southern Sudan and Nubia mountains, enslaving women, men and children, and forcing Christians and animists in the south to convert to Islam. In this aggressive attempt to achieve religious homogeneity, the rich diversity of cultures, languages, communities, and religious and ethnic identities that characterizes Sudan was destroyed.

In the violent conflicts in Central America during the 1970s and 1980s and in the dictatorships of the Southern American countries in the same period, cases of human rights violations, torture and murder were justified as the defence of the Christian faith. Some extreme religious groups, and in some cases the church authorities, provided the needed legitimation for these acts of violence. The racial acts of violence against blacks in the south of the United States had religious justification, which may persist even now in some areas.

However, most churches and ecumenical bodies have denounced and clearly rejected such religious justification of violence, turning instead to defend and support its victims.

The root cause of religiously inspired violence is using faith to support an ideology. For example, words like Christendom, Christian civilization and fundamentalism often mask an ideology of power which rejects religious pluralism. Each society needs to renounce certain myths that support such ideologies, such as the doctrine of national security, the equating of Christianity with democracy and the counterposing of democracy and socialism. In religiously plural societies, the ideologies of government must foster the wholeness of peoples, primarily their freedom of conscience and expression.

Also, Christians could look at mission as calling peoples to their true humanity in Gods own image. The WCC consultation on dialogue, held in Chiang Mai in 1977, proposed a revised understanding of mission as the building of a community of communities. This thought has found its way into the WCCs Guidelines on Dialogue with People of Living Faiths and Ideologies. Such revision of the understanding and model of mission is urgent in dealing with a pluralistic society (see pluralism).

The ecumenical task, then, is to explore broadly what it means to be human, to teach and encourage a culture of magnanimity and hospitality in a context of pluralism, and to empathize deliberately with past opponents as a first step in dialogue and searching together for a common humanity.

JOHN S. POBEE and DEENABANDHU MANCHALA

■ R.S. Appleby, The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation, Lanham MD, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000 ■ W. Beuken, K.-J. Kuschel, Religions as a Source of Violence, London, SCM Press, 1997 ■ B. Hagen, Non-Violence in the World Religions: Vision and Reality, London, SCM Press, 2000 ■ J. Galtung, “Violence, Peace and Peace Research”, Journal of Peace Research, 6, 2, 1969 ■ J. de Gruchy & C. Villa-Vicencio eds, Apartheid Is a Heresy, Cape Town, David Philip, 1983 ■ Human Relations and the South African Scene in Light of Scripture: A Report, Cape Town, Dutch Reformed Church, 1974 ■ Reconciliation: Gift of God and Source of New Life, CCBC/CEC, 1995 ■ J. Witte Jr ed., Christianity and Democracy in Global Context, Boulder CA, Westview, 1993.