• Get Crisis in your Inbox

  • The Ecumenical Future

    by George Weigel

    The Evangelical Church in Germany is a theological muddle, being a federation of Lutheran, Prussian Union, and Reformed (or Calvinist) Protestant communities. Still, it must have been a moving moment when the Council of this federation met with Pope Benedict XVI last month in the chapter hall of the former Augustinian priory at Erfurt: the place where Martin Luther had studied theology, had been ordained a priest, and had, as the pope put it, thought with “deep passion” about one great question: “How do I receive the grace of God?” As Benedict, himself one of the great theologians of this or any other era, put it in his winsome way, “For Luther, theology was no mere academic pursuit, but the struggle for oneself, which was in turn a struggle for and with God.”

    One hopes the Catholic Theological Society of America was listening.

    Benedict then went on to note that, in bringing Luther’s question to life again in the 21st century, there were new realities to be confronted. One, which is killing Europe, is spiritual boredom, a kind of ennui about the wonder of being itself. Moreover, in trying to preach the Gospel today, what Benedict called the “mainstream Christian denominations” themselves face a new situation. For the “geography of Christianity” had “changed dramatically in recent times, and is in the process of changing further still.” There is a “new form of Christianity, which is spreading with overpowering missionary dynamism, sometimes in frightening ways…a form of Christianity with little institutional depth, little rationality and even less dogmatic content, and with little stability.”

    By which, I think we can assume, the pope meant the explosion of evangelical (in the American sense of the term), Pentecostalist, and fundamentalist Christianity throughout the Third World. “What is this new form of Christianity saying to us, for better and for worse?”, the pope asked his mainline German Protestant audience. Perhaps I might venture an answer to that question.

    The first thing that is being said is that preaching Jesus Christ crucified and the transforming power of personal friendship with the Risen Lord is going to win out, every time, over enticing men and women into a religious trade union or cultural club. Surely Benedict XVI, whose pontificate has been characterized by the theme of intimate friendship with the Lord, knows that. One hopes he is saying it, firmly, to the “bishops from all over the world” who are “constantly” complaining to him about evangelical inroads into their flocks.

    Take, for example, Latin America. The Catholic Church has been active in Latin America for over half a millennium. If it has poorly catechized that vast expanse of territory, such that the Church cannot retain the loyalty of traditionally Catholic peoples, it should look first to its own incapacities and failures, rather than blaming well-funded American evangelical and Pentecostalist missions for its problems.  As scholars like David Martin and Amy Sherman have demonstrated, it is the power of these missions to change self-destructive patterns of behavior through radical conversion to Christ that has given them their purchase in areas where five hundred years of Catholicism have failed to build a culture of responsibility — especially male responsibility. More recognition of that, and less complaining to the pope, would seem the appropriate Christian response from Catholic bishops in the world’s most densely Christian continent.

    The second thing this “new form of Christianity “is saying is that the old ecumenism — the bilateral dialogues between Catholicism and mainline Protestantism — is over. Throughout the world, mainline liberal Protestantism is dying from its own theological implausibility.  The serious ecumenical dialogue of the 21st century is with these “new forms of Christianity.” They may well lack “dogmatic content.” Some may be unscrupulous proselytizers. But at least some among them are searching for a deeper, richer theology — and they are finding it in serious conversation with Catholics, as the theological dialogue fellowship called Evangelicals and Catholics Together has demonstrated in the United States.

    The times are indeed “a-changin’.”  What remains unchanged is the power of the Gospel. Preach it, and they will come.

     

    George Weigel’s column is distributed by the Denver Catholic Register, the official newspaper of the Archdiocese of Denver. Image: Reuters / Norbert Neetz / Pool

    The views expressed by the authors and editorial staff are not necessarily the views of
    Sophia Institute, Holy Spirit College, or the Thomas More College of Liberal Arts.

    Print this   |   Share this

    • rtjl

      Amen. I am constantly struggling with the pastoral team to make the point that Jesus must come first in our proclamations. As Catholics we tend to shy away from this. We tend to proclaim a thousand good things – good liturgy (though much of our liturgy is not in fact good), deep theology, sophisticated philosophy, social justice, community, etc…
      These are all good and valuable things, but we proclaim them, not in addition to proclaiming Christ, but instead of proclaiming him. This strategy does not work and will never work. We must put first things first. Seek first the Kingdom of God (which is found in Christ) and the rest will follow. Seek the rest first and you will only harvest frustration and never quite find the Kingdom you are really seeking.

    • Steve N.

      It’s past time when descriptives are as valuable as they should be. Pardon the tangled syntax – I’m getting cold here in my pajamas hear.
      It’s time for a more expository and more broad ranging technique. Meaning theatre, a new writing of the past cennturies morality plays. Who can do it, or more to the point who wants to do it. These would be spectacular.

    • Deacon Ed Peitler

      Pick a Sunday, any Sunday to stop and ask a Catholic leaving Mass to engage in a role play. They are to take 5 minutes to tell you about their relationship to Jesus Christ. This is not to say they do not have a relationship to Christ, just that they could not put it into words.

      Then ask them to spend 5 minutes telling you what they think about Sunday homilies or the music at Mass and you’ll get an earful.

      We poorly prepare our Catholics to evangelize – especially the young.

      • Sarto

        This is because Catholics, unlike a lot of Protestants, are not encouraged to examine, discover, and then speak out about their relationship with Christ. And this is part of our last thousand years. In most of those years, a person who wanted to be close to Christ became a priest or a nun. They were discouraged from finding Christ in Scripture (I can remember this in my lifetime). Right now, my sister is attending a bible study in a Nazarene church, with several hundred women in attendance. The Protestants have a whole structure, led by laity, to get this done. I sat down with her to look at the book they are using and it does lead to a thoughtful meditation about faith in daily life. But it is not Lectio. It does not lead to prayer and resting in God. But in the meanwhile, what do Catholics have going?

        Oh, yeah. We are going to start using a latinized liturgy and we will all go spiraling up to heaven in ecstasy.

    • Tom

      The good thing about these spontaneous evangelical groups is that they have as principal text, the Bible. How many Catholics have even opened a Bible? There can be a problem when “tradition” is said to be of equal importance to the Bible, but “tradition” is not defined, and nobody reads the Bible. For example, it seems to me that it is high time, after mounting scandals, for a serious re-examination of what influenced late 20th century Catholicism, in particular the so called “lay movements”, like that of Escriva. Are some of his self-defined “radical” concepts even compatible with Catholicism? Holiness by “coercion, shamelessness and intransigence”? Really? Funny how the opposites, meekness, shame, and understanding, are closer to what is in the Scriptures. We are taught in a $30 million propaganda film* that God is principally found in “little things” like chocolate. Really? What about finding God by following his commandments? If I remember, it is Love God, and neighbor, not chocolate. Or that one has to do “little things” to be “holy”, but in fact, not too little, because the very little tings are reserved for personal slaves in spiritual bondage, that work for free (as recently exposed in France). Right? What about double speak re-definition of words, words like “prayer”, “charity” and “poverty” (now all three mean the same: obedience to the movement, by giving $$$ to the movement)? This double-speak has even made its way into the latest official Church guide to confession and spiritual direction. Now, according to this guide, for “spiritual counsel for lay”, “Anything can be payer”. Really? How does one reconcile this modernistic definition of prayer with how St Benedicts defined “Work of God”, or what Christ said to Martha? So when Christ went to the desert to pray, that was “anything”, “like making chocolate”?
      Now, if one needs a new saint to propagate one’s pet movement, no problem, it’s a cinch. All one needs is $1million and a specialized canon lawyer in Rome, since there is no office of Promoter of Faith any more (guess why?). So much for Faith and Reason.
      At least some of these new protestant groups are closer to the Word. It is also time for us lay to wake up, learn about our Faith, learn form the mistakes, including of these various movements, take what is good (…stop bitching), and work with our diocesan clergy and hierarchy, even if they are reluctant (and they are). Also work with the traditional orders, many of which are the holders of our real traditions.

      *fortunately, the Jewish film director of “There be Dragons”, Ronald Joffe, is not stupid. He made two stories, one bland official account, one totally fictional story of a scoundrel. One way to interpret his film, is that both are about the same, the scoundrel simply represents the unknown, untold story, and they both reconcile at the end.

    • Todd

      What does it even mean to declare that I have a relationship with Christ if it is just done in a vaccuum? Talk about sounding Protestant. Separating community and one’s relationship with Christ is a severe distortion of Church teaching. I come to know Christ in the context of the parish, in community, and in the liturgy. Proclaiming Christ in the context of “me and God” is a distortion of the Faith.

    • Cord Hamrick

      I think “Opposition Research” may be beneficial…with two important caveats.

      Whaddaya mean, “Opposition Research?”

      By “Opposition Research” I mean: Investigating some of the things the best Evangelical churches are doing better than the best Catholic parishes, and consider adopting or even improving upon whichever methods and means they’re using which are not incompatible with the Catholic faith.

      Two Caveats:

      The first caveat, of course, is that Evangelical churches are not really “the Opposition”; not the way the devil is, nor even way the world and the flesh are, nor even the way that atheism is, nor even the way non-Christian religions are. So it should be understood that I am using the term “Opposition Research” in the way an ethical-but-shrewd business owner would use it: Observing any bright ideas his competitor down the street comes up with, and making them his own.

      The second caveat is that we sometimes mistake which things are or aren’t incompatible with the Catholic faith. We have to be quite choosy, and pray for wisdom a lot. We should be especially cautious about the liturgy; too much damage has been done there already.

      Things To Learn From (Potentially)

      However, some things are pretty clearly compatible:

      1. Evangelicals teach intentional, conscious, planned tithing from early childhood on up. They teach it is 10% of one’s income, and doesn’t apply if one has no income. They teach it is pre-tax, because in a Christian set of priorities and values, God gets the firstfruits of your labor, not the government. They teach that it is cheerfully given, and that if one cannot give cheerfully, one ought not to give, but one ought to pray for the grace to give cheerfully.

      In Somalia, I would not advocate this discipline; I would be concerned about laying too heavy a burden on people already destitute. That, surely, is a big reason why the Catechism says so little about this topic, and so vaguely. But in America, even in bad economic times, this is not a problem for anyone with a job, an iPhone, and clothes purchased somewhere other than Goodwill.

      Would we be able to afford to care for the poor, or the upkeep of the parish, better, if folk actually considered tithing an important and natural part of their commitment to the Lord? It seems likely.

      2. Evangelicals use “sword drills” to teach kids their way around the Bible: “Quick, who’s the person who can find Exodus 20 the fastest?” “Quick, which book comes after Romans and before Ephesians?” “Quick, what are the last five books of the New Testament, in order?” These were among the games played in my Baptist Sunday School when I was, oh, I dunno, maybe ten or eleven years old.

      As a result, I can say the books of the Bible in order from Genesis to Revelation. When I learned about the books that the Protestants took out, I injected them into my existing learning and can list them, too; and I know how to flip to them quickly.

      3. Evangelicals send their members in groups of 5-10 on short-term mission trips overseas to the third world, to help the poor and carry the gospel. They raise their own support for the trip, like a full-time missionary would; they go to China (euphemistically called “East Asia” in case Chinese authorities were to find the trip website) and Iran and worse places, as well as Albania and Romania and Guatemala and Nicaragua. Thus the average member becomes a missionary, third-world aid worker, and full-time evangelist, for a short period of time.

      Do not underestimate the benefit on a person’s walk of faith of having them sacrifice vacation time and endure rough travel to bring Christ to folk who have either never known Him or whose religious commitment is weak and uninformed (the norm, sadly, in the “Catholic” third world).

      And do not underestimate the frequency with which this happens. Before I became Catholic, my wife and I were members of an in-home Bible study with about 15 other couples, through an Evangelical church. Out of those couples, the majority did some short-term overseas mission trips. I went myself, to Romania, to help Gypsies build homes in their villages. Two men from the group left corporate America to take up full-time missionary work. A third left a six-figure job at HP and moved his family to Guatemala to help run an orphanage there.

      That’s just out of the 15 or so families in one small Bible study group in one Evangelical church, folks. Again, most had gone overseas, and while there, had personally engaged in evangelism and aid work of some kind. And three changed their jobs over it, and one relocated to another country for the long-term.

      4. Catholics often leave the Mass remembering nothing of the homily, even when the teaching is good teaching. Evangelical churches often hand out fill-in-the-blank outlines so that a person is taking notes during the sermon. I don’t know how much this helps a person absorb the gospel truths being taught, long-term, but it can’t hurt.

      Who Is Doing Our “Opposition Research?”

      One can learn a lot of important techniques for doing things effectively, merely by watching others to see what they’re doing right and wrong. One shouldn’t invent everything from scratch.

      Who, in the Catholic Church, is currently tasked with doing “Opposition Research?” Who is visiting the other churches, observing how they do things (in the services, in the Sunday Schools, in the in-home Bible Studies) to see what they’re doing right, and what they’re doing wrong? Who is bringing these things back to their home parish for discussion? Who is working, in a methodical way, to adopt (and revise as needed) a set of “best practices” to carry out the mission of the Church with maximum effectiveness?

      (Or, at least, with equal or greater effectiveness than our separated brethren?)

      Who does this? Anyone?

      Oughtn’t someone do it?

      • Deacon Ed Peitler

        Cord,
        You’re right on about mission trips. I have been leading Catholic mission trips to Guatemala for 5 years now. We have taken 11 trips, built a clinic at the local parish and have, through a sponsorship program for the children attending the Catholic school, provided to the religious Sisters there over $200,000. Last trip in May had 45 people coming on mission from 6 US States. We are planning our next mission in Feb and already 40 people have signed on.

        All of our missionaries pay their own way. They repeatedly sign up for repeat missions after their first experience and then bring along parents, children, spouses, nieces, nephews and friends so that they, too, can experience what going on mission is like.

        I would like to have $1 for every time a Catholic said to me, “I’ve always wanted to go on mission, but NO ONE EVER ASKED ME!”

        We Catholics have forgotten that we are a Church whose very identity revolves around being on mission. What goes through the mind of Catholics when they hear in Sunday’s second reading about Paul’s travels all over the Mediterranean basin? When not going on mission, we become self-absorbed and our parishes languish.

        Every diocese, in my humble opinion, should have a major diocesan department that is called “Missionary Department.” Pick a country – any country – and conduct regular missions there. Given the fact that the Protestants have evangelized 40% of the Catholics in Latin America out of the Catholic Church, we should start this effort tomorrow!

        • Sarto

          I am glad you are going to Guatamala. Right now, the Evangelical Protestants down there are kicking our butts. I was in the middle of the campesinos a year or so ago and watched people being baptized in the local lake–by the hundreds–every single week. The priest, from Spain, felt totally outmanned and outgunned.

      • Sarto

        This is good stuff. And the Church doesn’t do opposition research. On top of that, we are probably the least self-reflective of all the major churches.

    • Michael PS

      It was St Benedict who said “laborare est orare” – To work is to pray

    • Tom

      “It was St Benedict who said “laborare est orare” – To work is to pray”

      Do you have a reference?
      Or is this just a saying attributed to monks?
      It is appears to be a motto used by Masons (at least per Google).
      It does not appear at all in the Vatican site.
      However, there are many references to “Ora et labora”

      If you look at the Rules of St Benedict, there is a clear distinction between “Work of God” (payer in the form of the Devine Office), and regular work.

      Please correct me if I am wrong.

      http://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0480-0547,_Benedictus_Nursinus,_Regola,_EN.pdf

    • Tom

      On the origins of “Laborare est Orare”, from the Oxford Notes and Queries (1885)

      s6-XII(299): 235 “LABORARE EST ORARE” It seems that the inscription which Mr Peacok exhibited on a seal of the 13th century “qui laborat Manducet” is not derived from the passage in the Lamentation of Jeremiah to which reference was made as to the source of the former quotation. It appears to proceed from a verse in the new testament 2 Thes iii 10. which the vulgate is rendered “St quia non vult operari, nec manducet” and there is the same change of the earlier “operari” into “laborare” whcih was previously noticed “orare” and “laborare” are placed in juxtaposition in what is recorded of St Anthony in the following sentence “S. Antonius a Deo audivit: “Antoni, quseris Deo placere? Ora, et dum orare non poteris, minibus labora et simper aliquid facito” (corn. A Lap. Ad 1 Thes iii 10). But the exact expression, “laborare est orare” has not been traced to its earliest use.

      “LABORARE EST ORARE” (6tb S. xi. 267).—This appears to have been originally “Laborare et orare,” and as such to have been derived from Jeremiah, Lamentations iii. 41. So in Pseudo-Bernard there is the following :—
      “Jeremias propheta dixit: ‘Levemus corda nostra cum manibus ad Deum.’ Qui orat et laborat, cor levat ad Deum cum manibus; qui vero orat et non laborat, cor levat ad Deum et non manus; qui autcm laborat et non orat. mamis levat ad Deum et non cor. Igitur, soror carissima, necesse est cor in oratione ad Deum levare, et manus cum operatione ad Deum extendere.”—”Ad Soror. de modo bene vivendi,” S. Bern., Opp-, torn, ii. col. 866, Paris, 1690.
      The idea had been expressed before in different words, with operari for “laborare,” by Gregory the Great, who, after referring to Jeremiah, Lam. iii. 41, says :—
      “Corda vero cum manibus levat, qui orationem suam operibus roborat; nam quisquis orat, sed operari dissimulat, cor levat et manus non levat. Quisquis vero operatur et non orat, manus levat et cor non levat.”— Moral, in Libr. Job, lib. xviii. c. 4, torn. i. col. 560 D, Paris, 1704).
      There is an almost identical expression in Pseudo Hieron., “In Jerem.,” Thren. iii. 41 (S. Hieron., Opp., torn. v. col. 826, Paris, 1706).
      Among the quotations from various writers in Venerable Bede (” Scintillce, sive Loci Communes,” Opp., torn. vii. col. 531, Basil, 1563) the following is said to be taken from Isidore (“SententiiB,” iii. 18, Opp., torn. vi. p. 284, Rom., 1802):—
      “Cor enim cum manibus levat qui orationem cum opere sublevat.
      “Quisquis orat, et non operatur, cor levat et manum non levat.
      “Quisquis ergo operatur, et non orat, manum levat et cor non levat.
      “Ergo et orare necesse est, et operari.”
      The note in this edition of Isidore states that the passage is taken from St. Gregory (u.».).
      I am unable to trace the alteration of the ” et” into “est” in the proverb.
      There is this further use of the expression: “Scriptum est et ‘oratio mea in sinu meo convertetur’ (Ps. xxxiv. 13, Vulg.), et qui pro alio orat pro se ipso laborat” (Radulphus Ardens, Horn. I., “De Temp.,” xliii., Opp., col. 1485B, Paris, Migne, 1854). This may, perhaps, intimate a transition towards the use of the proverb which is now most commonly thought of. It occurs in verse as follows, “Tu supplex ora, tu protege, tuque labora” (Carminum Proverbialium Loci Communes, p. 156, Lond., 1588). This was a common text-book, and was often reprinted.
      I have noticed the more recent use of this proverb in the two following instances, which give an example of either form:—”Work for God might be Adoration. In its true deep sense, ‘laborare est orare’” (Dr. Pusey, Sermons for the Church’s Seasons, p. 420, Lond., 1883). The Kev. Jeffrey Orlebar stated at a public meeting that “The motto of his family was ‘Ora et labora’—pray and work” (Hastings and St. Leonard’s News, May 8, 1885, p. 2). ED. MARSHALL.

      • Sarto

        Those quotes in Latin really set me straight. Et tu, que piensas de la idea que hay una distincion entre la oracion y el trabo? Todo el dia es sagrado, no?

    • Tom

      So there seems to be not clear Catholic origin of “Laborare est orare” from what I can see. However, it is clear that, based on the passage from Lamentation iii 41, there is a long Church tradition, support by Doctors of the Chruch (Gregory the Great, St Bernard,) that states that heart and hand are used to reach out to God, in other words, pray and work (Orare et Laborare). But they are both separate concepts.

    • Tom

      PRÉCIS HISTORIQUES
      MÉLANGES LITTÉRAIRES ET SCIENTIFIQUES
      Par Éd. Terwecoren
      De la compagnie de Jesus

      1869 — XVIII* ANNÉE
      BRUXELLES,
      J. VANDEREYDT,
      Imprimeur- rue de Flandre, I04.

      P 528-540

      TRAVAILLER C’EST PRIER
      « Le proverbe qui dit : Qui travaille prie, a tout à la fois tort et raison.
      « Il a raison sur les lèvres de celui qui entend simplement par là que l’ouvrier qui travaille chrétiennement prie; mais il a tort, mille fois tort, si l’on veut lui faire dire que le travail peut, considéré en lui-même, tenir lieu de prière. Comment, en effet, oser prétendre servir Dieu lorsqu’on travaille pour le seul désir du gain ou dans l’unique but de se procurer une occupation?
      • Qu’est-ce que prier? C’est élever son esprit et son cœur vers Dieu; c’est diriger vers lui l’exercice des facultés dont il nous a doués. Donc, travailler chrétiennement c’est prier, puisque c’est rapporter à Dieu l’emploi de son temps et l’usage de ses forces intellectuelles et physiques.
      » Que fait, en effet, le travailleur chrétien?
      » Le matin, il offre à Dieu toutes ses actions de la journée, toutes ses; fatigues, tous ses travaux. Il unit ce travail, et les peines qui en sont inséparables, avec les peines que Noire-Seigneur Jésus-Christ a volontairement souffertes pour lui.
      » Dans le courant du jour, et, en particulier, quand il se présente, dans son travail, quelques difficultés à surmonter, le chrétien élève de nouveau son cœur à Dieu et renouvelle ses résolutions du matin.
      » Certes, travailler ainsi c’est prier, et cette prière laborieuse est agréable aux yeux du Seigneur.
      » Mais qu’y a-t-il qui ressemble moins à un acte religieux, à une prière, que le labeur de cet homme travaillant en murmurant contre la loi divine qui a imposé le travail à l’humanité déchue ? de cet homme qui n’a d’autre pensée, d’autre but que de remplir une tâche, de gagner un salaire?
      » Non que cette double fin du travail ne soit honorable et louable en soi; la sainte famille de Nazareth ne vivait-elle pas du travail de Jésus et de Joseph? Mais, pour qu’il soit sanctifié, il faut que la pensée de Dieu, le désir d’accomplir sa sainte volonté soient inséparables du travail.
      » Vous donc qui n’êtes conduits au travail que par des motifs humains, ne vous croyez pas dispensés du grand devoir de la prière. Cessez, cessez de répéter cette phrase devenue banale parmi les esprits indifférents : Qui travaille prie. Non, vous ne priez pas en travaillant, vous qui n’avez d’autre souci que d’assurer votre salaire ici-bas. Et de quel droit espéreriez-vous que le Seigneur pût vous récompenser, plus tard,.dans son royaume, de ce que vous n’avez pas fait pour lui?
      » Mais vous, au contraire, vous âmes fidèles, qui, en toutes vos actions, avez pour fin la gloire de Dieu et l’accomplissement de sa sainte volonté, si le temps manque à vos pieux désirs, si vos prières sont courtes et rapides, rassurez-vous; car c’est bien vraiment pour vous que travailler c’est prier. Non-seulement voire travail vous produit son salaire en ce monde, mais il vous tresse une couronne dans la vie à venir.
      » Rien ne se perd de ce qui est fait en vue de Dieu, en union avec Dieu; car Dieu est un père tendre et miséricordieux. Il voit, il recueille, il conserve les moindres efforts, la plus légère fatigue de ses enfants, pour les récompenser dans son éternité.
      » Nous tous donc qui nous honorons du titre de chrétiens, étudionsnous à purifier, à sanctifier notre travail de tous les jours. Présentons-le par avance à Dieu chaque matin; offrons-le-lui; consacrons-le-lui; unissons-le au travail de Jésus de Nazareth; et alors nous pourrons dire en toute vérité : Travailler c’est prier. »
      (La Vierge, 1864, octobre, p. 681.)

    • Mike

      Amen. Amen. Amen. When my wife and I married, she also joined the Catholic Church. But several years later she left to return to her Pentacostal-style roots. Since then, I have been on a fascinating journey into the Evangelical world. To make a long story short, I have developed an immense respect for these people, though at the same time becoming even more Catholic myself. The best of them are truly more concerned with saving sinners than with the details of theology and indeed are some of the most welcoming and humble people I have ever known. How do we make our churches like this? The Catholic Church has tradition, theology sacraments etc; ie all the right stuff. But why are not people flocking to us? There is a great hunger for faith and truth out there (and healing too). How do we meet it?