Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
EDITORIAL The ecumenical movement has put the unity and renewal of Christian communities or churches as the major target on its agenda. Since its beginning, however, already in the early decades of the twentieth century, unity was never defined as an homogeneous unity. There have been also fluctuating definitions of renewal: from radical and political programmes until more individual and inhibited expressions of piety. But how far may variety go`? What kind of variation disturbs unity? In how far is true vari- ation between Christian communities allowed or even necessary? Although not planned as a special issue around a well-defined subject, we find here four contributions together, which reflect aspects of the present state of the ecumenical movement world-wide. The Roman Catholic Peter Hocken asks attention for the streams as partners in the ecumenical process, besides the existing concentration on contacts between churches. The Indonesian Reformed theologian Chris Hartono provides us with a detailed story of one of the few successful church unions of the last decades. He also produces enough evidence to look for other ways to bring churches in cooperation and communion. Noko Frans Kekana, former General Secretary of the South Africa Council of Churches, struggles with the transition from a critical church, fighting against an apartheid state towards a church, committed to the general programme of a new government, in which many of its church leaders have prominent positions. How to continue the prophetic criticism of the churches in a balanced appraisal and basically positive attitude towards the new state order? Tony Neelankavil, from his Indian and orthodox background, repeats the laborious debate on intercultural hermeneutics of so many international conferences, placing what is now called the 'Gospel and Culture Debate' in the light of a specific Syro- Indian orthodox theology. [Tony's comment: We have never called ourselves as a uniate church. It was the Missionaries from Europe who called us uniate church, which we don't understand because we have never been united to any other church!] The title of ECUMENICAL VARIATIONS therefore should be taken in a double sense. Our authors not only present a variety of ecumenical contributions, but also emphasize a continuing internal variety in the Christian traditions, which must be the result of ecumenical endeavour. - Karel Steenbrink
Exchange – Brill
Published: Jan 1, 1999
You can share this free article with as many people as you like with the url below! We hope you enjoy this feature!
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.