THE FAITH AND ORDER MOVEMENT: HOLINESS CHURCH PARTICIPATION
by
Gilbert W. Stafford
The phrases "holiness movement," "ecumenical movement," and "charismatic movement" are widely used in general conversation. They evoke responses of allegiance and/or concern. The "faith and order movement," however, is a term not widely used in general conversation and therefore may evoke little more than a blank stare. It is a movement of significance to contemporary Christianity and one to which bodies associated with the "holiness" tradition should give increasing attention.
The Genesis and History of Faith and Order
The genesis of the Faith and Order movement can be traced to an event that took place at the 1910 World Missionary Conference held in Edinburgh, Scotland. There, for the first time since the rise of denominational Christianity, a world conference was held with participants who were not simply those interested in the subject matter, but persons officially chosen by denominations and missionary societies. Those at Edinburgh had the responsibility of representing the positions and concerns of their ecclesial sponsors. This put a different stamp on the character of this conference. It was first and foremost an officially representative gathering.
In the course of the conference it became apparent, at least to some, that the identities imposed on emerging churches around the world were the result of theological and doctrinal disagreements having historical roots and social contexts that were foreign to the newer churches. These various denominational identities, therefore, did not reflect their own wrestling with faith issues. This was of such great concern to Bishop Charles H. Brent of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States-at the time Bishop of the Philippine Islands-that near the end of the Edinburgh meeting he pled for the churches in the future to convene for the purpose of addressing not only missionary concerns but doctrinal concerns as well.
After Edinburgh, Brent did what he could in his own church to bring this about. In October of that year-on the day prior to the convening of the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Cincinnati, Ohio-Brent addressed a mass meeting of Episcopalians. He shared his passionate concern that the churches begin addressing doctrinal issues-i.e., matters of faith and order-in formalized discussions between persons officially chosen by their respective communions to represent them. On October 19, 1910, the Episcopal church responded by passing unanimously the following resolution:
That a Joint Commission be appointed to bring about a Conference for the consideration of questions touching Faith and Order, and that all Christian Communions throughout the world which confess Our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior be asked to unite with us in arranging for and conducting such a Conference.[1]
The vision was caught by other churches and in 1911 the proposal for such a conference was communicated in a letter to Christian communions around the world. While the response was positive, the intricacies of planning such a gathering and the turmoil associated with World War I slowed down the process. Finally, though, the first World Conference on Faith and Order was held in Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1927 with 394 delegates representing 108 churches from around the world.[2] Subsequent conferences were held in Edinburgh (1937),[3] Lund, Sweden (1952),[4] Montreal, Canada (1963),[5] and Santiago de Compostela, Spain (1993).[6]
Besides the Missionary Conference movement and the Faith and Order movement, a third development, called the Life and Work movement, also emerged. Bishop Nathan Söderblom of Sweden was convinced that contemporary international and societal issues could be addressed adequately only by a Christian church united for social witness. The view held was that, whereas doctrine inevitably divides, social witness can be an opportunity for a united Christianity. On the basis of these strong convictions, the Universal Christian Conference on Life and Work was convened in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1925, and the second conference was held in Oxford, England, in 1937.
By this time, however, there was a growing realization that life-and-work was inevitably theological, and, consequently, could not be kept in isolation from faith-and-order considerations. In 1937, with Life and Work meeting in Scotland, and Faith and Order meeting in England, it was convenient for the two to consider working as one unit. The decision was made to formalize the union of the two movements, to be known jointly as the World Council of Churches. The chaos of World War II, however, kept this process from coming to culmination until 1948 when the WCC held its founding Assembly in Amsterdam, Holland.[7]
With the union of Faith and Order and Life and Work, the latter ceased to exist as a separate entity whereas Faith and Order continued as a distinctive movement which, while now sponsored by the WCC, continued to be wider than WCC membership.
The Holiness Presence in Faith And Order
No representative from an American holiness church was present at Lausanne, Edinburgh, or Lund. The first holiness participation was at Montreal in 1963 with a delegate (Gene W. Newberry) and two observers (Louis Meyer and John W. V. Smith) from the Church of God (Anderson),[8] and with two U.S.A. delegates from the Salvation Army (Commissioner S. Hepburn and Lt-Col. P. S. Kaiser).[9] At Santiago de Compostela in 1993, holiness representatives included Cheryl Bridges-Johns of the Church of God (Cleveland)[10] and Susie C. Stanley of the Church of God (Anderson).[11]
In 1957 Faith and Order sponsored a conference particularly for the church in the United States and Canada. Called the North American Conference on Faith and Order, it was held September 3-10 of that year in Oberlin, Ohio. Regarding holiness participation, the Salvation Army was a full member with two representatives. One was a member of the study section on "Authority and Freedom in Church Government," and the other in the section on "Racial and Economic Stratification."[12] In addition to this, the holiness movement was indirectly represented by James Royster of the Church of God (Anderson) who was a youth delegate from the Interseminary Movement.[13] Consultants from churches that were not members of the World Council included Donald Demaray from the Free Methodist Church, who worked in the section on "Baptism Into Christ,"[14] and John W. V. Smith from the Church of God (Anderson) who worked in the section on "Doctrinal Consensus and Conflict."[15] In addition, observers-a category for those who, while not official delegates of the sending churches, could nevertheless participate-included three from the Church of God (Anderson): Clarence W. Hatch who worked in the study section on "Authority and Freedom in Church Government,"[16] Gene W. Newberry who worked in the section on "The Life of the Congregation,"[17] and Harold Phillips in the section on "Imperatives and Motivations."[18]
Ever since Oberlin the Church of God (Anderson) has continued to participate. Serving as commissioner until his death in 1984 was John W. V. Smith, and for a short time in 1983-84 Juanita Lewis, and since 1984, Gilbert W. Stafford. The only other holiness church (though also pentecostal) that currently participates is the Church of God (Cleveland) represented by Cheryl Bridges-Johns. Two additional holiness churches participate indirectly by virtue of the Wesleyan Theological Society's appointment of Paul Bassett of the Church of the Nazarene and Donald Dayton of the Wesleyan Church. WTS participation began in 1985 with the appointment of Dayton and David Cubie of the Church of the Nazarene. Bassett followed Cubie in 1988. The Church of God (Anderson) is, therefore, the only non-pentecostal holiness church that participates officially as a church.
Faith and Order work in the United States is now sponsored by the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. (NCCC). In keeping with the long-standing tradition of including churches that are not members of the NCCC, present membership encompasses a wide range of non-NCCC churches, including Roman Catholic, Church of God (Cleveland, TN), Church of God in Christ, Mennonite, Friends General Conference, International Evangelical Church, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Independent Christian Churches, Assemblies of God, Christian Reformed, Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, Korean Presbyterian, Churches of Christ (non-instrumental), and the Church of God (Anderson).
The Ongoing Vision of Faith and Order
In my years of Faith and Order work, I have found that the original purposes of the movement are still in place:
to proclaim the essential oneness of the Church of Christ and to keep prominently before...the churches the obligation to manifest that unity and its urgency for the work of evangelism.
to study questions of faith, order, and worship with the relevant social, cultural, political, racial and other factors in their bearing on the unity of the Church....
to study matters in the present relationships of the churches to one another which cause difficulties and need theological clarification....[19]
What Samuel McCrea Cavert said in 1970 about Faith and Order is still true:
The Faith and Order movement, in both its worldwide and its national aspects, has consistently adhered to the policy of making its contribution through study and dialogue. It has carefully refrained from presenting any particular plan of union, regarding this as necessarily the responsibility of the ecclesiastical bodies themselves.[20]
The inaugural report of the 1996-1999 quadrennium of study states the current vision of Faith and Order in North America:
To further the longstanding work of Faith and Order on theological issues that are church-dividing and church-uniting by engaging more fully and directly the faithful people of the churches of Christ in ecclesial settings of ongoing worship and witness, with renewed commitment to engagement with churches in wide ranging ecclesial traditions, and thereby to nurture the NCCC's commitment to fuller ecclesial fellowship.[21]
The Benefits of Participating in Faith and Order
What, then, are the benefits of a church's participation in Faith and Order? I list the following.
1. Participation is an opportunity to learn about other traditions in a dialogical setting. One of the more rewarding intellectual experiences of my life was my sub-group's discussion in an earlier triennium (as it was then) of our several understandings of apostolic faith. The fact that each Christian tradition makes claims of being apostolic in its faith provided a basis for vigorous discussion. In our extended deliberations we learned enough about each other's traditions to be able to identify points both of agreement and of divergence. We came to appreciate that all of us agree that being a church of apostolic faith includes at least these basic components: the confession that Jesus Christ is God and Savior; the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Spirit; the authoritative witness of the Scriptures; and the church as the community of faithful worship, witness, and service in the world. But we differ when it comes to other characteristics of what it means to be apostolic. Some traditions emphasize normative creedal and confessional statements; others emphasize normative teaching offices and polities; and others emphasize normative experiences of conversion, sanctification, holiness, and liberation.[22]
2. Faith and Order is an opportunity to learn from other traditions. Other traditions of the faith ask questions about one's own tradition that insiders tend not to ask. Once in a discussion about creeds, I explained that traditionally my own church (Church of God, Anderson) has been anti-creedalistic and that we even have a song one stanza of which begins: "The day of sects and creeds for us forevermore is past."[23] "What!" an Orthodox priest exclaimed, "how can you be Christian if you don't believe something?" He asked the right question and pressed the right issues for a tradition that has perhaps been too unreflective in its anti-creed rhetoric.
3. Faith and Order provides an arena of discussion with a wide spectrum of Christian traditions. This arena is wider than any other I know. Obviously, wide spectrums can be found in seminaries, theological forums, the academy, and in informal conversations. That which makes Faith and Order distinct from these, however, is that its members are, for the most part, chosen in some official way to represent their respective churches or organizations. In my case, I am elected by the Commission on Christian Unity of the Church of God, a commission made up both of representatives from our several national agencies and persons elected by the General Assembly of the Church of God.
The role of a participant is not that of setting forth his or her own personal theological positions, but those of the church being represented. Faith and Order participants are, in a sense, personifications of the differing traditions of Christian faith. For instance, when in my own sub-group Samuel Nafzger of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod speaks, we want him to give voice to the Missouri Synod. The assignment is not "Tell us what you personally think about this issue," but "Tell us, to the best of your ability, what you believe your church tradition holds concerning this matter." That goes even for the most overtly independent participants. When Doug Foster, a member of the Churches of Christ (non-instrumental), speaks, he, true to his tradition, makes it clear that he speaks only as Doug Foster, but we push him to represent to us, to the best of his ability, the Church of Christ tradition, not the Doug Foster view.
Where else can one find such a wide spectrum of thought being expressed by those who seek earnestly to speak for the respective traditions out of which they come? In my sub-group this quadrennium are representatives from churches as diverse as United Methodist, Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Churches of Christ (non-instrumental), Quaker, Evangelical Lutheran, Reformed Church in America, Assemblies of God, Presbyterian, United Church of Christ, National Baptist, and Church of God (Anderson).
4. Faith and Order provides each participant the opportunity to teach other traditions about one's own tradition. It is as though each tradition has the opportunity to bring other Christian traditions into its classroom for a short while for the purpose of teaching something about the Christian faith which it believes God has entrusted to it. Over the course of several years, for example, I have had the opportunity to present to my colleagues in Faith and Order several short papers: two on "The Apostolic Faith" as understood by the Church of God (Anderson), another titled "The Holy Spirit and the Experience of Church," and two papers on authority: "Authority in the Church of God (Anderson...)" and "Authorities for Making Decisions in the Church of God...". Also, I prepared a paper in answer to the question: "What would be the prerequisites for the Church of God (Anderson) to become a part of a Christian organization which is inclusive of Christian faith in its widest possible spectrum?" Another paper was prepared under the title, "Visioning for Koinonia in the Life of the Church." All of these were opportunities to teach others about matters which my church believes are crucial if the church at large is to be in health.
More recently, my papers have centered especially on our identification as a holiness church. I presented a paper titled: "The Nineteenth Century Holiness Movement and Christian Unity." At the time of this writing, I am working with two other colleagues on presentations for an upcoming meeting in New Orleans. The first project has to do with "The Unitive Power of Holiness." The sub-group will consider my paper from the holiness perspective and that of Father Kevin McMorrow, editor of Ecumenical Trends, from the Roman Catholic perspective. Upon exchanging papers, each of us will write a response that will include three components: points of resonance with each other, differences, and points at which we simply do not understand the other. These four papers, then, will be presented to our sub-group for discussion.
The second project will use the same dialogical method on the subject of "The Hermeneutics of Reconciliation in Worship." My partner is John Erickson, professor of theology at St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary in Crestwood, New York. In preparation for this assignment, Professor Erickson told me that since he had never worshipped in a holiness church, he would like to have that experience. I put him in touch with a Church of God congregation which, without my knowing it, turned out to be close to St. Vladimir's. He has already worshipped there and has invited the Church of God to be guests at St. Vladimir's. In New Orleans, he and I will present our papers to the plenary, which we hope will be enriched both by holiness and orthodox insights.
5. Faith and Order work is the opportunity for one's own tradition to recognize in other traditions dimensions of the apostolic faith which lie dormant in one's own. While for one Christian tradition verbal confession about the person and work of Christ may be very much alive, an emphasis on the converting ministry of Christ in the here and now may lie dormant. In another tradition the enlivening presence of the Holy Spirit may be very much front and center, but the hard sayings about Kingdom life may lie dormant. For still another tradition an emphasis on personal conversion may be alive, but communal confession of the faith may be dormant. And for another tradition Kingdom teachings may be considered with great seriousness, but the joy of the risen Christ may be dormant. Faith and Order provides an ecclesial opportunity for each tradition of the faith to feed into the bloodstream of other traditions. It is in this kind of setting that the emphasis on personal sanctification, which holiness churches are convinced is part and parcel of the apostolic faith, can be fed into the bloodstream of a wide spectrum of other Christian traditions.
An example of how this happens is reflected in the following segment of the summary report of the last quadrennium:
At Newark the Episcopal representative was inspired by what the Church of God (Anderson) representative had said about...join[ing] his church. When asked how people become members, he replied: "The process would be similar to the acceptance around this table. None of us has been formally 'checked out.' We sense some basic assumptions as we talk with each other. We share. It's not legalistic...." As the representative of the Church of God (Cleveland) said in response to the information about the lack of formal joining in the Church of God (Anderson): "You are probably providing a model for the future, where things aren't so sharply defined as [they are] by organizational entities."[24]
Whether one agrees with the subject mentioned in this excerpt is not the point. It is simply an illustration of how one tradition can feed into the bloodstream of other traditions. In this instance an anabaptist-holiness tradition, a pentecostal-holiness tradition, and a mainline-anglican tradition were engaged in conversation about a new paradigm never before considered by some.
I cherish the possibility of the Church of the Nazarene, the Wesleyan Church, the Free Methodist Church, the Salvation Army, and others, as churches, taking advantage of the Faith and Order opportunity to feed their own rich understandings of the apostolic faith into the bloodstream of the wider church.
6. Faith and Order is the opportunity to develop a deeper understanding and appreciation of one's own tradition. It is both refreshing and challenging to explain one's tradition to those who may be learning about it for the first time. As we are pressed to explain the meaning of a particular aspect of our tradition, we are required to rethink the dynamics of it. That which within the circles of the tradition itself is dealt with in a shorthand way has to be written out in longhand, so to speak, for those unacquainted with it. The end result is that one's understanding of one's own tradition matures.
7. Faith and Order work is the opportunity for churches to guard against becoming root bound within their own narrower tradition. Just as root-bound plants eventually die, so do Christian traditions that limit themselves to their own little bit of Christian soil. Doctrinal development in controlled theological hot houses may lead to only superficially healthy churches. In order to be in health, all churches need to develop in the open spaces of doctrinal discussions in the church at large.
8. Faith and Order is the opportunity for a wide spectrum of ecclesial bodies to work together in theological endeavors. In 1982 at a Faith and Order meeting in Lima, Peru, over one hundred theologians unanimously agreed to present a statement for common study by and official responses from any and all churches willing to do so. Published under the title "Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry" (BEM), it is the product of some fifty years of study and consultation representing Orthodox, Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Reformed, Methodist, Disciples, Methodist, Adventist, and Pentecostal traditions. BEM has become one of the more widely discussed theological documents in the church's history.
In 1984, the Believers Church Conference (consisting of churches that stress believer baptism) was hosted by Anderson School of Theology for the purpose of discussing the baptism section of BEM. Participants included Brethren, Mennonite, Church of God (Anderson), Adventist, Churches of Christ, Disciples, and Baptist theologians and church historians. But also present were scholars from infant baptism churches, including the associate director of Faith and Order (NCCC), Brother Jeffrey Gros, a Roman Catholic. On the basis of four days of papers and discussion, the conference affirmed eight points of agreement with BEM on baptism, stated six points of disagreement, listed two consequences that so-called believers churches can draw from BEM for their relationships and dialogues with other churches, and stated four contributions that BEM can make to them as believer baptism churches. The report concludes by giving three suggestions for the ongoing work of Faith and Order, which included the view of some in the conference that "Scripture...[should] be regarded as the sole source and criterion of Christian belief, standing as the authoritative corrective to our various traditions."[25]
My only reason for lifting up this last issue is not to emphasize the "Bible only" position, but to use it as an illustration of the opportunity that Faith and Order both provides and promotes for a wide spectrum of ecclesial traditions to be heard as they work together in theological endeavors.
One of John Wesley's well-known sermons is on the "Catholic Spirit." His text is 2 Kings 10:15, "Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart: And Jehonadab answered, It is. If it be, give me thine hand." In the sermon, Wesley spells out what he has in mind by one's heart being right: it is right with God; it believes in the Lord Jesus Christ; it is "filled with the energy of love"; it is doing the will of God; it serves the Lord with reverence; it is right toward one's neighbor; and it shows love by what it does.
This "catholic spirit" is to be expressed both towards those outside the faith and within. Regarding those outside the faith, Wesley says that the person with a catholic spirit "embraces with strong and cordial affection neighbors and strangers, friends and enemies. This is catholic or universal love. And he that has this is of a catholic spirit. For love alone gives the title to this character: catholic love is a catholic spirit" (III.4).
Following this consideration, Wesley then deals with the catholic spirit in relation to fellow believers. He refers to love for all "whatever opinion or worship or congregation, who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, who love God and man, who, rejoicing to please and fearing to offend God, are careful to abstain from evil and zealous of good works." Continuing, Wesley says that the one who is of a truly catholic spirit, "having an unspeakable tenderness for their persons and longing for their welfare, does not cease to commend them to God in prayer as well as to plead their cause before men; who speaks comfortably to them and labors by all his words to strengthen their hands in God. He assists them to the uttermost of his power in all things, spiritual and temporal. He is ready 'to spend and be spent for them' [cf. 2 Cor. 12:15], yea, 'to lay down his life for' their sake [Jn. 15:13]" [III.5].[26]
9. Faith and Order provides the opportunity for us to become interpreters of other traditions at points where they may be misunderstood. A personal example of this is Cecil Robeck's information about the traditional pentecostal understanding regarding the distinction between tongues as the initial evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit and the gift of tongues. Robeck, professor at Fuller and a representative of the Assemblies of God, taught all of us in that particular discussion that the classical pentecostal position is not, as some non-pentecostals think, that all Spirit-baptized persons have the gift of tongues. Rather, tongues speaking is simply an initial evidence of the baptism. Consequently, a person baptized in the Holy Spirit may initially speak in tongues but never again do so because they do not have the gift.
As a result of that Faith and Order "lecture," I, as a non-pentecostal, have been able to teach others about a pentecostal understanding and to correct a widespread misunderstanding in my own church that pentecostals believe that all should have the gift of tongues. Many among us point to 1 Corinthians 12:30 which asks rhetorically, "Do all speak in tongues?" and has the implied answer that not all do. Why, then, they want to know, can't pentecostal people see the error of their ways? But that is to misunderstand the pentecostal position. Robeck has helped me as a seminary teacher, preacher, and writer to fulfill an important role of clarifying the pentecostal position among my own people, not so that they will become pentecostals, but so that they will relate to others of "like precious faith" on the basis of accurate information instead of misinformation. Christian charity demands no less. In like manner, would it not be helpful to have more people in non-holiness churches clarifying for those traditions holiness terminology such as Christian perfection and entire sanctification?
Faith and Order is certainly no panacea for the dividedness of Christ's church, but it is an opportunity for that dividedness to be addressed within the context of a broad spectrum of Christian faith traditions. Many have been the times when I have been thoroughly frustrated in the meetings and by the process. There have been times when I have wondered whether it was worthwhile. But the benefits far outweigh the liabilities.
At Faith and Order meetings (twice a year), I often desire the participation of more of my holiness colleagues in the faith. By participating, a church has much to gain. Not only may it feed into the bloodstream of the wider Christian community its own treasures of the apostolic faith, but also it can be immeasurably enriched by the treasures of the same faith which others feed into the bloodstream. But of greatest importance is this: Faith and Order is one additional small step toward the fulfillment of our Lord's prayer in John 17:21-22 that we "may all be one," to the end "that the world may believe." It is one additional feeble attempt toward responding positively to Paul's plea in Ephesians 4:1-3 for us "to lead a life worthy of the calling to which [we]...have been called...making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."
Endnotes:
