UMNS on refining ecumenical relations Wednesday, May 21 2008 

UMC and ecumenical news , , J. Andrew Edwards 11:02 pm

Today UMNS posted on GC2008’s actions to refine the ecumenical relations process.

Prior to the 2008 United Methodist General Conference, the church’s Council of Bishops was authorized to work in cooperation with its ecumenical agency to engage in formal relations with other denominations or ecclesial bodies. The bishops’ ecumenical officer coordinated the relationships.

Delegates to the 2008 General Conference added language to give the bishops authority to enter into “interim and provisional ecumenical agreements” with other Christian bodies, following consultation with and concurrence of the United Methodist Commission on Christian Unity and Interreligious Concerns. However, all agreements of full communion and permanent membership in ecumenical organizations must be ratified by General Conference.

Furthermore, GC2008 defined “full communion” for the Discipline:

In approving the petition submitted by the Council of Bishops, General Conference delegates described full communion as two or more Christian churches that recognize the:

  • One, holy, catholic and apostolic faith as expressed in the Holy Scriptures and confessed in the church’s historic creeds;
  • Authenticity of each other’s baptism and Eucharist and extend sacramental hospitality to each other’s members;
  • Validity of their respective ministries; and
  • Full interchangeability and reciprocity of all ordained ministers in each of the churches.

Full communion does not presume that there are no differences in rites or doctrines between churches, but that these differences provide no barrier to affirming each other as full expressions of the one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Jesus Christ, according to legislation passed by the assembly. The relationship commits the churches to working together as partners in mission.

 

Report on a variegated day Tuesday, Apr 29 2008 

UMC and books and ecumenical news , , J. Andrew Edwards 11:46 pm

Today at General Conference saw approval of both Full Communion with the ELCA (pending the ELCA’s mutual approval next summer), as well as a new hymnal, to be prepared for acceptance and the next GC in 2012. I am excited about both.

I did not get to watch the proceedings today, however, as my wife and I were visiting the Cities for various errands. I went to my favorite bookstore in Stillwater to get some theological books in German (to prepare for my German exam in September)…and I scored big. I really wanted to find some works by Hermann Diem, particularly vol 1 of his Theologie als kirchliche Wissenschaft. Only the second volume is available in English, presumably because it contains the bulk of his argument against Käsemann’s use of “justification” as a hermeneutical key toward reading the unity of the NT. I was disappointed, however, in that they had no books authored by Diem (other than the aforementioned English translation, which I already own). I did find, however, a book that makes significant use of Diem’s first volume – the first volume of Matthias Gatzemeier’s Theologie als Wissenschaft?

In addition to this great find, I also acquired Hans Küng’s Rechtfertigung, Gogarten’s Der Mensch zwischen Gott und Welt, Ebeling’s Das Wesen des christlichen Glaubens (Gerhard Forde’s personal copy) and Eberhard Jüngel’s Gott als Geheimnis der Welt.

As I was about to leave, I also spotted W.E. Sangster’s 1943 dissertation on John Wesley’s doctrine of sanctification, The Path to Perfection. This is one of the earliest works to call attention to the fundamental divergence between John and Charles Wesley on this doctrine (19th century Wesleyana tended to harmonize the two for the sake of hagiography). So I reread that book this evening, which helped to prepare me to learn of Obama’s so-called “divorce” earlier today from his pastor, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. This deserves its own post, however, so I will continue shortly….

 

GC approves Committee on Faith and Order Monday, Apr 28 2008 

UMC , J. Andrew Edwards 3:59 pm

Petition 80160 has just passed at the General Conference, with several amendments (one of which is here). Another amendment that was added from the floor states that, rather than a 50-50 clergy/laity ratio, out of 24 members there will be 3 clergy from the local church and 3 laity.

As a layperson who would be interested in serving on this committee at some point, I don’t like my reduced odds after this latter amendment.

 

UMC considers Full Communion with ELCA Saturday, Apr 26 2008 

UMC and ecumenical news , , J. Andrew Edwards 8:41 pm

Rachel Hagewood is doing a great job blogging from General Conference. She’s been sitting in on several different legislative committee meetings, which is very helpful for those of us who are only able to view the proceedings from the main floor as streamed online.

Yesterday she sat in on the Independent Commissions LC (which I discussed here), which (among other things) dealt with petitions 80142 and 81455. These petitions call for Full Communion with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). The ELCA will vote on this next year at their Bienniel Churchwide Assembly in Minneapolis. These two petitions present a historic ecumenical opportunity for the UMC. Given that an important part of our heritage is to be located in the Evangelical/Lutheran tradition (vis-à-vis both Jacob Albright and the Moravian/Pietist influence on the Wesleys), I tend to think that this is a no-brainer.

That said, I look forward to hearing any debate on this from the floor. Ecumenical progress must not be made willy-nilly. If the various church bodies are to keep true to their theological heritage, they must not compromise their identity. Although this polyphonic rant of Episcopalian complaints against the proposed ECUSA-UMC full communion initially broke my strangely-warmed-heart, I agree that such conversation needs to take place. Apostolic succession is indeed an important ecclesial issue that cannot be ignored.

To this end, I wish more and more ecumenical proceedings were published and made widely available. The bilateral dialogue groups have been discussing these issues for decades now, but very little of those discussions are made public. I can only guess that publication as traditionally practiced (i.e. through denominational publishing houses) requires a market…and there is (sadly) too small a market for ecumenical proceedings to be profitable. The web, however, is very inexpensive. If each bilateral dialogue group would post their proceedings on a website, the ecumenical movement could be much more successful. (ENI is a good resource, but it is hardly comprehensive.)

I’ve tried in the past to provide ecumenical news…I will attempt that more often here on my new blog.

 

 

First full day at GC2008 Thursday, Apr 24 2008 

UMC , J. Andrew Edwards 8:41 pm

Today was the first full day of business at the 2008 General Conference of the UMC. The three main addresses (episcopal, lay, young people) were all delivered, and then there was business-as-usual as delegates struggled to keep the business straight.

One interesting development is the new “Four Areas of Focus” for the UMC:

  1. Developing principled Christian leaders for the church and the world.
  2. Creating new places for new people and renewing existing congregations.
  3. Stamping out diseases of poverty by improving health globally.
  4. Engaging in ministry with the poor.

These four areas were gleaned from the “Seven Vision Pathways” defined by the Council of Bishops earlier this quadrennium:

  1. Teaching the Wesleyan model of reaching and forming disciples of Jesus Christ.
  2. Strengthening clergy and lay leadership.
  3. Developing new congregations.
  4. Transforming existing congregations.
  5. Ending racism as the church authentically expands racial and ethnic ministries.
  6. Reaching and transforming the lives of new generations of children.
  7. Eliminating poverty in community with the poor.

Thus the General Council on Finance and Administration has drawn the UMC’s budget for the next quadrennium according to these “Four Areas of Focus.”

While I appreciate the need to organize ministerial/fiscal priorities, I must admit that the Church’s language about itself often disappoints me. Perhaps I’m too aesthetically sensitive to language use (as a sophomoric undergrad, I didn’t like the word “pastoral” for some stupid reason…perhaps I thought it too “soft” and “sheepish”!), but I get tired of words like ”vision” and “focus.” I prefer traditional ecclesiastical terminology over the corporate mentality of folks like Bill Easum (who, incidentally, was referenced in today’s Laity Address).