The Spirit is poured out into our hearts as a mysterious power that moves us toward unity. He makes anyone and everyone our neighbor. Saint Paul says: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called,. . . eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit” (Eph 4:3–4).
It is the Spirit, God’s own koinonia, who moves us to realize something of the divine koinonia here on earth.
Father Congar emphasizes that two words are important in Luke’s description of the first day of Pentecost. The first is epi to auto: together, in the same place (Acts 2:1). The second is homothymadon: unanimously, united (1:14).5 The Holy Spirit could have descended on the apostles individually and in different places, wherever they happened to be. But no, he was poured out over them when they were together, in the same place, in unanimity. Each apostle received the Holy Spirit because he was united with the others.
The Holy Spirit, the Spirit of unity, builds on a unity that has already begun, though even that is a fruit of his action. If one is not willing to be reconciled and united, he cannot have a share in the Holy Spirit. Every form of schism stands in direct opposition to the Holy Spirit.
As soon as one notices a lack of unity, at home, at work, or in the congregation at church, one ought to conclude: The Holy Spirit is missing in this place. We must begin to open ourselves to him here.
2
The Spirit of Unity and Ecumenism
The Second Vatican Council states: “The Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd.”1 And Pope John Paul II writes in his encyclical that the Holy Spirit is the ultimate source of unity, and thus he opens the paths to Christian unity.2
Pope John Paul II also said at different times that now more than ever, it is necessary for the Church to breathe again with both lungs, the East and the West.
The ecumenical movement is first of all a work of the Holy Spirit. Since he is koinonia, it is he and only he who can restore the unity of the churches. To create unity and fellowship is his “charism”.
He does it without doing violence to anyone. He lives in the heart of man, in his center, where he is free. He helps him freely consent to the deep longing for unity that he bears within himself as an innate gift. He arranges circumstances, events, and encounters in the direction of ever greater unity.
How Does the Spirit Further Unity?
The Holy Spirit is active in all the churches. No church has a monopoly on him. In regard to the relationship of the Catholic Church to the other churches, the Second Vatican Council states: “Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood.”3
Since we know that the same Spirit works in all denominations, we ought never to set a limit to our hope.
In what way does the Spirit work, and how does he further unity? Above all by making us aware of the unity that already exists. We have a natural tendency to become fixated on what is lacking, both in ourselves and in others. But we could begin to rejoice even now in all that unites us.
It is a great thing that we share the same baptism, for through baptism we are incorporated into Christ and are members of his Church. There is a deep theological significance in mutually acknowledging one another’s baptism. It shows that a fundamental fellowship remains between the different churches, despite all the division. Since baptism is administered “in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit”, it gives witness to our common faith in a triune God, our common love for him, and our common desire to live faithfully according to the Gospel.
This fellowship in baptism is a foundation that is so firm, so stable, that it should be possible to build unity upon it again.
At the same time, the Holy Spirit gives us a keen awareness of the sin and scandal of division. He reminds us of Jesus’ words: “May they all be one”, and he himself prays this prayer in us.
The Spirit leads us deeper into the truth, into the whole truth, and, thus, he necessarily leads us closer to each other. He who is openness itself in God opens us up to each other, so that we can see each other as we really are and not as certain labels indicate that we are. He helps to free us from our self-sufficiency, so that we can discover everything that is true and right in others.
It is the Spirit, it must be he, who inspired the Council Fathers to make the following statement, which all Christians would do well to take to heart and make their own: “Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among our separated brethren. It is right and salutary to recognize the riches of Christ and virtuous works in the lives of others who are bearing witness to Christ, sometimes even to the shedding of their blood. . . . Nor should we forget that anything wrought by the grace of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of our separated brethren can be a help to our own edification.”4
It is the Holy Spirit who exhorts us not to look at the speck in our brother’s eye, but to see instead the log in our own eye (Mt 7:3). He calls us continually to conversion. The Council also says:
Catholics, in their ecumenical work, must assuredly be concerned for their separated brethren, praying for them, keeping them informed about the Church, making the first approaches toward them. But their primary duty is to make a careful and honest appraisal of whatever needs to be done or renewed in the Catholic household itself, in order that its life may bear witness more clearly and faithfully to the teachings and institutions which have come to it from Christ through the Apostles.5
The Four Ways of Ecumenism
The Dominican Father Yves Congar, one of the great ecumenists of our time, has, on different occasions, tried to specify concrete means or ways to unity.
He divides them into four ways.
1. Institutional Ecumenism
To this belongs, first of all, the World Council of Churches, the world organization of the ecumenical movement, founded in 1948, whose secretariat is in Geneva. There are also all the ecumenical committees and associations. In Sweden one thinks, for example, of Förbundet för Kristen enhet (the Organization for Christian Unity) and Ekumeniska nämnden (the Ecumenical Committee). They are an indispensable framework. For them to become living organisms, they must be at the service of the Spirit and sensitive to his inspiration.
2. Secular or Practical Ecumenism
This ecumenism consists of the involvement of the different unified churches for the liberation of man. If more churches work together for peace, freedom, and justice, they will also come closer to each other. Cooperation of this kind gives birth to a deeper dialogue and creates unity. This practical ecumenism is also open to non-Christian denominations.
3. Spiritual Ecumenism
Congar points out how important it is to renew one’s faith and to be continually converted. Then we will be able to communicate with each other on a deep level and walk together in the ways of the Spirit. By praying together, we actualize what we already have in common. Our common inheritance then becomes an existential reality.
The prayer for unity occupies an important place in this shared prayer, preferably formulated with the words Jesus himself used in his high priestly prayer: “That they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (Jn 17:21). We ought to listen often to this prayer and let it fill us. Jesus has prayed it in the Holy Spirit, and we ourselves awaken the Holy Spirit in us when we repeat it with Jesus. Since it is Jesus himself who prays this prayer, the Father cannot resist it.
Father Congar relates that since the time of his priestly ordination, he has celebrated Mass for Christian unity on every occasion it was permitted. “By celebrating Mass for unity, I actualized the prayer of Jesus. That meant
very much to me.”
The prayer for unity affects all other ecumenical activities. That is why spiritual ecumenism is the soul of ecumenism. It is ecumenism on the level where the Spirit lives and works.
4. Theological Ecumenism
This means an intellectual effort and an honest search for unity in the faith and in the formulation of the faith with other churches through dialogue. Here it is important to have a solid knowledge of Church history. It is part of the work of ecumenism to correct the errors that have been made in the past.
Pope John Paul II repeatedly stressed the importance of ecumenism. In a letter to the presidents of the European Bishops’ Conferences, he wrote that it was particularly in Europe that the unity of the Church was broken. He likened unity to the robe of Jesus that had no seams but was woven into one single piece (Jn 19:23).
“It is clear to all that division constitutes a serious obstacle to all attempts at evangelization in the modern world. Each person ought therefore to engage all his energies in the service of ecumenism, so that the development toward unity by the efforts of all do not stand still, but are hastened—which the most eager Christians long for under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”6
What Kind of Unity?
Perfect unity is not for this world. It is an eschatological reality that belongs to heaven. Here on earth, there will always be a certain amount of division. But this must not hinder us from striving for a greater unity.
Is it not the same in our personal life? We cannot reach absolute perfection, but we should nevertheless strive for it. And the closer we come to it, the more value our life has.
Let us first clarify the unity we must not strive for. There are, namely, two kinds of unity in which only those who are naïve can believe.7
The first kind is the myth of collective conversion. This myth was rather common among Catholics before the Second Vatican Council. One imagined that the non-Catholic churches would return to the Catholic Church, but without any need for her to reform or change herself. These non-Catholic churches would thus assume, not only Catholic teaching, but also all Catholic customs, the Catholic monastic tradition, the forms of Catholic piety, and so on.
The other kind is the direct opposite. According to this concept of unity, all Christians may remain as they are now. The churches are considered to be different branches of the same tree, as though all have the same value, and it is believed that, in reality, we are already one, because the external organization does not affect the true nature of Christianity. The only thing that is still missing is for all of us to share the one table of the Lord, which shows that we are fundamentally one already. We come across this view of unity in different forms, most of all in Protestants but, in recent times, also in some Catholics. It is just as much a caricature of unity as the first kind.
How, then, can we imagine a future of unity?
We can conceive of a community of sister churches. The idea of “sister churches” is not new. It goes back to the early Church and was used by the Second Vatican Council to designate the mutual relationship of the different local churches.8 Pope Paul VI spoke of sister churches when, in a message to Patriarch Athenagoras, he described the relationship between the Catholic and Orthodox Church. In recent times the idea has even become acceptable between the Catholic and Lutheran churches.
Reconciled Difference
An expression that is used mostly by Lutheran theologians is “unity in reconciled difference”. “Reconciled difference” means that between sister churches that have reached full unity, there can still be considerable, but not irreconcilable, differences.
One could, thus, very well imagine that the Catholic Church could live in full communion with another church that had married priests, another liturgy, and another form of Marian piety. But the condition would be that a unity had been reached regarding the Creed itself and that the priestly ministry of each would be recognized. Without the ministry of the priesthood, there is no Eucharist, and without the Eucharist, there is no unity (cf. 1 Cor 10:17).
Unity in the faith also requires that one recognize the bishop of Rome as the one who possesses a ministry of unity and bears responsibility for the whole Church.
But this does not exclude a great degree of independence among the sister churches. The Second Vatican Council urgently recommends a great respect for the individuality of each of the churches. The Decree on Ecumenism says: “But let all, according to the gifts they have received, enjoy a proper freedom, in their various forms of spiritual life and discipline, in their different liturgical rites, and even in their theological elaborations of revealed truth.”9
This last sentence is interesting. It shows that there may also be differences in the sphere of the theologian. Farther on the decree specifies:
What has just been said about the lawful variety that can exist in the Church must also be taken to apply to the differences in theological expression of doctrine. In the study of revelation East and West have followed different methods and have developed differently their understanding and confession of God’s truth. It is hardly surprising, then, if from time to time one tradition has come nearer to a full appreciation of some aspects of a mystery of revelation than the other or has expressed it to better advantage. In such cases, these various theological expressions are to be considered often as mutually complementary rather than conflicting.10
The Problem of the Filioque
An example of this is the conflict between the East and the West regarding the addition of the Filioque to the Creed. In that context, Filioque means that the Holy Spirit proceeds not only from the Father but “also from the Son”. The formula came into existence in Spain in the seventh century and was directed at the Visigothic Arians, who at that time denied that the Son is one with the Father.11 Only in the eleventh century was it inserted into the Creed of the Roman Mass.
This addition, which was never accepted by the Eastern Church, has given rise to endless theological disputes.
There are some who believe that it is actually only a matter of an artificial problem. For the life of the Church and the believer, it would hardly have any significance if one did away with the Filioque or not. They think the whole controversy is sterile and that the addition of the Filioque should not be an obstacle to unity. The well-known theologian Sergey Bulgakov writes that he has tried for many years to research what meaning it could have for the life of the Church if one says that the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone or from the Father and the Son, but he has never discovered it.
Others are of the opinion that it is precisely the opposite, that this question is of the greatest importance and that it is the only dogmatic reason for the split between the East and the West. Their foremost representative is Vladimir Lossky (1903–1958).
These theologians wish to defend the absolute monarchy of the Father. The Father alone is the source and origin of the Son and the Spirit. They point to John 15:26: “But when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me.”
The Council of Florence (1438–1445) has explained that the Father’s monarchy is in no way diminished by the addition of the Filioque. The Son always receives everything from the Father. Even the fact that the Spirit proceeds from the Son is something that the Son receives from the Father. The Father gives all that he is and has to the Son except the fact that he is the Father.12 One could therefore say that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son.
That the Filioque is an acceptable addition is also explained by present-day theology, from its viewpoint of the relationship between the immanent Trinity (God as he is in himself) and the economical Trinity (God as he works and reveals himself in the economy of salvation). Many of them, with Karl Rahner (1904–1984) in the lead, claim that the economical Trinity is the immanent Trinity. When God reveals himself in creation and in Jesus, he is truly revealing himself, and himself as he is. The face that he
shows us is his own face. The way he works and reveals himself is the way he is. In the end, it is about the realism of the Incarnation. Naturally God cannot reveal everything,13 but what he reveals is himself.
There is a connection between the inner life of the Trinity and what the Holy Trinity does in relation to us. We know that Jesus says the Holy Spirit shall be sent both by the Father and himself (Jn 14:26, 15:26). This “sending” (missio) shows and makes clear what happens within the Holy Trinity. That the Holy Spirit is sent both by the Father and by the Son means that he proceeds from the Father and the Son.
Is it not reasonable that everything God does reflects his being and that everything Jesus says and does is an echo of the conversation within the Trinity? For us there is often a difference between what we show and what we are. But not with God. His action is always transparent.
Come, Holy Spirit!
More important than all speculation about future unity is prayer.
Unity is the work of the Spirit. Only to the extent that everyone, individuals and churches, open themselves to him can the unity for which Jesus prayed to the Father become a reality.
It is a source of joy that the Holy Spirit, who was previously called le grand Inconnu (the great Unknown), is coming more and more into the light. Everywhere we are beginning to hear people speak of him. At the same time, we see the desire for unity increasing in all the churches. There is an undeniable connection between these two facts.
The Holy Spirit, Fire of Divine Love Page 10
