Copyright holder: Tyndale University, 3377 Bayview Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M2M 3S4 Att.: Library Director, J. William Horsey Library Copyright: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Copyright license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License Citation: Wahba, Wafik. “Ecumenical Responsibility of Reformed Theology: The Case of Egypt,” In Toward the Future of Reformed Theology: Tasks, Topics, Traditions, edited by David Willis-Watkins, Michael Welker and Matthias Gockel, pages 87-102. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1999. “Reprinted by permission of the publisher” ***** Begin Content ****** TYNDALE UNIVERSITY 3377 Bayview Avenue Toronto, ON M2M 3S4 TEL: 416.226.6620 www.tyndale.ca Note: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Wahba, Wafik. “Ecumenical Responsibility of Reformed Theology: The Case of Egypt,” In Toward the Future of Reformed Theology: Tasks, Topics, Traditions, edited by David Willis-Watkins, Michael Welker and Matthias Gockel, pages 87-102. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 1999. “Reprinted by permission of the publisher” [ Citation Page ] CHAPTER 6 The Ecumenical Responsibility of Reformed Theology: The Case of Egypt Wafiq Wahba The fact of the Christian presence in the Middle East, from apostolic times to our own, is hardly known by the average Western Christian. Yet, some 12 million Christians live in the region today as heirs of a rich Christian tradi- tion. By remaining indigenous to the areas where Christianity began, they link the world church historically with its origins. Through the centuries, the Orthodox churches of the region kept the lamp of faith burning amid much turmoil and difficulty. As early as the middle of the sixteenth century, the Catholic presence in the Middle East started to form an important part in the life of the church. By the middle of the nine- teenth century, the Reformed tradition added another rich dimension to the life and witness of the church in the Middle East. The Emergence of Ecumenism in the Middle East The formation of the International Missionary Council early in this century is considered one of the early steps toward ecumenism. This step, which was fol- lowed up by the World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh in 1910, signifies the degree of awareness of the urgency of ecumenism among the churches originating from the Reformation. One of the most significant consequences of the International Missionary Council was the formation of the Missionary Council in the Middle East, which was created in the Missionary Conference held in Jerusalem in 1927. Membership in this council was confined to mission [ Page ] 87 personnel, although Protestant church leaders were invited to attend as ob- servers. In 1932 in Beirut, Lebanon, further development turned the Mission- ary Council into the Near East Christian Council, in which churches were in- vited to accept membership alongside the missionary societies.1 In a parallel manner, the Orthodox churches also contributed to the ecu- menical movement in the Middle East. In 1902 the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople addressed an encyclical letter to all the Orthodox churches, calling on them to search for paths of encounter with the other churches. In 1920 he invited “all the churches of Christ” to form “a commission of churches.” Such a call from one of the Orthodox churches in the Middle East, along with the Reformed churches’ efforts in the West, contributed to the for- mation of the World Council of Churches (WCC) in 1948. During the forties and the fifties of this century, and as an indirect result of the presence of Reformed thinking in the Middle East, many Orthodox churches witnessed dramatic renewal from the inside. The Orthodox Youth Movement, born during these years, produced a host of highly educated Chris- tians dedicated to renewing their churches, opening them to the contemporary world, and working for the unity of the churches. During the decades that fol- lowed, the Orthodox Youth Movement provided servants and initiatives for the ecumenical movement within the Orthodox Church.2 In 1962 the Near East Christian Council, which was formed mainly of Protestant churches, gave way to the Near East Council of Churches, into which the membership of the Syriac Orthodox Church was welcomed. The meetings of the heads of the Oriental Orthodox churches (non-Chalcedonian: Armenian, Coptic, and Syriac) in Addis Ababa in 1965 gave a new impulse to the ecumenical movement in the Middle East. The formation of the Middle East Council of Churches (MECC) m May 1974 in Cyprus marked an important milestone in the history of the ecumeni- cal movement in the Middle East. The MECC is organized along the lines of families of churches rather than on the basis of individual church member- ship. Three families of churches — Oriental Orthodox (non-Chalcedonians), Eastern Orthodox (Chalcedonians), and Protestant — were the founding members.3 At the MECC’s Fifth General Assembly meeting in Nicosia, Cyprus, in 1990, the Catholic churches of the Middle East became official members of the MECC. Today, virtually all Middle Eastern Christians are represented in 1. Father Jean Corbon, “Middle Eastern Churches and the Ecumenical Movement,” MECC Perspective, October 1986, pp. 46-49. 2. Father Jean Corbon, “Ecumenical Movement: An Historical Overview” (paper ad- dressed to the MECC Fifth General Assembly, 22-29 January 1990). 3. Corbon, “Middle Eastern Churches,” pp. 46-49. [ Page ] 88 the MECC. The geographic area covered by the council stretches from Iran to Morocco and from Turkey to the Gulf. According to its constitution, the MECC aims “to be a point of regional reference in the world-wide fellowship of Christian churches, to establish and maintain churches, to establish and maintain relations with the World Council of Churches, with national and regional councils and with other ecumenical organizations.”4 This already makes clear that most Middle Eastern churches are also active members in the World Council of Churches. The Reformed churches of the Middle East participated in the formation of the WCC and were members as early as its First General Assembly in Amsterdam in 1948. The Eastern Orthodox churches joined the WCC at its Third Assembly in New Delhi in 1961. Later on, the Oriental Orthodox churches joined the WCC as well. Real and enduring ecumenism, however, will only be achieved when the local churches, their people, pastors, and priests, come together to celebrate their unity in worshiping the one God who was manifested to us in the Lord Jesus Christ. The priorities of the MECC reflect those of the Middle Eastern churches. One of the main concerns of the council is to secure the continuity of Chris- tian presence in the land in which our Lord was born and lived, and which wit- nessed the formation of the early church. In light of the sociopolitical and reli- gious context of the Middle East, a great effort is needed to insure that Christians and their churches live in freedom in their lands so that they may actively participate in the development of their societies. In the midst of ideo- logical conflicts and suffering, spiritual renewal and education are sought to enable the churches to continue their witness to the resurrected Christ. An- other great concern is Christian unity. The current plurality of the Middle Eastern churches has not always been caused by doctrinal difference. The sociopolitical and cultural situation also played a great role in causing such di- visions. In a multireligious context where Christians are the minority, the unity of the Middle Eastern churches is essential to the churches’ life and wit- ness. The MECC aims to promote communion and ecumenical awareness among the churches to enable each church, through prayer, study, and action, to participate in the riches of the traditional and spiritual experiences of the others. Certain signs attest the effectiveness of the ecumenical movement on the Middle Eastern churches today. For instance, several theological dia- logues between member churches of the MECC have been conducted. The 4. Gabriel Habib (general secretary of the MECC), “The Consensus of the Middle East Council of Churches” (paper addressed to the MECC Third General Assembly, 28 No- vember-4 December 1980). [ Page ] 89 Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches met in Lebanon for the first time, after more than fifteen hundred years of separation, in March 1972 to discuss their christological differences. This meeting was followed by others (Greece, November 1978; Cairo, November 1987). Orthodox churches and Catholic churches also have met several times, the result being a willingness to accept each other’s sacraments. Protestants also have met with both Orthodox and Catholic churches to discuss their doctrinal differences. In February 1985 nineteen patriarchs and heads of Oriental and Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant churches in the Middle East met in an historical meeting in Cairo, Egypt. Meanwhile, both Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches have partici- pated in several bilateral theological dialogues with the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion, the Lutheran World Federation, and the Alliance of Reformed Churches. The most recent meeting between the Orien- tal Orthodox churches and the Alliance of Reformed Churches took place in the Anba Bishoy Monastery in Egypt in April 1993. The Ongoing Process of Reformation Reformed theology has played a very central role in the formation and devel- opment of the worldwide ecumenical movement, including in the Middle East. It continues to exert great ecumenical responsibility in shaping the contempo- rary life and ministry of the church in Egypt. The Reformed churches in the Middle East did not result from a refor- mation of the traditional apostolic Orthodox Churches of the region. The Coptic Orthodox Church of Egypt, for example, is proud of being unchanged through the centuries. “The Church (Coptic Orthodox) kept its worship, disci- pline, and tradition for two thousand years without any changes,”5 affirms Fa- ther Matthew the Poor, a contemporary theologian in the Coptic Orthodox Church. The presence of the Reformed tradition in Egypt, however, has indirectly contributed to the renewal of the Orthodox Church, its theology and way of worship. The centrality of the Scripture in the Orthodox Church’s worship and theological discussions today is a case in point. Although Reformed theology and tradition was originally formed and developed in the West, and transmitted to some Middle Eastern countries by American missionaries, its core characteristics and transforming power still 5. Father Matthew the Poor, The Christian Tradition (in Arabic) (Barriyat Shihit: Anba Makar Monastery Press, 1978), p. 2. [ Page ] 90 represent a meaningful and effective tool for the renewal of the church in the Middle East. Obviously, the context of the original Reformers was quite differ- ent from ours, as the East is different from the West, yet the need for reforma- tion continues in every context. The voices of the Reformers in the sixteenth century still echo in many parts of the contemporary world, East and West. For Calvin, the church under the Word and Spirit only existed in the pro- cess of reformation — hence the slogan ecclesia reformata sed semper reformanda (the church reformed but always to be reformed). The driving force behind this continuous need for reformation is twofold. On the one hand, the Reformed tradition emphasizes that the church is part of the fallen world, whose members are confessed sinners. It often fails to fulfill its calling. Therefore, there is continuous need for repentance, and for reformation. The center of Reformed theology is the gospel of justification that sets people free from sin, gives new life, and leads to sanctification and righteousness that is not based on people’s merit. Since the proclamation of this gospel is the pri- mary task of the church, there must be a constant renewal for the church to be effective in communicating the good news of God’s salvation to the world. On the other hand, the Reformed tradition seriously considers the con- tinual historical changes from one generation to the next and emphasizes the need for rewriting the confessions of faith in the light of historical, social, and political developments. This may be seen historically in the First and Second Helvetic Confessions. When Heinrich Bullinger, Zwingli’s successor in Zurich, felt there was a need to stress not only the importance of doctrine and ministry but faithfulness in the life and witness of the church, he wrote the Second Helvetic Confession in 1566, just a few years after the First Helvetic Confession was written. In our contemporary era, when the Confessing Church in the German Third Reich felt responsible to speak out against the Nazi ideology, the powerful Barmen Declaration of 1934 was formulated. The same can be said about the Presbyterian Confession of 1967 in the United States, where socio-ethical concerns were taken seriously as part of the church’s confession of faith. In a predominantly Islamic culture, the Christian communities in Egypt and other parts of the Middle East need to express clearly their faith in the trinitarian God. We need to affirm that our understanding of the triune God is based primarily on the presupposition that God is one. However, the way in which God acted in the person of Jesus Christ led the early Christians to be- lieve that God is triune. The early Christians’ understanding of the Trinity was not something they invented. The early church councils never dealt with for- mulas that simply affirmed God as a Trinity; they rather tried to understand and explain who Jesus Christ is, what his relationship to God is, and how they should relate to him. By the same token, they tried to understand the relation- [ Page ] 91 ship between God and God’s Spirit, and the relationship between God’s Spirit and the person Jesus the Christ. They used certain terms in their context, such as “Son,” “Father,” “eternal being,” “person,” “homoousious,” etc., in order to explain such relationships. By the same token we need to use terms relevant to our contemporary context in order to communicate our faith in the triune God in meaningful language. The fact must remain dear, however, that the concept of the Trinity in Christianity does not mean that Christians worship three Gods. The Trinity expresses the basic Christian understanding of how the one God, the source of all existence, is acting through Jesus Christ. God’s Wisdom, God’s Logos, or God’s Word brings the alienated creation to experience God’s love where God’s Spirit, who creates and sustains life, is still working on giving life to the world. Scripture and Tradition In a country like Egypt, history plays a very powerful role in shaping people’s perspectives of who they are and of the world around them. The Christian community carries a deep sense of continuity that goes back, not only to the early Christian era but even to Pharaonic Egypt. The Coptic Orthodox Church is very proud of such a long tradition. The contemporary Coptic Orthodox perspective considers Christian tradition to be the norm of the church’s life, faith, and worship. It is a living heritage, handed down from Christ and his apostles to the church. It includes the church’s sacraments, liturgy, and Scrip- ture. As non-Chalcedonian, the Coptic Orthodox Church considers the first three ecumenical councils, especially Nicaea, to be the norm of all doctrinal statements and theology. In its handing on and proclamation of Christian tra- dition, Orthodoxy considers the voice of the church to be infallible. This quali- ty, however, is not localized in a bishop or bishops, but is held to inhere in the life of the church as a whole.6 Since the life and theology of the Coptic Orthodox Church revolve around Christian tradition, one of the basic ecumenical responsibilities of contemporary Reformed theology in our context is to clarify and better under- stand what we mean by Christian tradition. The Reformers’ affirmation of sola Scriptura did not imply a rejection of all church traditions. To the contrary, they affirmed the value and the validity of the ecumenical councils, the creeds of the early church, and patristic teaching and writings. For the Reformers, agreement with the early church was proof of the true catholicity and legiti- macy of the Reformation. The sola Scriptura principle implies an adherence to 6. Matthew the Poor, pp. 3-13. [ Page ] 92 the original tradition, unmixed with foreign elements. It meant the primacy of Scripture as a theological norm over all traditions, rather than the total rejec- tion of tradition. Creeds, church councils, and patristic teachings were to be received insofar as they were consistent with Scripture. Since tradition is al- ways in danger of becoming legalistic and falsifying the transmission of the gospel, the correct use of tradition must be guided according to the source and standard of the Christian tradition, viz., Scripture. From that perspective, the gospel message not only liberates us from the false use of tradition, but also liberates us to use it rightly. The Reformers emphasized that the church had to be always reformed and reforming according to the Word of God. What they meant by the Word of God was primarily Christ, to whom Scripture witnessed. Reformed theology has al- ways emphasized the deep interrelation among the Word of God incarnated in Jesus Christ, Scripture as the written Word that witnesses to Christ, and the Word of God heard in preaching and communicated with in the Lord’s Supper. Furthermore, Reformed theology presupposes the clarity of Scripture and strongly emphasizes that Scripture is its own best interpreter — Scriptura sua interpretans. This principle, however, does not minimize the need to study and interpret Scripture in its historical, linguistic, and cultural context. The Reformed theologians thus drew heavily on the history of interpretation in the fathers of the early church. They turned to the ecumenical councils for guiding principles, since the councils’ interpretation of Scripture gave the church clear and meaningful interpretations of the basic Christian doctrines. By the same token, the contemporary responsibility of Reformed theol- ogy is to interpret the Word of God in its historical and cultural context, using all the available sources in the Christian tradition — i.e., ecumenical councils, patristic teachings, archaeological findings, etc. At the same time, the Word of God must be interpreted in light of and in relation to our contemporary con- text. The hermeneutical task here is to let the Word of God speak to us today, addressing our social, economic, and political concerns. Obviously, the preunderstanding of the text, which is usually influenced by one’s own tradi- tion, cannot be ignored. However, honesty and openness to new and fresh un- derstandings of the Scripture under the guidance of the Holy Spirit will give us new insights from the Word of God. Reformed theology is particularly concerned with the right interpreta- tion and the right teaching of Scripture — in other words, with the orthodoxy of teaching and interpretation. In Egypt, where reliance on the past history and civilization is very strong, Reformed theology’s responsibility is to transform the past memories and history into a generating power that can motivate new possibilities for a better future. These possibilities must be relevant to the ac- tual situation, and furthermore, they must be able to transform it. [ Page ] 93 The message of the Reformers stressed continuity with the past — not, of course, with every element of the past, but with those elements of the past that gave expression to the gospel that had brought the church into being. The Reformers felt they were working within and on behalf of the church of Jesus Christ. Their main concern was to call the church back to the gospel that had brought it into being and which it was called to proclaim. In so doing, the Re- formers did not neglect other rich sources in the Christian tradition. They took the early church fathers seriously, because the early church fathers had taken Scripture seriously. Calvin’s Institutes is full of references to the early church fathers. The sequence of his chapters is patterned after the Apostles’ Creed. The Reformers’ call “to the sources” referred to patristic literature and liturgies. Their fundamental concern was to maintain continuity with all that had been creative in the church’s life and witness, and to repudiate only what had been falsely imported into that witness. Ministry, Baptism, and the Eucharist Jurgen Moltmann rightly observed that Reformed theology tends to focus “the history of Christ on the justification of the sinners.” The church is essentially the community of those who are justified by faith through grace. On the other hand, the Orthodox Church has stressed “the history of the Spirit, his continu- ing presence since Pentecost.”7 We need to think of the church as a community of those who have been justified by faith through grace and, at the same time, as those guided by the power of the Holy Spirit. Reformed theology needs to emphasize the centrality of the cross of Christ which justified the unrighteous, as well as the breath of the Holy Spirit and the abundance of the Spirit’s gifts. The Reformed churches in Egypt and the Middle East need to experience anew the deep sense of spirituality that is characteristic to the Orthodox tradi- tion. We need to see ourselves as part of the church of Christ that is based on the Word of God and also guided by the power of the Spirit. This dialectical in- teraction between the Word and the Spirit is the basis of the life and witness of the church. The church continues to live and witness in the Middle East through much turmoil, suffering, and persecution, and has done so from the time of the apostles until now. The clearest expression of the ethos and life of the Orthodox Church is found in its liturgy, in which those in heaven and on earth are held to be united in their common acts of worship. In such a context, Reformed theology’s re- 7. Jurgen Moltmann, The Church in the Power of the Spirit (New York: Harper & Row, 1977), pp. 35-37. [ Page ] 94 sponsibility is to remind the church that the focus and goal of worship is to glorify God, who through Christ has called the church to serve and witness in the world. Worship is not service to God or to the self. When Christians gather together for worship, they are nourished in order to grow and witness to the world. Reformed theology emphasizes the role that each and every one has in ministry. Since each one has received a certain gift or gifts, the purpose is to “use it in service to one another, like good stewards dispensing the grace of God in its varied forms” (1 Pet. 4:10 NEB). Being baptized is the beginning of a process of ministry. The Christian enters into covenant life, is made a sharer in the full benefits of Christ, and ac- cordingly is called to a life of responsible ministry. The Reformers affirmed that ministry in the church is everybody’s responsibility, but “the priesthood of all believers” does not negate the fact that certain people are trusted with a special ministry of Word and sacrament. The Reformed tradition regards those chosen for the ministry of Word and sacrament to be in the apostolic succes- sion. According to Calvin, to be a minister of the Word is the “highest calling.” In our Egyptian context, there is a common agreement between the churches that all the people of God are called to ministry. However, there is a great difference in the churches’ understanding of how the life of the church is to be ordered. In particular, there are differences concerning the place and forms of the ordained ministry. In order to achieve mutual recognition be- tween the Orthodox, the Catholic, and the Reformed churches in Egypt, we must continue to work from the perspective of the calling of the whole people of God. At the same time, and in light of Reformed theology’s understanding of the special ministry of Word and sacrament, we must enable Orthodox and Catholic churches, which are concerned to preserve the apostolic succession, to recognize the apostolic content of the ministry of Word and sacrament that ex- ists in the Reformed church. Starting from such understanding of ministry, we can come to better un- derstand the sacraments of baptism and Eucharist as essential parts of the life of the church. In the New Testament, the act of baptism is entrusted by the risen Christ to his disciples as a sign of acceptance in the fellowship of the church. Buried with Christ in baptism, the baptized person has died to sin, partakes of the life and resurrection of the Lord (cf. Rom. 6:3-11), and engages in the ongoing ministry of the church. Since acceptance into the life and min- istry of the church depends on God’s grace that redeems the unrighteous, the baptizer and the baptized have no role except communicating and accepting God’s grace through faith. Therefore, there is no legitimate theological reason for the Coptic Orthodox Church not to accept the baptism of other churches. Reformed theology’s ecumenical responsibility is to remind the Coptic Ortho- dox Church that baptism is an unrepeatable act. It is God through Christ who [ Page ] 95 has called us to be what we are. We need to accept God’s gift of faith through grace and be faithful to the ministry that God has called us to fulfill. The ecu- menical consensus expressed in Faith and Order Paper number 111, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (BEM), serves as a guiding principle for us here: As the churches come to fuller mutual understanding and acceptance of one another and enter into closer relationships in witness and service, they will want to refrain from any practice which might call into question the sacramental integrity of other churches or might diminish the unrepeata- bility of the sacrament of baptism.8 In this sacramental perspective, Reformed theology also affirms that the church celebrates the real presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper. In our Egyp- tian context, the common misunderstanding is that the Orthodox and the Catholic hold to the real presence, while the Reformed hold to a spiritual pres- ence of Christ in the Eucharist. It is true that the Reformed emphasize the spir- itual presence of Christ. But that means a deep and total participation with Christ. As Calvin put it, “We are made his members and are made one sub- stance with him.”9 Calvin affirmed that we participate not only in Christ’s ben- efits but also in Christ himself: I say, therefore, that in the mystery of the Supper, Christ is truly shown to us through the symbols of bread and wine, his very body and blood, in which he has fulfilled all obedience to obtain righteousness for us. Why? First, that we may grow into one body with him; secondly, having been made partakers of his substance, that we may also feel his power in partak- ing of all his benefits.10 Calvin taught that Christ is really and substantially present in the Eucharist by the power of the Spirit, which should not be misinterpreted to say that the Re- formed believe only in a “spiritual presence.” Calvin, however, did oppose the concept of the bodily ubiquity of Christ: I indeed admit that the breaking of the bread is a symbol; it is not the thing itself. But, having admitted this, we shall nevertheless duly infer that by the showing of the symbol the thing itself is shown.... Therefore, if the Lord truly represents the participation in his body through the breaking of the 8. Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, Faith and Order Paper no. 111 (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1982), p. 5. 9. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. F. L. Battles and J. T. McNeill (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960), 3.2.24. 10. Calvin, Institutes 4.17.11. [ Page ] 96 bread, there ought not to be the least doubt that he truly represents and shows his body.11 Calvin thus taught the apostolic and orthodox concept that the eternal Word of God was and is united to the flesh, but not confined within its bounds. As David Willis put it, “The eternal Word is hypostatically united to the flesh but is (also beyond the flesh) etiam extra carnem."12 Reformed theology needs to affirm anew the purpose of the Lord’s Sup- per: to grow into one body with Christ, and to experience his transforming power in order to live a responsible life that witnesses to his salvific act until he comes. In the words of the BEM document: “Under the signs of bread and wine, the deepest reality is the total being of Christ who comes to us in order to feed us and transform our entire being.”13 The Transformation of Society The Reformation in the sixteenth century was an integral part of a monumental upheaval in the social, cultural, and religious life of western Europe. Motivated by a new experience and understanding of the gospel, the Reformers called for the renewal of the church and the salvation of the individual. This spiritual re- newal was also accompanied by a significant transformation of society. Re- formed theology emphasized relating the Word of God to the social and political context within which it is proclaimed. It takes responsibility for prophetic wit- ness to transform society. This Reformed emphasis on prophetic witness must be the church’s norm for social transformation in the current Egyptian society. The church should take a clear stand against the current socioeconomic injustices where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. There is an urgent need for a democratic and pluralistic system that is not based on favoring one religious group over another. The political system must protect people’s freedom, dignity, and basic human rights. In the current Egyptian situation where Christian communities have very limited roles in in- fluencing sociopolitical life, persuasion is their most effective means to cause real change. Nonetheless, the Christian community should be aware that it ex- presses God’s creative power, which is able to transform persuasively. In our contemporary Egyptian context, the Christian community needs to 11. Calvin, Institutes 4.17.10. 12. David Willis, “A Reformed Doctrine of the Eucharist and Ministry and Its Impli- cations for Roman Catholic Dialogues,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 21, no. 2 (spring 1984): 302. 13. Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, p. 12. [ Page ] 97 be reminded that the true church of the poor and the voiceless is able, by the power of the Spirit, to transform the world around it. At the same time, the Chris- tian community needs to be reminded that the incarnated God, who took all hu- man suffering and sin on God’s self on the cross, is Immanuel, God with us, who suffers our suffering today and is with us in the time of turmoil and persecution. As in the past, so in the present, Reformed theology has an ecumenical contribution to make. In the continuous process of change and renewal, Re- formed theology proclaims the Word of God as the continuing force for the life and witness of the church. It will maintain the catholicity of the Christian faith and the orthodoxy of its beliefs, while never ceasing to play its prophetic role in transforming society into the kingdom of God. Jesus Christ Is Our Hope When the Orthodox and Reformed churches think together about the one au- thentic Christian tradition, they can come to discover the element of move- ment in what is permanent and what continues to have essential validity in the reforms — Jesus Christ. In the New Testament there is no conceptually and in- tellectually developed Christology. For the disciples and the writers of the Gos- pels, there could not be the least doubt concerning the true humanity of Jesus. At the same time, the disciples were sure that Jesus Christ was not just an ordi- nary human being. They knew Jesus was also divine. They had known Christ “according to the flesh.” They were eyewitnesses of his teaching and life, of his condemnation and his death on the cross. Their faith in the resurrection did not contradict these experiences. To the contrary, they found that God, in res- urrecting Jesus Christ from death, was testifying that the one crucified was also the one sent from God. This faith did not result exclusively from experiencing the risen Christ. The earthly Jesus had an authority uniquely different from everything they had experienced before. The christological two-natures doctrine obviously went through different phases before it was completely developed in the fifth century. Two important factors contributed to this later christological concept. On the one hand, there was the continuous need for the church to express its faith in relation to the con- text in which it lived. During the second century, for example, the apologists de- veloped their understanding of the concept of the Logos developed in Greek philosophy. They thought of the Logos as a universal mind and cosmic princi- ple.14 By the third century, Logos Christology had established itself everywhere. 14. Bernhard Lohse, A Short History of Christian Doctrine (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), p. 76. [ Page ] 98 On the other hand, the church felt obliged to differentiate the orthodox faith against other false teachings (heresies). In the fourth century Athanasius of Alexandria stood against the arguments of Arius, and the Nicene Creed was formulated as an expression of the church’s belief in Jesus Christ, his death and resurrection. It is beyond the scope of this article to detail the development of christological thinking during the early centuries of Christianity. But we must be concerned that the church’s attempt to express its faith in Christ had, by the fifth century, become a heated christological controversy that resulted in the first major division in the church. The council which met in 451 at Chalcedon is known as the Fourth Ecumenical Council. It was decisively influenced by the Christology of the West, emphasizing in its dogmatic decision that the person of God-man who became flesh is identical with the person of the divine Logos. In this one person of the incarnate Logos, the divine and human natures are coordinated but not intermingled.15 Prior to the Fourth Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon, a long christological debate between Alexandria and Constantinople had taken place. The council’s task, under the influence of the emperor, was to formulate a creed that would be acceptable to all churches in order to maintain peace in the Byzantine Empire. In fact, the council tried to do so by adopting decisive elements from both the Alexandrian and the Antiochene christological con- ceptions, while carefully avoiding their one-sided features. The creed contains neither the Cyrillic insistence upon “hypostatic union” nor the Antiochene opinion that the Logos dwelt in the man Jesus. Emphasis was rather laid both upon the unity of the person and the individuality of the natures.16 Unfortunately, the Chalcedonian creed did not put an end to christological debate, but ended in ecclesial division. The adherents of Alexan- drian Christology felt that the Chalcedonian creed did not take sufficient ac- count of their concern. They thought the unity of the natures in the person of Christ should be more strongly emphasized. This rejection of Chalcedon by the Alexandrian church resulted in a controversy which lasted until this centu- ry. It is well known that the Alexandrian rejection of Chalcedon was due not only to the christological controversy but also to a political power struggle. In their struggle to maintain peace and control over the Byzantine Empire, the Eastern emperors suppressed the Egyptians and the Syrians. Accordingly, the christological debate turned out to be a political and national conflict. In the Balamand Monastery, Lebanon, in March 1972, after 1,521 years 15. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1978), pp. 338-43. 16. Kelly, pp. 338-43. [ Page ] 99 of separation, representatives of the Oriental Orthodox Church (non- Chalcedonian: Armenian, Coptic, and Syriac) met for the first time with the Eastern (Chalcedonian) Orthodox Church’s representatives to discuss their christological differences. This first Middle East Consultation on Orthodox Unity expressed its ecumenical consensus in a declaration to the heads of the Orthodox churches: We, the undersigned, have met as official representatives delegated by our Patriarchates and religious heads to express the desire of our churches — both clergy and laity — to achieve the ecumenical Christian unity for which we have long prayed ever since the division between us occurred.... After examining the factors which separate us, we are convinced that in addition to the factors of theology and wording, other non-theological fac- tors (historical, cultural, social and political) have had their effect. But fif- teen centuries after the schism, after dialogue, study and rapprochement, and after many non-theological elements of division have vanished, we find ourselves this day in a new place with a new understanding, with purer spirits, and a stronger desire to break down the impediments to Christian unity. We have been enabled thereby in the spirit of love and peace to review the doctrinal issues which divided us. After study and discussion, we as official representatives of our churches agreed that the opinions expressed by the theologians gathered at Aarhus, Bristol, Geneva and Addis Ababa affirm the conclusions reached by the theo- logians that the traditional Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian churches have one faith in the Lord Jesus.... We all believe the Lord Saviour and King of us all, Jesus the Christ, is fully God in His divinity and He is fully man in His humanity; in Him di- vinity and humanity were truly and fully united without mixing or merger or change or transformation or separation or division; He, the eternal, ev- erlasting, invisible God, became visible in the body, taking on the form of a slave, for He is complete both in His divinity and in His humanity. In His Holy Person were gathered all the attributes of divinity and all the attri- butes of humanity together in a unity which cannot be expressed, a unity which cannot be differentiated.17 The second Middle East Consultation on Orthodox Unity, under the auspices of the MECC, took place at the Pendelli Monastery in Athens, Greece, in November 1978. This second consultation issued an even stronger call for unity: 17. “Middle Eastern Churches’ Life and Witness,” MECC Perspective, October 1986, pp. 34-35. [ Page ] 100 we endorse the statement and recommendations of the meeting held by our churches at the Monastery of Balamand in Lebanon in 1972. At that historic meeting the conviction was expressed by the delegates that there are no dogmatic differences to hinder the unity of our churches. Therefore, it is our opinion that our understanding of our faith is identical, and thus it is high time for the unofficial negotiations to be given official status, and that a common declaration of the faith become possible and effective in our Holy Churches in the Middle East and in the two Orthodox families in the world at large.18 The Oriental and Eastern Orthodox Churches’ agreement on Christol- ogy is considered to be a great step toward mutual understanding and recogni- tion between churches in the Middle East. The basic ecumenical responsibility of Reformed theology in this emerging ecumenical context is to emphasize anew the centrality of our faith in Jesus Christ’s life, death, and resurrection. The church redeemed by the blood of Christ that has experienced the suffering of his death on the cross needs to be recalled to its task of proclaiming the good news to the world. The core message of the church is “Christ is risen!” This is the event that does not pass away, the only one in history that endures and gives life to the church. Jesus' life, death, and resurrection formed an integral whole for the early church. The Christ-event marked the beginning of a new “aeon,” where God’s reconciling act in Christ enables people to begin a process of total transforma- tion toward a better life.19 Such a radical break with the past and entrance into the new order of God’s reign is what they termed “justification by faith.” For Calvin, human liberation is first and foremost redemption from the bondage of self-worship. Through grace we are restored to our true nature as people made in the image of God, and therefore reconciled to God and to one an- other. “We now begin,” Calvin wrote, “to be formed anew by the Spirit after the image of God, in order that our entire renovation and that of the whole world may afterwards follow in due time.”20 Recovering and reaffirming this new beginning through justification by faith will enable the church to be a community of transformation in our con- temporary world. As Moltmann put it, “The tradition to which the church ap- peals, and which it proclaims whenever it calls itself Christ’s church and speaks in Christ’s name, is the tradition of the messianic liberation and eschatological 18. “Middle Eastern Churches’ Life and Witness,” p. 36. 19. James E. Will, A Chnstology of Peace (Louisville: Westmmster/John Knox, 1989), pp. 61-79. 20. Quoted by Richard Lucien Joseph, The Spirituality of John Calvin (Atlanta: John Knox, 1974), p. 175. [ Page ] 101 renewal of the world.”21 Though it is important for the church to establish its faith in Jesus the Christ on the basis of the early Christian tradition, on the ec- umenical councils and the teaching of the church fathers, the church needs to rediscover the presence of Christ in it today. It needs to experience anew Christ’s power that can transform the church and the world around it. The church also needs to look for the future of God’s reign. The church does not only live from the past. Remembrance of Christ’s act of salvation, his self-giving and his resurrection, not only gives the church the power to live its present mission and liberating task, but also enables it to look to the future with confidence and hope. It is only when the church experiences Jesus Christ as the living hope that the church can become a sign of hope for the people of the region. 21. Moltmann, p. 3. [ Page ] 102 ***** This is the end of the e-text. This e-text was brought to you by Tyndale University, J. William Horsey Library - Tyndale Digital Collections *****