From Polite Ecumenism to Joint Prophetic Witness

I was asked to reflect on how we can move from ‘polite ecumenism’ to a ‘joint prophetic witness’. I must confess that I am not very familiar with the expression ‘polite ecumenism’ nor with its meaning. According to Vatican II, ecumenism is, first and foremost, an internal duty, a ‘homework’ in a literal sense, an internal conversion (cf. Unitatis redintegratio 4), and not primarily a question of external relationships, polite or impolite.

If ‘polite’ means beginning a dialogue with what we have in common rather than what divides us, then it is not mere ‘politeness’, but good theological methodology. Likewise, if ‘polite’ means recognising the baptism of other Christians as a starting point for discussion, this is not ‘politeness’, but a fundamental theological standpoint. As John Paul II said in Ut Unum Sint, ‘acknowledging our brotherhood […] is something much more than an act of ecumenical courtesy; it constitutes a basic ecclesiological statement’ (UUS42). 

I would describe ‘polite ecumenism’ as an ecumenism that lacks roots and horizons, since it is rather emotional, self-referential, and ultimately superficial. Let us consider five aspects mainly based on misconceptions of true ecumenism.

1. Ecumenism as inter-church diplomacy: ecumenism is regarded as a platform providing churches with visibility and the opportunity to form ‘strategic alliances’ and engage in Christian lobbying.
2. Ecumenism as celebrating our divisions: we are comfortable with our separations, either because we consider them outdated or because we believe they will never be overcome. The goal of achieving full visible communion in faith, sacraments and ministries is overlooked in favour of celebrating pluralism.
3. Ecumenism as a purely academic exercise: ecumenism is reduced to ‘expert meetings’ of professional theologians attempting to reach consensus on historical disputes through the publication of documents, regardless of how they are received.
4. Ecumenism as merely social Christian activism — this is the opposite misconception: convinced by the motto ‘doctrine divides, action unites’, some advocate an ‘ecumenism of serving the world’. The search for unity is reduced to secular struggles for values considered Christian.
5. Ecumenism as a self-referential activity: ecumenism has its own bureaucracy, institutions, staff, specialists, jargon, codes and protocols, all of which are alien to the wider Christian community. We have moved from the dynamism of the ‘ecumenical movement’ to a kind of closed circle and ideology, a self-sufficient ‘ecumenical bubble’.

As we can see, these approaches are not wrong in themselves; but they are mistaken in focusing exclusively on certain aspects of ecumenism. However, just as there is an ‘integral ecology’, we are called to promote an ‘integral ecumenism’articulating the various dialogues usually identified as part of the ecumenical movement, namely, the dialogue of love, the dialogue of truth and the dialogue of life. Let us consider some potential ways of achieving this ‘integral ecumenism’. I will suggest ten possible approaches, simply listing them.

1. Prophetic ecumenism: The ecumenical movement was always marked by prophetic gestures, such as the lifting of anathemas in 1965, Pope Paul VI giving his pastoral ring to the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1966, Pope Paul VI kissing the feet of Metropolitan Meliton in 1975. It is important to acknowledge the significance of such gestures, to propose new ones and to read them theologically. As Athenagoras affirmed: “Church leaders act, theologians explain.” – not the other way around.
2. Memorial ecumenism: Many divisions can be explained or understood in terms of wounded memories. But healing memories begins with a common reading of history. History can be weaponized by conflicting memories. Franco-German reconciliation began with a joint re-examination of history and the publication of common narrative in school-books. Numerous theological dialogues have begun this process of re-evaluating history. For example, in 2003 the Catholic-Mennonite dialogue began its report ‘Called to be Peacemakers Together’ with a section entitled ‘Reviewing History Together’.
3. Hermeneutical ecumenism: Hermeneutical methodology has proven to be one of the most successful approaches to ecumenical theological dialogue. Rather than compromising our identity or convictions for the sake of consensus, the aim is to understand how and why the same faith can be expressed differently. Christological agreements with the Oriental Orthodox Churches were possible thanks to this methodology.
4. Kerygmatic ecumenism: The ecumenical movement was born from the missionary movement. It is when churches are united in their desire to proclaim the Gospel today that they can overcome the problems of the past. The recent Synod on Synodality proposed an ‘ecumenical synod on evangelization’, which, from this perspective, could be a promising initiative.
5. Synodal ecumenism (the ‘via synodalis’): Ecumenical synodality occurs when Christians invite each other to participate in their synodical processes, or when they gather in the name of Christ to pray and discern, as happened recently in Iznik and Istanbul. There can be no ecumenism without synodality, nor synodality without ecumenism.
6. Receptive ecumenism: The exchange of gifts between Churches was proposed by John Paul II as a privileged path to full communion. Receptive ecumenism is a promising approach, provided it does not exclude the need for conversion. It should also involve receiving ecumenical achievements into the life of local churches.
7. Pastoral ecumenism: Reception of theological ecumenism is favoured when accompanied by pastoral agreements. There are several examples of such agreements with some Oriental Orthodox Churches, including the reception of sacraments. Such pastoral agreements should be promoted and multiplied.
8. Ecumenism of saints: “Perhaps the most convincing”, according to John Paul II (Tertio Millennio Adveniente 37). Receiving the holiness that has flourished in other Churches is part of the ‘exchange of gifts’ between Churches, as illustrated by the recent inclusion in the Roman Martyrology of Saint Gregory of Narek, the Twenty-one Coptic martyrs and Saint Isaac of Nineveh.
9. Ecumenism of friendship: Not what we sometimes call the ‘kiss-kiss ecumenism’, but friendship in the Johannine sense, based on the conviction that “there is no greater love than to give one’s life for one’s friends” (John 15:13). The ecumenical movement has been shaped by friendships, such as between Fernand Portal and Lord Halifax, Vladimir Soloviev and Henri Lorin, and Paul VI and Athenagoras, who exchanged more than thirty letters per year between 1966 and 1970. Twinning can play an important role in promoting these friendships, as shown by the example of Franco-German reconciliation.
10. Visionary ecumenism: We should believe in the power of ideas. As Seneca said, “There is no favourable wind for the sailor who does not know where to go”. We need a vision. This vision must be carried out by visionaries, members of the Church who have the ability to read the ‘signs of the times.’ Above all, we need a model of Christian unity, bearing in mind that this is only a step towards an even greater goal: the unity of humanity and of all creation in Christ.

Fr. Prof. Dr. Hyacinthe Destivelle, OP