Editorial

Five young theologians

The Georges Lombard Prize is awarded every other year to

the three best essays written by theological students or young pastors who are under 31 and belong to one of the member churches of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. The theme of the 2005-2006 edition was Water, source of life: socioeconomic, theological and interreligious perspectives. The recipients of the prize were Anderson Jeremiah (India), Clifford Rawlins (Trinidad and Tobago), and Carola Ruth Tron (Uruguay). Their essays are published in this issue of Reformed World. Two other young theologians join them here: the Presbyterians Aimee Moiso (USA) and Claudio Carvalhaes (Brazil). and two prophets Andr Biler, the author of Calvins Economic and Social Thought, challenged the Protestant churches in Switzerland to engage their members to contribute three per cent of their income to a development project. Milan Opocensk, the former General Secretary of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches, challenged the Reformed family to realize that the integrity of our faith is at stake if we remain silent or refuse to act in the face of the current system of neoliberal economic globalization Biler passed away in December 2006, at the age of 93, and Opocensk in January 2007, at the age of 75. Jean-Pierre Thvenaz, Edward Dommen, and Alastair Hulbert bear witness to their legacy. Orthodox-Reformed dialogue Following the agreements on the doctrine of the Trinity (1992) and on the doctrine of Christ (1994), Orthodox and Reformed theologians representing the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches turned their attention to the doctrine of the church. This issue of Reformed World brings together the results of ten years of work on ecclesiology.
^ ^

Odair Pedroso Mateus

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Privatization of water a theological critique and ensuing challenges for the church
Anderson H. M. Jeremiah
What is the theological rationale behind privatizing the basis and source of life, which sustains and nurtures life, and moreover comes to represent Gods presence in creation? asks the young Indian theologian Anderson Jeremiah. He describes the notion of water privatization, offers biblical and theological perspectives on the privatization of water and identifies the challenges which it raises for the public witness of the church. Jeremiah is an ordained minister of the Church of South India, Vellore Diocese. He is currently a postgraduate research (PhD) student at New College, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. His work as a rural parish minister among the Dalit people propelled him to do further research in theology from the Dalit perspective. This essay won the Lombard Prize 2005-2006.

Water, without any ambiguity, is accepted as the source and basis of life on this planet earth. Every form of living being and biological life owes its existence to water, which sets apart the earth from the rest of the planetary universe. In other words, water becomes a precondition and harbinger of life. This fact of life flashed into my mind on a hot and humid day back in my city, Chennai in southern India, when I was desperately looking for water to drink. To my agony I found out that the water supplier had not turned up that day. I frantically called to check what had happened and they told me that their supply van had broken

down and they would come in an hours time. All that I had in my refrigerator was some coke! That is when I realized that, after all, this source of life does not come free; I need to depend on private water distributors to provide drinking water to me in this privatized pay-for-your-life world, since the water tap of the inefficient municipal system (the primary reason for privatizing is the inefficiency of the public sector!) has not seen water pass through it for days if not months, although basic necessities like water are supposed to be the right of every citizen and the responsibility of the government.
3

This paper tries to look at the impending privatization of water distribution in India from a theological perspective and develop the idea of a responsible church. This paper progresses at three levels. Firstly, it presents a brief overview of privatization, a global perspective of water privatization and considers some specific cases from India. Secondly, it shows the basic biblical significance of water and the Christian theological foundation for a community of sharing. Finally, it lays bare the essential characteristics of a responsible church in the context of privatization. This paper is not exhaustive. Rather, it raises points for further reflection.

companies in the distribution and maintenance of public services with the government infrastructure at various levels of agreement and not necessarily controlling the assets. There are ardent supporters and advocates of privatization as the norm and future of the world.3 The privatization of water The world is waking up to the reality of the precious nature of water. Some of the facts about water are startling. 4 In this context the attitude to water has changed. The important step in recognizing the economic value was taken in Berlin, Germany. As the statement says: Water has an economic value in all its competing uses and should be recognized as an economic good. Within this principle, it is vital to recognize first the basic right of all human beings to have access to clean water and sanitation at an affordable price. Past failure to recognize the economic value of water has led to wasteful and environmentally damaging uses of the resource. Managing water as an economic good is an important way of achieving efficient and equitable use, and of encouraging conservation and protection of water resources.5 This attitude towards water as an economic entity has led the private sector to cash in on the need for safe drinking water. The community that has the economic potential makes use of this privilege and the low-income category is left to the mercy of governments. The recent trend of governments to

1. Privatization
Privatization is often assumed to entail commercialization and commodification, to the extent that the terms are, at times, used interchangeably. Privatization requires change of ownership, or handover of management, from the public to the private sector.1 Privatization is the accumulation of property and ownership of the right to exclude others from using it.2 This idea of privatizing in order to prevent conflict and preserve scarce resources is a key to capitalism, since it also creates the scarce condition to make it competitive. Inequality is a by-product of this process. The market is for those who have purchasing power and not the impoverished. Furthermore, the term privatization could be interpreted as the process that involves the participation of private
4

entrust to private companies the responsibility for securing water resources and for distributing water is an issue of great concern. Apart from paying a fee to the government, private companies would earn a huge profit by selling water to the public. There were efforts to enhance the government policy to accommodate this process. Considering the fact that governments lacked funds and expertise, private companies, which were on the high following the neoliberal market economic boom, jumped in to provide the service, exploiting the inability of the public sector infrastructure. This is true of many developing countries. India is no different. Within a neoliberal setting it is believed that governments should play the role of a facilitator by allowing the market to carry out the social functions.6 It is too attractive a proposal for governments to refuse. When it comes to water, the issue becomes rather complicated due to the very attitude of people towards water. It is an essential part of human life. In the words of the World Council of Churches, which probably summarizes the peoples view, Water is a symbol of life It is a basic condition for all life on Earth and is to be preserved and shared for the benefit of all creatures and the wider creation.7 Water has a special place in the spiritual life of many world religions. It is an accepted notion that all human beings, irrespective of their economic background, have a right to use water.8 The UN states that, The human

right to water entitles everyone to sufficient, affordable, physically accessible, safe and acceptable water for personal and domestic uses. 9 But with the definition of water as an economic entity, water has shifted from a human right to a commodity that needs to be bought.10 It is very obvious that the poor become the victims of this effort to privatize water distribution by the private sector as they cannot afford to pay for and buy it. Although this privatization argument is furthered from the stance that it would enable better efficiency in the preservation and distribution of water, and would serve the poor better, very little evidence comes in support of this.11 An Indian journalist describes this situation as follows, Developing country governments that are under the charmed spell of the proprivatization World Bank, Asian Development Bank and other multilateral organizations have come around to a consensus that water is a commodity. On the other hand, civil society groups firmly believe that water is a natural resource that belongs equally to all people and should stay a public utility. World Bank sponsored studies indicate that the urban poor already pay five times the municipal rate for water in Abidjan, Cte dIvoire; 25 times more in Dhaka, Bangladesh; and 40 times more in Cairo, Egypt.12 Although the organized private sector does not yet have a monopoly on water, the distribution and sale of bottled/packaged mineral water within the context of the
5

lack of a proper drinkable water supply by the municipal system assumes an importance that cannot be ignored. Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke, severely critiquing this process, comment: The commodification of water is wrong ethically, environmentally and socially. It insures that decisions regarding the allocation of water would centre on commercial, not environmental or social justice considerations. Privatization means that the management of water resources is based on principles of scarcity and profit maximization rather than long-term sustainability. Corporations are dependent on increased consumption to generate profits and are much more likely to invest in the use of chemical technology, desalination, marketing and water trading than in conservation.13 This destructive developmental process has to be countered in order to save the earth and the human community which demands strict measures and policies protecting the natural resources and upholding human rights. It can be achieved only when governments take the responsibility and provide legal frameworks for safeguarding the interests of the whole of creation and not just private individuals and corporations. The poor are the hardest hit by this process.
14

Some cases of privatization of water in India The Indian situation on the privatization of water is yet to assume the status of a national problem. But the recent developments spearheaded by new economic policy and neoliberal free market champions are rather concerning. The pace with which public sector units are being privatized for better performance and the few MNC (multinational corporation) water distribution projects that are being tried around the country, definitely point to the eventual handing-over of important functions of the government, citing inefficiency, to the private sector for better performance. 16 In actuality the economic growth reported in India is widening the urbanrural divide which is deteriorating the already polarized country. Slums are growing faster than the cities on their peripheries as a direct result of the new market economy that neglects the rural sphere, further complicating the situation. 17 In order to sustain urban industrial development, water resources are diverted from rural areas. The leftover water in the villages is either polluted or contaminated, driving the helpless villagers to move to urban centres and end up in slums. 18 Within this context, when we observe the Indian governments water policy, we see mixed results. Though it claims that 90% have access to potable water, it does not mention the percentage of people who actually get it and how often they get it. There seems to be no answer.19 With the

International experience tells us that they pay more than anyone, since water has become a commodity controlled by multinational companies and soon will no longer be a natural free source.15
6

growing demand for water coupled with the inefficient functioning of the government water distribution system, private companies have staked a claim to do the job, but at a price. This development can be looked at on two levels. Small-scale privatization domestic and local commercialization of water As explained through my own experience in the beginning, Chennai is one of the countrys water-starved cities. It depends for its water needs to a large extent on the dwindling ground water. The water tanks too remain dry due to the failure of the monsoon rains. With the heat and humidity, water consumption is very high. Exploiting this situation, more than 200 legal and 400 illegal water packaging units have sprung up, utilizing the bore well water on their own small lands to meet the needs. According to a press release, in the past few years the people of Chennai have paid $10 million to these companies for 3.7 billion litres of potable water. 20 Perceiving the profitability of this market, bigger players like Nestle, Parle, Aquafina (Pepsi) and Kinley (Coca-Cola) have invested heavily and even bought out some of the smaller companies. Adding to the water woes of the neighbouring villages, these companies have sunk deep bore wells to feed their factories, deteriorating the water sources in those villages.21 Continuing failure of the municipal water distribution system promises a good future for these companies. The Chennai Metro water authority has also adopted another

method of utilizing private vendors to provide and distribute water to the major unserviced area by spending a huge amount.22 This is indirectly promoting and encouraging private water vendors. Instead of investing in a long-term plan, energy is being spent on a short-term solution. Personal experience shows that for many reasons even this water is not available to 50% of the population in Chennai. Those individuals or shops that can pay more money can very easily buy out the water from the vendors, leaving the poor people waterless for days, if not weeks. Large-scale industrial and multinational takeover of water distribution and maintenance The following are the archetypal mega projects of the modern market world that are at various stages of execution in India. The water distribution system in New Delhi, following the privatization of electricity, has been handed over to Vivendi and Degremont; the latter is taking up a design, build and distribute system in Sonia Vihar, New Delhi.23 Tirupur is an industrial town chosen by the state government of Tamilnadu to experiment a private build, operate, own and transfer model. This project was given to Bechtel and other Indian companies which have formed a consortium.24 Vivendi had secured water management worth US$ 7.5 million in Calcutta, and in Bangalore along with the Northumbrian Water Group (NLI), secured a pilot project in water management and distribution, which
7

would lead to a 30 year contract in 2000. Even Chennai has handed over its water service management to Vivendi.25 Apart from these, there is this host of Coca-Cola and Pepsi establishments around the country involved in monopolizing water sources and causing severe ecological destruction, which needs no explanation.26 The effects of these developments can be generally summarized in the following points: 1. The price of privatized water involves the cost of purification, upgradation and distribution, which is unaffordable by the poor. 2. Unsustainable and uncontrolled water mining, with profit as the only motive, leads to an alarming fall in the ground water level, which is the primary source of fresh water. 3. Privatization leads to the formation of water monopolies thereby eliminating public control over this resource. 4. In the absence of the legal implementation of quality control, individuals and companies driven by profit compromise on water quality, thereby causing a serious threat to public health. 5. In order to feed the growing urban need for water, villagers are robbed of their remaining water resources, driving them to abandon their villages and move to urban centres. 6. It is true that government agencies fail miserably due to deep-seated corruption and lack of transparency in their transactions, thus causing private companies to flourish.
8

All the above-mentioned points could be substantiated through the cases that were briefly presented earlier. One of the fundamental problems is that the people who have money survive somehow; it is the poor who become the victims in this whole transaction. They form a large majority (65%) of the Indian population, and are excluded and driven to the edge of despair and death, which is a gross violation of human rights.27 To summarize in the words of Maude Barlow, an activist, Leaving water in the hands of private companies which are driven by commercial concerns and are not accountable to anyone is socially and environmentally immoral. 28

2. Biblical significance of water and a Christian perspective on privatization

The biblical creation story in Genesis lays down some of the fundamental understandings of water.29 In the beginning the spirit of God was hovering over the water (Gen 1.2) even before creation began, signifying the fact that water is a pre-creation source and becomes the basis for the creation that followed. Heaven and earth were called out of the waters (Gen 1.6-10). The waters were blessed with abundant living creatures (Gen 1.20-21). God uses water to nourish and sustain creation, and gives it as a blessing on the whole of creation (Gen 1.20-23, 2.6). Water becomes a means of Gods creation. In other words, it is the lifeline of Gods creation. It is also important to note that water can become a tool of

destruction in the face of human wickedness (Gen 7.1-24) and ecological destruction (the 2004 tsunami and hurricane Katrina in 2005).30 The New Testament carries on this symbolical importance of water. Johns gospel31 abounds in references to it. During Jesus baptism, water becomes the context of divine revelation (Jn 1.31-33). It is also considered to be purifying in nature, as it is closely identified with the Spirit of God.32 Living water (Jn 4.10) is another expression that needs our attention, as it signifies the new life which Jesus promises. The gospel of John also narrates two important healing stories by the pool side (Jn 5.1-9 & 9.1-14). The purpose of this brief biblical overview is to highlight the creational thinking that underlines the significance of water in human communities as life-giver and sustainer of this complex ecosystem. It is important for us, as Christians, to recognize this aspect of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. The presence of water ensures life and the absence of it spells death. In other words, water comes to represent the divine among creation. These preceding points on the significance of water demand an answer in the light of water being privatized. Can there be a theological justification or explanation of this development? What is the rationale behind privatizing the basis and source of life, which sustains and nurtures life, and moreover comes to represent Gods presence in creation? Ultimately, how do we treat Gods gift to humanity? What are the

experiences of the early Christians on the issue of private possession? Does privatizing water amount to privatizing God? Acts 4.32-35 holds the key to the early Christians understanding of this issue. In very clear terms it is mentioned that they shared everything and had everything in common. Importantly, there was not a needy person in their midst. Ulrich Duchrow interprets that it was not an accident that the early Christians had this practice; it is an outcome of their experience with their master Jesus Christ, who prophetically condemned the attitude of accumulation and insisted on sharing and gaining abundant life. They continued it because, through this fellowship of a sharing and caring community, Jesus Christ became alive in their midst. The early Christians represented a community without need, a counter community of sharing.33 Throughout the centuries this idea of a shared common life occupied the heart of the Christian message. In the understanding of the early church fathers, private ownership is rather sinful and the common use of goods manifested the fellowship in Christ which is Gods will for humanity. Joan L. ODonovan substantiates this: Within the practice of the church, the original use was more closely approximated by the communal ownership and distribution of goods throughout the clerical and monastic estates, but was also reflected in the giving away of superfluous property to the poor by all estates of the church. As much as the fathers, the medievals viewed the
9

private amassing of wealth, retained and preserved by property right for exclusive use, as a violation of the divine owners indentation that the earths abundance be shared in charity and distributed justly for the sustenance of all, love and justice being bound together. () They concurred in their predecessors indictment of avaricious accumulation as robbery of the needy, taking from the poor what belongs to them by divine and natural right.34 Property and economic exchange, human industry and market trade have to be fairly and righteously dealt with, Luther claimed.35 It is important to pick up these threads from Christian theological history i.e. that there is no Christian justification for privatization or claim for exclusive use of resources; rather we are expected to share and live in a community. Exclusive ownership and accumulation are even considered to be against Gods will. Common good is the norm, since Christian theology makes it very clear that we do not own anything but God, and all the earths resources need to be justly shared among all in other words; this is the Christian ethical basis. Furthering Calvins idea of our resources as Gods gift and we as stewards,36 Kathryn Tanner says that there should be a non-commodity exchange rather than a commodity exchange, putting the emphasis on giving rather than accumulating. One partakes in the community not for personal reasons but to be part of a self-sustaining society,37 which stands in opposition to the commodity
10

contract of capitalist transaction. 38 This ushers in the idea of common sharing and possession as against private accumulation. It is not the individual but the community that is at the heart of Gods gift.39 The necessity of non-competitive relations is crucial in sustaining this community, selfsharing for the good of others.40 In other words, The significance of the ethic of common good and stewardship, since ownership is defined in the light of love for the neighbour, an essential mandate for Christians because it is the necessity of all of us to promote justice and protect the common good by working together with neighbourly love.41 In the light of the foregoing discussion, the WCC statement makes a clear point on the issue of privatization of water: The centrality of water to life, and the experience of water as a gift are two sources of the affirmation of water as a basic human right. Just as the biblical Jubilee declared that land belonged, in the final analysis, to God and not to any particular individual, so water should be part of the global commons and a social good. To treat water as a gift of God and human right implies that clean fresh water should be available to meet the basic needs of all living beings, rather than be treated as a private commodity to be bought and sold.42 We can conclude that any privatization that excludes and denies the rightful use of resources is against Gods will and more so with the water which God uses to create,

nurture, sustain and heal the whole of creation. The multinational companies that are trying to privatize water are actually trying to privatize life itself, thereby excluding and denying to a large section of humanity their right to livelihood through the unjust structures of society. This process requires serious consideration within the ecclesial community.

advocates that it is possible only through covenantal relationship, which is a pact for the good of the community. Not through moral order (morality of domination or privatization) but by ethical praxis, not through accumulation, but through freely giving, by making ourselves responsible for the other, we may be able to establish a covenantal community.47 This community relationship should have the characteristics of sharing and stewardship, not economically commodified transaction. Salvation is not just an issue concerning an individuals soul but also involves transforming the sociopolitical and economic structure of which the individual is part. Privatization that replaces God with self should be critiqued. In the context of the dehumanizing forces of privatization and globalization, Hans Kng stresses the necessity of a global ethic that has binding values, irrevocable standards and personal attitudes.48 The church is an instrument of Gods justice. Hence it is incompatible with the unjust structures of the world and stands under the obligation to strive and struggle for the restoration of the fallen creation. It should have in its heart combating for justice and promoting right relationships, relationships of equality, mutual sharing and caring with love for the neighbour as the driving force, embodying the image of God.49 In the light of the growing privatization of water in India, the Indian church is called upon to be prophetic, critiquing the kind of dehumanizing privatization that is being
11

3. Challenges for the church

The church exists in modern society as the work and instrument of Gods justice.43 These defining words of Jrgen Moltmann summarize the purpose and mission of the church in our times. The church, which stands in the historical tradition of being a counter community, promoting the values of justice and love, the importance of sharing, has to reinvent itself to confront contemporary challenges. When talking about the responsibility of the churches Ulrich Duchrow says, Prophetic critique, resistance, living alternatives and intervention towards legal reforms these were the biblical forms of practising faith in Yahweh, the compassionate God.44 As has been pointed out, the church is under obligation to promote a non-market framework and practise unconditional giving in the face of competitive terms of relationship. 45 The theological roots of economy have to rework the truncated hopes, unrectified losses, callous exclusions and challenge the winner takes all competitive market attitude.46 How is this possible? Enrique Dussel

pushed by the national water policy under the influence of international funding agencies (World Bank, Asian Development Bank and International Monetary Fund) and to challenge the government to develop policies that protect water resources. Being a model, the church should practise the ecologically sustainable use of water resources and promote communitybased initiatives with equal and just sharing. It should encourage the government to take up sustainable watershed management and invest in ecofriendly technologies. 50 It should highlight to its members the benefits of rainwater harvesting. As an instrument of Gods justice, it should urge the government to take the legal framework seriously to protect the poor against this onslaught, by regulating various water bodies and monitoring the price, quality and distribution of water. The church being the epitome of a just sharing community, without romanticizing community, should live it out in all possible ways. It requires a firm belief in a God who has gifted us with all these resources and given us a vocation as stewards to preserve, nurture and share in a community.51 There is no provision for claiming an exclusive right to Gods gift to humanity and the church has the mandate to resist such a development. It is the duty of the church in the light of Luke 4.14-21 (Jesus Nazareth Manifesto) to ensure that justice is done to the poor, the victimized and the excluded, especially in the context of privatization!
12

Conclusion
The strongest theological critique is that the core aspect of privatization undermines the very nature of community and the place of God in it. As we found in this paper, it breaks the bond of community and creates inequality through accumulation and exclusion, with the result that some have access to good drinking water and some do not. Community in a Christian sense is essentially sharing the resources and caring for one another. The church as a community of faithfuls should practise reciprocal commitment52 by ensuring the wellbeing of all the members. This is the fundamental difference between privatization and the communitarian aspect. The church should promote a non-commodity exchange community, based on a sharing and caring principle, reflecting the economy of Gods grace. Water is the basic source of life. It needs to be considered not in terms of its economic capabilities and potential, but as a necessity for human sustenance, hence the importance to its distribution to all, irrespective of their ability to pay for it. In India, water is understood to be life itself, on which our land, our food, our livelihood, our tradition and culture depend. As the lifeline of society, water is a sacred common heritage to be worshipped, preserved and shared collectively, sustainably used and equitably distributed in our culture.53 I hope the church in India opens its eyes and ears to these realities and takes a stand against the privatized destruction of creation

and promotes Life instead! Here is how the prophet Isaiah (41.17-18) proclaims Gods promise: When the poor and needy seek water, and there is none, and their tongue fails for thirst, I the LORD will hear them, I the God of Israel will not

forsake them. I will open rivers in high places, and fountains in the midst of the valleys; I will make the wilderness a pool of water, and the dry land springs of water. 54 God is concerned about the poor and the needy, what about the Church? Is it listening?

Other sources
Statements World Meteorological Organization (1992), International Conference on Water and the Environment: Development Issues for the 21st Century: The Dublin Statement and Report of the Conference, Geneva, WMO, http://www.wmo.int/web/homs/documents/english/ icwedece.html (accessed 24.04.2007). WCC statement, http://www.wcc-assembly.info/en/theme-issues/assembly-documents/ plenary-presentations/committee-reports/public-issues-committee/water-for-lifestatement.html. United Nations Economic and Social Council (2002), Substantive issues arising in the implementation of the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, draft, General Comment No 15, Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights, Geneva, 11-29 November 2002, http://www.iied.org/human/eandu/documents/ budds_mcgranahan.pdf. Web sites Water Facts, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/waterfacts.html, www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/pdf/chap13.pdf, http://www.indiaresource.org/news/2003/4343.html. The Water Policy of the Asian Development Bank 2002, www.adb.org, http://www.newleftreview.net/Issue26.asp?Article=01.
13

Notes
Karen Bakker, Neo-liberalizing Nature? Market Environmentalism in Water Supply in England and Wales, http://www.geog.ubc.ca/~bakker/PDF/neoliberalizing.pdf, p.544. 2 Kathryn Tanner, Economy of Grace, Minneapolis, MN, Fortress Press, 2005, p.34. 3 Morgan Paul, Edd Noell, Capitalism and Liberation Theology in Latin America, Santa Barabra, CA., Westmont College, December 1990, gordon.edu/ace/pdf/ MorganNoell_CapAndLiberTheolLat.pdf. 4 Water Facts, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/waterfacts.html, www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr/pdf/chap13.pdf, http://www.indiaresource.org/news/ 2003/4343.html. 5 World Meteorological Organization, International Conference on Water and the Environment: Development Issues for the 21st Century: The Dublin Statement and Report of the Conference, WMO, Geneva, 1992; as quoted by: Jessica Budds, Gordon McGranahan, www.iied.org/human/eandu/documents/budds_mcgranahan.pdf, p.91. 6 Jessica Budds & Gordon McGranahan, Are the Debates on Water Privatization Missing the Point? Experiences from Africa, Asia and Latin America, http://www.iied.org/human/ eandu/documents/budds_mcgranahan.pdf. p.89. 7 WCC statement on Water for Life, http://www.oikoumene.org/index.php?id=1955. 8 Jessica Budds & Gordon McGranahan, op. cit., p.90. 9 United Nations Economic and Social Council (2002), Substantive Issues Arising in the Implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, draft, General Comment No 15, Committee on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights, Geneva, 11-29 November 2002, http://www.iied.org/human/eandu/documents/ budds_mcgranahan.pdf, p.94. 10 Conserving water, Water for All: The Water Policy of the Asian Development Bank, 2002, www.adb.org. 11 Jessica Budds & Gordon McGranahan, op. cit., pp.100-110. 12 Ann Ninan, Private Water, Public Misery, India Resource Center, April 16, 2003, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/privatewaterpublicmisery.html 13 Maude Barlow & Tony Clarke, Who Owns Water?, http://www.thenation.com/ docPrint.mhtml?i=20020902&s=barlow p.5. 14 Ibid., p.6. 15 Charles Santiago observes, Water as a global common good has come under the control of market forces. This is because water promises to be the most precious commodity of the 21st century, profiting corporations. The global trade in water is currently estimated to be US$ 800 billion, involving about 6% of the world population receiving services from corporations. However, the global trade is expected to be a multitrillion dollar industry in the near future when privatized water systems expand to serve about 17% of the worlds population by 2015. The Big Ten multinational corporations control the water market and related industries. Nine of the ten largest water corporations in the world are located in Europe. European Water Corporations and the Privatization of Asian Water Resources: The Challenge for Asian Water Security, http://www.boell.de/downloads/global/ cancun_water.pdf, p.9. 16 Ann Ninan, op. cit. 17 Elliott D. Sclar et al., The 21st Century Health Challenge of Slums and Cities, http://www.earth.columbia.edu/images/TheLancet_slum_dwellers.pdf and http://
1

14

www.newleftreview.net/Issue26.asp?Article=01. 18 McKenzie & Ray, Household Water Delivery Options in Urban and Rural India, http://scid.stanford.edu/events/India2004/McKenzie-Ray%205-11-04.pdf. 19 Ibid., p.31. 20 Anjali Kamat, Water Profiteers, http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/ waterprofiteers.html. 21 Ibid. 22 McKenzie & Ray, op. cit., p.29. 23 Anitha Sampath et al., Water Privatization and Implications in India, http:// studentorgs.utexas.edu/aidaustin/water/water_privatization.pdf, p.6. 24 Ibid., p.6. 25 Charles Santiago, European Water Corporations and the Privatization of Asian Water Resources: The Challenge for Asian Water Security, http://www.boell.de/downloads/global/ cancun_water.pdf, p.17. 26 Ibid., p.18 and S. Viswanathan, Bottling Thamiraparani, http://www.indiaresource.org/ news/2005/2022.html. 27 Charles Santiago, op. cit., p.21. 28 Maude Barlow, Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the Worlds Water, http://www.cceia.org/viewMedia.php/prmTemplateID/5/prmID/830. 29 William P. Brown, Structure, Role, and Ideology in the Hebrew and Greek Texts of Genesis 1.1-2.3, Atlanta, GA, Scholars Press, 1993, p.42f and William Henry Propp, Water in the Wilderness: a Biblical Motif and its Mythological Background, Atlanta, GA, Scholars Press, 1987, p.9f. 30 There are plenty of Old Testament narratives to substantiate the significance of water that are not mentioned here. 31 Craig R. Koester, Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, Minneapolis, MN, Fortress Press, 2003, pp.175-206 and Stephen T. Um, The Theme of Temple Christology in Johns Gospel, London, T&T Clark, 2006, p.10f. 32 Ibid., p.181. 33 Ulrich Duchrow, Private Property: a Growing Danger for Life - or: Neglected in the Globalization Debate, The Ecumenical Review, (54(4), October 2002 http:// findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2065/is_4_54/ai_97118068. 34 Joan L. ODonovan, The Theological Economics of Medieval Usury Theory in: Oliver ODonovan (ed.), Bonds of Imperfection: Christian Politics Past and Present, Grand Rapids, MI,Wm B. Eerdmans, 2004, pp.104-5. 35 Ibid., p.117. 36 Kathryn Tanner, op. cit., p.48. 37 Ibid., p.50. 38 Ibid., p.55. 39 Ibid., p.74. 40 Ibid., p.85. 41 James B. Martin-Schramm & Robert L. Stivers, Taking on water in: Christian Environmental Ethics, New York, Orbis Books, 2003, p.178. 42 Working Group on Water, WCC Consultation at Mission 21, Basle, 9-13 May 2005, http:/ /www.oikoumene.org/index.php?id=2612 43 Jrgen Moltmann, Creating a Just Future : the Politics of Peace and the Ethics of Creation in a Threatened World, London, SCM Press, 1989, p.6.

15

Ulrich Duchrow, op. cit., p.480. Kathryn Tanner, op. cit., p.129. 46 Ibid., p.90. 47 Enrique Dussel, Ethics and Community, Turnbridge Wells, Kent, Burns & Oates, 1988, pp.40-46. 48 Hans Kng (ed.), A Global Ethic and Global Responsibility: Two Declarations, London, SCM Press, 1998, p.41. 49 This idea is borrowed from the feminist ecclesiology narrated by Natalie K. Watson, Introducing Feminist Ecclesiology, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press, 2002, pp.116-120. 50 Also support alternate models such as check dam and bund building, holistic watershed management, integrated river basin management, etc. For further alternates in water management see Anitha Sampath, p.14. 51 James B. Martin-Schramm & Robert L. Stivers, op. cit., pp.101, 298. 52 By reciprocal commitment, I mean it is not just that the members of a church should be committed to the church as an institution or organization, the church should also show its commitment for the betterment and wellbeing of its members. 53 Quoted by Maude Barlow & Tony Clarke, Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the Worlds Water, New York, The New Press, 2002, p.87. 54 Isa 41.17-18.
44 45

16

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Water, source of life socioeconomic, theological and interreligious perspectives

Clifford Reinhold Leandro Rawlins

There are two things essential to life, writes Clifford Rawlins: water and breath. These two elements, water and breath, form the basis of a powerful biblical metaphor relating to the second and third persons of the Trinity, the spiritual life of humanity and the whole created order and also of life in communion with Jesus Christ. Rawlins provides a succinct introduction to the socio-economic, theological, and inter-religious aspects of water. A native of Trinidad and Tobago, Rawlins has been a minister of the Church of Scotland in his country for 10 years. He is currently doing research in post-colonial studies and preparing a degree of Master of Theology. He is engaged in local ecumenism and in the contextual renewal of Reformed spirituality, particularly through church music. This article was one of the winners of the 2005-2006 Lombard Prize.

Water is a unique element on Planet Earth. It makes possible the existence of all living organisms more than any other element of life. Indeed, the very absence of this element on other planets of the solar system may well preclude the existence of life forms on any of them. It has been observed that only the planet Mars lies within the narrow temperature band that allows water to exist in its three states of liquid, solid and gas, and only the earth is blanketed by a living, water-built biosphere in which the life force seems to issue from the waters evaporation, precipitation, runoff, seepage, plant transpiration, animal

respiration, melting, freezing and flowing. Earth, as humanity knows it, is the only water planet in this galaxy and therefore the only one capable of propagating various life forms.1 The Dublin Principles for Water have declared that water is a finite and valuable economic resource,2 which, although selfrecycling through the process of evaporation and condensation back into rainfall, is not increasing in quantity. In other words, it is argued that nearly every molecule of the water that exists today for human consumption was present at the time when the seas formed the earth.
17

This is due mainly to the Dynamic hydrological cycle that bathes and supports all life.3 Also, this hydrological cycle yields only a fixed quantity of water per time period, which cannot be humanly improved though it may be depleted by human waste and pollution. It is estimated that just three thousandths (3/1000) of the earths water is available for human consumption. The rest is either highly inaccessible, unfit to consume or just too expensive to obtain.4 Water is a unique element. It can absorb other elements such as heat and cold thereby making it a vast energy storage bank. Other substances can be dissolved in it, as with sugar and salt, or be suspended therein (i.e. existing side by side with the water without changing the essential nature of either) as in the case of milk, juices and other liquid or semi-solid products. Seeing, therefore, that the earth is essentially a water planet with just over 70% of its landmass covered in this element, and all of its life forms having their origin therefrom, and that the human body itself is composed of about the same 70% of water, it becomes evident that our own preservation is closely and inextricably linked with the availability of water for all, with respect to basic human needs, and with the preservation of this very limited and finite resource from which all life originates. Water is, literally, the source of life on earth and vital for its sustainability, even for human survival, dignity and development. Indeed, The earth is the Lords, and the fullness thereof, the world and those who
18

dwell therein; for he has founded it upon the seas and established it upon the rivers (Ps 24.1-2). The demands on this finite resource are enormous. Industrial purposes, food and energy production, human consumption, sanitation, jobs and recreation stake their claim. And when these demands are translated into actual figures they become startling indeed. Water resources are under pressure from steadily increasing population growth, economic activity and intensifying competition from water users. At the heart of this there is also the voice for environmental needs among these other users in the ecosystem. Then too, there are growing concerns about climate change and variability such as the greenhouse effect and El Nio phenomena, floods and drought.5 Yet the amount of usable water remains invariably unchanged.

Socioeconomic perspectives
It has been recognized that about one in six of the worlds human population is without access to potable water and at least one half without adequate sanitation. 6 Many of these cases are located in the poorer segments of the developed and the developing world. In some of these segments, however, this inaccessibility is often confused with the inability to obtain a developed, perhaps even luxurious supply of water via in-house taps and modern and/or elaborate bathing and sanitation systems as against a truck-

borne or community taps/wells supply which may have an invariable flow. This still does not detract from the fact that at least 1.2 billion people worldwide are without recourse to an adequate water supply required for basic human consumption and sanitation needs, if any supply at all in most circumstances. The adult human body is 70% water, and this figure is higher for children, so that one may be able to survive a traditional biblical period of forty days without food, but only a few days without water.7 It is therefore essential to the very dignity of the human person that each one has access to an amount of water necessary for personal survival and development, before the needs of the larger user groups. This would invariably place water allocation firstly within the realm of economics and the political will (or lack thereof) to combat vested economic interests in industry and foreign investment. The Dublin Articles recognize that within this principle it is vital to acknowledge the basic right of all humans to have access to water and sanitation at an affordable price. Water must be seen as having economic worth. The non-recognition of its full value has led to wasteful and environmentally damaging uses up to the present.8 There must needs be a cost for managing a nations water resources in such a manner as to ensure the availability of this resource on a sustainable basis. But would it be proper to levy such an assessment on groups and communities

already disadvantaged by the inaccessibility thereof, and who are also on the lowest levels of economic empowerment? An inherent danger here is that of the privatization of water allocation and management supply and services. Where this action of a privatized supply of water services has occurred, there have been steadily soaring increases in rates, water shortages and disconnection without concern or compassion for those who may be unable to afford such services. Applying such an economic instrument to support thus disadvantaged groups would affect behaviour towards conservation and efficient usage, provide incentives for demand management, ensure cost recovery and signal the consumers willingness to pay for additional investments in water services. It is an important means of decision-making that impacts on social aspirations as well. In a water-scarce environment, would it be right to give water to industrial giants instead of the poor simply because they can afford to pay? Water allocation may not be most efficient when valued in economic terms alone or acceptable when made only on political grounds. Here the value of water is measured against the economic charge for use and services. The value of water rightly assessed would place decisions on its management and allocation now within the realm of natural justice, fairplay and even equity to a lesser degree, bearing in mind increased scarcity of supply and a reduction in conflict among users.9
19

No longer would it be the first, second and third fruits for the strong and powerful only, but as a kingdom principle, God intended that the first fruits should go to him, rightly recognizing water as a gift of God, essential to the created order, of which humanity is only a fraction. The second fruits, as it were, would have to involve a coordinated effort among all interested parties. This means that all government agencies with an interest in water usage, such as health, local government, agriculture, public utilities, water management institutions, industry and other user groups should clarify the entitlements, responsibilities and roles in relation to stakeholders.10 Water uses are interdependent and must be considered together. However, entrusting responsibility for drinking water to one agency, for irrigation to another, for the environment to another and for industry to yet another, leads to uncoordinated water development and resource development management, resulting in conflict, waste and unsustainable systems. Grassroots involvement should be paramount here because local solutions regarding water and sanitation would then be found by local people who are most affected. This endeavour would clean up much of the bureaucracy, redundancy and separatedness of human and other resources with regard to water management and ensure a sustainable use of the resource. This effort serves to highlight as well the interconnectedness of all of life which
20

postmodern society has maliciously dissected into various compartments, often in seeming conflict with one another, in a vain attempt to attain some measure of human control over the elemental and other forces of the created order which was never originally God-intended. Lastly, the gleanings of the field should demand an attitude that incorporates even the poor and disadvantaged (Lev 19.9-10). God demands the right use of his gifts so that his providential nature will be glorified when all creation is cared for and looked after and receives in celebration a just and fair distribution proportionate to ones needs without wasting, polluting, greed or selfish indulgence (Ezek 34; Jn 10.10). Lack of basic resources vital to human existence and development and in many instances wilfully withheld on political grounds poses a serious threat to a persons power in society and position in decisionmaking circles. On the other hand, such an empowerment could be seen also as a threat to a governments power and position where absolute power is tyrannically maintained. Such possible threats are thus controlled and a government consolidates its hold on power. The General Council of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches in its 1989 Open Letter to the Children and Young People of the Planet had this to say, Over and over again one refrain persisted: The rich get richer, while the poor get poorer. Surely the world should not be the way that it is. But if the world is to be changedthen the present global

economic order will have to be altered drastically. Basic to all other injustices todayis economic injustice; and this means that the churches are being called to recognize that the present world economic order and the systems and structures which maintain it are unjust at base. They not only allow but they actually foster injustice in terms of the distribution of wealth and access to economic power. This means that many people are bound to be kept in a condition of utter poverty while a few enjoy immense wealth. If the present economic order is maintained, this enormous discrepancy between rich and poor will prevail, and it will become still more conspicuous.11 Decision-making on water management and allocation must not be confined to the vested interests of limited groups of users, geographical boundaries, sectoral institutions or national jurisdictions. It must involve full public consultation and decisions from the lowest levels of water users in planning and implementation. This would go a long way towards a rejection of the notion and experience of victimhood by the disadvantaged who desire to be on an equal footing with the rest of the world, at least where the equitable distribution of the earths resources is concerned. It may be that the powerful transnational economic trading blocs, economic superpower nations and even despotic regimes will keep setting objective standards so that disempowered concerned groups and other such lobbyists cannot fight, and who are to be mourned for protests so seemingly helpless. In any event, too, such protest

actions appear to have only a hollow, passing effect in that there is a great uproar about a particular issue of a particular time-period, and without influencing the desired decision from the world powerhouses, the protest dies or fades away quietly until another time and another issue. This can be seen with regard to the issue of the depletion of the ozone layer, the refusal of the United States of America to sign the Kyoto Accord and the Jubilee 2000 campaign to cancel the debts of poorer nations. The Dublin Principles again bear witness to the need for gender equality with regard to water allocation and the concomitant empowerment that it brings to those so disadvantaged. It recognizes that water management is male-dominated because of a preponderance of males in the decisionmaking strata of government and its agencies and in industry and agriculture. It acknowledges, too, that different societies, especially more traditional ones, assign particular social, economic and cultural roles to men and women, and that there is need for synergy between gender equity and sustainable water management, where such gender equity would be improved by access of both men and women to water and waterrelated services to meet their particular and essential needs.12 Women the world over have traditionally been revered as guardians of the living environment in their role as mother. They have been at the bedrock of sustainable development on the whole as homemakers and through their involvement in agriculture. They thus play a central role
21

in the provision, management and safeguarding of water. Water, while not the source per se, can also be the means by which disease and death-carrying species of life are borne. Medical researcher David Bratt observes that water-borne diseases are dirty-water diseases, caused primarily by water that has been contaminated by human, animal or chemical wastes. Worldwide the lack of sanitary waste disposal and of clean water for human consumption and hygiene is to blame for over twelve million deaths a year.13 He surmises, Water, like honesty or trust, when not contaminated with garbage, is healthy, clear and sparkling with life.14 The fact is that much of human activity with water and interference with many of the self-maintaining processes of nature, and with nature in general, have long been accepted as part of humankinds God-given right to take, have and hold dominion over the earth (Gen 1.28). The construction of the Aswan High Dam in the River Nile has greatly affected the natural flooding of the plains with the rivers silt and thus considerably reduced the agricultural capacity of the land to feed its people, resulting in widespread famine, malnutrition and disease. This is all due to the silt that once fertilized the land now being deposited and trapped in the dam, and this also poses a problem to the infrastructural safety of the dam itself. More than a century earlier the transplanting of the water hyacinth from its unique home in the Orinoco River in
22

Venezuela to other parts of the world because of its natural capacity as a water purifier has led to the plant now becoming an agricultural pest and a threat to many species of water life. The plant was removed from its place in a naturally controlled environment where seasonal flooding, insects, fish and others would feed and otherwise use the plant thus constricting the untamed spread that occurred when it was transplanted to other uncontrolled environments. In 1825 the Erie Canal in the northern United States was opened with much fanfare celebrating the arrival of easier inland access through riverboats. Unseen, however, was that the opening of the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean led to their invasion by the sea lamprey. This was a seafood delicacy in Europe from time immemorial, and unknown as such in North America. It soon became a ravaging parasite that greatly affected the fishing industry in the Great Lakes region for many years. 15 These serve to highlight an idea of the earth as a dead, empty thing to be conquered and subdued, (much the same way as women were regarded and treated in Western church and society), by the political and private economic giants that have continued the old imperial trends in a modern and brazen resurgence of neocolonialist tendencies. Yet the apostle Paul reminds us that it was not only humankind that was redeemed by the Christ Event, but all creation, which was

groaning in labour pains until the dawning of a new order (Rom 8.19-23). Furthermore, Anne Hadfield, writing in Reformed World reminds us that this process of reconciliation to God is not a completed one either; but rather a continuing one that involves not just personal repentance but the twin movements of stopping the destruction of creation and the restoration of creation, which would imply a christology of nature as well. This idea, as well as that of humankind
16

those in direct communion with Christ (Rom 8.19ff; Rev 22).

Theological perspectives
There are two things essential to life: water and breath. Interestingly one of waters two component elements is that which is also responsible for sustaining everything that has breath, namely oxygen. These two elements of water and breath have formed the basis of a powerful biblical metaphor relating to the second and third persons of the Trinity, the spiritual life of humanity and the whole created order and also of life in communion with Jesus Christ. In the beginning of the worlds creation, it is the Spirit (ruach, breath) of God that hovers over the vast expanse of water, making it fertile to receive the life-giving word of God and bring all things into being. This word of God itself is composed of water and breath as are all words and sounds that proceed from the mouth of any being. The two primordial elements of water and breath combine to incarnate thoughts into the spoken word. In the book of Job, chapter 37, verses 9 and 10, it is written that from Gods chamber comes the whirlwind, and cold from the scattering winds (bringing water in their condensation) and by the breath of God ice is given, and the broad waters are frozen fast. In anticipation of the New Creation in the Christ event, this same Spirit is involved in the incarnation of the very Word of God, the second person of the Trinity. He/she [the Spirit] was there in the inspiration of
23

as stewards of Gods creation, is fully embodied in the churchs eucharistic rite where not only thanks is invoked on behalf of the whole created order, but where this whole creation is together the sum total of the oikoumene. In the words of Psalm 150 it is everything with breath that praises the Lord. The other psalms just previous to this one also invoke the elemental forces of nature with its flora and fauna in a universal thanksgiving. Indeed, All creation rightly gives you thanks and praise; all life, all holiness comes from you, and joins humanity and the entire cosmic order
17

now in the ecstasy of the angelic Sanctus. Therefore, it is the fullness of the benefits of the redemption of Jesus Christ that not only has been gained for the whole created order but also poured forth in eucharistic blessing through the intercession and elemental partaking of the priests and stewards of this creation, namely humankind; and more particularly

the prophets, the conception of Jesus and the prenatal anointing of John the Baptizer, the laudatory acclamations of Mary, Zechariah and Simeon and Anna. It is the Spirit that is Ready to give birth to all the word will say.18 This Word of God, incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth, was called upon to heal a man blind from birth according to Johns gospel, chapter 9. Jesus spits on the ground and with the wet clay anoints the mans eyes for healing. The spittle is composed of water and breath and coming from one who is Gods incarnate Word and full of the Spirit. Thus the Spirit of God is again seen bringing life to birth when water and breath from the Holy One are cast upon dry, infertile earth. Jesus uses the metaphor of water to refer to the Spirit of God indwelling those who respond to God through him. It was a potent symbol in a land that encompassed the extremes of cold and heat, aridity and fertility, desert and oasis. Water was an allimportant and many times scarce resource so that its intrinsic value was fully recognized and appreciated by the entire region for generations on end. More interestingly his referrals to the gift of living or life-giving water, recorded in John 4.10, 13; 7. 38-39 (which themselves are seen as a fulfilling of the prophecies of Isaiah 55.12, Jeremiah 2.13, 17. 13, Zechariah 14.8 and the desire of Psalm 23.2) stand in stark contrast to the existence of the Dead Sea in which no life can be found or sustained. Indeed, Jesus proclaimed blessings on those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
24

in Matthew 5.6, since this life-giving water of the fullness of life in God through the Spirit is given to those who live within the Reign of God and seek, invoke and exude his justice and mercy as priests of the new creation. The rivers of the Garden of Eden are lifegiving. The water from the rock provided much needed relief in crossing the barren wilderness into the Promised Land. Water, even if it destroyed Pharaoh and his host, did give a new life to the Israelites. The Syrian captain, Namaan, was cleansed of leprosy in the waters of the Jordan, as was likewise the world cleansed in the deluge of Noahs day. As Amos declares in chapter 5, verse 24, Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. This justice and mercy of God in lifegiving water is further contrasted with Gods judgement and indignation against sin and a life contrary to his will, in drought. The absence of this life-giving resource symbolizes the absence of his favour, his Spirit, his Word and his life, as clearly perceived in the story of Elijah who called a drought upon the land for three and a half years as Gods condemnation upon the idolatry of his people. However, water itself may also be used as a sign of Gods judgement on the land. It is common among Caribbean churchgoing folk to describe the ravages of hurricanes as the judgement of God upon a particular people. Recently, with the double ravaging of the island of Grenada in two successive years by hurricanes Ivan

and Emily respectively, the church has been forced to ask whether this can really be declared the judgement of God when there are other islands with worse sins than that one. In the same manner the very question begs to be asked in favour of those lands tragically devastated by the tsunami of December 26, 2004 in Southeast Asia and the South Pacific, or of the Southeast of the United States, New Orleans in particular, that was effectively destroyed by hurricane Katrina! In the latters regard one may say that Katrina was used as a potent instrument of revelation, to make known the once hidden recesses of abject poverty in the midst of a land and city of overwhelming prosperity, and at the forefront of world economic and political domination! It might have been Gods instrument of justice in regard to the descendants of former slaves (who had always considered themselves spiritually akin to the children of Israel in their Egyptian bondage and Mosaic deliverance) to reveal their plight so that they may obtain a share of the fullness of life which the rest of the nation was enjoying without any regard to their suffering brethren; and as a means of judgement on those who have wilfully sought economic and political means in order to keep their fellow citizens continually disempowered. In any event they, along with volcanoes, earthquakes and other such violent natural phenomena, may also be seen as a way of the earth cleansing, purging and renewing

itself; in much the same way a human being would have naturally automated means of self-cleansing and preservation. Or it could very well be the earth reacting vehemently to the interference with and inhumanity of the human race against nature itself. The earth has a judgemental reaction against pollution, waste, wanton abuse, misuse and pillage of the earths resources and of the continued domination by the rich few of the poor, helpless masses. But on the other hand, is there a way that we can see the glory of God in the power of water to give life as well as to destroy? Scripture does testify to the Lord who, thunders upon many waters, and who, sits enthroned upon the floods (Ps 29.3, 10). Also the very floods and mighty waves of the sea and the thunders worship God and declare his power in Psalm 93. The hymnwriter Robert Grant reminds us, O tell of his might, O sing of his grace, Whose robe is the light, whose canopy space. His chariots of wrath the deep thunderclouds form, And dark is his path on the wings of the storm.19 These frightening effects of nature are often a time to complain and murmur before and against God; a time for frenzied intercession to be spared, yet scripture testifies to their giving praise to Gods almightiness in their potency, as Job 36.2737.24 also concurs. This multifaceted imagery of water, its natural fluidity to being adapted to various
25

uses, its all pervading character throughout many states of being, has led to its adoption in scripture by Jesus, John the Baptizer and others as a symbol of cleansing, renewal, promise and hope. And this is chiefly demonstrated and effected in the sacrament of baptism. Again Jesus makes the reference to waters intrinsic relationship to life and breath (ruach Spirit) in his notion that to be born again would be through the one baptism of these two intertwining principles, water and the Spirit. Indeed, for the purposes of Christian theology, water may be the source of life, but water without the Spirit gives no real life at all. It is, thus, with a sense of grave concern that this writer pens his deep disquiet over Reformed Ministers of Word and Sacrament who baptize without any thanksgiving over or epiclesis of the Spirit upon the baptismal waters, especially over a falsely perceived notion that it closely resembles practices of the pre-Reformation Roman church. In the creation narrative it is the life-giving Spirit who breathes upon the watery chaos and brings it into order. So that from the time of Jesus, life-giving water and the gift of the Holy Spirit must always be seen in the closest relationship possible since they are inseparable. But the Spirit must be invoked, called to breathe upon, and never taken for granted. Otherwise we run the risk of forsaking the fountain of living water, Jeremiah 7.13, and performing a mere ritual that is not an effective means of grace or potent to apply the thing signified to the
26

recipient, though all the faith in the universe be present. The Reformed tradition has always evangelically held that sacraments and indeed the entire salvific economy of God and the church are effected primarily by the sovereign and graceful action of God perceived and obtained through faith, but that faith is never the centre of activity or point of departure. The same malpractice of the failure to have an epiclesis of the Holy Spirit is also true of many a Reformed celebration of the Eucharist. Water may be further used as a metaphor of the Resurrection in the Caribbean. With the advent of Christianity and missionary activity in the colonial era, the Caribbean church inevitably acquired all the trappings and imagery of a European brand of the faith. Within this were hymns and ideas relating to the changing of seasons of a temperate climate and especially to the significance of spring as a time of new birth, fertility and resurrection in relation to the seemingly dead earth, delayed activity and suspended animation of the effects of winter upon the land. This is totally out of harmony with the weather patterns of the Caribbean where only two seasons abound, namely dry and wet. Yet there is a similar deathlike quality over the land in the intense heat and aridness of the dry season. Rain hardly falls, there is the threat of drought, water reserves are used up and water is rationed along with penalties for failure to observe such water rationing, as with the watering of lawns and

use of hoses. The land is parched and on many a mountainside and plain there are vicious bush fires, [hu]manmade or naturally caused. The grass dries up and the land is bare and hard. No planting takes place then. But then the Poui tree sends forth her blossoms in March/April and the people breathe a sigh of relief because the Poui signals the coming of the April showers with their promise of renewal, slightly cooler temperatures, especially at night, and fertility. The dryness of the land is intimately linked with the timing of the season of Lent and the Crucifixion and is a ready symbol of repentance, of yearning and thirst for living water, of death, loss, suffering and sacrifice. The advent of the April showers potently point to Christ who by his rising again becomes our Returning Rain and who comes to renew creation in all its colour and splendour. This Returning Rain also comes with victory to those who have known loss and destruction, whose lives are parched and dry from not having any more tears to cry or have grown hard and callous from pain and suffering. The Returning Rain comes to bring freshness and colour to those bound up in the staleness of routine or lack of imagination.

Whereas in Christianity water is only now being appreciated as a gift of God, it formerly being just another tract of subjugated creation, other religions have tended to see water as the sacred milieu in which we live. This is due to a pantheistic approach to creation which views the created order as divided aspects of the divine whole, each intrinsically divine in its own right and worthy of praise, awe, respect and therefore, correct use. Christianity has tended formerly to regard only that water consecrated for spiritual use as in baptism or as holy water for cleansing, blessing and purification as sacred. Yet more traditional religions, because of the peoples closeness with the land and the elements of nature, have preferred to give a more sacred character to water on the whole and to see it as an interconnected part of all life. It does not follow that all believers of such religions have always observed the tenets of their respective faiths especially in regard to the right use of nature. Throughout humanity there is ever the tendency to evil and destruction. In Hinduism and in the Orisha religion (transplanted in the Caribbean from West Africa), rivers, streams and oceans contain the vital mother spirit. From the churning of the seas the Hindu Mother Lakshmi, the feminine aspect of Vishnu, was generated. She is the mother of the universe and the goddess of wealth and prosperity. For the Orisha the water spirit is represented by the Kweyol name, Mama Glo, from the
27

Interreligious perspectives
Water, as a religious image, is common to all religions, no doubt because of its recognition as essential to life and living. It is to be found in prayers, scripture texts, teachings and rituals.

French, Maman de lEau, mother of the water. This bears an interesting connotation to the biblical connection between water and the Spirit seeing that in Hebrew the generic word for Spirit is feminine in gender. But Mama Glo can be beneficent if her gift is used rightly or vengeful if abused. Water in Hinduism is worshipped as the source of all life. Originally revered at the mighty Ganges River in India as Ganga Dhaara, postcolonial Caribbean diaspora Hindus, who were believed to have lost their caste and by extension all ancestral and other connections with Mother India in crossing the seas, have re-established that bond in this ritual of Ganga Dhaara. It purports that since all waters merge into one in the oceans then all water, whether of river or sea and separated by landmasses, is essentially one through this oceanic connection. So the Ganges can be revered in the diaspora in this way. But for this writer, this ideology does not augur well for re-establishing the local validity of the land, lost through Western imperialism, in itself, since it has here to get validity from a supposed connection with a foreign entity, seeing it once had a local identity and validity of its own. For Africans transplanted to the West from their native continent by the demonic system of slavery and its concomitant racism, the crossing of the sea also signifies a cutting off of ancestral ties and the establishing of a new way of being, though still intrinsically African, on new soil. For many it is the salt in the seawater that cuts,
28

kills and even hinders. Added to water, salt takes away its potability and is effective also against spirits of evil. As the biblical prophet Elisha used salt to restore this potability to the Jordan (2 Kings 2.21), so too salt added to water has traditionally been used in Christianity to convey blessing and holy water for warding off evil. And in popular belief it is acknowledged that crossing the sea by any means of transport or even a sea bath is potent to cleanse from Obeah, or witchcraft. For the Orisha religion, salt in food or water, is never offered to the gods because it cuts off all spirit contact whether for good or for ill.20 The crossing, though, of a river, especially in a dream, often signifies death of some sort, physical or spiritual. There is also an interesting connection here with the biblical concept of crossing the Jordan into the Promised Land, used by Christianity as an image of passing over from death to eternity. And there is also the connection with baptism, especially believers immersion baptism, which is the defining rite of the large Afro-based indigenous Christian expression in the Caribbean, the Spiritual Baptist Shouter Faith. Here baptism refers to the uniting of the believer with the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus (Rom 6.311).

Conclusion
Water is a sacred gift from God to humankind, indeed to all life on earth. As the guardians, stewards, priests of Gods creation and acting thusly on behalf of the

rest of the created order, we must ensure that all life has access to the water it needs to preserve the intrinsic dignity of being and the continuation in time to come of the species. This requires a recognition of all life as being interconnected and that human beings are not dominators or the sole proprietors of Gods sacred gift; but that all life which depends on water in some form has a right to access it without fear or favour. As a gift it must be held in a similarly sacred

trust, used correctly and managed properly, without wasting, polluting or destroying this already limited, overburdened and finite yet absolutely essential resource for life. Humanity, spearheaded by the church, must continue to work and pray to ensure the justice, peace and integrity of Gods creation, that there may be a just and equal sharing of all Mother Earths resources for all her creatures and that The earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Hah 2.14).

Note
All biblical quotations are taken from the New Oxford Annotated Bible, Revised Standard Version, Oxford University Press Inc., 1962, 1973.

Notes
Jacques-Yves Cousteau and staff of the Cousteau Society, The Cousteau Almanac An Inventory of Life on our Water Planet: Water Facts, New York, Doubleday and Co. Inc., 1981, p.116. 2 The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development, International Conference on Water and the Environment, Dublin (Ireland), January 1992. 3 Op. cit., no. 1, p.117. 4 Ibid., Eating, Drinking and Breathing, p.616. 5 Miguel Solanes, Fernando Gonzalez-Villareal, Dublin Principles for Water as reflected in a Comparative Assessment of Institutional and Legal Arrangements for Integrated Water
1

29

Resources Management, TEC Background Paper No. 3, June 1999 (http://www.unsgab.org/ III-1.6.pdf). 6 Ibid. 7 David E. Bratt M.D., The Source of Life, published in The Trinidad Guardian, 28 March 2006. 8 Op. cit., no. 5. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 11 Section III: Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation: Report to the General Council An Open Letter to the Children and Young People of the Planet, Reformed World, 40(7), September 1989, p.135. 12 Op. cit., no. 5. 13 Op. cit., no. 7. 14 Ibid. 15 Op. cit., no. 1, Unlearned Lessons Unintended Effects, p.180ff. 16 Anne Hadfield, A Perspective from the Pacific, Reformed World, 46(1), March 1996, pp.31-2. 17 Eucharistic Prayer B, Book of Common Prayer, Anglican Church in the Province of the West Indies, 1995. 18 John Bell and Graham Maule, Hymn: Enemy of Apathy, Wild Goose Resource Group, Iona Community, published in Iona Abbey Worship Book, Iona Community 2002. 19 Robert Grant (1779-1838), Hymn: O Worship the King, all-glorious above, published in :The Church Hymnary, third edition, Oxford University Press. 20 Maureen Warner-Lewis, Guineas Other Suns The African Dynamic in Trinidad Culture, Dover (USA), The Majority Press, 1991.

30

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Water and the Christian community in a liquid modernity - a Latin-American perspective

Carola Ruth Tron

The lack of water is giving us the chance to repent from our individualistic way of living and to choose a new way, writes the young Waldensian theologian Carola Tron. A water-related theology needs to overcome anthropocentrism and start at home, to take root in daily life. This is what Jesus did every day when he got in touch with common people. He cared about their stories of life and gave them salvation. Tron is a Pastor of the Waldensian Evangelical Church of the River Plate, in Uruguay. She completed her theological studies at ISEDET in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in 1998, after having also attended the Princeton Theological Seminary. She is particularly committed to gender and youth issues. She is one of the winners of the Lombard Prize 2005-2006.

The problematic situation of water today claims an urgent and effective re-elaboration of classical theological topics. In order to do that, this essay will develop some guidelines to reframe theology within the new contexts. First, I will look at the Bible as a big frame in order to see the role of water in it. Second, I would like to name some examples of water problems that we are facing today, in a global context. Third, I would like to focus on globalization. By taking some tools from sociology I will see what is behind the concept of natural resources, humankind and the relationship between the two. Fourth, I will relate sociological analysis to

theology in order to propose a reconstruction of some theological understanding of human relationships with water and creation. Fifth, I will cite a case in Uruguay and propose some guidelines from a new rereading of the Bible and reconstructed theology in context. Finally, I will give some conclusions.

1. In the beginning, surrounded by waters

Why is the water issue a matter of theology? This rhetorical question will be present throughout this essay. First, as I look at the Bible I see that Genesis 1 and

31

Revelation 22 talk about waters. Gods creation started from the waters. The new creation that God has promised us is compared to a river of the water of life, bright as crystal, and good life is there.1 We can see that water is in the frame of the whole Bible because of its connection with life. There is no life and no creation without water. Water is also related to natural disaster, and in a mythological way to the anger of God and the condemnation of human sin (the Great Flood, Gen 6-8). The biblical image of water is a powerful vehicle to give life and death. Second, I would suggest that water is a theological issue because it has been present since the beginning of existence itself. Animals and plants cannot live without water. Our bodies are mostly made of water. We are born from the waters: our prenatal life grows in the amniotic liquid. We, as human beings, are part of the ecosystem; we are part of Gods creation. Water is an irreplaceable part of planet earth; water is part of life, as it is part of our bodies. Third, water means life, and Jesus came to give us life in abundance. When he meets the Samaritan woman at Jacobs well (Jn 1.1-24) he compares his ministry with water. I will come back to this passage later and develop some theological guidelines. Water plays an important role in the Bible. It also occupies an important place in our lives. We definitively cannot have life without water. It is more than an irreplaceable resource for humanity. It is part of creation. Creation is not finished. Jesus
32

offers us the water of life to live in abundance. We are called to play a great role in creation by searching for life, for water for everybody and for the life of all creation.

2. The shortage of water

Because water is an irreplaceable source of life, it is becoming a topic of conflict and concern in many places of the world. For example, the shortage of water that is growing in different ways and many places; the scarcity of water that confronts one neighbour with another in a struggle for a pot of water, stealing it; 2 water is being contaminated with the use of agrochemicals; related diseases like those that come from bacteria and cancer;3 and climate changes.4 Since the era of industrialization, water has become a fundamental resource for production. Water is not just part of the ecosystem. Not only people, animals and plants need it. Factories need water for production processes too. They take it from rivers, use it and then return it to the river at a higher temperature and with the addition of many chemicals. The same river that has become part of a production process also feeds its polluted water to the population. Beaches are getting dirty. Rivers are losing life, many fish and birds are in extinction. As the Fourth World Water Forum held in Mexico, March 2006, points out: Water resources can only be understood within the context of the

dynamics of the water cycle. [] Both the availability and use of water are changing. The reasons for concern over the worlds water resources can be summarized within three key areas: water scarcity, water quality and waterrelated disasters.5 These facts show that the water issue is already a big problem and a big challenge to all of us as caregivers of the earth. Statistics say that there is no time to lose and we have to act. The scarcity and abundance of water is becoming a topic of great political confrontation between nations. 6 Steve Lonergan points out that there is a new face to conflicts between countries. The socalled soft wars are going to happen because of environmental problems like, among others, diseases and corruption. Thinking geopolitically, this author believes that the possibility of a water war is low because it has never been a topic of high conflict even though, nowadays, the water crisis is promoting new conflicts. Actually, in the last chapter I will speak about the Argentine-Uruguayan water conflict. As we will see, abundance of water is a reason for conflict too.

face of individualistic freedom and temptation. Globalization subordinates and reduces everything to economic profit. We see through the Bible that freedom as a gift of God very soon became an opportunity for self-indulgence.7 Now the whole earth had one language and the same words Then they said, Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves Gen 11.1, 4. The attempt to become a strong dominant race, with only one language, in spite of others, has been a constant human temptation. Very sad examples of that were the totalitarian nondemocratic governments, Nazism, apartheid, dictatorships in Latin America. Nowadays, a new way of imposing one world order is in action. Day in and day out we are being told that there is only one world order with one economic system for the whole of humanity. The system claims it is the only voice to be listened to. Globalization claims to be the only system in which everybody needs to fit. It strongly supports the idea that there is no other option, and that those who are not part of the new economic order do not exist. Those who do not speak the one language like Babel will not touch the sky. They will be out of the system, out of the world. As in the time of the tower of Babel, human beings are building a tower. Our new tower is called globalization. In the globalization era, water has been privatized. The system preaches that those who are within it will get jobs and will be
33

3. Freedom and temptation

Humankind has been tempted by power and domination. God gave us the freedom to take good care of creation and to live in abundance. Instead of using our freedom to get life in abundance for all, we used it to dominate others. Globalization is the new

able to buy good water. Those who are outside the system will not be able to. While the first ones get life, the second ones do not. There are those who strongly believe that they are touching the sky and are living according to the Revelation promise of prosperity, but in a private way, they will buy a private river of life. From the scriptures we know and believe that the seeking of human power, domination and exploitation has always been condemned by God. The Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which mortals had built. And the Lord said, Look, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one anothers speech.8 We clearly see that God is against domination. Babels ideals are so close to globalization ones. As it was in the time of Babel, those ideals are condemned by God. The tower of Babel was an anthropocentric dream of domination. The individualistic dream today is to be part of the system in order to obtain life. But very soon, the dream will collapse. There will be the chance to get good and expensive water because the system does not provide all the solutions. When water from natural resources starts to become scarce, no money that would make it good enough to drink. The paper tower is built out of power and sin and will collapse upon
34

us. Within this context churches are called upon by God to act.

4. Communities of faith in a liquid modernity

However, before we get there, we need to understand the place of Christianity and even other religions in our world today. In this era of globalization, freedom is conceived essentially as an individualistic human right. This comprehension of freedom needs to be confronted with the concept of freedom as a grace of God (Gal 5.13ss). The idea of Western Christendom is in crisis. Modernity has become the expression of secularism and hard sciences to the detriment of others, theology included. Nowadays, theology is no longer the main centre of studies as it was in the past. Our churches have discussed too much about how to grow, how to continue to be Protestant churches in a secularized world, in a modern society. Sociology can give us an interesting vision of present society. We need these approaches in order to dialogue with the new contexts, and to continue doing theology on the basis of this dialogue. A challenge to think theologically about water is to build bridges with the social sciences. Zygmunt Bauman in his book Liquid Modernity proposes that humankind has a complete sense of freedom and individualism. The individual has guaranteed for him/herself a complete sense of freedom as he or she had wished. In relation to the social dream of integrating outsiders into society, he affirms that there

are only temporary solutions9, which means that in liquid modernity, it is very hard to work together to find alternatives. As we confront the liquid modernity concept with our religious practices, we see that our churches are dealing with this. When we listen to the word of God at Sunday services and then do not get in touch until the next week, we can consider that we are part of a community, but only during Sunday services. Church community is fragmented into many proposals and groups. The concept of individualism is applicable to the idea of church community. Models of being church are changing to more individualistic, more personal, private ways of living our faith. Christian faith is no longer the centre of peoples life. Faith is being fragmented into little pieces, and believers choose one, two or all. As religious proposals are being fragmented, so are believers lives. There is a believer at church, a worker at his/her job, a father or mother at home, a student at school. In this context they hardly relate Gods will with job, with children, with neighbours. The question here is how can we practise a theology related to water in this context? What church models are we building? Are we building churches for consumers? I ask myself that question very often. Everyone takes what they need, and will listen to God in their personal and urgent needs, losing the sense of community. We can conclude that humankind has established a relationship of owner and user in Gods creation.

This relationship can be translated to Gods sphere by constructing a religion of consumers. We can remark that discipleship and social compromise are not first-place issues in the church agenda. People do not enjoy getting involved in community projects for a long period of time. Sometimes they make some commitments but these must be specific and time limited. Reconstructing the concepts of freedom and grace in a liquid modernity Since the Reformation, Protestant theologies have preached strongly about freedom and grace. They were very liberating because they introduced a new relationship with God. However, those concepts in a secularized context became an opportunity for self-indulgence10 and a temptation like in the time of Babel. Silently, they became part of the ideals of the system. We diminished the importance of the prophetic role. Freedom and grace are very rich and expensive theological concepts handed down from the Reformed tradition. In that context they were prophetic, challenging and transforming. They have become isolated and nonrelational concepts. Grace is no longer a gift of God and a model to live. Grace has become something automatically given. Freedom has become one of the most precious individual rights. The misunderstanding of those two concepts is not helpful in our search for Gods justice in liquid modernity, and we will need to reframe and reinforce these concepts, so they can have become strong and prophetic again.11 First, they are relational concepts. The
35

truth that is in God,12 and the grace of God, will give us freedom and life.13 It is not a positive anthropological understanding of freedom but the transforming grace of God. We will need to stop building the tower and focus our future on the word of God. The truth and grace of God will guide us. We need to listen to the voice of God. Second, we are not going to guide Gods will. Gods will is going to guide us to the future. This is a liberating concept for those who are outside the system because it gives people the opportunity to be part of a future. For those who are part of this system it is not good news. Elsa Tamez affirms that humankind feels free to rest because the future does not belong only to them. The future belongs to God. Humanization is a gift of Gods grace.14 We do not have to build our own future alone because we are living in the grace of God. We need to listen to Gods will and take it seriously in our daily life. From an anthropocentric to an individualistic practice of religion We are moving from an anthropocentric to an individualistic practice of religion. Modern theologies have focused on an anthropocentric interpretation of scripture.15 Some people even related their faith to the social situation but they did not link it with environmental issues. Many others look at problems like water in an anthropocentric way, thinking that water is a resource for human development and production. We are searching for more integral theologies that take the idea of diversity seriously. The
36

concept of diversity does not refer only to people, but to ecosystems too. Modernity looked at the human being and his/her capacities. Humankind believed that the world was something to conquer or to build with progress and development using all that was in it: natural resources, people, science, etc. Theology was not isolated from that time and was mostly preached in an anthropocentric way. Contemporary Christians are citizens of a planet gravely troubled by the reckless and rapacious enterprises of its human inhabitants. Human industries, spurred by technological innovations of the last several centuries, have turned the earth into a commodity for human purposes. The earths geological features and animal and plant life are routinely sacrificed before the altars of corporate profit and a moneyed publics everexpanding hunger for consumable goods. Modes of production and patterns of consumption in the industrialized nations proceed as if the earth were an infinitely malleable object of human mastery readily bent for any human use, or as if the harm done by human enterprises to the earth and its life forms were of no real importance or concern.16 If modernity was characterized by anthropocentric practices, postmodernity or liquid modernity has an individualistic view of humankind. As we move from an anthropocentric to an individualistic practice of religion, I believe we are being tempted to build a theology for consumers. Consumerism is the mark of this time and the mark of the world economic order.17 The

relationship between religious offer and demand determines our theological agenda because the agenda is often controlled by the necessity of keeping the number of members in our churches rather than the gospel. Many times, in order to keep

searching for more integral theologies that take the idea of diversity seriously. The diversity concept does not refer only to people, but to ecosystems too. Creation is as diverse and rich as are we.18 From creation and the lack of water we are learning that we have to change and be transformed by the grace of God into new people so we can transform our homes and the world.19 Fresh new water to build communities of faith We need to refresh our faith and our communities with the grace of God in order to keep walking in Gods promise towards the river of life. As water keeps itself fresh when it is running, our faith needs to run to be kept alive.20 We have learned that the Reformed church is always in a reforming process. This remains true as we continue the constant process of reformation. The analogy of theology with water can be good to understand that there is not a closed idea of God and its interpretation. Stagnant water turns bad, it needs to run, it needs sun, air; so do we as churches, so does theology and our reading of the Bible. The water crisis will bring new challenges to refresh theology and relate it to home where water is lacking. First, we recognize the negative elements. At the local level we know that we are facing one or more water problems. How many of us who are concerned about water have taken some new decisions to save water, and not to contaminate it, not to use chemicals, to talk and denounce abuses about it? How do we teach children in Sunday schools to relate God to daily
37

communities at peace, we do not talk about controversial topics. In a world that is changing so fast, sometimes churches do not want to confront each other. They work for reconciliation and non-conflict and they will do whatever is possible to implement that. Water issues confront countries, rich and poor, pitting those who use agrochemicals against those who are struggling to have clean water, even those who do not care and drink contaminated water saying that it is not dangerous against those who want to denounce that as bad. In this situation we can be prophetic and an alternative community to the system, or we can offer symbolic goods to consume in our churches. We are called to offer resistance and be prophetic in a liquid modernity. The water crisis can help us to convert our hearts and minds, our practices at home, in our places of work, and to walk new paths where God walks. Ecofeminism has given us some new theological tools to achieve this. It emphasizes the idea that we (all creation) are one sacred body. Patriarchal systems, in contrast, divide our social body into different parts, each one living by the domination of one over the other. After years of anthropocentric theologies we are

practices? We are so anthropocentric, so individualistic that is too hard to sustain these simple, daily concerns. We are so concentrated on the constructions of big paper towers (personal careers, power and status) that we do not have time to save water and care about creation. Can we recognize our concerns at church? Is the community concerned about water issues? Are we relating faith to daily life, water conflicts to church community? Do we think that God and churches have something to do with water issues or not? These questions need to be raised in our communities of faith. If we are not taking God to our secular life, I guess we are not taking God to water problems. I would ask, where we are taking God. The water crisis brings the challenge for a new theology and it starts at home. Second, we will have to take God home to find a new understanding of faith and theology. Theologies in context have given us new tools to read reality and relate to theology: liberation theology, for example, looked at reality through social structures. Daily and essential issues like the lack of water are giving us the chance to do theology at home.21 We have to start to do theology in the context of daily life using all the tools that many theologies have given us. Today, the lack of clean water has to connect us with God, and the Bible; also tomorrow, the lack of a piece of land to live on, lack of health, lack of love will have to be the starting point for a theology of daily life. Let us be prophetic at home. Let us be converted at home.
38

Third, once we take God home, we will have to check our traditional meaning of freedom and grace and how this relates to our daily life. We will be surprised to see how anthropocentric and individualistic our way of life is. To recover the deep meaning of these concepts we will need to refocus God in our lives. The grace of God transforms us into new persons; grace involves repentance and forgiveness. It starts with a crisis too. Grace is a new way of living and understanding life under Gods blessing. The concept of grace is extensible to all creation. Grace is a new model of Gods economy that will show us an alternative way of globalization. We are called to live in the grace of God that is connected with all creation. By grace we are saved from sin; living in this new economy we not only connect with salvation but also with a new understanding of the relationship between creation and ourselves.22 Only by living in the grace of God and searching for truth can we use freedom in a correct way. Freedom does not mean doing whatever I want or need without caring for others because the grace of God justifies me. Freedom is the right to think and to believe, to transform those things that are wrong. Freedom is liberation and it is a long walk. Jesus invited us to seek liberation, that means no water poverty, no destroyed ecosystems. A theology related to water has to start at home where women and men are facing the water problem day by day. They are the subjects that need to be transformed by

grace and then in turn to transform the practices. They are suffering when they do not have water to cook, to clean, and to feed their children. Finally, we need to read the Bible from our daily needs and challenges. I would like to come back to the encounter of Jesus with the Samaritan woman. She went to do the domestic work and met Jesus. She had the pot to take water from Jacobs well and Jesus had the water of life. They had different resources. She had the concrete solution for his thirst. When they met, they had an interreligious dialogue. This was not to be expected. It is an example of freedom in the grace of God: the sharing of needs through the grace of God. We can practise the exercise at home: share our daily needs, read the Bible with the necessities in mind, and relate them to the grace of God.

in Latin America. American native people believed they had to ask the earth for permission to kill an animal in order to feed the family. They also believed they had to ask for permission to fish from the river. Animals and plants, water and land are not usable resources. They are part of creation and belong to God. I need to believe that we, as Christians, also relate to creation in that way. Maybe it was too far back in history. I also think that we have to recover this understanding of creation. theological

Christopher Columbus arrived on this continent in 1492. At that time, Latin America started to learn about being a colony. Colonization took the gold and God from the people. The colonizers took the gold and every valuable resource they found. They also took away the cultural identity and essence that constituted the peoples way of life, organizing and building communities. They killed the native peoples God, who was connected to daily life, and imposed their European, male, anthropocentric and conquering God. Native people had a completely different way of relating to their God and to creation. Since colonization, Latin American countries have been colonia. By colonia I mean lands full of natural resources that were taken to First World countries (first period), and then to economic powers called transnational companies (nowadays). Why do we continue to be colonia? The deepest meaning of colonia is not rooted in the economy; it is the ideology that is beyond it.
39

5. Uruguay is building the paper tower: cellulose pulp case

The context of Latin America There are two concepts crucial to understanding our Latin American context: first, the situation of Latin America as a colony; second, rediscovery of the theology of the native people in Latin America. The native peoples God was connected to daily life while the God that came with colonization was European, male, anthropocentric and a conqueror. America has been a colony since 1492. In liquid modernity, developing countries are the backyard of the world. Multinational corporations build the factories and throw out dangerous garbage

The paper tower

The ideology of

private investors because the countrys economy depends on them. Ever since a forestation law was passed, Uruguay started to sell lands to foreign companies to practise monoculture of eucalyptus trees. For 20 years this colonia has been preparing to build a paper tower. From the World Bank report we know that Botnia will produce 24,000 tons of solid garbage per year; ENCE will produce more than 23,000 tons. The first will produce from 100 to 150 tons of dangerous garbage and the second from 90 to 100 tons. There is more information about gaseous and liquid garbage and the energy and primary resources that will be consumed.24 There are many discussions beyond the building of the cellulose pulp factory. I will mention them in order just to illustrate how deep this concern is. The need to add another paper factory to satisfy demand is being questioned since most of the paper is used for luxury packaging in the First World. The impact of monocultures on the ecosystem and the related diseases and contamination, the selling of Uruguayan lands to foreign economies, the exodus from the countryside to the city, the end of tourist resorts that signifies an economic impact on the population are all questions being raised. Taking all this into account, I will focus on the international conflict and the churches role. The game of the media in the conflict plays an important role when we do not have a clear voice from the government and the environmental impact

colonia was an assault against the culture, knowledge, religion and philosophy of the indigenous people. That continued with the dictatorships supported by First World countries. It continues today with the promise of factories that will give us the opportunity of new jobs in developing countries where unemployment is very high. Two cellulose pulp mills are in construction on the Uruguayan side of the River Uruguay which divides Argentina and Uruguay. Cellulose pulp mills are one of the highest factors of water contamination. Nowadays there is an international conflict between the two countries. Churches are challenged to have a prophetic voice, although social involvement is very slight. The Spanish company ENCE and the Finnish company Botnia are building two cellulose pulp mills on the coast of the River Uruguay in Fray Bentos City, Uruguay. A third one is projected to be built on the coast of the Ro Negro near Durazno City, Uruguay. It is important to note that not the whole process will be done here, but only the first, most contaminating part. This is the face of globalization in Uruguay. Factories that use the river in their production process have had serious legal problems in the other countries where they were established.23 They choose to establish their factories in developing countries because they get more economic benefits and there is less State control. Unemployment is very high, which causes salaries to be lower. The State is slack in controlling and sanctioning the
40

reports are given by the factories themselves. Feelings like nationalism, as a kind of social individualism, are at the top. Citizens do not have enough information to be able to discern. A great part of the Uruguayan population is in agreement with the government in the construction of the factory. They argue that very big investors have chosen Uruguay to build the factory and this will reactivate the local economy. They argue that Argentina is protesting because the companies did not choose it. A minority group of Uruguayan people is in agreement with a local environmental assembly group from the Argentine city of Gualeguaych which is opposite Fray Bentos, Uruguay. They have been speaking out against the project since 2003. The environmental assembly group from the other side of the river is striking to stop the construction because of the impact on the ecosystem. Since December 2005 they have been organizing a strike by cutting off two of the three international bridges. It seems that Uruguay does not have the tools or the economic power to stop the investors. They affirm that this factory will not contaminate the River Uruguay and they have promised that the state will control the environmental impact once it is working. This powerful strike has put the discussion on the table for both governments. In the context of liquid modernity this is a new way of striking. The ones primarily affected by the cutting of the routes are individuals. People cannot circulate and they feel attacked in their personal rights.

This generates great discontent that has to be resolved in order to prevent a social outbreak. We may or may not agree with this style of showing discontent, but we have to confess that they have attracted the attention of governments and the population. As social groups have found new ways of showing their discontent in this liquid modernity and globalization, we as churches have to search for new ways of getting involved in issues that cross the border of the individual. I reinforce the idea that we have to preach at the everyday level because this is where people are first affected by situations. We will not get socially involved as churches if first we are not convinced of that at the personal level. Church voices In this conflict many churches have assumed a nationalistic spirit. While some churches in Argentina are with the environmental assembly group, in Uruguay we are not even raising the topic. Opinions and discussions turn around the conflict itself and the right to be against the factories or not. People do not relate the discussion to a theological understanding on environmental situations. On March 23, the Latin American Council of Churches organized a regional consultation on cellulose on the Uruguay River banks. The consultations impact on local churches was very limited although it was most important for the churches to meet with the representatives of environmental groups, who opened church peoples minds to a new understanding of ecology. The resistance to taking this conflict
41

to the local churches agenda shows that it is easy to be ecological when we do not have to sacrifice our daily practices or our political points of view. It also shows the fragmentation of local and denominational churches. This is an example of churches for consumers where the prophetic voice has been very low.

home. It has to be rooted in daily life. There is nothing new about that because it was what Jesus did every day when he got in touch with common people. He cared about their stories of life and offered them salvation. A new frame has to move from an anthropocentric theology to an integral one that cares and goes from our daily work at home to our big home, the Planet Earth. A reframed theology has to help us to remove sinful practices like egocentrism, individualism, nationalism. Reconciliation into the grace of God is to confess our exploitation of natural and human resources and to ask for Gods will in our life. Searching for the grace of God and living through its freedom we will find a new alternative way to live in abundance. There is transforming water from prophet Ezekiel25 imagery. This water flows from the temple of God. As waters flows, new life starts to spring up. This sweet water enters the sea and has the power of making it fresh. This sweet water is the grace that God offers us. It is a dream: that we search for this water to make us new, to cleanse us of our unclean practices and to walk towards the Kingdom.

Conclusion
The lack of water is giving us a great chance to repent from our individualistic way of living life and to choose a new way. This new way has to be rooted in a holistic conception of life that integrates every part of creation. From the Bible and theology we know that water is a matter of faith because it is part of creation. We recognize that colonial countries are being affected by globalization and liquid modernity. Within a fragmented world and society, theology has been affected too. It cannot pretend to be universal. Neither can it pretend to move from the general to the particular. It has to be concrete and converting. In this changing world, theology has to be reframed in order to respond to the new challenges. The frame to do theology related to water has to start at

42

Notes
Genesis 1.1-2.4 and Revelation 22.1-7. Ivonne Gebara, La Sed de Sentido, Bsquedas ecofeministas en prosa potica [The Thirst for Meaning: Ecofeminist Experiments in Poetic Prose], Montevideo, Uruguay, Doble clic Editoras, 2002, pp.43-48. 3 Water-related problems in Dolores City: there is a high concentration of nitrates in the water because of agrochemicals. Recently there were more than 130 hepatitis cases related to sanitation problems. See Accin Magazine, Mercedes, Monday April 10, 2006, p.3. 4 Damage to the environment is causing a greater number of natural disasters. Flooding occurs in areas where deforestation and soil erosion prevent the attenuation of flood waters. Climate change, which, it is suggested, is fuelled both by emissions and degradation of the worlds natural environment, is blamed for the increasing number of floods and droughts. The Worlds Water Crisis, Fourth World Water Forum, Mexico, March 16-22, 2006, p.8. 5 Ibid., pp.10-11. 6 Steve Lonergan & Davis Brooks, Watershed: The Role of Freshwater in the IsraeliPalestinian Conflict (IDRC Books, 1994) in Our Planet, 15(4), in www.redtercermundo.org.uy. 7 Galatians 5.13. 8 Genesis 11.5-7 (NRSV). 9 Zygmunt Bauman, Modernidad Lquida, Fondo de Cultura Econmica, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2003, pp.21-28. 10 See footnote 6, Galatians 5.13. 11 Relationship between Christian God and modern culture; ethic consequences of theology, in: J. M. Mardones, Postmodernidad y Cristianismo [Postmodernism and Christianity], Santander, Sal Terrae, 1988, pp.115-116. 12 Jesus says and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free (Jn 8.32 NRSV). 13 John Calvin is denoting a negative anthropology when he points out that only by the grace of God can humanity work for goodness. He quotes Paul, I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me (1 Cor 15.10b). John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter III, 12 [translation: Henry Beveridge]. Grand Rapids MI, Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957, p. 262. 14 Elsa Tamez, Contra Toda Condena: la justificacin por la fe desde los excluidos [Against all condemnation: justification by faith from the point of view of those who are excluded], San Jos (Costa Rica), Editorial DEI, 1993, pp.39-40. 15 See Kathryn Tanner, Creation, Environmental Crisis and Ecological Justice, in Rebecca Chopp & Mark Taylor, (eds), Reconstructing Christian Theology, Minneapolis (USA), Fortress Press, 1994, pp.99-123. 16 Idem, p.99. 17 Zygmunt Bauman, op. cit., p.82ss. 18 Ivonne Gebara, Ecofeminism, in Letty Russel & Shannon Clarkson (eds), Dictionary of Feminist Theologies, Louisville (USA), Westminster John Knox Press, 1996, pp.77-78. 19 God, in your Grace, Transform the World was the theme of the 9th Assembly of the World Council of Churches celebrated last February in Brazil.
1 2

43

Revelation 22.1-7. Steve Lonergan, op. cit. The author affirms that geopolitically water will not become a topic for war because water is a domestic problem. He thinks in a male category that analyses the macro and public sphere and does not look at the micro and private. A new fact of liquid modernity is that the borders of the public and the domestic spheres are not clear as they were in modernity. Environmental crises will lead more often to unexpected issues like water and they will turn into political conflicts. 22 See Romans 8.19ss. 23 For example, in Valdivia, Chile the Arauco Cellulose Factory contaminated the Ro Cruces and black swans died. See Observatorio Latinoamericano de Conflictos Ambientales (www.olca.cl). 24 Eduardo Gudynas, Batalla sobre aguas turbulentas, in El Pas, Montevideo, March 17, 2006. 25 Ezequiel 47.1-12.
20 21

44

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Louder please, I cant hear you: voices, spiritualities and minorities

Claudio Carvalhaes

The meditation on the final words of the Waldensian Oath of Sibaud leads Claudio Carvalhaes to connections between Christian faith, marginalized voices, immigrants without papers, globalization, spirituality, and community life. A Presbyterian from Brazil, Claudio Carvalhaes studied theology at the Methodist University of So Paulo, Brazil, and ecumenism at the Ecumenical Institute, Bossey, Switzerland. He has a doctorate in Liturgy and Systematic Theology from Union Theological Seminary, New York, USA

For Daisy Machado1 There is no such thing as silence (John Cage) Sometimes you have to scream to be heard (Avital Ronell)

In 2006 the American Waldensian Society celebrated one hundred years of existence, a short span of time compared to the history of the movement since its beginning with Waldo of Lyons. It is a time to speak out loud, rejoice with our sisters and brothers and renew our resistance and resilience against intolerance. The survival of the Waldensians is a world sign of resistance and survival of many minorities across the globe.

The voice of the oath

Reading some of the documents of the Waldensian Church, I was struck by one of its oaths. It says: Waldensians, by these oaths, Heaven blessed our fathers, And in these days is still ready to bless us. Joining our brothers hands, let us loudly proclaim: At the altars of my God, So, I want to live and to die.

45

This is a powerful statement of faith, a radical shout that clearly places life on the edge (to live and to die), which understands both faith and life as one event, an event that is always at risk. This profession of faith was a second step, a response from a community who knew well what faith in praxis meant. For this short paper, I would like to reflect on just one word from this oath, namely, loudly. The oath says: let us loudly proclaim. That word called my attention. Why this need for volume? Why not say let us proclaim or even let us boldly proclaim? Why it is not enough to proclaim, declare or confess? I might well be wrong, but it seems that this oath refers not so much to what you say as to how you say it, which I guess, is very Italian, or Brazilian Aloud! The oath seems to be preoccupied with the levels of energy, trying to instill a mixture of awe, fierceness and urgency, and intending to fill the believer with a necessary intensity that she or he will need in order to live the challenges and perils of this faith, perhaps to the last consequences. Thus, the how of the confession might have to do more with the liturgical ways the believer attaches her/ himself to the belief than to the theological aspect of that belief. In order to believe, one cannot only proclaim what one believes, one has to do it in an intense and loud way. This oath claims a faith that combines words and sounds, making every affirmation sound like an exclamation, a shout, a scream, a creed confessed with a loud voice. Moreover, you cannot understand this faith
46

if it does not come with the gestures of the body moving closer to the altar and the movements of the hands searching for somebody else. Joining our brothers hands At the altars of my God. What we see here is the connection between liturgical gestures of companionship, bodies closer and hands together with the assurance of a God who belongs to them (my God). Let us loudly proclaim Again, the volume of ones voice radically affects the way one believes, and consequently, determines the ways in which one understands, negotiates, lives and performs ones spirituality.

Whose voices are speaking in us?

What does voice have to do with our faith and to the ways we develop our spiritualities and worship God? If we pay attention to the voices that speak our theologies or create the hymnody of our congregations, what voices are they and whose voices do they represent? The voices of our theologians and liturgists are located voices, under an array of influences and limitations. Their voices are only a rumor, or a point of view about God. These particular and local voices become a problem when they become or want to become a universal voice that has to be listened to by everybody else. For instance, we in Latin America for far too long listened to the voices of European and North American theologians and only later did we realize that we also had a voice, that we could speak and more interestingly, that we

could speak about God too. In the midst of foreign and colonizing voices, we went through a long process to find our tupiniquim2 theological and liturgical voices. One of the things at stake in liberation theologies is the search for difference, alterity, i.e. other ways of speaking, listening, understanding, believing, and experiencing life. Differences that were denied, avoided and erased in the construction of Western theological thought. In this process, the task of hearing the voice of the voiceless has been a major and complicated one. One of the many questions we should ask is: can we move beyond the pleasurable tone of our voices and hear the voice of the other? If so, how can we hear the voices of those who have been silenced for so long the poor and the oppressed, whose voices have been smashed down and whose mouths have been brutally shut up? How can we hear if they dont speak? Why dont they speak? The voices of minorities have been historically dismissed and forbidden. The construction of an official voice of history, that determined what existed and what did not exist was made by those who, by imposing a sort of pre-Babel world, decided to speak for all the others and establish a lingua franca which provided straight and proper standards of how life should be listened to, spoken about and understood. Within theology, there was always an attempt to establish an unambiguous voice that would tell us what to believe and what to do regarding Gods will. In this process,

this exclusionary voice was so loud that it made mute many other voices, the voices of the women, the voices of black people, the voices of the South of the world, the voices of religious difference, the voices of nature. A voice so loud that it ended up deafening many of those who were trying to say something, an uninterrupted noise that intended to continuously strike at the ears of others until they all agree, as in the movie 1984.3 If any voice goes on without being challenged and interrupted, in time this voice will become the truth and the measure of life for those who are listening. However, within the discourses pronounced by major voices, there were those who resisted, and decided not to conform or to obey. Voices of marginalized people ended up writing history in different shades, modulations and tonalities of sounds. These voices, hidden under those of the colonizer, were the sounds and vocabularies of a different understanding of God and of the world. These voices of dissent gave us different histories filled with examples of resistance and possibilities to perceive, experience and live our common faith differently in the world. Waldo of Lyon and the Waldensians are some of these voices. Waldos strange voice shaped an other spirituality that challenged proper and acceptable measures of faith at his time, creating other theological and spiritual possibilities for the believer to live life and faith beyond the stream of the official discourses. He shouted as if in a desert,
47

voicing other ways for the coming of God. The sound of his voice echoes within us today and is mixed with the screams and shouts of those who decided to listen to strange voices. As we hear Waldos voice, we must continue to listen to the voices of those who lived and died on the margins, and those who are still living and dying in the mute gutters of our world: Are they saying anything? What are they saying and what we can learn about God from them? We must continuously ask ourselves whose voices are speaking in and through us, since our voice is never a single voice. Our voices depend on the economic structures and cultural settings in which we are confined. My voice, for instance, depends on the opportunities, on the education I had, and the network of possibilities in which I am integrated; it also depends on the voices I have heard and the choices I have made; the voices I didnt hear, the things nobody ever told me; it depends on my history, the limits of my world and the multiplicity of voices that I allow to speak for and with me. Our voices are necessary tools to determine who and what we are always becoming. Our voices determine the ways in which we develop our communal spiritualities. Is it possible to develop a sense of spirituality if we cannot talk? How can our voices and more specifically, the volume of our voices, give contours to our faith and create a place of dignity in the world?

Algeria, says that the Algerian people were only able to incorporate a larger sense of the struggle of an assembled people4 when they were able to buy a radio and listen to the voice of fighting Algeria, which was an official voice, the voice of the combatant(s), (to) explain the combat to him, tell him the story of the Liberation on the March, and incorporate it into the nations new life. But due to the highly trained French services, they detected the sound-wave warfare and the programs were then systematically jammed, and the Voice of Fighting Algeria soon became inaudible.5 The occupier of foreign territories intends to control people by gradually muting their voices. Without a voice, one loses the capacity to recollect and the threads of ones history. Thus, the history of the colonizer becomes the history of the colonized. By dismantling the voices of colonized people, the colonizer wants to prevent the colonized from discovering the power of their voices, the concatenation of their thoughts and establish any movement of resistance. Fanon says: Imperfectly heard, obscured by an incessant jamming, forced to change wave lengths two or three times in the course of a broadcast, the Voice of Fighting Algeria could hardly ever be heard from beginning to end. It was a choppy, broken voice.6 Voice matters and the processes of colonization, then and now, try to obliterate the voices of the other, cracking its codes and shattering its nuances, rendering other voices imperceptible, unpleasant,

Franz Fanons voice

Franz Fanon in This is the Voice of
48

unimportant, a mere distraction. When only one voice speaks, the silence of the other voices amplifies the volume of the one spoken. Moreover, unheard voices usually sound strange when rarely spoken and they end up being used as reverberations of the negative side of the spoken one. The relationship between silence, voice, amplification and reverberation performs an acute role in the Waldensian service where silence constitutes an important aspect of the service. There, silence is not the absence of a voice but rather, the condition of the possibility of their sounding voices. For in silence, we are able to hear our own voice, and articulate it in various ways. Fanon was in favour of adding new sounds into the univocal sound of the colonizer. I believe that, theologies, liturgies, ecclesiologies and spiritualities must be populated by many voices. The voice of the other is that constant challenge to my certainties and a continuous sign that shows that my voice is not absolute in any theological, liturgical or faithful matter. By adding different voices and sounds, even the sound of silence, to our spiritualities, the connections between voice and word can help undo the logos of any dominant voice into, perhaps, a more plural and pentecostal voice of God. Fanon says that the French language, the language of the occupier, was given the role of logos, with ontological implications within Algerian society.7 Our task is to break the ontological implications, i.e. the will to sovereignty of any dominant theology, and

turn the one logocentric voice of any theologian/occupier of Gods understandings, into a Babel/Pentecostal epiphanic moment, where God visits and transforms us in unimaginable ways. Between Babel and Pentecost, we must be able to create a liturgical space where the monolithic voice of the occupier gets distracted and transgressed by the multiplicity of voices of the Spirit, which comes from those who were not used to speaking but only to listening. Through these unheard voices, we might even be able to hear the logos of God. Therefore, by listening to different voices that speak a foreign theological language to which our ears are unaccustomed, we might become able to listen to an unpredictable singing of strange songs in strange lands. The ability to listen to somebody elses voices is the opening of the Spirit within us to see Gods movements in unexpected people and places. The voice of an-other has the power to signify to our ears the creation of liberating processes whereby the Spirit operates in and through people in ways we might never have imagined before. Moreover, by adding strange voices and sounds to our foreign/ mother tongue, we can learn how to recreate and reinvent ourselves as we enhance, change or add new possibilities for our spiritualities in praise of a God who always speaks in many tongues. The voice of the other within my voice, and my language within the language of my neighbour might take us to what Edmond
49

Jabs once said: My mother tongue is a foreign language.8

government after the complaints of various Afro-descendent movements who wanted to show a very important part of the history of Brazil. It was there, in that basement, that I had a conversion moment. All of a sudden I heard a myriad of voices indecipherably speaking and shouting out loud to the point of almost making me deaf. Words and sounds that I had never heard took my mind and my heart. There were sounds of weeping mothers and fathers separated from their daughters and sons, shouts of utter despair from people who were taken away from their homes to a strange place, desolation and unredeemable cries of free people all of a sudden turned into slaves. Nonetheless, among these sounds and voices, there were also screams of resistance, words of command not to give up and prayers to all the Orixs for deliverance. As I heard those voices, I realized that I have never lent my ears to this part of the history of my country and my people. Why did it take me so long to be able to hear those voices that formed who I am? Why has nobody ever told me about them and why have they never told me they were part of my self and my history? That day I realized that when I speak with my own voice, my voice is a blur of silenced and loud voices that speak inside of me. Voices that are unknown to me, voices that are telling me things that I am not able to understand, voices that are screaming inside of me and I cannot not hear them, voices of others that are trying to find their

My conversion: new voices in my voice

When I think about my voice, I realize that my voice is never my own voice, as it never comes alone. Instead, it is always marked by the mute screams of those who came before me, those who were enslaved, exploited and forgotten. My voice is a historical horizon of sounds, utterances, mumblings, words, and speeches that dispute a place and a right in my mind, in my heart and in my throat. One thing is certain: I can only speak through the timbers and sounds of those who colonized me, those who taught me how to speak and how loud I could be. It is with and against this voice that I try to engage and unravel my own history. Let me tell you a story: It was July 2004. I was in Bahia, a vibrant state of Brazil with 80% of its population composed of Afro-Brazilians. I went to visit Mercado Modelo, the Model Market where slaves were negotiated in the 18th century. Under the main floor, there was a large basement where people who came from Africa were thrown after arriving in Brazil, and kept until they were negotiated to slave owners. Women and men of all ages were kept under the market with water covering their bodies up to their waist. On the walls, there were holes with images of Christian saints, trying to teach them a proper and civilized faith. This place was opened for visit only a few years ago by the local
50

way into the volume of my voice. And yet, they make me what I am trying to be, they subvert my thoughts, they challenge me every time I try to speak just for myself and not for my community, the community of those who lived before me and those who are yet to come. These voices in the Mercado Modelo taught me that I cannot develop my spirituality without those voices, black voices, disrupting and undoing my theological frames of reference and indexes, and giving me life. I learned that my theological grounds and the spirituality that is shaped from these grounds must be this place between Babel and Pentecost, where indiscriminate sounds and incomprehensible voices abound, voices that I can hear and understand, and voices that are both unspeakable and untranslatable, near and afar. In order to stand on sound theological ground, I must learn to pay attention to the voices that went unheard and were lost in the loud archives and monotone records of the official history of the Western world. Thus, if we are an archive of silenced voices, how should we proceed to listen to them? The way we answer this question is the way we construct our theologies and spiritualities and the way we worship God. My guess is that we must keep listening, or trying to listen, digging into our history and the history of our countries, listening to these faded and mute voices, seeing erased traces, looking for the obscured remains of a people that we both know and know nothing about. Moreover, we must listen not

only to the voices of the past but also to the silenced voices that are present today around us and in our communities. I must listen to those who live on the streets and on the borders, near and afar, loudly proclaiming what I cannot or do not want to hear. I must make an oath to them saying: With you I want to live and die. My faith can only make sense if I listen to those who are on the margins of this world, a world, like God, made mine, not theirs. It is in the middle of the cacophony of these voices that I must linger with my theologies and spiritualities knowing that there is no such a thing as me and them. In this Babel/ Pentecost world, I must take on my faith and loudly proclaim with someone else, always with someone else, different from me, strangely and absurdly different from me, the many ways and the many voices of God in this world. As we confess our faith, it will be our continuous task to define the contours of this faith which is marked by the glossolalia of the Spirit.

The spiritualities of the voiceless

Stretching the possibilities of our theologies, let us assume, for now, that our spiritualities are closely related to the ways in which we speak, and to the volume and tonalities of our voices. If that is so, how can we measure, understand or relate to the spirituality of minorities? The Waldensian spirituality had to find ways to develop itself in hidden places, dangerous situations, always using a lower voice, negotiating its place in the world with a quiet voice. A louder
51

voice would mean death. What kind of spirituality and theology could be developed under such circumstances? Nowadays, we see the same situation happening to undocumented immigrants throughout the world. Even though their presence is well known by the authorities, their presence must be made invisible, silent. The watchword within these communities is dont draw the attention of the police, they want you here to do the worst jobs and receive lower salaries, but be quiet in everything you do, do your job and dont call attention to yourself. This invisibility entails the lowering of their voices. They cannot speak out loud, they cannot fight for rights, they cannot complain about sexual and other abuses and exploitation, they cannot scream their sorrows and hopes for, if they do, they are put in prison and sent back to their countries. In order to survive, they learn to pay a high price for their non-existence and learn that their voice can be a weapon against themselves. They learn to turn an exterior voice into an inner voice, a voice which says: Dont speak, your voice can kill you. Without a voice we cannot speak our language and without language there is no God, there is no creation, there is no world.9 Without a voice, without a language, one lives in the shadows, as if one has disappeared without a trace. As Gloria Alzaldua says, I am my language.10And Ray Gwyn Smith says: Who is to say that robbing a people of its language is less violent than
52

war?11 And Irena Klepfisz writes: And our tongues have become dry the wilderness has dried out our tongues and we have forgotten speech.12 Churches usually are, or have the potential to be, the space where undocumented immigrants choose to develop their spirituality, a ghetto where they can at least verify their existence and be certain they are not fake individuals. In spite of walking undercover, they have real names, even if they cannot say them out loud. In these whispering sanctuaries an undocumented immigrant searches for:13 A place where one hopes to find a measure of sanity and safety and where one can be with somebody else in order to find solace over and against rampant fears that have the power to disrupt and disarticulate ones subjectivity and to destroy hopes, desires and resistances. A place where one becomes a citizen for a while, without worrying about getting caught. A place where colliding worlds try to make sense out of a communal life, a place between places to call home. Worlds trying to be connected together through the liturgical practices that develop a certain spirituality that allows them to breathe for a while. A place of recovery when the experience of utter and indescribable violence plagues the individual and the community. A place to speak when silence seems to fill ones heart with fear, anger and sorrow.

 A place where one learns with others, is changed by others and expands ones ways of seeing and experiencing God and life. The sharing of our roots and our faith will serve as a reminders that any community alone can get life properly. The body of Christ is composed of many voices, with mixed roots, spread as rhizomes, always unfolding within trans-national communities. A place to use ones own language to do practical, illiterate theology, giving measurement to oneself, God and the world. A place where language marks off space, locates time and tries to control both the known and unknown world. A place where broken spiritualities reflect broken lives made of so many stories of pain, abuse and oblivion; a place where a displaced spirituality mirrors an exilic faith and fosters a theology of diaspora by trying ceaselessly to find rest in an insecure land, terra incognita, terra infirma. A place where half-way spiritualities reflect a land without maps, a theology without clear references, encapsulating life in a desert of scattered dreams and increasingly fewer possibilities. A place where the transcendence and sovereignty of God must be a reality in order to help the wandering immigrant to get through the hardships of life, where hopes are cherished and horizons are stretched. A place for social connections, shelter, healing and consolation where the body cries its brokenness and hopes to be somewhat joined together, mended by the Spirit. A place to contrast, to counteract, to

challenge, to prophesize against the open wound14 of many unfair borders. A place to re-member, i.e. to be reminded of Gods love in Christ and to be constantly reconnected with ones dignity. A place where resistance is always reinvented, where identities, theologies and struggles are constantly rewritten, redone. A gathered community that develop courage as strangers, immigrants, foreigners, excluded people, through the fresh and insisting moving of the Spirit. A place where voices find faces that make and demand ethical demands. There, we look at each others faces without putting our heads down, as brothers and sisters having to decide how to live life together in spite of injustices and difficulties. In these liturgical spaces, we are called to listen and to speak, to love and to be challenged to find the Face of the Voice15. A place where an incarnated spirituality is always pressing our faith in Christ. The spiritualities of undocumented immigrants are unmapped terrains, with fading and hidden marks, broken landscapes, moveable sights and unclaimed territories. Borders are written all over their bodies. This way of living engenders a spirituality that is always under negotiation. The substratum, the source of their spiritualities is made of contingent material supports that are always under suspicion. They cannot talk out loud for too long outside of the church, and are always relying on fake id cards, expired drivers licenses, and nonpermanent addresses. A life made of
53

impermanence that ends up fostering cracked, moveable spiritualities and where theologies are always on the go, as we live, as we learn to live with one another in a foreign land.

find our own voice if we cannot hear the other who is silenced? How can we experience the Pentecost if we do not go through the Babel of our faith? Strangers and voices have a strong relation to our beliefs, spiritualities and theologies. Like the Waldensians, how do we get to the altars of God? By ourselves? How much do our theological musts set apart the other who cannot fit into our beliefs? At the Eucharistic table for example, are we the hosts or the hostages of Gods sacrament? Should we raise our voices and speak out loud our own stories in the midst of Gods story until we dont know anymore whose story belongs to whom? Or are we only to regurgitate properly the words of institution as if a miracle were to happen? Saint Augustines famous line says: You receive what you are: the body of Christ. Who is the body of Christ around the table? What many languages does this body speak? Where are the borders of our spiritualities, of our Eucharistic tables, of our countries? In this endless web of questions, undocumented people everywhere have to learn to talk out loud, speak up and loudly proclaim whatever they believe, think and imagine. They are living on the shadow of our Eucharistic tables. The hope is that, by developing a Christian spirituality with the other, the stranger, the immigrant around the altars of God, listening to their voices and paying attention to what and how they say and sing and how they move, we will be able to engage in a negotiation of our faith that will

Touched by the voice of the other

The task for us Christians is to invite these immigrants to embark into our faith journey as we join their journey as well. In this process of listening to the voices of the other, we must be aware that there might be a constant vanishing point within our faith that can spur hatred and xenophobia. As we try to live together, we must hold tight to the Holy Spirit in order to learn, again and again, how to welcome the other in our midst. To do that, we must acknowledge that we are a people which is always on the move to a better theology, better liturgical practice, and a better sense of our faith. Our spiritualities must be touched by the presence of the other, by the voice of the other, as we incarnate the gospel of Christ within our communities of faith. The incarnation of our faith will entail the sharing of our sacred spaces and also of our belongings. We must learn to negotiate our liturgical actions and our faithful decisions. How do we give an account of our faith if we never hear about forgotten communities of poor people around the world and invite them to worship with us? What would it take from us to develop our spiritualities in the midst of a variety of strange people turned brothers and sisters? How can we
54

help us to move between Babel and Pentecost. In this process, our ears are very important. Our ears are key elements for any theology and liturgy. To talk about God is to talk about us, in disfigured words, in unspeakable words, in words yet to be said. Thus, we need to hear, hear the other. Our ears are connected to our mouths and our mouths can only make sense when our ears listen to the words we speak. There are words, wounded words that we cannot speak, words tainted by the horrific and impossible to our ears to grasp. As Derrida says, The ear is uncanny. Uncanny is what it is; double is what it can become; large or small is what it can make or let happen (as in laissez-faire), since the ear is the most tendered and most open organ, the one that, as Freud reminds us, the infant cannot close; large or small as well the manner in which one may offer or lend an ear.16 Speaking and listening, being able to talk and to hear, mouth to ear and ear to mouth, might be one way for us to develop our spiritualities, to make our organic theologies grow. Grow until we get to the point where speaking and listening become the same thing, your tongue in my ear, my ear in your mouth, always negotiating our sacred spaces, our becomings, our spiritualities, rewriting our stories, translating each other and expanding what we know and what we wish we knew about ourselves.

Conclusion
The Waldensians can teach us how to get from imposed silence to loud proclamation. Every time they were persecuted, destroyed, and killed, this community was able to resurrect and continue its journey. Through various tonalities of voices and uneven heartbeats and bodily gestures, they were able to come together, hold hands and loudly proclaim what they believed. They learned how to voice their faith, their spiritualities and their lives. We can also learn this when an oath is loudly professed. The Waldensian oath tells us something about them as a community. When you proclaim out loud whatever you believe, you are willing not only to be heard, but also to tell your peers that you can, that you are capable of something, that you cannot and must not stop. An oath professed from the top of our longs, as a scream that sounds like a deliverance. Perhaps, we could add to our directories of worship that everyone who wants to profess their faith in Christ must affirm their faith out loud as they hold hands with the rest of the congregation! Thus, speaking our faith out loud with one another, we learn that trust is in God, but also within each others hands. This is how we should begin to profess our faith and the first step to follow Jesus. For when we do that we are saying: Yes, we are here! We exist as a community, as a body! And even more, we have something to say. Loudly!

55

The voices of the Waldensians are now stretched to the voices of my African ancestors in Brazil, along with the voices made mute, the unknown, the uncared for, the improper and unlanded17 marginalized voices from all over the world. By now, our voices must have become a matter of life and death as well, as the Waldensian oath teaches us. So, as one and multiple communities, with different faces, colors, voices, bodies, classes, ears and tongues, springing a variety of spiritualities and

experiences with God, it is our task to create a hospitable community that is marked by diversity. We live under the guidance of the Spirit and the many tongues of the Pentecost. The voice of God is plural, received and spoken not by one major voice but by many voices. It is among our differences, voices and languages that we can loudly say: Joining our hands, Let us LOUDLY proclaim, At the altars of my God, So I want to live and to die!

Notes
Her soft and yet intense voice speaks in my ears since a day when she gave a speech at Union Theological Seminary, New York, in 2003. I dont remember much what she said but the tone of her voice was unforgettable: It was loud, intense, trembling, as if she was screaming even though she wasnt. Since that day, her voice speaks somehow in and through me. 2 An indigenous word used by Brazilians to refer to typically Brazilian cultural traits 3 Based on George Orwells novel Nineteen-eighty-four 4 Franz Fanon, A Dying Colonialism New York, Grove Press, 1965, p.84. 5 Ibid., 85. 6 Ibid., 86. 7 Ibid., 91. 8 Edmond Jabs in Rosmarie Walsroy, Lavish Absence: Recalling and Rereading Edmond Jabs (Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 2005). 9 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1, Holy Bible, NRSV. 10 Gloria Alzaldua, Borderlands, La Frontera. The New Mestiza. (San Francisco, Aunt Lute Books, 1987), 59. 11 Ray Gwyn Smith in Gloria Alzaldua, op. cit., 53. 12 Irena Kleptisz in Gloria Alzaldua, op. cit., 54.
1

56

13 The generalizations of these assertions are based on my experience as a pastor for undocumented immigrants in Massachusetts, USA, and have the sole intention of provoking our thoughts to a more particular and nuanced engagement with these very diverse communities on undocumented immigrants. 14 See Gloria Anzaldua, op. cit. 15 Craig Dworkin Reading the Illegible, (Northwestern Univ. Press: Evanston, Illinois, 2003), p.32. 16 Jacques Derrida, The Ear of the Other. Otobiography, Transference, Translation. Texts and Discussions with Jacques Derrida (Bisson Book, 1988), 33. 17 It refers to the condition of dispossession and displacement that occurs during war and to zones of the world that have been effectively abandoned, where life has become absolutely intolerable. Doris Salcedo, in Siobhn Garrigan. Worship Audible Only in the Mouth, So far. Not published yet.

57

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

How matters - the case for unityfocused methods of dialogue

Aimee Moiso

As the North American Faith and Order Commission celebrates its 50th anniversary, Aimee Moiso makes the case for dialogue methods more analogous to their objectives by critically comparing the methods adopted by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church with the way the Faith and Order study group on Justification/Justice has operated over the past four years. Moiso graduated in 2006 from San Francisco Theological Seminary. She serves as a PC(USA) commissioner to the US National Council of Churches and its Faith and Order Commission. She is currently completing a Masters in Ecumenical Studies at the Bossey Ecumenical Institute (World Council of Churches) and the University of Geneva, Switzerland.

1. Searching for unity across division

The case of the PC(USA) Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church For ten years, two letters and five numbers have represented the possibility of schism in the Presbyterian Church, United States of America, PC(USA). A provision of its Book of Order, known as G-6.0106b, addresses the controversial issue of ordination standards related to sexuality. Added to the Book of Order in 1997, G-6.0106b has been a source of contention, division and hostility among US Presbyterians ever since. Those working to retain the provision stand fast against those repeatedly seeking

to repeal it, and overtures from both sides have generated heated debate, angry rhetoric and painful discord at each successive PC(USA) General Assembly. Ongoing dispute over related issues of Reformed theology, biblical interpretation, Christology and ordination has threatened to forcibly split the Presbyterian family. In response not only to perpetual rancour but to fatigue and despair over potential church division, the 213th General Assembly (2001) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) approved the formation of a Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. Its mandate was to: lead the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in spiritual discernment of our Christian

58

identity in and for the 21st centuryseeking the peace, unity, and purity of the church. This discernment shall include but not be limited to issues of Christology, biblical authority and interpretation, ordination standards, and power. The task force is to develop a process and an instrument by which congregations and governing bodies throughout our church may reflect on and discern the matters that unite and divide us, praying that the Holy Spirit will promote the purity of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).1 Unlike commissions or committees appointed to design specific proposals or programs, the task force was a body of discernment, reflection and historical and theological study. Moreover, the 20 task force members were appointed to represent the widest possible spectrum of theological and cultural diversity within the denomination. As such, the task force was not directed to resolve the conflicts facing the church, but instead to help the church deal with current and future conflicts more faithfully.2 Between 2002 and 2005, the task force met three times a year, and in September 2005 released its unanimous report and recommendations to the larger church. Not all theological or ethical dilemmas were resolved most notably, the report offered no absolute statements on sexuality and ordination but through discernment the group found manifold foundational elements of the faith upon which to agree and which to affirm together. More importantly, despite issues that have yet to be resolved the task force ardently called on the church to resist

division precisely because the issues are as important and difficult as they are and thus require the participation, input and discernment of the whole church.3 In fact, though task force members themselves continued to disagree on some issues, their report reiterated the crucial importance of church unity nonetheless: We [the members of the task force] have not compromised our basic convictions or commitments. We still hold most of the views and perspectives we brought to the task forceBut still it is a fact that all of us have been greatly enriched and changed by our work togetherOur experience of Christian faith and life has been extended and expanded. Our trust in other Presbyterians and our respect for differing perspectives has deepened. Most of all, our joy in believing has been greatly increased by the work of the Holy Spirit. Our gratitude for the church has grown because of the honesty, humility, and faithfulness of the other members of the task force. As a result, our hopes for the future of the church have been confirmedOver our time together, a common conviction has grown among us: different as we are, God has called us all to be part of the body of Christ as it is manifested in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 4 The depth of fellowship and common vision and passion for unity were not coincidental outcomes of the work of the task force. The task force utilized judicious and deliberate methods to generate dialogue of honesty, humility and faithfulness over against the context of
59

suspicion, mistrust and conflict in the church. Specific methods of vulnerable discussion, active listening, discernment, prayer and study were carefully interwoven to create and maintain a context of open communication and relationships of trust and mutual forbearance among the task force members. The task force then offered these methods and findings to the larger Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) as tools to help others engage in similar dialogue in other contexts. The task force confirmed that not just what is discussed and affirmed but how is crucial to the churchs identity: How we deal with one another in controversy especially how we accept judgment and reconciliation won for us in Christ is a challenge to our discipleship, a test of our faith, and our most convincing witness to the truth and power of the gospel we proclaim.5 The case of the US Faith and Order study group on Justification/Justice Divisive discussion and debate over theological and ethical issues are not confined to the inner workings of denominations. Because parallel division also occurs in ecumenical settings, interconfessional organizations and commissions have been charged with the work of seeking unity across the one holy catholic and apostolic church. The Faith and Order (F&O) Commission of the National Council of Churches of Christ USA is the branch of the council devoted to theological dialogue as a
60

means of overcoming obstacles to unity of the church, principally in the North American context. 6 Through study and discussion, F&O strives to call the churches to the goal of visible unity in one faith and in one Eucharistic fellowship expressed in worship and common life in Christ, and to advance toward that unity that the world may believe.7 Twice a year, the F&O commissioners gather to discuss issues of theological and doctrinal importance to the North American church. The current quadrennium (20042007) is focused on three study areas: The Authority of the Church in the World, Full Communion, and Justification/ Sanctification/Theosis and Justice/Ethics: A First Study in Theological Anthropology. The first two study groups continue the work of previous quadrenniums; the latter group, Justification/Justice, began its work in 2004. From its inception, the F&O Justification/Justice group struggled to focus its study, to find points of commonality or even common language - which led to the unwieldy title above8 - and to communicate or facilitate common vision and understanding among its members. Though early work was done to focus the topic in specific directions, participants had difficulty connecting with the subject matter in the manners proposed, and instead offered alternate entry points, wording, and ways to engage the topic. As a result, the multifaceted discussions often felt disorganized or nebulous; in addition, some members discussed withdrawing

because they felt the dominant language was not representative of their communions.9 A common search for unity across division Though the PC(USA) Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church and the F&O Justification/ Justice study group are decidedly different bodies created and designed for distinct purposes, they share commonality as groups seeking the unity of the Christian church across theological, historical and contextual division. Given this common calling, is it possible that the methodologies of the task force might strengthen and enhance the difficult work of the Justification/Justice study group? As a case study, this paper will offer a brief overview and analysis of the methods used by the task force. The paper will then provide a first look at ways the work of the Justification/Justice study group might benefit from those methods.

1. Community building 2. Worship, prayer and Bible study 3. An atmosphere of listening and discernment. These categories are mutually interdependent, proceeding from one to another and informing and building upon each other. All of the elements served to enlighten and undergird the groups deep, thorough theological and historical study. None of the components was assumed or taken for granted; each was intentionally and thoughtfully fostered by the task force over time. Community building It is essential that relationships be nurtured among participants who have differing perspectives if effective engagement in theological exploration is to happen. Group cohesion enables reflection and discussion to have more depth and breadth.10 The community building aspect of the work of the task force included introductory activities designed to help participants get to know one another and understand the varied contexts from which each had come, and trust- and relationship-building activities that focused on sharing experiences, stories, feelings, expectations and goals, and that encouraged honesty, openness and vulnerability in dialogue. For example, at their first meeting the task force shared anonymously-written hopes, concerns and ideas, and from the resulting discussion created a common covenant that was affirmed by the group and became the common basis of their work together.
61

2. Methods used by the PC(USA) Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church
Examination of the final report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church (as well as other resources produced by the task force) reveals a number of elements the task force lifts up as integral to their rich process of dialogue and discernment. It is not within the scope of this paper to treat each element in great depth, but they can be loosely grouped into three categories:

Worship, prayer and Bible study In addition to an opening worship service at each meeting that included celebration of the Lords Supper, members of the task force engaged in regular Bible study relevant not only to the theological issues before them but also to personal and collective concerns they faced. Members spent time in regular prayer with each other: at meetings in pairs, small groups and as a whole, and individually between meetings. The final report states that the following, among others, were important aspects through which the participants were drawn closer to God and to each other: Sincere self-examination, mutual confession, and repentance of ways in which all have undermined the churchs calling and faithfulness. Joint participation in worship and the Lords Supper. Communal study of the Bible that seeks common and mutually enriching understanding across dividing lines.11 An atmosphere of listening and discernment Perhaps more than any other single element of the task force process, an atmosphere of listening and discernment seems to have been the most surprising and fruitful means to deep understanding and relationship. As participants took time to carefully and thoughtfully listen to the ideas, hopes, fears and faith of others, and to seek the will of God for the church through what was said and experienced, they found themselves irrevocably changed:

As we observed the disciplines of listening and reflection that became foundational in the task force process, we heardthe gospel anew and felt the spirit of Christ in the words and deeds of our fellow task force members. Repeatedly, we found ourselves moved and impressed by the depth and truth of statements made by our colleagues, including those whose backgrounds and experiences are very different from our own. Most surprisingly, our faith was enriched and strengthened by the contributions of those whose views on contested issues we do not share.12 The intentional listening and collective discernment necessary to come to such mutual enrichment is not an easy task, and for members of the task force it involved significant reflection on and discussion about such issues as power, stereotyping, inference, judgment, insecurity and interpretation. The task force took deliberate measures to recognize and break through preexisting patterns of assumption and belief, and to find new ways of approaching dialogue and discernment.13

3. Why how matters in unityrelated theological dialogue

Theological study is informed by method As a major portion of its mandate, the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church was asked to engage in extensive theological, biblical and historical study. The comprehensiveness and depth of the theological sections of the report, attested by the significant

62

bibliography of sources consulted 14 and presentations received, demonstrate the breadth and rigour of the study undertaken by the task force. Yet rather than being independent from the method previously described, the meticulous study was informed and in fact formed -- by those methods. The scholarly studies were conducted within the context and patterns established by a commitment to community building, common worship, and an atmosphere of listening and discernment, so that what might seem in another context to be merely an academic exercise was instead a continuation of the communal, worshipful and prayerful discernment of the task force. Theological study began by first laying groundwork of general theological understanding and engagement before taking up the more sensitive and difficult specific topics, 15 thus ensuring all participants both understood and affirmed the methods and means of study, not just their content. To foster engagement with varied opinions, the task force made a determination to seek to understand positions other than our own by studying some of the best written presentations of different perspectives by respected scholars and earlier committees and commissions of the church. 16 Both the content and methods of the theological and historical study were designed to bring the participants to common understanding while encouraging deep engagement with positions unfamiliar or

different from their own. That experience led to the task forces recognition of the importance of the unity the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.): We have given voice to our shared convictions in the theological reflection that heads this report. We have seen the reflection of Christs glory in one another. Our growing awareness of this common faith in Christ has become the basis of our unity and of our fear of the consequences of losing one another. This faith gives us hope, indeed, assurance that we should hold on to one another and bear with one another as we grapple with the other difficult issues before the church.17 Put another way, through their intensive work together task force members themselves found unity in Christ across their differences, and in so doing became convinced of the value of and possibility for the unity of the church as a whole. Challenges facing the F&O Justification/Justice group The Faith and Order Commission of the NCCCUSA, charged with witnessing to the churches the Gospel call to full visible unity, 18 has generally engaged in its mandate through the methods of Western academia, pursuing theological study and dialogue (typically among scholars who write and share academic-style papers) and publishing research that serves the unity of the churches. 19 This work has often been fruitful and has led to a number of helpful and significant studies for the churches. At times the study groups have also used a variety of methodologies of
63

dialogue to assist with the difficult work of communicating transdenominationally, especially as it has been recognized that the work of interconfessional theological dialogue requires more than merely expertise in and knowledge of theology itself.20 Language. Among the many challenges currently facing the F&O Justification/ Justice study group is that of use of language. The use of the word justification itself poses problems for traditions (such as Orthodox or Pentecostal) that focus more on experiences of sanctification or theosis. Mutual understanding of the terms was mistakenly assumed from the groups inception. Even among the Reformed and Lutheran members of the study group (traditions with a more developed understanding of justification) there was miscommunication and disagreement about how to best conceive of and express the concept. Often, such miscommunication was based not in different root understandings of the underlying concepts how God redeems creation or humanity, per se but in a lack of willingness or ability to speak of the complex concepts in other than theologically-loaded terms that were not equally familiar or meaningful to all group members.21 The etymological play-on-words of justification and justice had significant meaning for some members, while for others the term justification was so remote to their tradition as to potentially preclude participation in a study group by that name.
64

Perpetual discussions about what language to use and how to use it kept substantive dialogue from moving forward but never seemed to lead to a concerted effort to truly understand or define common language.22 Inclusion. In addition to the problems of language, early presentations were complex and assumed shared knowledge of concepts unfamiliar to some group members. Some who had planned the studies wanted to forge ahead with particular topical agendas despite the obvious hesitation of others who felt marginalized in the discussion. Conversation around the table was often dominated by a few, while others appeared to be merely observers. I noticed in particular that participants who were either new to Faith and Order or who held non-academic positions (as pastors or other church leaders, for example) were frequently less able to engage fully in the discussions. Efforts by some to pose alternate methods or ways to frame the questions at hand were often unsuccessful.23

4. Rethinking the how in existing dialogue

It is likely that the work of the F&O study group would have benefited from taking more time in its early stages to establish common ground and mutual understanding of both the task and subjects at hand. Deliberate efforts to build community within the study group might have allowed for fuller participation of all members. Presentations might have been

more useful if they had begun with discussion and clarification of underlying theological concepts before proceeding to more complex and interrelated topics. Still, even at this late stage methods like those used by the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church could offer some benefit to the Justification/ Justice study group. As the group nears the end if its first quadrennium, deliberate reflection on both the subject and methods of the groups dialogue could prove critical for the future. Such a moment of review of the past and creative vision for the future is also an opportunity for new direction which could be characterized by both new methodologies and a transformed ethos. At the most recent meetings - October 2006 and March 2007 - much energy was devoted to discussing the difficulties the study group had encountered in its work and trying to identify the underlying tensions and misunderstandings. Such conversations which will undoubtedly continue in October 2007 could be strengthened by the use of different methods of dialogue. For example, future discussion might begin with open round-table sharing (perhaps using mutual invitation) about each participants fears, disappointments and hopes for the study. A recorder could note common themes of both hope and frustration that might help inform the group as to the most fruitful directions of dialogue, both in format and content. A discussion of theological topics could

be channeled creatively to highlight what each person thinks is the most relevant aspect of justification or justice in his or her tradition, and each person could then be invited to explain or express not only why that aspect is important in the tradition, but also its importance to the individual. Such dialogue would serve two purposes: lifting up and sharing key theological concepts from each tradition, and giving an opportunity for participants to share beliefs using non-theological (and perhaps personal or experiential) language, thus (perhaps) providing alternate language for common understandings and values. With the beginning of a new quadrennium in March 2008, there will likely be changes in the study groups membership as various church representatives depart and are replaced. This time of transition provides an opportunity to build community and partnership among the members of the new body to ensure everyones full participation. Setting a tone of inclusion, welcome and collaboration from the start and using methods that strengthen our relationships along the way will serve us well when we face misunderstanding, disagreement and division. Though it is not possible at this time for such an ecumenical body to share in the Eucharist, the Faith and Order Commission as a whole does participate in worship together at its meetings. The Justification/Justice group would also benefit from sharing prayer together as a study group itself, both to reflect on the
65

nature, purpose and direction of its work, and to offer care and concern for the other members of the group many of whom have struggled with serious health issues during this quadrennium. Minutes of several meetings also reflect a desire among some members to spend time in Biblical study together. Perhaps a prayerful or worshipful spirit in each meeting might help the members listen and share with each other anew in patient and thoughtful ways. At the October 2006 F&O meeting, one of the co-moderators of the Justification/ Justice study group commented on the difficulty of finding a method to define and understand the theological, ecclesiological and linguistic differences being voiced by the members of the group. Traditional comparative methods of presenting denominational or confessional positions to one another seemed to be limiting the process. Is there another way? she asked the group.24

method, or ecclesiology and method. Various traditions have different ideas of how church structures of decision making should impact or influence the methods used in dialogue, as well as how the participants themselves might understand power and authority. Theologically, there may be good reasons for utilizing methods that promote relationship and community, but such theologies have not yet been strongly articulated (with the exception of some work done regarding the use of the consensus model of decision making in parts of the global church and the ecumenical movement). What is clear is that unity and community among members of a study group or task force have a direct impact on work accomplished toward unity; thus methods of dialogue that foster unity could be an important factor in furthering the visible unity of the church. But beyond the pragmatic and productive reasons for using such methods, might there be another possibly even more significant reason for seeking unity and community in these bodies? Should not the methods, goals and life of the task force or study group reflect the unity it seeks to achieve? As various groups work for the visible unity of the church, might it also be important or even faithful to do all they can to live the unity they seek?

Conclusion
A short analysis of this kind can only begin to scratch the surface of how particular methods might contribute to dialogue seeking the visible unity of the church. Many areas require further study, and this paper has dealt primarily with the practical and pragmatic reasons for utilizing such processes. One area for further study would be the relationship between theology and

66

Bibliography
Bills, Samuel. Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission. National Council of Churches of Christ. October 2006. Coalter, Milton J., Barbara G. Wheeler and John Wilkinson. Principles of Polity: Their Contribution to the Peace, Unity and Purity of the Presbyterian Church. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Final Report Resources. 2 June 2005. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/ finalreport.htm>. Cross, Terry. Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission. National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission. March 2004. ___. Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission. National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission. October 2004. ___. Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission. National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission. March 2005. ___. Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission. National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission. October 2005. Curtiss, Victoria. Resources for Fostering Community and Dialogue. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Final Report Resources. 2005. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>. ___. Discernment and Decision-Making. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Final Report Resources. 2005. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>. Demarest, Gary and Jenny Stoner. A Plan for Moving Ahead. Attachment to Press Release of August 2002 Meeting Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church. 5 August 2002. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/ peaceunitypurity/archive/aug06-pressrelease.htm>. Ford, Rev. John, CSC. Theological Language and Ecumenical Methodology. 2004. National Council of Churches of Christ USA. 15 January 2007 <http://www.ncccusa.org/unity/ fandoford.html>. Fuchs, Sr. Lorelei, SA, ed. National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission Handbook. New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, 2005. Goodwiller, Gregory A. Presbytery Theological Reflection Groups: A Guide to Their Formation and Work. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Final Report Resources. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/ peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>. Kinnamon, Michael and Brian E. Cope, eds. The Ecumenical Movement: An Anthology of Key Texts and Voices. Geneva: WCC Publications, 1997. Lancaster, Bill. Assembly approves task force to seek peace, unity and purity of the church. Presbyterian News Service, 13 June 2001. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 12 January 2007. <http://www.pcusa.org/ga213/news/ga01116.htm>
67

Lossky, Nicholas, et al., eds. Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement. Geneva: WCC Publications, 2002. Loughran, James, SA, ed. Minutes, Faith & Order USA, Justification, Sanctification, Theosis and Justice. National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission. March 2006. National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. Faith and Order Commission. 2004. Website of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. 5 January 2007 <http:// www.ncccusa.org/about/unityhome.html>. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Part I: Book of Confessions. Louisville, KY: Office of the General Assembly, 1999. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Part II: Book of Order, 2005-2007. Louisville, KY: Office of the General Assembly, 2005. Presbyterian Peacemaking Program. Seeking to Be Faithful: Guidelines for Presbyterians During Times of Disagreement. 1992. Office of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 5 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peacemaking/index.htm>. Raiser, Konrad. To be the Church: Challenges and Hopes for a New Millennium. Geneva: WCC Publications, 1997. Small, Joseph D. Committed Conversation. No. 2 of the Office of Theology and Worship Church Issues Series. 6 vols. Louisville, KY: Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), 1999. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity in the Church. A Season of Discernment: The Final Report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. June 2006. Office of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 6 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>. ___. Engaging One Another in New Ways. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Final Report Resources. 2006. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>. ___. Resources: Bibliography of materials read by Task Force members. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Resources. 2004. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 9 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/resources/biblio.htm>.

68

Notes
1 Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity in the Church, A Season of Discernment: The Final Report of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church, June 2006 (Office of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), 6 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>), p.1. 2 Ibid, 14-15. 3 The final report states: The differences on these matters are strenuous and serious, but precisely because they are so important, we have been encouraged to stay together, speaking the truth in love, learning from one another, and building up the body. Ibid, p.21. 4 Ibid, 13. 5 Ibid, 32. 6 Faith and Order in the United States also works in tandem with Faith and Order of the World Council of Churches, often on issues of parallel or global concern. The NCCCUSA F&O Commission also includes some Canadian members. 7 Lorelei Fuchs, SA, ed., National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission Handbook, (New York: National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, 2005), p.18. 8 This was the unofficial, amended title for the study groups first years. At its October 2006 meeting, the study group voted to have Justification and Justice: Beyond the Dichotomy as its working title, though there was still not unanimity on this language. 9 James Loughran, ed., Minutes, Faith & Order USA, Justification, Sanctification, Theosis and Justice, (National Council of Churches of Christ USA Faith and Order Commission Meeting, March 2006), p.9. 10 Victoria Curtiss, Resources for Fostering Community and Dialogue, Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Final Report Resources, 2005 (Presbyterian Church, (U.S.A.). 1 January 2007 <http://www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/finalreport.htm>), p.4. 11 A Season of Discernment, op. cit., 23. 12 Ibid., p.13. 13 One example was the use of mutual invitation in group discussions, wherein each member was directly invited by another to speak to the issue at hand, and all have the opportunity to speak once before anyone speaks a second time, thus transforming power dynamics and allowing all to listen freely knowing they will also have an opportunity to speak. See Victoria Curtiss, op. cit., p.6-9. 14 Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity, and Purity of the Church. Resources: Bibliography of materials read by Task Force members. Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity of the Church Resources, 2004, (Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). 9 January 2007 <http:/ /www.pcusa.org/peaceunitypurity/resources/biblio.htm>). 15 A Season of Discernment, op. cit., p.10. 16 Ibid., p.10. 17 Ibid., p.16. 18 Fuchs, op. cit., p.18. 19 Ibid., p.18. 20 See for example the methodology developed by Rev. John Ford, STD, professor of theology at the Catholic University of America, in Theological Language and Ecumenical Methodology on the website of the NCCCUSA at <http://www.ncccusa.org/unity/

69

fandoford.html>. Also discussed in Committed Conversation by Rev. Joseph D. Small, Office of Theology and Worship Church Issues Series No. 2, (Louisville: Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), 1999), p.32-37. 21 Minutes of various Justification/Justice study group meetings reflect the frequent desire on the part of some members to use other kinds of language, such as metaphor (October 2004) and experience (March 2006), or by reframing the question in a different way entirely (October 2005). See Terry Cross, Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission, (National Council of Churches of Christ USA). 22 Loughran, ed., op. cit, p.8. 23 Two meetings of the study group have since taken place, and the body was able to agree on a title and some ways in which to move forward in the next quadrennium. But divisions in the group continue to be evident and there appears to be little consensus even now on the most effective or appropriate ways to focus the discussions. 24 Samuel Bills, Minutes, Justification/Sanctification/theosis and Justice: Towards a Theological Anthropology Group of the NCCCUSA Faith and Order Commission. (National Council of Churches of Christ, October 2006).

70

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Milan Opocensk (1931-2007)

Alastair Hulbert

The Czech pastor and Reformed theologian Milan Opocensk was the General Secretary of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches from 1989 to 2000. Alastair Hulbert evokes his friend and mentor in the form of a conversation with him. Opocensk was European Secretary of the World Student Christian Federation from 1967 to 1973. Hulbert succeeded him from 1977 to 1983. Presently, he is Warden of Scottish Churches House, Dunblane. With WARC and WSCF he is preparing a conference on Opocensks life and spiritual legacy for Easter 2008.
^ ^

Milan Opocensk, who died on 31 January 2007, was born in 1931 in Hradec Krlov, Czechoslovakia, the son of a minister of the Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren, a church which owes its origin to the Hussite Reformation. His mother was the first woman graduate in theology in Czechoslovakia. As a student of theology in Prague in the years following the Communist putsch he came under the influence of Josef Hromdka, the leading theologian of crisis and renewal in Eastern Europe. Though Hromdka probably never had an equal as a promoter of ChristianMarxist dialogue, Milan Opocensk was made of the same stuff and his life too was marked by a passionate concern about international disorder and the need for dialogue between East and West, Christianity and the secular world, Socialism and the status quo.
^

Opocensks view of the church, like Hromdkas, was prophetic. The church is not founded on some concept of God but on the reality of Gods grace at work in the world. Only by holding theology and prophecy together can theology be instrumental and relevant to life. This conviction, I believe, informed Milan throughout his whole life as a member of the Comenius Faculty of Theology teaching social ethics during different periods of his life, as European Secretary of the World Student Christian Federation (WSCF), 19671973, and as General Secretary of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC), 1989-2000. Milans first visit to Scotland was in 1965 when, as Assistant to Professor Hromdka, he visited New College, the Divinity Faculty of Edinburgh University, and addressed the students. For most of us it was our first
71

encounter with a theologian from Eastern Europe. I dont remember all that he said but I remember his accent and the urgency in his voice. He recalled the strong ties between the Reformed traditions in Czechoslovakia and Scotland, and appealed for a renewal of the student exchanges that had allowed several leading Czech theologians to study in Scotland before the war. It was the Dubcek era, the beginning of the Prague Spring. I visited Prague that summer and met Milan there. Fiona Williams, another New College student, responded to his call a year later when, with the help of a World Council of Churches scholarship, she began a years postgraduate study in the Comenius Faculty with Hromdka, Lochman, Smolk and others. Milan was like that, always making connections, inspiring, challenging you to get on with it, forging ecumenism between people. In September 1966, a World Council of Churches Consultation on Theological Education in Europe was held in Scottish Churches House, Dunblane. Steven Mackie was the staff member in charge. Werner Simpfendrfer, Gregory Baum, Gillian Carver, Ian Fraser, Jim White and other ecumenical theologians were all there. Milan was the only Eastern European; I was there as the divinity student. The consultation report suggests that here was a group of theologians who were indeed ready to confront the huge cultural and social changes about to hit the western world. Can there be a modern and scientific view of theology
72

entering into dialogue with the forces that shape society? This is the problem of theological education in a day when Gods absence is felt more radically and painfully than was his hiddenness and mystery before.

The Fourth Man

This theological quest was the thrust of a book Milan introduced me to around that time: Kornelis Miskottes When the Gods are Silent, a passionate work of European cultural critique and practical theology. It recognized, as Bonhoeffer had done in prison, the paramount relevance of the Old Testament in the search for an answer to the atheism and nihilism of the fourth man (Alfred Webers characterization of modern man emerging under the pressures of technocracy) or Bonhoeffers Man come of age. In 1971, some years after Milan had moved to Geneva to take up the post of European Secretary of the WSCF, he published his colleague Josef Smolcs study, The Fourth Man and the Gospel in the series WSCF Books. There was much to excite students theologically in Smolcs work (in 1972 I myself was awarded a WCC scholarship to study with him in Prague, but the normalization that followed 1968 finally caught up and I was denied a visa). Smolc developed the call, coming out of post-war Germany, for a confessing church. This embraced Milans passion for Christian ethics, and his later search for status confessionis in the church.

The programme of the WSCF Europe Region during Milans leadership was characterized by the theme, The Witness of the Gospel in the Struggle for Socialism. Certain student Christian movements, notably the Italian FGEI, supported it strongly with the influence of Barth and Marx. In the French Fd and the British and Irish SCM, it introduced the tension between a radical lite and those who defended the student branches of the movement. SCMs had to preserve a liberal base in the universities if there was to be any regular flow of new members to be formed ecumenically, let alone radicalized as Christians. Given the revolutionary cultural context of the time, it was a serious issue for many of us. Risto Lehtonen, General Secretary of the WSCF, reflected on this dilemma in his essay, The Story of a Storm (WCC, 1972). The direction of the ecumenical movement... does not seem at all clear, Risto wrote, Is this apparent loss of nerve, the polarities, the financial difficulties, merely a reflection of the inevitable transitions in the present-day world which should not worry us too much? Or are there perhaps at stake crucial questions of faith and obedience, authority and participation, integrity and commitment? Im not sure about how to understand the polarization of these questions now with the hindsight of thirty-five years. How could we expect those who were caught up in the turmoil of the sixties to run with the crucial questions of the church tradition as such?

Systematic theology was on its way out. Emotion and imagination were in. Liberation was the new Word. (And yet) somewhere there must be a point where the criterion of truth does not lie with me... Somewhere you will have to grasp, not so much in ecstasy as in sober apprehension of truth, the privilege of understanding that you are understood and known and chosen. (Miskotte)

Beauty is a rebellion against time

I remember you in the winter of 1970, Milan. I was Scottish Secretary of SCM. You came over from Ireland, homo viator, and I picked you up in Glasgow in the late evening. We drove north east in my old Land Rover, right across Scotland, through Dunblane, Perth, Blairgowrie, the Spittal of Glenshee, Braemar, Ballater and Banchory to Aberdeen, arriving at my brothers place in the wee small hours. For me the journey was a tutorial on the student movement and ecumenism in the sixties, a road to Emmaus interpreting all the things that had happened. You preached the next morning in Kings College Chapel at Aberdeen University, Hromdkas alma mater, and in the evening addressed the SCM on liberation theology! The coal miners were on strike in Britain. Eventually they were to bring down Ted Heaths government. In Edinburgh (do you remember?) there was no electricity so we took you out to a forest in East Lothian to gather wood for the fire. Hard work and
73

hilarity! What happened when the Sahara became socialist? - Nothing much for three weeks; then they ran out of sand! Sawing wood and loading the jeep, talking and laughing. The survival value of humour, as Rosenstock puts it. By the light of a great fire in our New Town sitting room the Edinburgh SCM discussed Europe with you history, society, politics, theology - late into the night. Fond memories of another time! Beauty is a spark which flares up when two ages meet across the distance of time... a clean sweep of chronology, a rebellion against time. (Milan Kundera, The Book of Laughter and Forgetting) Mind you, in some ways you were really quite conservative, what with your Latin quips and quotes! Central European, your culture was more staid than ours in the West. Ten years my elder, all through the sixties your haircut was short and you rejected the fashion of a beard or, like me, a Sergeant Pepper moustache! Whats more, radical though you were, you navigated Europe all those years wearing your uniform grey suit and tie. I ask you! In 1977 I took the train to Prague from Paris where we were living at the time. It was winter; Prague was so beautiful in the snow. Milan had been elected Chairman of the WSCF Europe Region for a second quadrennium since leaving Geneva, though for two years he had not been allowed to travel. He said he didnt want to become a museum! Fiona and I had just been appointed to the post of European Secretary.
74

He and I talked for two days, about Europe and the Third World, projects and conferences, ecumenism and the movements, history and ideas for the quadrennium - and the difficulties we all faced. During the two years that followed, the Executive Committee of the Europe Region held its meetings in East Berlin in the offices of the ESG, whose General Secretary was a member of the Committee. Milan made his way clandestinely from Prague without much trouble while those of us from the West stayed in West Berlin and travelled over daily on the S-Bahn.

Dont you let yourself grow hard

The 70s were a very different decade from the 60s normalization and oppression in the East and disillusionment in the West. Not so much in Norway, mind you, where the SCM was on the winning side in the national campaign against the Common Market, and grew out of that, so to speak, to take over the leadership of the WSCF Europe Region from the Italians in the early 80s. Wolf Biermann was an East German singer and poet under a Berufsverbot, forbidden to perform in public. His songs and poems circulated through the underground, by tape recordings and handwritten copies. In 1974 a record album of a dozen of his songs and ballads was brought out in West Germany, Wolf Biermann aahja! It was an instant success in the student movement and the left. Like Kenneth Patchen in America, Biermann caught the

spirit of the age, grief and revolt, steadfastness and bold disrespect. In some ESG circles one of the shorter songs, Ermutigung (Encouragement), enjoyed the status of a hymn. Du, lass dich nicht verhrten In dieser harten Zeit... Du, lass dich nicht verbittern In dieser bittren Zeit... Du, lass dich nicht erschrecken In dieser Schreckenzeit... Du, lass dich nicht verbrauchen Gebrauche deine Zeit Du kannst nicht untertauchen Du brauchst uns, und wir brauchen Grad deiner Heiterkeit Wir wolln es nicht verschweigen In dieser Schweigezeit Das Grn bricht aus den Zweigen Wir wolln das allen zeigen Dann wissen sie Bescheid You, dont let yourself grow hard in these hard times. Dont become bitter in these bitter times. Be not afraid in this fearsome time. Dont let yourself get used up; take your time: you cant disappear. You need us and we need your good cheer. We shant cover things up in this time of cover-up. Green bursts from the bough and well prove it to everyone: then youll know! Wolf Biermanns songs had an echo of

the theology of Kornelis Miskotte.

Status confessionis
In 1988 we invited Milan to a South-North Encounter Programme in Scotland. He was there as an Eastern European, from the Second World, along with four representatives of the Third World. Each of them was placed in a different locality, living with a family, observing the culture and society, analysing the ideology of development in the First World, with a methodology that was an inversion of the norm; then brought together for a conference. He spent a week in Dundee involved with industrial mission and urban ministry. The poverty of the housing schemes and the wealth of the new industrial development shocked him. He could see that transnational economic and technological management was accelerating, bringing with it a new alienation from the small and human-centred: the fourth man, alive and well and living in Dundee! What, we asked, is Christian witness in these marches of modern civilization? The paradigms of what we now call globalization were bringing new categories for theology to deal with, different from those of communism and the Cold War. Milan spoke harshly about the contrast between Dundees Technology Park and the Whitfield Housing Estate. Putting people at the centre of our processes should be treated by the church as status confessionis, he said. It is heresy in Christian faith to believe that nothing can be done! And in
75

his farewell message to WARC in the year 2000, he echoed this: It was my principle to take every single voice seriously Perhaps we do not appreciate fully the notion of church as Gods gift. Communion means sharing and if necessary sacrificing and suffering for each other. Status confessionis remained the vocation of Milan Opocensk throughout the years with WARC and for the rest of his life. The emphasis on economic justice and justice vis--vis creation expressed in the call to a confessing process in Debrecen in 1997 was done under his leadership as general secretary and it continued to be a priority with the Alliance after he retired. In everything Milan did, he had the support of his wife, Jana, also a theologian.
^

sufferings of millions and tens of millions its ability to treat the history of the world as an autobiography... The worlds history is our own history... Out of Revolution is a wonderful, eloquent testimony to Europe and the human spirit, full of rich insights and astonishing reflections, the work of a great historian, poet and polymath. Using Aristotles definition of the forms of government - monarchy, aristocracy, democracy and dictatorship - he weaves his way through the European revolutions of the second half of the second millennium and earlier, in the first half, tracing his thesis back into the mediaeval church of Rome. The study is unique, though its very uniqueness suggests comparison with Eduardo Galeanos extraordinary threevolume history of Latin America, Memory of Fire. Galeano admits he doesnt know for sure to what literary form his work belongs - novel, essay, epic poem, chronicle, testament. Maybe, as an exile from the Uruguayan junta, he could have suggested autobiography as well. He describes his vast task of translating hundreds of separate sources into successive independent narratives as a contribution to the rescue of the kidnapped memory of all America, but above all of Latin America, that despised and beloved land. The reader is made to feel that what has happened happens again when the author tells it. And as with Rosenstock there is nothing neutral about Galeanos historical narrative. Unable to distance myself, he says, I take sides. Both

Its your story thats being told

Milan had an intense, intimate way of talking to friends, especially one to one. It was almost conspiratorial! Each time we met he would ask me what books I had added to my special shelf - the ones that sustained me. And it was he who put me on to the most important of them all, Eugen Rosenstock-Huessys Out of Revolution: Autobiography of Western Man. Our passions give life to the world. Our collective passions constitute the history of mankind - Rosenstocks opening words were written in 1938. This book owes to the World War... to events that far transcend our individual judgement its rediscovery of what is important and what is trifling in the life of mankind... This book owes to the
76

histories express the same yearning and belonging to a continent. Milans life manifested this kind of personal engagement. The fact that he was a Central European, bearing deep within his national psyche a personal awareness of the power and consequence of empire, the disasters of war and revolution, had touched me from the start. Rosenstocks Autobiography of Western Man has this superscription: De te fabula narratur. And he translates, It is your own story that is told in this volume. That is to say: Any real man behaves in the volcanic hours of his own life as people behaved during revolutions. Those hours are extreme and terrible, yet they tell us more about the unity of human nature than soft days of peace from which behaviourists are apt to derive their political concepts... I am an impure thinker. I am hurt, swayed, shaken, elated, disillusioned, shocked, comforted, and I have to transmit my mental experiences lest I die. And although I may die. To write this book... was a means of survival.

SCM students and others from the WARC, to tell our stories. Not just storytelling about the past either, but reflection about what happened to us then, and whats happening in our lives today, what we believe now and where were bound. Heres one response to the idea. It comes from Gaby Belz of Zrich, who joined the WSCF Europe Committee after Milan had left. ... if we can realize a conference, I wouldnt be able to contribute memories with Milan. What I can do is talk about how the conference in El Escorial that took place in Spring 1981 was so important to me because we decided to send a telegram to Maggie Thatcher and ask her to save Bobby Sands from dying in prison. Well he died anyway because she wouldnt listen. But in my universe the spiritual and the political layers were linked to each other forever, and thats why I, being the daughter of a Jewish father and a Christian mother, am into the Jewish peace movement today. The aim of the conference will be to offer a help to all kinds of dwellers on the fringes of church and culture (Miskotte again, but oh so relevant today). Participative ecumenism rather than the representative ecumenism of the churches - a help to those of us who still have something to give and also to those who are still willing to receive. It will be at Easter 2008 in Scotland where we call a party a ceilidh and everyone joins in. De te fabula narratur, Milan, the stories that well tell will be yours as well!
77

A conference to honour Milan Opocensk

Milan autobiographical theology in the context of the student Christian movements and liberation: we tell each other the story of our lives and call it the ecumenical movement. To celebrate his life and legacy, next year we plan to hold a gathering of WSCF friends from those years, with some
^

talked

to

us

about

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Andr Biler (1914-2006)

Jean-Pierre Thvenaz and Edward Dommen1

The Reformed Christian, Swiss pastor and Calvin scholar Andr Biler was the author, among other works, of Calvins Economic and Social Thought, published in English in 2005 under the auspices of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. According to Thvenaz and Dommen, Biler has taught us this freedom to be responsible despite the difficulties, this firmness in conviction and hope, this open confrontation with the different faces of destructive powers, and this pinpointing of the great social cleavages where it is essential to give signs of a liberating presence. Thvenaz is a pastor of the Evangelical Reformed Church in the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. The economist Edward Dommen, a Quaker, is the author of How Just is the Market Economy? (Geneva, WCC, 2003).

Andr Biler, born in Geneva in 1914, professor of Social Ethics in Geneva and Lausanne but far more than just that, died in December 2006 at the age of 92. If there is such a character as a Renaissance man embracing the whole range of human knowledge and culture, then Andr Biler was the epitome of the Reformation man: his life was a coherent expression of meticulous scholarship and active, effective engagement with the world of economics and politics, informed by a deep yet limpid spirituality. It is only because of his Protestant simplicity and discretion that he did not become a guru to his generation, but only an admired, respected man of ideas and ideals who not only
78

inspired but stimulated and guided farreaching social initiatives.

A scholars life2
Andr Bilers first substantial book, Calvins Economic and Social Thought (La pense conomique et sociale de Calvin, 1959) was in fact his doctoral thesis in economics. It is undoubtedly also his most authoritative work. First published in 1959, it was translated in Brazil into Portuguese in 1990 and into English in 2005. These tardy translations confirm the lasting reference value of this meticulous work, an unrivalled source book of quotations from Calvins own writings and sermons systematically organized, analysed and

commented by theme and set into the social and economic context of Geneva in Calvins time. A shorter popularization of the main themes of this major work, Calvins Social Humanism (Lhumanisme social de Calvin, 1961) met with quicker international recognition: it was quickly translated into English, Japanese, Italian and (in parts) German; Portuguese and Spanish followed. The implications of Calvins thought for the modern economy were again spelled out in a further booklet, Calvin, Prophet of the Industrial Era (Calvin, prophte de lre industrielle, 1964). Those books aimed at a specifically Reformed audience. Among the general public probably the best-known of his books is Development gone mad (Le dveloppement fou, 1973). In it he compares humanity to the passengers of a space vessel eating up its supplies; indeed the upper-class passengers are consuming abundantly and throwing their rubbish away while the lowerclass ones are already reduced to famine. He concludes that the development of the world economy is mad because it is contrary to reason and contrary to justice as reason allows us to apprehend it. If anything, the book is more topical today than when it was written. In his second large work, Christians and Socialists before Marx (Chrtiens et socialistes avant Marx, 1982), written after his retirement, he returned to preachers and gospel witnesses confronting the economic conditions of their own day. We

find there again his concern for exact references, explicit evidence and verbatim quotations. Let us end this selective account with The hidden strength of the Protestants (La force cache des protestants, 1995). Written explicitly from an insiders point of view, it presents with more care and attention to detail than Max Weber the role of the Reformed tradition in the development not only of capitalism but at least as important of democracy. In his typical manner, the second half of the book moves from description to proposals for a more just society in a Reformed perspective. For, in Bilers thinking, ethical discourse implies a concrete analysis of economic mechanisms and a search for means to make them serve the common good of the whole society. The essence of this ethic is basically a rejection of ideologies, especially the ideology and idolatry secreted by the possession of wealth and power. Biler founds ethics on the self-disclosure of God his revelation, which is conveyed by the Bible but originates beyond it. With his master and friend, W. A. Vissert Hooft, the first General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, Andr Biler was a voice in the ecumenical movement already before the birth of the Council in 1948. With the Commission on the Churches Participation in Development and its programme Towards a Church in Solidarity with the Poor, he was invited to describe the evolution of the relation between the churches and the poor from the eighteenth
79

to the twentieth century, which he did with his characteristic cautious detachment as the first chapter of Separation without hope?, 1978. Biler clearly sees that this concern has been and still is something which only engages critical Christian minorities, while the middle class held sway over society and the church.3 When Biler is setting out current ethical issues, he carefully describes the divergent trends. On each occasion he writes sound, cautious, comprehensive sentences, weighing opposing risks against each other and looking scrupulously for an approach that can avoid these hazards. Thus something written by Andr Biler becomes a source of clarification for those who read it. His reasons for this or that choice are set forth carefully and in complete awareness of the current state of the political debate around the issues. To follow Andr Bilers intellectual output and church involvement is to accompany the church of the twentieth century in its commitment with the economic world of the day and with the political management of its conflicts. Biler did indeed also publish a work on liturgy and architecture and another on man and woman in Calvinist ethics, but the economic and political spheres were those in which his involvement counted most.

and study centres (in Geneva the Centre protestant dtudes) and the ecumenical movement were set in motion. He was involved in both. As a member of a commission of the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches on the social issue Biler was entrusted with drafting its report. This was published in 1950 as Le message social de lglise dans notre conomie (The Churchs Social Message in our Economy), in which we find the following analysis of the situation: 1. A striking contrast exists between the citizens participation in political life, in a democracy, and their moral involvement in the countrys economic life. 2. Generally the proletariat is excluded from taking a decisive part in what happens to businesses and professions. 3. The traditional wage system does not adequately respect the workers dignity (plus three other characteristics, p.8). In 1964 the Cold War and the arms race were in full swing; on the occasion of a message given to the Assembly of the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches in commemoration of the 400th anniversary of Calvins death, Biler urged the churches to seek a reduction in arms expenditure in order to increase development aid. The churches, embarrassed, buried the proposal in commission debates. As a fallback position, in 1968, together with Lukas Vischer and Max Geiger, he launched the Berne Declaration, signed by thousands of Swiss who committed

A life in context
Andr Biler was first a pastor in Geneva, particularly at the University Chaplaincy, during the years when the lay academies
80

themselves to devoting 3% of their own income to development. The Berne Declaration became Switzerlands leading development education organization, contesting the shortcomings in the NorthSouth policies of the Swiss government and enterprises. This was also the period when the WCC convened its conference on Church and Society and its Uppsala Assembly on world development (1966, 1968). Biler took part in both. Andr Biler, having become a Professor at Lausanne and Geneva universities as from 1967, also supported the establishment of an Institute for Social Ethics within the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches (1971). At this time he wrote his two books most widely read among church people and beyond: A Politics of Hope (Une politique de lesprance, 1970), and Development gone mad (1973). When he retired Andr Biler planned to write works on history and social ethics but was prevented by his failing eyesight. However, his practical commitments were able to continue. With some friends who like him had shares in Nestl he started the Convention dactionnaires Nestl (CANES Convention of Nestle Shareholders) to criticize the management of this Swiss transnational company, but from within as people involved in the enterprise, and in the spirit of loyal dialogue. CANES in due course merged into a largerscale movement (Actares). He was among those who launched the

idea of the fair trade shops Les Magasins du Monde. He was involved with the movements in Switzerland which defended foreign seasonal workers or conscientious objectors, which opposed nuclear energy, arms exports or investment in apartheid South Africa; or with those who, like his brother-in-law Jean-Jacques Gautier, were fighting against torture. And that is only a partial list.

The roots of his thought and action

The gospel, as the Reformed understand it, represents a motor of history. Its driving effects are a characteristic relationship to material things and to political structures, especially to capitalism and democracy. It is not, as Max Weber argues, a subjection of the Protestant spirit to capitalist materialism but clearly a quest for the right way to run the economy and society. Andr Bilers penultimate book, Christians and Socialists before Marx, shows that he himself was attached to socialism as a Christian line of thought, which is of long standing, though it has always been held only by a minority in the churches. He jibbed at the liberal capitalism which turns economic production into a categorical imperative. Bilers magnum opus was Calvins Economic and Social Thought. It begins with 160 pages of history. After sketching the arrival of the Reformation with Luther, Zwingli and then Calvin, he describes the political and social realities of Geneva in Calvins time. In the following 300 pages he
81

systematically and meticulously presents Calvins teaching, with a wealth of quotations from Calvin. He thus tests the social realities of the time against the touchstone, the Bible. Social justice is not measured in terms of the law that exists. He quotes Calvin: God will always require of us from heaven whatever may have been unjustly excused us on earth.4 As Calvin had never accepted (nor even entertained) the idea that economic and financial existence could have its own moral rules for Christians and be detached from Gods eternal loving and just plan for human beings, Calvinism in its original form could not fail to see the dangers and vices of capitalism from its very beginnings and oppose them with absolute rigour. The economy, considered as distinct from actual human beings and taking no account of their ultimate ends, cut off from a moral foundation, very quickly becomes subjected to cupidity and idolatry, and politics to ideology. Christian doctrine, which seeks to mirror the Word of God, has to be defended to the full extent of its demanding nature. Biler sees in it, from the start of the Reformation, the driving force leading believers to the very specific activity of organizing the social and economic life of their country through a succession of laws and decisions. One may always debate and challenge the appropriateness of the decisions taken but not the constant and necessary reference to Christ, revealing God as support to the poor, a God who offers himself as Saviour to all.
82

In 1970 Andr Biler in turn attempted this effort to develop a doctrinal construction, in a little work of great import: A Politics of Hope (Une politique de lesprance, 1970). It expressed the radiance of a Christian conviction in counterpoint to the 1968 social revolts. In this book we hear above all the proclamation of humanitys calling in society: We humans have been made to be dynamic, progressive, imaginative, venturesome and creative. Our task in the twentieth century everyones task is to develop and share together the riches of the world in such a way that all human beings may profit from them and achieve their full human stature.5 Biler writes that God recreates that identity, that calling, which an alienated humanity is constantly destroying. In Christ humanity rediscovers itself by rediscovering its God.6 Then comes a critical analysis of the ideological alienations and technical or political proposals that flow from them which tend to destroy the foundations laid by God. In a structured and reflective way Biler bears witness to Gods work intervening in all this, in the tensions of human practical experience, and giving mission to his church (his churches he also includes the Roman Catholic contributions in the spirit of Vatican II). As a churchman he looks for the signs of liberation that churches, despite their wellknown unworthy compromises, can and must offer in todays world with its conflicts and crises. The stakes affect the whole world, and

the politics of hope clearly accept that they are ominous and that in fact there is not very much hope. But the hope God reveals in Christ really must make it possible to say with William the Silent, One need not hope in order to make a start nor succeed in order to keep trying. One can see in this book the essential quality of Bilers ethical discourse: the desire to contain in a few lines and pages the widest possible range of social tendencies and what is at stake in society in order to facilitate a proper grasp of societies as a whole. Reality is complex. Part of the complexity consists of fundamental but contradictory needs that nevertheless have to be held together. It also consists of conflicts that have to be eased divergences that have to be reconciled. The complexity also results from cover-ups by powerful groups striving to maintain their power over the societies of this world. Believing Christians have a responsibility not to let themselves be fooled, confused or trapped in this.

thought and his activities have helped Christians to renew their faithfulness to Christ both in their personal and family life and in their social and political action.7 As Franois de Vargas put it, in absolute faithfulness to his Reformed convictions, he always sought how to act in order to transform the world we live in. And always in hope.8

Chief works by Andr Biler9

Le message social de lglise dans lconomie, Fdration des glises protestantes de la Suisse, Cligny (French language edition), St. Gall (German) 1950. La pense conomique et sociale de Calvin, Geneva, Georg, 1959 A second edition with a new introduction is forthcoming: Paris, ditions du Cerf, and Geneva, World Alliance of Reformed Churches and World Council of Churches. Translations: O Pensamento Econmico e Social de Calvino. So Paulo, Casa Editora Presbiteriana, 1990. Calvins Economic and Social Thought, Geneva, World Alliance of Reformed Churches and World Council of Churches, 2005. Lhumanisme social de Calvin, Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1961; preface by W. A. Vissert Hooft.

A life in the spirit

Andr Biler has taught us this freedom to be responsible despite the difficulties, this firmness in conviction and hope, this open confrontation with the different faces of destructive powers, and this pinpointing of the great social cleavages where it is essential to give signs of a liberating presence. What Andr Biler said of W. A. Vissert Hooft could equally be said of himself: His

Translations: Partial German translation in: Kirchenblatt fr die reformierte Schweiz, April 1961. The social humanism of Calvin,
83

Richmond (USA), John Knox Press, 1964. Japanese: Tokyo, Japan Shinkyo Shuppansha Publ. Co., 1964. LUmansimo sociale di Calvino, Turin, Claudiana, 1964. O Humanismo Social de Calvino, So Paulo, Edies Oikoumene, 1970. El Humanismo social de Calvino, Buenos Aires, Ed. Escaton, 1973. Liturgie et architecture. Le temple des chrtiens, Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1961.

Translation: Gottes Gebot und der Hunger der Welt. Calvin, Prophet des industriellen Zeitalters, Zurich, Evangelischer Verlag, 1966. Une politique de lesprance, Paris, Centurion; Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1970, preface by Dom Helder Camara. Translations: Eine Politik der Hoffnung, Lucerne and
Munich, RexVerlag, 1971. A Esperana e Politica, Coimbra, Livraria Almedina, 1972. Una Poltica de la esperanza, Bilbao, Ed. Paulinas, 1972. The Politics of Hope, Grand Rapids (USA), Eerdmans, 1974. Le dveloppement fou. Le cri dalarme des savants et lappel des glises, Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1973; preface by Philip Potter. German translation: Der Wahnwitz des Wachstums, Fribourg, Laetare Verlag, 1974. Separation without hope, Julio de Santa Ana (ed.), Geneva, World Council of Churches, 1978. Chrtiens et socialistes avant Marx, Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1982. La force cache des protestants. Chance ou menace pour la socit?, Le Mont-surLausanne, Ouverture; Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1995.

Translations : Architecture in worship, Edinburgh & London, Olivier and Boyd; Philadelphia, Westminster Press, 1965. Kirchbau und Gottesdienst, Neukirchen Vluyn, Neukirchener Verlag, 1965. Lhomme et la femme dans la morale calviniste. La doctrine rforme sur lamour, le mariage, le clibat, le divorce, ladultre et la prostitution, considre dans son cadre historique, Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1963. Translation: Man and Woman in Calvins ethic, in The Reformed and Presbyterian World, Geneva, December 1963. Calvin, prophte de lre industrielle. Fondement et mthode de lthique calvinienne de la socit. En appendice: Une suggestion aux glises chrtiennes, Geneva, Labor et Fides, 1964.

84

Notes
The authors are grateful to Franois de Vargas for his insights and detailed information. A selective list of his major books is given at the end of this article. 3 The arguments in the two foregoing paragraphs are developed in James Bratt & Edward Dommen (eds), Calvin Rediscovered, Westminster/John Knox Press, forthcoming. 4 Commentary on Deuteronomy 24, 14. 5 Page 40f of the French original. 6 Ibid., p.72. 7 The dedication of Chrtiens et socialistes avant Marx. 8 F. de Vargas, Andr Biler: parcours dun battant, La Vie protestante, Geneva, 31.03.2004, on the occasion of his 90th birthday. 9 This bibliography is mainly drawn from Henry Mottu, Bibliographie Andr Biler 19381979, in Hommage Andr Biler, Bulletin du Centre protestant dtudes, Geneva, 1979.
1 2

85

VOLUME 57(1), MARCH, 2007

Orthodox-Reformed international dialogue: convergences on the doctrine of the Church (1996-2005)

Since its inception in 1988, the Orthodox-Reformed dialogue has pursued convergence in the Apostolic faith on the basis of a joint study of the NiceneConstantinopolitan Creed. This has yielded the agreed statements on the doctrine of the Trinity (1992) and on the doctrine of Christ (1994). The doctrine of the Church was the focus of the work accomplished in the past ten years. What follows is the harvest of the work accomplished in ecclesiology.

The identity and unity of the Church (Summary of discussions) Fifth session Aberdeen, Scotland, June 9-15, 1996
The Joint Commission of the Dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the World Alliance of Reformed Churches held its fifth meeting at the Department of Divinity, Kings College, University of Aberdeen, from 9 to 15 June 1996. The main theme of the meeting, specified by the preparatory committee, was The identity and unity of the Church in the context of the respective article of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed and in the light of the patristic tradition of the ancient Church. There were three sub-divisions to the main theme: (1) The Mystery of Christ and the Mystery of the Church; (2) The Nature of the Church; and (3) The Unity of the Church (The Church and the Churches, and The Limits of the Church). All these subjects
86

were examined from both the Orthodox and Reformed points of view by means of presentations and discussions of relevant papers, with a view to understanding the ecclesiological positions of the two traditions and to establishing points of convergence. The discussions made clear that there are important differences in the understanding and interpretation of the nature of the Church in the two traditions, which derive from historical and theological developments and make difficult a common description of the nature and mission of the Church. Nevertheless, the necessity of reaching convergence on the question of the unity of the Church was recognised, because it became apparent in the discussions that this unity is a matter of faith on which no compromise is possible.

On this basis, the discussions examined existing divergences in the ecclesiologies of the two traditions, and then affirmed together the following points: Both traditions converge on the belief that the Church is the gift of the Triune God, a divine creation. Both affirm that the divine foundation of the Church is Jesus Christ, in accordance with Gods eternal, free and gracious will and desire to have communion with Gods people and to bring them into communion with God. They understand this koinonia as based upon and as being an expression of the koinonia which is in the Triune God. Both traditions affirm that in creation and in the history of salvation, God the Holy Trinity has acted graciously in establishing this koinonia, Gods holy Church. They acknowledge that in the fullness of time in the birth and human life of Gods eternal Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, God acted decisively in fulfilling in a consummating way the divine will for all creation. The advent of Christ marks the full manifestation and establishment of the Church. Given this divine action in Jesus Christ, both traditions recognise that the Church towers above any merely historical, human institution. The Orthodox express this by speaking of the Church as supreme Mystery and by stressing the sacramental character of the Church, which includes both the divine and the human dimensions. The Reformed express this in their distinction between the Church invisible and visible,

and hold together an ecclesiology from above and from below, reflecting the two natures of Christ. Both traditions agree on the basis of the teaching of the Bible and the Fathers that the Church could in no way be divided from Jesus Christ, and that her true being lies in the fact that she is his Body. That the Church is the Body of Christ is fundamental to both ecclesiologies, although this is understood differently. The Orthodox tend to understand this primarily in sacramental terms, but they also refer to the apostolic foundation and the uninterrupted sacred history of the Church. The Reformed emphasise the true preaching of the Gospel and the right celebration of the dominical sacraments, believing that where this occurs, there the Body of Christ is manifested. Both distinguish between the undivided Body of Christ and the believers who are incorporated into it through Baptism. The neglect or sinfulness of the believers does not threaten the reality and integrity of the Body of Christ, but puts the believers relationship to it at risk. This means that through their divisions Christians stand under the danger of being separated from the Body of Christ which is the Church. Given that incorporation of the believers into the Body of Christ takes place through Baptism both sides explored the possibility of using Baptism as a starting point for moving towards convergence in ecclesiology and eventually church unity. Nevertheless it became clear that Baptism is not understood or practised in the same way by
87

the two traditions. Therefore both traditions recognise that they need to explore further the meaning of Baptism and its relation to the Church as the Body

of Christ. It was suggested by both sides that the next session should be devoted to the crucial issue of Church and sacraments.

The Church as the body of Christ (Agreed working statement) Sixth session - Zakynthos, Greece, June 16-21, 1998
The Church is founded in the mystery of the one God, the Holy Trinity. In its primary and wider sense the Church manifests the communion and union of the uncreated God with the created world. In the biblical and patristic tradition the Church, rooted in the eternal counsel of God, was first manifested in the communion between God and the invisible world of the holy angels which was created first. The fall of Satan and his angels did not prevail against this first Church. The first manifestation of the Church was expanded to include the visible creation in and through humanity. This manifestation of the Church in the visible creation is primarily connected with the Garden of Eden in which Adam and Eve, the ancestors of all humanity, were originally placed. This visible manifestation of the mystery of the Church was disrupted by the fall of the first ancestors of humanity which led to our subjection to Satan and to sin leading to corruption and death. Such a disruption did not incur the total loss of the visible manifestation of the Church. This is the Church of the old covenant, revealed in the
88

history of Gods people Israel, which was finally fulfilled and given to the whole of humanity through Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son and Word of God.

The Body of Christ

The Body of Christ is the perfect human nature which the Son and Word of God, assumed from the Virgin Mary in order to fulfil the old covenant and restore humanitys true relation with God its Creator. In Christ the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily. As such the Body of Christ is the most tangible, visible and focused manifestation of the Church. In the first instance the Body of Christ is the single, or particular human nature which the Son and Word of God took from the Virgin Mary and united to himself personally or hypostatically. Christs humanity is the first-fruits of the restoration and renewal of the image of the Church in the visible creation and throughout the cosmos. In the second instance the Body of Christ includes the whole of human nature, inasmuch as Christ is the second and last Adam, who recapitulates in himself the first Adam and with him all humanity. The Son

of God assumed the whole of humanity when he became man, and he lived, died, rose again, ascended into glory and sits at the right hand of the Father for the salvation of the whole of humanity. Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it, but he remains the Lord of the Church. Christs place as Head of the Church indicates that neither can the Church be body without Christ as its head, nor can Christ now be head without the Church, since he has become incarnate, and irrevocably bound himself to his human nature. Being engrafted into the human nature of the incarnate Son, the Church realises the koinonia between the Triune God and humanity achieved in the incarnation, and as a community of love is active in showing Gods love to the world, in reaching out to the poor and the oppressed, the sick and the dispossessed. The Church reaches out to the whole creation, which is thus recreated by joining it. The Church is Gods new creation, because in it all things are recapitulated in Christ (Eph 1.10). The Body of Christ in its particularity was visibly manifested in history and was linked with particular human beings, Christs holy mother, the Theotokos, the holy Apostles and the apostolic community which gathered around them. This means that the Church founded upon Christ has a concrete, visible and historical form, the apostolic community. This community was

expanded at Pentecost and from Jerusalem it spread to other places. As a historic community it was given a historic mission, to preach the good news of the Gospel and receive into membership of the One Body of Christ, the Church, all those who received the good news of the Gospel. The most distinctive mark of this community was that Christ was their basis, their life, their head. They were united with him and were fed and sustained by him. Their union and communion with Christ was centred on the celebration of and participation in the sacrament of the Eucharist. It meant that as members of the Church they were members of his Body.

Membership of the Body of Christ

Those who receive the Gospel and freely believe in it, through Baptism are incorporated into the Church which is the Body of Christ. They are engrafted into Christ, put on Christ, are regenerated in Christ, so that in him they may be restored to their true nature and fulfilled in the Church. What Christ has done objectively for all in and through his humanity is now appropriated by those who believe and freely submit to him as their Lord and Saviour. Baptism is the great sacrament of entry into the Body of Christ, it is Christs gracious gift to all human beings; it is a gift to be freely accepted and appropriated by each human being.

89

Membership and incorporation into the body of Christ (Common statement) Seventh session - Pittsburgh, USA, April 3-7,2000
Following our discussion of the Body of Christ in Zakynthos the Mixed Commission at its 7 th Meeting proceeded to discuss Baptism, Chrismation and Apostolicity as an undergirding of our understanding of initiation into the Body of Christ, the Church. What follows is our preliminary statement comprising the viewpoints of the two traditions, their convergence, and the questions that arise for discussion, and need further clarification. Baptism cannot be divorced from Chrismation and Holy Communion which are equally necessary. This is rooted in the practice of the early Church, which is based on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and is clearly specified in the Holy Tradition of the early Church. Baptism is related to Chrismation as Pascha is related to Pentecost and the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and on the entire body of the Church. This indicates that for the Orthodox Christology is inseparable from Pneumatology inasmuch as the Mystery of Christ and the Church is both constituted and appropriated in and through the Spirit. The Reformed understand Baptism as a sacrament instituted by Christ. It is understood primarily as the means whereby what God has done for us in Christ is applied and sealed upon the candidate who is presented for Baptism by the believing community. Baptism is in the name of the Holy Trinity, and is by water and the Holy Spirit. Although Baptism is performed by an ordained minister, the Reformed Churches believe profoundly that the true baptizer is Christ. The person baptised is engrafted into the whole life of Christ, his life, his death, his resurrection (justification), and enabled to share in the new life offered by Christ through the Holy Spirit (sanctification). Through the grace of the Holy Spirit, and the nurture of the Church, the individual

Baptism
The Orthodox understand Baptism as a necessary part of the Christian initiation into the Mystery of Christ and His Body, the Church. In this sense it is itself called a mystery or sacrament which in no way can be divorced from Christ and the Church. Baptism is administered normally by ordained priests in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit by means of a triple immersion into water sanctified by the Holy Spirit. Baptism is closely related to the paschal event and draws its primary meaning from the death and resurrection of Christ. It is a personal participation of the recipient into the Gift of Christs death and resurrection whereby he receives forgiveness of sins and eternal life, regeneration. As a necessary part of Christian initiation into the Mystery of Christ and His Church,
90

believer grows in faith and holiness, living not in their own strength, but in the strength of Christ. It is inconceivable to the Reformed that a baptised person will not proceed to Holy Communion. In light of the above both Orthodox and Reformed share a common understanding that Baptism is a sacrament/mystery of divine grace freely given and freely received, which is not to be repeated. Both agree that Baptism is connected with the death and resurrection of Christ. Furthermore they understand that this grace confers forgiveness of sins and rebirth of water and the Holy Spirit, which is necessary for entry into the Kingdom of Heaven. Nevertheless, there is a difference of understanding between the traditions as to whether this grace in Baptism includes the seal of the Gift of the Spirit. The Orthodox believe that on the basis of Scripture and Tradition the seal of the Gift of the Spirit is granted through Chrismation. The Reformed include the fullness of the Spirit in the Baptismal grace. Both agree that they need to engage in fuller exploration of this issue, and especially the connection between Baptism and Eucharist.

Apostles and the whole Body of the Church. Chrismation is indeed connected with the transmission of the Gift of the Spirit, who seals the Gift of reconciliation granted in Baptism and constitutes the pledge for the Kingdom of heaven. In the Apostolic age the Gift of the Spirit was granted by the laying on of hands of the Apostles. With the extending of the Christian mission and the growing of the numbers of converts to the Gospel the Gift of the Spirit began to be communicated by Chrismation with blessed oil, chrism or myron. By virtue of their Chrismation Christians are members of the royal priesthood of the Church. Christians on receiving Baptism and Chrismation were immediately led to receive Holy Communion. This marked their complete incorporation into the Body of Christ, the Church. Orthodox continue to follow this tradition and object to the separations of Baptism, Chrismation and Eucharist practised by other Churches. The Reformed churches do not practise Chrismation. To them, every person engrafted into Christ by Baptism receives the Holy Spirit, because such an engrafting could not be effected except through the agency of the Holy Spirit. To the Reformed, Baptismal incorporation without receiving the Holy Spirit is no more intelligible than would be the real presence of Christ at Holy Communion without the agency of the Holy Spirit. Although the Reformed Churches baptise persons of any age, when the one baptised is an infant, usually though not invariably, and now less often there is a
91

Chrismation / confirmation
In Orthodox practice Chrismation is distinct but not separate from Baptism. This is clearly attested by the fact that the two are administered together. Chrismation draws its meaning from the event of the descent of the Holy Spirit upon our Lord at his Baptism and at Pentecost upon the holy

subsequent service of confirmation. To the Reformed Churches, it is important that this is understood as being a matter of church discipline rather than as being an additional sacrament. To the Reformed, an additional sacrament could imply that Baptism was somehow inadequate, or that the baptised person was somehow not fully and completely a member of Christ. Confirmation, in the Reformed tradition, where it is practised, is to do with allowing a person to make public profession of the faith into which they were baptised. It takes place normally, though not invariably, prior to receiving Holy Communion for the first time. Increasingly, in the Reformed Churches, small-baptised children are encouraged to come to Communion, as it is acknowledged that they are members of Christ and fully members of the Church. Such children may subsequently still be confirmed: this allows them an opportunity to make public profession of their faith and is an occasion for rejoicing. Orthodox and Reformed believe that they share the theology behind Chrismation, in that they understand that communion in the Holy Spirit is the basis of life in the Church. The Reformed believe that the Gift of the Spirit is implicit in the rite of Baptism. The Orthodox believe that the seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit is conferred by an act distinct from that of Baptism in the practice of the Apostles and their successors and ought to be preserved as such. This is an issue which requires further clarification.
92

Apostolicity
The Orthodox understand the apostolicity of the Church primarily in terms of the mission of Christ and the Apostles. This mission, which is rooted in God, was extended to the Church through the descent of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit guided the Apostles to establish an apostolic succession which was to continue the sacred mission which had been entrusted to them by the Lord for the salvation of the world. Orthodox holy orders cannot be understood apart from the continuing presence and act of the Spirit who summons the Church again and again in the celebration of the Mystery of Christ in the Divine Eucharist. It is in this context that all apostolic activities, preaching and teaching, as well as praying and healing, are to be understood. This is why Baptism and Chrismation, as well as all other mysteries are completed in relation to it. It is on the same basis that Orthodox see the unbroken continuity of the Apostolic succession which is maintained by the episcopate. To the Reformed, Christology is paramount, and what is central is a preservation of the continuing ministry of Christ, with no other human priesthood. No specific church order is understood as being of the esse of the Church, but the Reformed Church tends to give normative status to the historic presbyterate. Along with the priesthood of Christ, the Reformed recognise a church as being apostolic where the Gospel is preached and heard, and the sacraments are

celebrated without accretions from later tradition. They fear the intrusion of human tradition and the temptation to invest an independent priesthood with its own powers, which could then mediate between the people and Christ. The Reformed Churches uphold the sole priesthood of Christ into which by grace the Church is invited to share through the priesthood of all believers and upholds the transparency of any order for fear that the Lordship of Christ might be eclipsed. The Reformed Churches defer to the authority of the apostolic witness as embodied in the New Testament and the New Testaments interpretation of the Old. They express this as a successio fidei. The Orthodox find that the Reformed understanding of these points appears to them to be neglectful of the rich and fruitful content that apostolicity has in the Holy Tradition of the early church. The Orthodox see the unique priesthood of Christ as concretely acknowledged and preserved in the episcopate which stands as the type and place of Christ (eis typon kai topon Christou), or as his living ikon in the context of the local church by the grace of the Spirit (charisma veritatis) and as a guardian of the churchs unity and of the right proclamation of the Gospel. Furthermore, the Orthodox believe that the apostolic witness cannot be restricted

only to the scriptures but should include the whole Apostolic Tradition which has been historically transmitted to the Church through the Lord, the Holy Paraclete, who abides in her and leads her in her life. Besides, it is clear to the Orthodox that the Canon of Scripture cannot be seen as being independent of the Apostolic Order which is of the esse of the Church as they confess in the Creed. The Orthodox and the Reformed agree that the apostolic witness has primary authority in the Church and that the Church is founded upon it (Eph 3:2). Both acknowledge the uniqueness of Christ and the authority of the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament as essential elements in the understanding of the apostolicity of the Church. Each tradition believes that it maintains an unbroken Apostolic succession: the Orthodox through the episcopate; the Reformed through the proclamation of the Apostolic Gospel. Both the Orthodox and the Reformed are certain that their convergence on the fundamental doctrines of the Trinity and Christology and their common acceptance of the Scriptures constitute a sufficient basis for building up greater convergence in the future by the Lords grace and inspiration.

93

The holiness of the Church (Common statement) Sibiu, Romania, September 4-11, 2003
The Joint Reformed/Orthodox Commission for Theological Dialogue followed up its discussion on Ecclesiology on the basis of the Nicene Constantinopolitan Creed. Having considered the Apostolicity of the Church at its previous meeting in Pittsburgh, USA (2000) along with some other ecclesiological aspects, the Commission turned to the topic of the Holiness of the Church. The discussion was focused on the following subthemes: 1) the general theme of the Holiness of the Church, 2) Holiness as a divine Gift and human task and 3) the Saints. Each aspect was discussed on the basis of papers from the two sides, Orthodox and Reformed. The main points of these discussions are as follows: the believers who are baptised into it from generation to generation. This historic Body of Christ, the visible Church on earth, expresses on the historical level that which exists on the divine level in the incarnate person of Christ. Holiness is primarily an innate quality of the Church as the Body of Christ in the incarnational sense, which is also granted to the Church as the historic Body of Christ, whom he loved and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the Church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any other such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish (Eph 5, 25-27). This transmission of the Holiness of the humanity of Christ to the humanity of the Apostolic Community is realised through the Holy Spirit who was granted to the latter at Pentecost. The Holy Spirit is the distinctive mark of every local community of the historic Body of Christ, because as the other Paraclete that was sent after Christs ascension, the Holy Spirit helps the members of this Body to be transformed according to the image of Christ and, as a result, to achieve access to the Father, becoming fellow-citizens with the saints and members of the household of God. Holiness, then, is Trinitarian in character, because it is by the operation of the Holy Spirit that Christians are sanctified

1. The holiness of the Church

The Orthodox understand the Holiness of the Church on the basis of her being the Body of Christ in which God the Holy Trinity has made His Holiness available to the human nature. Holiness is a divine property, which is communicated to us through the Church, i.e., the Body of Christ, by the operation of the Holy Spirit. The Body of Christ is primarily the Humanity of Christ but it is also the Apostolic Community, which He gathered around Him and united to Himself and is extended in history as the historic Body of Christ that comprises all
94

in the Son as members of His Body and through the Son that they are led to the Father. The Reformed emphasised that the Holiness of the Church derives exclusively from the Holiness of the Triune God. In his Holiness, God in Christ through the Holy Spirit provides the covenant to His people. The Church receives the new covenant in Christ as a gift encouraging us to live a life in holiness. We thereby experience in faith the Holiness of the Church. Ultimately the Church is Holy because God sanctifies the Church. As a human community of believers, the Church is always in process. Seen from this perspective, the Church is not yet perfect. The Churchs Holiness gives the Church direction in her mission to the world. The Church fulfils her holy calling in praying, Hallowed be Your Name and then acting appropriately.

submitting to His will and keeping His word, in short, by following the path of spiritual perfection and sainthood. This path towards spiritual perfection and sainthood is possible only through union of the believers with Christ which is achieved through faith and prayer within the Church, that is to say, within the historic Body of Christ which is extended in the history of salvation through the operation of the Holy Spirit and through participation in the sacramental life of the Church. The sacramental life of the Church ensures that the Churchs being is Christocentric and this implies not only the work of the Holy Spirit in the era of the Church but also the indissoluble bond of Christs very Body (his humanity) with the Church in the history of the salvation of humanity until the end of the ages. The Reformed believe that the Holiness of the Church is related to the wholeness of Gods reign over the creation. There is no absolute separation between the holy and the secular in Gods Reign. The Holiness of the Church cannot be used as a justification of exclusive powers. The Holy Word [Scriptures] is seen as the sole source of divine authority; however, it cannot be understood in isolation from human and secular words. We are called to appreciate the sanctity of the whole of life. The violation of the sanctity of life is the violation of the very Holiness of God. In modern philosophy and sciences this dimension of sanctity is largely neglected. That the Church is holy gives us missiological imperatives. The holiness of the
95

2. Holiness as a divine gift and human task

For the Orthodox, since Holiness is given by God in the Body of Christ through the operation of the Holy Spirit, it is primarily a divine gift. This gift is freely given and is totally gratuitous and so in essence it can never be an achievement of human effort, because God does not owe anything to anyone and everything He gives is free. Nevertheless, human beings not only have to receive the free gift of God freely, but also have to work for it, or prove themselves worthy of it. In other words, human beings have to hallow the name of God by freely

Church is the yeast for the sanctity of life. It requires us to demand a new polity where the sanctity of life is secured in sovereign partnership with God.

enters their names in the Churchs liturgical calendar, i.e. includes them in her liturgical life and prayer and invokes their intercessions to Christ, the One and only Mediator between God and humanity. In conclusion, the Saints manifest that the Holiness of the Church as the historic Body of Christ is not an abstract idea, but a concrete reality that permeates the lives of her members whose existence is transformed by being conformed to that of Christ through the activity of the Holy Spirit that dwells in them. For the Reformed sainthood is the result of the Grace of the Triune God, acting out his work of salvation. The believers, those who are in Christ, are called saints for they have been set apart, as a Holy Nation (1 Pet 2, 9). It is also a Reformed conviction that there exists a communion between the living and the dead, in Christ. Consequently, the believers who are still alive in this world should remember and honour those who have departed. In the Reformed view, this honouring does not include invoking the saints and praying to them. The main reason for this position is Christological: Jesus alone is the mediator between God and sinful humanity, as Calvin said it: prayers to the saints and the invocation of the saints seem to remove Christ from his unique mediating role. The Reformed do not canonise saints. Recognition of special saints happens in a process of spontaneous popular consent. The departed saints are to be emulated, but

3. The Saints
For the Orthodox the Saints are those vibrant branches of the Body of Christ who bear fruit in the Spirit, manifest Christs holiness in a concrete way and become channels of communication of divine grace through the operation of the Holy Spirit. Their sainthood cannot be understood apart from the operation of the Spirit in the Church, just as the Church cannot be understood apart from the Lord Jesus Christ. In relation to the rest of the Christians who are called to be saints, the Saints are models to be imitated because they are truly approved models of Christ through the Spirit (cf. 1 Cor 11,1 and 4,16). Hence the Orthodox Church as the historic Body of Christ commemorates the Saints in history by venerating their holy icons and relics and by including them in her liturgical celebrations of the mystery of Christ. In the Orthodox tradition the Saints are the cloud of witnesses to the mystery of the Saviour as manifested in history through the Church in the Spirit. They include the Mother of God, the Angels, the Prophets, the Apostles, as well as Fathers, Martyrs, Ascetics and all those who were attested as having pleased to God (Hebr 11). In the Orthodox Church it is the body of the believers that first recognises and acclaims the Saints but finally it is the proper church authority that
96

the whole idea of canonisation is foreign to the Reformed mentality. This does not mean that the Reformed lack a hagiography. Saints are remembered for their exemplary Christian life. The Reformed view on the saints is Christocentric and Trinitarian.

respecting and upholding the sanctity of life, as well as to the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. c) Both, Orthodox and Reformed, recognise and honour Saints in the Church and see them as Christian models to be imitated by the believers, but the Orthodox relate the Saints to the Churchs liturgy and prayer and accord to them intercessory functions because they regard them as approved and vibrant members of the Body of Christ and as bearers of the Holy Spirit, whereas the Reformed do not pray to the Saints because they consider this practice as removing Christ from His unique mediating role in the Church. d) Finally, it is agreed that although in general both, Orthodox and Reformed, converge in their acceptance of the Holiness of the Church, the Orthodox see it as an absolute ontological reality, because they relate it to the Church as the Body of Christ which is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, whereas the Reformed relate it to the believers who are called to be but often fall short from being holy. The divergences in the understanding of the Holiness of the Church between the Reformed and the Orthodox are clearly related to their divergence in the perception of the reality of the Church, which, they agree, needs to be explored further.

Convergence and divergence

In light of the above Orthodox and Reformed statements, it is clear that there are both points of convergence and divergence in the understanding of The Holiness of the Church by the two traditions. These points are as follows: a) Both, Orthodox and Reformed agree that Holiness primarily belongs to the Triune God and that it is He who grants it to the Church. They diverge, however, in their understanding of how this Holiness is granted to the Church. For the Orthodox it is a free and gratuitous gift to the Church as the Body of Christ, whereas to the Reformed it is a condition of the divine covenant that is granted by God to the Church as His chosen people. b) Both, Orthodox and Reformed, agree that the Holiness of the Church is also a human task, but the Orthodox relate it to the work of the Holy Spirit and sacramental life in the Church, whereas the Reformed see it in more terms as

97

The catholicity and mission of the Church (A common statement) Ninth session - Beirut, Lebanon, October 13-19, 2005
According to the decision of the subcommittee of the Joint Commission which met in Geneva, John Knox Center, on January 7, 2005, the Plenary Session met at Dhour Choueir Evangelical Center in Metn, Mount Lebanon. Six papers were presented on the three particular topics relating to the main theme, three from each side. There was full discussion which revealed many points of general convergence in spite of differences of approach. Thus the members of the Joint Commission unanimously decided to outline in this Statement the points of convergence on the subject discussed and some of their implications without neglecting points of divergence. but to the historic community of the Church which He gathered around Him. The Church is the Body of Christ consisting of Him and those united with Him through Baptism, who are sent to the ends of the world to proclaim the Gospel of salvation and to summon the people into union and communion with Him. This means that the catholicity of the Church is the extension of the apostolic community as the concrete and historical manifestation of the mystery of Christ in all space and time and among all peoples. This extension is manifested in each of the Local Churches. Their union and communion with each other display this mystery in common, and none of them forfeits its integrity by exclusive claims and unilateral actions. For the Reformed the Church is also understood to be the Body of Christ which is grounded in his person and redemptive work, and includes all those united to Him by grace through faith, in Baptism. The possibility of union with Christ is open to all human beings and this is one of the ways of understanding the meaning of the catholicity of the Church as stated in the Nicene Creed. The Reformed Local Churches emerged in history as protests against exclusive claims and abusive actions of the Roman Church of the sixteenth century. It was for this reason that they emphasised that no single Local Church should claim

1. The Understanding of Catholicity

a) The general sense of Catholicity Both Orthodox and Reformed agree on the Christological basis of understanding the catholicity of the Church. Fundamental for both are the person of Christ and the Incarnation, together with the work of Christ and the Gospel of Salvation. Therefore, the Church, which is grounded in Christ, has a universal range, i.e. is catholic. For the Orthodox the Church, preexistent in Gods eternal will is finally revealed in the Incarnation, which is unfolded in the whole work of Christ. This does not refer only to His own life in history,
98

the exclusive right to be called the Catholic Church. But with the Orthodox the Reformed agree that each Local Church should be a true manifestation of the one Catholic Church. A further consequence of the particular historical context within which the Reformed Churches arose is that they felt compelled to specify marks for recognising true manifestations of the Catholic Church without denying the four notes of the Church mentioned in the Nicene Creed.1

creation through Christ. Thus the life of Christ is at a deeper level the life of love and communion which constitutes a mode of existence in the Trinity and is now communicated and reflected on the human and cosmic level. The Orthodox understand the above in Eucharistic terms, inasmuch as it is through the Eucharist that this inner life of God in Christ is manifested and communicated. The Liturgy echoes this understanding in the dialogue between celebrant and congregation: Let us love one another, that we may confess. Father, Son and Holy Spirit, Trinity one in being and inseparable. The presupposition to participation in the Eucharist is reconciliation with one another through forgiveness, restoration of the bonds of love, and confession of the faith. To participate in the body of Christ becomes participation through Christs humanity in the life of the Trinity and this bonding is the special or inner sense of catholicity. This experience becomes the point of renewal of commitment to Christ and His Church and also the starting point for bringing this commitment to bear upon the life of the world, what sometimes Orthodox call the Liturgy after the Liturgy. The Reformed also understand the above in Eucharistic terms, inasmuch as it is in the Eucharist that believers are united together in Christ and therefore with one another. Many Reformed liturgies speak of the many grains from which one bread is formed, and the many grapes from which one wine is pressed. In the same way, a
99

b) The special sense of Catholicity Orthodox and Reformed agree that according to the Gospel Christ came to save the whole world. He did this first of all by assuming it all to himself through the Incarnation. But he also did it by his whole ministry and life whereby he exposed sin and evil and eventually through his cross and resurrection abolished them in Himself. Thus Christ restored humanity and the whole of creation to its original and true basis, redeeming it in Himself. He made Himself the foundation of its redemption and fulfilment of its original purpose which was full union and communion with the One God in the Holy Trinity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. This recapitulation, to use a biblical term, includes all things in Him: human and cosmic, things in heaven and things on earth, visible and invisible, Israel and all Nations, past, present and future. This means that the life of God in Trinity has been poured out into humanity and the entire realm of

communion and union of believers with Christ and with each other, formed by the Word and the Spirit, are manifested in the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving in the Eucharist. Thus the love of Christ that binds this community flows out into the world in works of love and justice. Orthodox and Reformed agree that the catholicity of the Church means being in communion with Christ and through Him with God and with one another. It also implies being committed to mission summoning the whole world to be reconciled to God. The intensive aspect of catholicity finds its manifestation and fulfilment in the extensive, which is realised through the mission of the Church in the world.

the Church. Mission has two aspects: on the one hand, it seeks to deepen the faith of those already in the Local Church by increasing their knowledge of doctrine and liturgy and their maturity in their life in Christ; on the other hand, it seeks to bear witness to the Gospel faithfully in ever new historical situations and cultural contexts. The Churchs mission is guided by the vision that the whole world has been included in the saving work of Christ, that the decisive victory has been won, and therefore there are no limits to her commitment and sacrifices.

3. Implications
The broad convergence outlined above concerning the catholicity of the Church and her mission has several practical implications for our two communions. a) The failure to share the general and special sense of catholicity, to which both Orthodox and Reformed are committed, debilitates their mission to the world, which has not yet come to know salvation in Christ. b) The distinctive historical circumstances that have shaped the Orthodox and the Reformed communions can be understood and explained, but should not become obstacles to their drawing together in the unity of the Catholic Church, or serve as causes for becoming entrenched in their separate ecclesiastical forms. c) The affirmation of their mutual commitment to the catholicity of the

2. The Mission of the Church

When the Church affirms itself as the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, it affirms in no uncertain terms that mission is essential to her life and action as the living community witnessing to Christ and His saving work. Mission springs from the Triune God, inasmuch as the Father sends His Son and His Spirit, who are received as a permanent gift in the Holy Eucharist. Mission as obedience to Gods will regarding the ultimate goal [telos] of creation was fully accomplished by Jesus Christ and takes place in the Church by the power of the Holy Spirit, reaching out to all peoples in all times and in all places. As such, mission is the restoration of the image and the likeness of God to every human being in and through
100

Church and of its existence in each other leads them to transcend past conflicts and misunderstandings. They acknowledge that such occasions of past conflicts also entailed other factors (cultural, political, philosophical) which need to be accounted for. They strongly reject proselytism, which shows a lack of respect of the ecclesial identity of the other.

d) The Orthodox/Reformed agreement on catholicity both in its extensive and intensive senses, constitutes a challenge to modern notions of individualism, especially the idea that the individual per se is the absolute centre and source of value. They are, therefore, jointly opposed to the ideology of secularism, which excludes the Churchs understanding and practice from shaping our common life.

Note
1

The Reformed marks of the Church are the pure preaching of the Word of God, the proper administration of the Sacraments according to Christs own command, and the exercise of church discipline or the keys of the Kingdom. For the Orthodox the marks of the Church are the Holy Sacraments.
101

Subscription Rates-2007
1 year 2 years 3 years 1 year 2 years 3 years

Reformed World

USD

EURO CHF

GBP

16.00 13.00 20.00 9.00 29.00 24.00 37.00 17.00 42.00 35.00 54.00 24.00 13.00 11.00 17.00 8.00 24.00 20.00 31.00 14.00 36.00 30.00 46.00 20.00

Update

Combined subscription to Reformed World and Update

1 year 2 years 3 years 28.00 23.00 35.00 16.00 50.00 42.00 64.00 28.00 75.00 62.00 95.00 42.00

Update is the quarterly newsletter of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. Published in English and French, it keeps its readers informed of developments in the life of WARC and its churches. Please say which language you wish to receive. Payment may be made at www.warc.ch or by cheque to the WARC office or through our postal cheque account: 12-2890-9, Switzerland. Please mention Reformed World and/or Update as appropriate.

Payment may also be made through our authorized agents in the following countries: Japan: New Zealand: Committee of Ecumenical Relations 2-2 Yoshida, Kawagoe City 350-0807 Church Stores NZ Ltd., PO Box 11-1061 Ellerslie, Auckland 1131

Back issues, books and other publications are available from: Word Alliance of Reformed Churches, 150 route de Ferney, PO Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland. Tel 0041 22 791 62 40 Fax 0041 22 791 65 05 e-mail: warc@warc.ch web: www.warc.ch Prices include mailing.
Editor: Odair Pedroso Mateus Assistants: Sally Redondo and Frederick Schlagenhaft Layout and cover: emblema idias visuais - So Paulo, Brazil - marcos.gianelli@gmail.com
Published by the World Alliance of Reformed Churches 150 route de Ferney, PO Box 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland

102