Two major new articles by Bridgefolk Board members are now available in the “Theological Resources” section of the Bridgefolk website,
http://www.bridgefolk.net/theology/resources
Writing for the online journal Mennonite Life, Darrin Snyder Belousek, offers an appeal to overcome Christian division, arguing that ecumenical work is integral to Christian peacemaking. The article includes an extended reflection on the unexpected Eucharistic celebration at the 2006 Bridgefolk conference. The article is entitled “‘Has Christ been divided? Was Paul Crucified for You?’: The Evangelical Imperative of Ecumenical Peacemaking and the Bridgefolk (Mennonite-Catholic) Movement.” Here are excerpts:
The central theme of this essay is simple, yet radical: ecumenism, far from being a recent movement (praised by some, scorned by others), is rooted in the identity and mission of the church, ordained by Christ our Lord. If we are to be authentic and effective in our calling as the church that witnesses to Jesus, the one Lord and Savior of the nations, then we must pay attention to who is the “we” of the church when we say, “We are the body of Christ.” Evangelical mission, understood from the perspective of the gospel of Jesus Christ, requires ecclesial unity; and, because of the current division of the church, this calls us to ecumenical peacemaking, peacemaking within the body of Christ in service of the gospel. …
As I reflected later on what happened [at the Eucharist] I recalled the moment when, moved by the Spirit to the Lord’s table to receive communion, recognizing the Spirit “discerning the body” in and among and for us, I let go of my need for a rationally-discerned consensus to guide our action as a body. And I thought of how Peter explained to the church in Jerusalem why he had baptized Gentiles in the name of Jesus (Acts 11:17): “If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ [i.e., the gift of the Spirit], who was I that I could hinder God?” Indeed, that is how I felt at that moment: If this be what the Spirit is doing in and through and for us this day, who am I to hinder God? And so, with those in Jerusalem who praised the Lord at Peter’s report (Acts 11:18), I say again, “Thanks be to God!” …
To read the entire article, go to http://www.bethelks.edu/mennonitelife/2007fall/snyder_belousek.php.
Sharing his paper from last July’s Mennonite-Catholic Theological Conference at Notre Dame, Gerald Schlabach offers his fullest statement to date of the vision that has animated his own ecumenical work. Along the way he explains why he believes we may realistically hope and work for a day when it will be easier to be both Catholic and Mennonite. The article is entitled “”Mennonite and Catholic: A Journey of Healing.” Here are excerpts:
In a faith so incarnational as Christianity, the healing of memories in the broken body of Christ will remain merely gnostic if it is not enfleshed through the bridging of folk. When severed flesh comes together, scars are the bridge, while scar formation is a sign of returning health. Yet even in the healthiest of recovering bodies, scars remain. And scars remind. Even when memories heal, in other words, the body writes new memories onto its very flesh. Often such scars continue to itch. For some, this can be a calling, to incarnate the healing of memories, to be the scars that close gaping wounds in the body of Christ, and frankly to itch. Bridge people, I argue, ought neither to be nor be seen as distractions in an otherwise clean bilateral process of ecumenical dialogue. Nor should their “double belonging” be taken merely as the product of post-modern messiness. To be sure, something can be unsettling about both still-forming scars and folks who remain “on a journey.” But in the incarnational faith we call Christianity, no healing of memories will be complete — or really even begin — without someone there to enflesh the rejoining of separated parts. …
Postmodernity has loosened rigid identity configurations that long kept peoples, cultures, and churches distrustful, estranged, and unable to exchange gifts. Postmodernity has thus allowed for fresh, creative, once-unthinkable conversations. It is reshaping our identities whether we welcome its changes or not. For those who welcome its opportunities self-critically, it makes once unthinkable identity configurations possible. Ivan Kauffman frees us from obsessing over whether postmodernity is simply producing “cafeteria Christians” when he proposes that the postmodern age is actually misnamed. At least for Christians, our age is in fact the “ecumenical age,” says Kauffman. For the realization is dawning: Everyone needs the gifts that everyone else has to offer. Still, how to have the benefits of our postmodern (a.k.a. ecumenical) age while minimizing its dangers? My appeal is to church officials and in its essence it is really quite simple: Give bridge people better ways to be accountable; help them make “double belonging” into something more than their own improvised idiosyncrasies. Though no fully canonical model yet exists for double belonging to both the Roman Catholic Church and some other Christian communion, models and categories do already exist. Some are the precedents of centuries, in fact, while others have only recently emerged. …
To read the entire article, go to
http://www.bridgefolk.net/misc/catholic-and-mennonite-a-journey-of-healing.