 |
| Temple to Jupiter |
As I wandered through Pompeii yesterday, I was pondering the whole idea of ecumenism – both personal and institutional, and the more I think about it, the more I understand what an extraordinary thing it is on the institutional level. I think, in fact, I have underestimated it, in my previous post, to a staggering extent.What we refer to as personal ecumenism (getting along with friends and family from different denominations, caring little about denominations) is not actually the work of ecumenism. What it IS, is basic human decency. Is that really what we are patting ourselves on the back for? Personal ecumenism is not irrelevant, but it is insufficient.
We love our friends and family because we love them, not because we in any way understand their beliefs or what motivates them to believe what they do or why we are divided.
You know the old saying: never talk religion or politics. Why is that a saying? Because it's really, really hard to do without conflict.
 |
| The lanes of Pompeii |
Those engaged in ecumenism in the Dicasteries and other ecumenical organizations are doing this hard work. They are not proselytizing their own beliefs; they are working hard to be clear and open about them. How many of us can even do that? But they are also deliberately and carefully taking a stance of humility, seeing what others have to teach them. They train in attentive listening; they are willing to be surprised, to learn. They engage those really, really hard conversations with grace, dignity and integrity. And when the talks break down, they have to begin again - with deeper humility, sharper clarity and wider integrity.Part of me still wonders how much those amazing conversations affect those on the ground. For example, in spite of peace talks in Northern Ireland, tensions between the communities continue. Blame persists. Hatred festers. Basic human decency declines.
 |
| Temple to Isis |
There is a way in which the value of the ecumenical movement can only be seen in spiritual terms. I turn to Teilhard de Chardin and his idea of the noosphere: the layer of consciousness emerging from human relations, the field of shared meaning. Or you could think of the Jungian collective consciousness, or any shared intuition about collective meaning-making. Every act of genuine listening, every refusal to caricature the other, every moment of intellectual honesty adds structure to the noosphere, to the universe, to the Kingdom of God. Even if two individuals leave a dialogue still irritated or wounded, the method they used – patience, charity, accuracy - becomes available to others. It enters the shared repertoire of how Christians can disagree in a faithful and even united way.How privileged we are to meet these people! To learn from them. To try to carry these attributes into real relations with others. I am so grateful. Grateful also to be studying at Toronto School of Theology which offers a diverse denominational feast do dig into! The perfect place to learn and practice these skills.
Catherine
Some of what is at stake
- the healing of old wounds
- The Petrine ministry - meant to unite, but a source of division
- Apostolic succession: who has authority to teach?
- What are Sacraments? How do they express our shared Christian life?
- What does reconciled diversity look like?
- Who is qualified to ordain?
- Are women meant to minister?
Catherine, thank you for a lovely post. I love your mentioning of Chardin's noosphere and collective consciousness. I think Jesus, the Incarnation, occurred for this purpose, to "elevate" the collective consciousness /AND salvation, all of it. People were getting it wrong - to grave consequences of human suffering (and possibly hell), so God chose to interfere, and instead of scolding us, was meek and let himself be killed. A tiny tribe of believers spread throughout the globe and we are very slowly getting better at how he showed us to live (two steps forward, one and half back).
ReplyDeleteYour mentioning North Ireland reminded me of Ignatius' "Discernment of Spirits" and "assuming the other's best intentions." (Those aren't Exclusively Ignatian, but they're Ignation.). I imagine the first person to throw a bomb fantasizes about many mean-spirited dialogues with his opponent. (or me with the driver who Unreasonably honked at me yesterday) If he recognized that his fantasies come from "the dark spirit," could he bring himself to resort to dialogue instead of violence? Anyway, discernment of spirits seems important in ecumenical dialogue, and your post reminded me of that!