Issuu

116

Martina NOVÁKOVÁ: Integration of Refugees in Slovakia

123

Daniel PASTIRCˇÁK:

Rebecca BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL Szabolcs – Peter Sˇ AJDA •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

There are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit

Gentle Theology 131

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

147

Martin CONWAY:

156

Cheryl L. THOMSEN:

Christian Unity and Discipleship in WSCF Healing of Memories: Beginning with Forgiveness 171

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry

186

Describing a human as a coincidentia oppositorum, rather than through a simple flat image, has a long history in philosophy. Also in our ecumenical anthology we have made an attempt to link two important areas of Christian witness that seem to us complementary, balancing the different focuses of Christian presence in the affairs of this world.

OROVA Csaba: Baptism and Eucharist in an Ecumenical Perspective:

I. Serpent, Dove, Human

For the 40th Anniversary of the Second Vatican Council

The image of a serpent can be understood as a symbol of the human eternally bound to Earth. Like Prometheus to a rock, we are tied to the Earth and thus can never become indifferent towards the environment that co-creates us. The serpent cannot fly or jump; he is in constant contact with Earth, he feels all the changes of its temperature. For us he has become the embodiment of our social milieu that we are called to live in and co-shape. In the image of a dove we see the symbol of independence, a healthy detachment from the worries, pressures and manipulations of our surroundings. The dove leaves the ground and flies up towards the sky, that ancient symbol of the seat of God. For us she has become the symbol of the freedom of the children of God. These two symbols of parallel missions in an individual’s life complement each other, and although seemingly contradictory, they lead to a more holistic understanding of the vocation of Christian witness. We sought to capture this bi-polarity of our calling also by means

Serpent as Substrate 199

Peter S ˇAJDA:

208

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK:

223

Jamie MORAN: Hard Wakan

231

Andrzej RASZYK: Father and Son

238

Adam PRYOR:

Religious Neoromanticism as Substrate for Monocultures Critique of Religion and Christian–Muslim Dialogue

Am I Going to Hell? Universal Essentialization and its Implications as Applied to the Problem of Soteriological Eschatology

Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

Introduction

of the two seminars, whose lectures and workshops constitute the basis of this book. They were held in Trencˇín, Slovakia (February 2005) on the “serpent” topic Equal Chances or Equal Discrimination? and in Brno, Czech Republic (July 2005) on the “dove” topic The Myth of Independency. First of all, we would like to thank the main organisers of our two seminars in 2005: Lenka MATUSˇKOVÁ, Irenej FINTOR, Jordán BLAHO, Veronika HORVÁTHOVÁ, SZÔNYI László Gyula, Tanja GANTNER, Jirˇí SÍBRT, BARTALOSˇ Tamás, Lukasˇ TREBULA, Aleksandra L\UKSZA, Kristin NICKEL, and many others. We remain thankful to the Benedictine Archabbot of Pannonhalma, VÁRSZEGI Asztrik OSB, the director of the Békés Gellért Ecumenical Institute (BGÖI), for his strong support. We also remain grateful for the support of the Dominican province of Slovakia and its provincial, Benedikt Róbert HAJAS. We are especially grateful to our donors: the International Visegrád Fund (IVF), the Youth Programme of the European Commission, and the Benedictine Békés Gellért Ecumenical Institute (BGÖI), Pannonhalma. In particular, we would like to thank our mother organisation, the World Student Christian Federation Europe Region (WSCF–E, www.wscf-europe.org), the European Regional Committee (ERC), and her regional secretary, Hanna TERVANOTKO, for their support and valuable incentives. Finally, let us introduce the illustrator of this ecumenical anthology of ours. Marta PIWNIK is twenty years old, she comes from Poland, and currently she is a student at the Faculty of Linguistics in Warsaw University. Apart from art, she is interested mainly in foreign languages: she speaks English, German, French and Luxembourgian fluently. She spends all her free time for artistic development. She participates at courses of the history of art, while at the same time making illustrations for (mainly Orthodox) youth organisations. Her email address is papillonblue@o2.pl. All these people working together have been instrumental in the progress towards our broader aims—to promote cultural diversity and tolerance, particularly in the areas of religion, gender, nationality and ethnicity; to develop a (Central) European consciousness which emphasises recognition of and solidarity with

members of the greater society; and to encourage and empower youth engagement in civil society as a key element of responsible citizenship.

II. Committed Catalysis 1. Culture of Dialogue Cultural diversity and tolerance is the underlying motive for all of WSCF–Europe’s activities. The World Student Christian Federation was founded as an ecumenical organisation more than a century ago, in 1895, for the specific purpose of healing the painful divisions which tear apart Christianity. She wanted to heal it not by obliterating them, but rather by coming to a full knowledge and understanding of each member’s uniqueness and the special richness each member adds to our common body, the Church. We look forward to the blessed day when we will achieve true unity in diversity. We believe that it is necessary to look outward as well as inward; that in defining our common place in the wider world, we come to understand the many similarities which bind us together, and to appreciate that we are stronger together than we are apart. We also bear a responsibility, therefore, towards interreligious understanding and cooperation, and for the unity of humankind as a whole. We are committed to realising in society the values issuing from our faith: peace, justice and respect for human dignity, developed through a culture of dialogue, tolerance and appreciation of diversity.

2. (Central) European Awareness Fundamentally the issue at stake here is identity—how we define ourselves and how we define the ‘Other’. Parallel with that is the issue of how others define us, and how those definitions shape our images of ourselves and influence our relationships with the others. Correspondingly, in order to defuse tension among different groups, it is imperative that we learn how to define ourselves in ways which are as inclusive as possible; and, beyond that, how to

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

deconstruct the dualistic paradigms which give rise to the idea of “us/them” in the first place. Marching towards a multi-focal Europe, we attempt these aims within the context of European awareness—building an identity as citizens of Europe, an identity which can be shared by all the various and sundry people with whom we come in contact in our daily lives. This is especially critical in the region of Central Europe upon which we focus, as well as in Eastern and South Eastern Europe, marked as it is by historical tensions, former border disputes and mutual misunderstanding and mistrust. Our goal is to facilitate reconciliation among nations by layering on additional dimensions—Central European and European identities—to the narrow self-definitions which unfortunately still prevail. The time is ripe for this project in Central Europe. Identity is a sensitive issue particularly in this region of the world, where the legacy of crumbled empires is a collection of nation states haunted by a history of majority (or minority) oppression and subjugation. With the recent entrance into the European Union (EU) of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, they find themselves once again part of a trans-national political and cultural structure. But in order to fully integrate, it is imperative that citizens of these countries come to define themselves in terms larger than their own nationality, culture, religion or religious denomination.

3. Responsible Civil Society Hand-in-hand with identity goes responsibility: as we become aware of the many different roles we play in the world, we also understand the manifold ways in which we are accountable to the other members of our communities; and in which our communities are accountable to other communities. Towards this end, we work to promote civil society—young people engaging in private efforts for the public good, taking the initiative for social development through collective action. Once again, this is an issue of vital weigh and importance in the post-communist context of Central Europe, and one that we share with our neighbours also to the South and to the East.

Under communism, civil society was suppressed entirely; only official organisations were allowed to exist—those in line with the totalitarian ideology. As a result, a materialist ideology developed and the concept of personal responsibility wasted away under the authoritarian hand of the state. Now that communism has finally fallen, the civil society is showing signs of revival, but it is still very weak. Our goal is not only to strengthen and expand this key actor in the cultural sphere in Central Europe, but also to use our experiences to encourage the process in Eastern and South Eastern Europe. Central Europe, then, is the starting point: as our title indicates, our ultimate aim for this project is to multiply the foci of European culture, to reflect the full richness of the continent in all her diversity. But it is only possible to do this one step at a time—neighbour helping neighbour. As Central Europe is restored to her rightful place within the mozaik of Europe, she is uniquely situated to bridge the gap between West and East, North and South, using her wisdom and experiences to further the multiplication process.

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

Introduction

Our main goal is to educate generations of students and young people, who acknowledge this responsibility and are prepared to take up the challenge of building a common future.

membership, dealing with topics of relevance to youth in our primary focus area, Central Europe. Participants will come from the partner countries, as well as guests from neighbouring Eastern and South Eastern European countries (Serbia and Montenegro, Romania, Ukraine). Two seminars take place each year, one in the winter and one in the summer. Following the second seminar each year, an anthology is published to follow up the themes of the seminar and spread them to a much wider and broader audience. Other activities of ours are language and leadership training courses in Eastern and South Eastern Europe, our secondary focus area. These courses serve multiple purposes: for our organisation, to increase our contacts in those areas and to identify participants for our events; and for them, access to leadership training, international contacts and other capacity-building support. Furthermore, Central European students, who show leadership potential, will be able to participate as guests in these Eastern and South Eastern Europe events, reciprocating the Eastern and South Eastern guests at Central European events, thus providing opportunities for sharing our wisdom and knowledge with each other.

4. Subregionalisation of WSCF Europe Corresponding to these aims, our concrete objectives are to deconstruct national, denominational and religious prejudices in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe through intercultural and interdenominational dialogue; to build supra-national identities and relationships through cross-border cooperation both within Central Europe and with neighbours to the South and East; and to educate new generations of committed leaders through training and practical leadership experiences. These goals align closely with the goals of our partner organisations, who share our basic mission and vision. By cooperating in this project, they have the opportunity to extend the national character of their work into an international dimension, bringing them into contact with other organisations working towards the same ends and facing similar challenges. Through these cross-border cooperations, they can mutually enrich each other through the exchange of ideas about new topics and working methods. They also benefit from the leadership training aspect of the project, which identifies potential leaders from amongst their membership and provides appropriate developmental activities, ultimately strengthening the capacities of the organisations themselves. Concretely, we hope to accomplish these goals by the institutionalisation of the Central European Subregion (CESR) within our Europe-wide organisation. This subregional structure comprises at the moment our partners in Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, as well as our supporting partner in Croatia. We would solidify the formal basis for cooperation amongst the partner organisations in this project and enable them to increase contacts and cooperation with Eastern and South Eastern Europe, hopefully providing a catalyst for those countries to begin in turn such cooperations of their own. We envision the cooperation to consist of a series of seminars, one in each of the aforementioned countries with full

III. Interconnected Innovation 1. Dialogical Methodology Our long-term cooperation is innovative in many respects, most of all methodologically, in the sense that we provide fora, which foster dialogue among students and young intellectuals. The concept and theory of dialogue is central to our philosophy and provides the unifying foundation, which subsumes all our work. We understand it to be an end as well as a means—the experience of engaging in dialogue has value in and of itself. This important aspect is often overlooked when communication is regarded solely in terms of the content being transferred, ignoring the equally important issue of the mode, which the transfer takes place by. The methodology of dialogue works by the rediscovery of humankind’s original and fundamental interconnectedness. The

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

Introduction

mentality of dialogue is complementarity, mutual correction and relationality: not ‘superior-than’ but ‘in-relation-to.’ It also utilises the processes of indigenisation, inculturation and contextualisation. This is important, as it allows for issues to be addressed in a multidisciplinary way, rather than artificially removing them from their natural and proper relations. True dialogue assumes that the parties engaging in it meet as equals, each bringing a uniquely valuable perspective—a crucial prerequisite for deconstructing the oppressive dualisms and hierarchical relationships, which breed prejudice, hostility and intolerance.

The board agrees on themes and venues for the seminars, prepares applications for funding, nominates the preparatory committee, recruits participants and evaluates the success of activities. Members also determine the strategic direction of the cooperation, for instance, which non-Central European countries to focus on cooperation with. As well, they provide oversight for the coordinator and the preparatory committees. Board members keep in regular contact with each other via email, and meet at least twice a year, usually during or in connection with the seminars. Preparatory committees are formed for each seminar by one representative of each of the five full partner organisations, plus the project coordinator, and an additional member from the country, where the seminar is to take place, who leads the hosting committee. The preparatory committees decide the actual content of the seminar, formulate the programme, invite lecturers, recruit participants, and take care of all the practical arrangements necessary for the hosting and travel, and for the visas if needed. At the seminar itself, they ensure the smooth running of the programme; they meet daily during the seminar to evaluate its progress, and at the end of the seminar to evaluate it in its totality.

2. Disciples in Community This important innovation has radical implications for our working methods as well, if understood seriously. We are committed to ensuring that all participants in our activities come together on equal footing—that we are a community of peers and mates. Towards this end, our cooperation, like all our projects, is wholly conceived and implemented by youth (ages eighteen to thirty-five). Young people are involved at all levels in project activities, from simple participation through organisation and implementation to strategic oversight. In this way there is an emphasis on mutual exchange of knowledge and development in a maximally inspiring environment. The coordinator of the project is a recent graduate or young professional usually from outside Central Europe (sometimes even from outside the continent), who is provided with a monthly stipend to live and work in one of the Central European cities, to date Budapest or Praha. This adds an important dimension of intercultural exchange to the project, as the coordinator brings experiences and knowledge from her or his unique background to share; and by living in Central Europe and working with Central Europeans, she or he comes to know the realities of life in another (many times in a very different) context. A board made up of youth from each of the five countries (a member and a proxy, and sometimes other guests and experts) orchestrates the long-term vision and mission of the subregional project.

3. Informal Education Young people are also responsible for the learning, which takes place at the seminars. We invite as lecturers postgraduate students or recent graduates, who provide the perspective of young intellectuals and professionals on topics of high contemporary relevance. We also implement cooperative informal education in all our seminars, led by the participants themselves, in the form of workshops, working groups, discussion groups and moderated panel discussions. Special care is taken always to ensure that each participant of the seminar is properly encouraged and provided with a space to share her or his knowledge and experience related to the general or specific topic. Following each calendar year’s two seminars, a team of usually three editors (all youth: the project coordinator, plus two members of different partner organisations) solicit articles related

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

Introduction

to the themes of the seminars, and put together the annual ecumenical anthology. It includes the lectures from the seminars, as well as responses to or developments of ideas presented there from participants, and articles from other non-participants interested in the same topics. The book is published mostly in English (some exceptions can be made), usually with summaries of each article appearing in all of the official national languages of the subregion, currently in Czech, German, Magyar, Polish and Slovak. Our Lingua Franca language and leadership training courses follow the same principle of mutual learning that underlies our seminars. Young people fluent in one of Europe’s Linguæ Francæ (usually English, but also French, German, Russian or Spanish) travel to Central, Eastern or South Eastern Europe to share this knowledge with their peers there. Teachers come from Western or Central Europe or the United States of America (USA) or Canada, so this provides another valuable cultural exchange. Teaching is done on a voluntary basis; in return for her or his time, the teacher receives full hosting in the local community, along with cultural excursions and other insights into the host culture.

which are arbitrarily based on the history of the last sixty or maximum ninety years. This has led to a unique combination of countries involved in this project: Austria (who also has experiences with Soviet occupation) is a full and equal partner with the four post-Soviet Bloc countries; and Croatia and Slovenia participate as partners as well, helping to develop their post-Yugoslav identities. Our Croatian partner organisation constitutes a special case within the scope of our cooperation, and it helps to illustrate another of its many innovative and creative aspects. Although ideally it would be full and equal members with the other five, at present it does not have the organisational capacity to participate fully, for instance by hosting seminars, within the current time frame of our cooperation. Therefore they participate in a limited role, tailored to meet their needs. The other five countries appreciate the value of the Croatian contribution and are committed to helping fundamentally strengthen its position through participation in our cooperation.

4. Bridge Towards East and South The idea that Central Europe must serve as a bridge to Eastern and South Eastern Europe is another innovation springing from our central emphasis on dialogue and peer relationships. In this way the people reaching out to these countries are those from contexts most similar to their own; thus minimising any condescension or unfavourable comparison, and maximising the amount of useful information and experiences which can be exchanged. It is perceived as a friendly hand being extended to neighbours, taking our responsibility for others from less favourable circumstances. In fact, all the Central European organisations, which comprise our partners involved, have been carefully selected as well to continue this focus of building relationships between neighbours. The very idea of Central Europe breaks down traditional divisions between East and West, North and South, many of

IV. Ever-higher Education Thus our firm commitment to dialogue and mutual respect also serves as the principle upon which the structure of our cooperation is based. It is designed entirely in a ‘bottom-up’ manner, with the needs of the partner organisations determining the direction of the project, rather than vice-versa. Our philosophy of learning is one of praxis, or learning by doing. We believe that the only way young people can learn to work and make decisions in an international and intercultural context is simply to be enabled to do so, within a suitable and supportive environment. Therefore, our programme is structured to provide these opportunities at different intensities, suitable to the various levels our participants are at and allowing space for them to develop during the course of the project. Our emphasis is on education combined with leadership training, which interact and mutually enrich each other.

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

1. Language Training Leadership training is divided into three levels within the project, beginning with the Lingua Franca language and leadership training courses. The primary function of these courses is to teach young people a language with which they can communicate in an international environment, enabling them to represent their countries in international events. The courses take place in groups mostly of a single nationality within the participants’ home countries, making them a very nonthreatening environment for young people’s initial encounters with the project. The international dimension of these leadership courses comes from the teachers, coming primarily from Western, Northern, Southern and Central Europe, but sometimes even from overseas. Also other Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europeans from neighbouring countries may join the courses as participants. This dual participation structure is necessary because of the wide range of proficiencies in English among young Central Europeans. Some of them are quite fluent and able to teach, while others have a basic knowledge, but could benefit from a short intensive course to give them sufficient self-confidence to use it in a working environment.

2. Student Seminars From there, the next step is participation in one of our international seminars. This is where the information aspect of the cooperation culminates. One significant topic is explored in depth through a variety of methodologies, considering it from every angle to give a true multidisciplinary approach. The themes are carefully chosen to cover a broad area, providing a solid background on issues of importance to future Central European leaders and youth leaders. Special care is also taken to ensure that all participants have the opportunity to share their perspectives, in particular many minority voices. Since multiple youth from each country participate, and the countries share a broader Central European culture, again it is a non-threatening, welcoming and warm environment.

Introduction

3. Preparation for Decision-Making The third level of leadership training comes in the preparatory committees for the seminars. There, people, who show potential based on their active participation in previous seminars, are brought together, one from each partner country, to formulate the programme for the seminar and to realise it at the appointed time. Including the project coordinator, youth from at least six different nationalities work together as a team, to produce a fully international event. They get hands-on experience in all the activities necessary to produce such an event. They are also responsible to evaluate its success at the end and to make recommendations on how it could be done better in the future.

4. Vision and Supervision The fourth level is the Central European Board, which is a supervisory structure responsible for determining the overall raison d’être of the subregion, and envisioning her future direction and the strategic steps necessary for reaching it. The participating countries, following the example of the European Union (EU), take turns every half a year in providing chairperson for the subregion, who serves as the moderator of the meeting sessions and the email discussions. The board consists of the coordinator, plus one member from each of the five countries. Another member from each country serves as a non-voting proxy—in itself a level of leadership training in preparation to becoming a full board member. Proxies are present at all board meetings and discussions, are free to speak and to take on responsibilities, and act in the place of voting members in the case of their absence. The board serves as a training ground, which can bear many fruits later in the adult life as well. Outside this ladder structure, several other opportunities for leadership exist as well. Another opportunity might be teaching Lingua Franca courses in countries of Eastern and of South Eastern Europe, thus completing the circle of leadership training.

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

V. Contextual Outreach 1. Disseminating Subregions While youth in our Eastern and South Eastern European neighbouring countries are not formally and totally included in the uppermost levels within the structure of this project, opportunities for development exist for them as well. Most prominent among these would be the possibility of becoming a course organiser for Lingua Franca in their own countries, coordinating national courses jointly with a multinational team. Ultimately, however, the idea is that young leaders from these countries would employ their skills in their own contexts, developing multinational projects of their own through the people and ideas they come in contact with, while participating in our project. Outside the scope of our cooperation, but open to all the youth participating, is the opportunity for further leadership development at the European-wide level of the parent organisation. Indeed, one of our goals in building and strengthening these subregions is the formation of leaders with the skills and experience, to assume responsibility at our highest level in WSCFEurope, that of the European Regional Committee (ERC). The ERC is a multinational group of youth which implements the policy of WSCF-Europe; several Central European youth, who have come up through our project structure have taken roles on this committee or various other European-level leadership positions. Furthermore, it is also possible that the most talented youth leaders can represent Europe in the global leadership of WSCF. These are just some examples of how the effective and complementary partnership between the international- and national-level constituent organisations can facilitate stretching the borders of this project far beyond Central Europe.

2. Inspiring Europe Another area in which this occurs is the multi-layered dissemination of results: WSCF-Europe’s network ensures that

Introduction

information about our aims and events reach at least one thousand five hundred people across the continent. As the national partner organisations frequently comprise local groups (Student Christian Movements) in the major university cities of their respective countries, many of the youth active at this level are also active in local and regional groups. So in this way both the advance publicity and the resulting information find their way into their church groups, equally benefiting other segments of the general population as well. The primary follow-up to our activities is the publication of the annual ecumenical anthology. At least one thousand copies are printed and distributed widely throughout Central Europe and the rest of the continent and the globe. Members of the partner organisations all receive copies, as well as our contacts in Eastern and South Eastern Europe. Further, they are distributed at all Central European and WSCF-Europe conferences and events; and to libraries, universities, colleges, institutions, church bodies, sister organisations and senior friends. And finally, it is made available in full on our website, www.wscfcesr.org, for anyone to view at any time. Perhaps the best dissemination of results, though, is that done by the participants themselves, when they return to their own countries. The topics, which are addressed from an international perspective at the seminars, can be studied further in a national context by the partner organisations. The participants themselves can lead the discussions in these cases, and contribute new ideas gleaned from the interaction at the seminars. In this way, participants take back not only the educational or informational aspects of the seminars, but also leadership skills, thoroughly and effectively multiplying the results. Our method of selecting participants for the seminars is crucially important in fostering this indelible multiplicative effect. Because there are several participants from each country instead of just two or three, they are able to form relationships, while participating and working together at the seminars. Then, as soon as they return to their respective home countries, they can properly function as a core nucleus to spread their knowledge, while mutually supporting and encouraging each other.

BLOCKSOME – NAGYPÁL – S ˇAJDA: Towards a Multi-Focal Europe

Introduction

Also, we do not bring in an entirely new group of participants at each seminar; the presence of earlier participants moving up through the leadership ladder (as board members, preparatory committees, and so on) serves to create a healthy balance of experience and fresh perspectives. This balance of old and of new also creates a solid basis for the continuation of the Central European Subregion, which we truly envision as a genuine and visionary long-term cooperation.

It is important to mention that the first incarnation of today’s Central European cooperation existed in the interwar years (1921–1939) in the form of conferences of Polish, Czech, Slovak, Magyar, Romanian, Yugoslav and Austrian students, devoted to developing future leaders. Furthermore, education (be it in a formal or in a non-formal way) is by its very nature a long-term investment, many times passing through generations. Knowledge, wisdom and erudition have no expiration date. As our participants grow and learn together within the informal environment of our seminars and of our other activities, they are acquiring skills and knowledge, which will serve them well at all times and in all areas of their lives. The interdisciplinary approach to themes encourages the synthesis of information, drawing together understanding and expertise from many walks of life to fashion a true education in the humanities: the awareness of human thought and relations, in which subsists our very conception of who we truly are. To this theoretical dimension we add the practical dimension of learning by doing, not just from lecturers and leaders, but also from each other, as we come together to learn and work across boundaries of nation, gender, ethnicity and religion. It is a potent combination. They are two dimensions of education—theoretical and practical—humanistically focused, and carried out within an environment of dialogue, cooperation and mutual respect. From these, something truly revolutionary can spring: an understanding of ourselves first and foremost as human beings, inextricably identified with each other and with the world we create.

3. Ownership of Strategies All of our well thought-out and constantly developing structures, among them the board and proxy systems, are set up to facilitate the transfer of knowledge, wisdom, spirituality and authority. They also foster a sense of ownership and responsibility among the many youth involved. Having such a structure in place makes it possible to adapt our strategic direction as necessary to make sure that it meets the changing needs of the partners and youth involved. For example, we allow the increased participation of Croatia into the cooperation as its organisational capacities develop. For Eastern and South Eastern European participants especially we hope to achieve a multiplicative effect in the home countries. Our hope and vision is that through leadership formation activities and exposure to the subregional structure of international meetings as it exists in Central Europe, they will gain the skills, enthusiasm and knowledge to adapt this structure to meet the needs of their own respective contexts. Our long-term goal is to see them establish national Student Christian Movements (SCMs), similar to our partner organisations in Central Europe, and ultimately to form the foundation for the Eastern and for the South Eastern European subregions, for the benefit of all of us in Europe.

4. Long-term Investment in Spirit and Genius We definitely and committedly anticipate a long-term multiplicative effect far beyond the scope of our cooperation. The spirit and genius of international cooperation created at these events can long outlive the cooperation itself.

TÓTH Mihály •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The Morality of Self: The Myth of Independency At the beginning of our attempt to present a philosophical interpretation of the importance and nature of the morality of the self, we would like to clarify the meaning of the concept of independency. According to the definitions found in various dictionaries and thesauri, ‘independency’ or ‘independence’ is a special form of freedom, i.e. being free from the influence of other things or persons. In addition to this negative—ie. passive, opposing—meaning of the term, we can also find a positive, active definition of it, in the sense of which it is the inner state of autonomy, self-government or sovereignty.

I. What Is Independency? All these expressions may have political connotations; in my approach, however, I will confine myself to their original, ontological context, where they have been used to characterize relations between entities or persons. Considering the conceptual potential of the meanings listed above, it is no wonder that there is not one myth of independency, but rather a whole series of them. Thus, we can speak not only of the independency of one individual from the other, but even of the independency of one extended abstract area of human culture from the other—for example the independency of science from religion. So, there are many possible representatives for this multitude. Nevertheless, among them we find two particularly powerful myths that have shaped the way of thinking of many generations. One of them is the independency of the self from the society, also called individualism. The other is its contrary, the independency of the society from the self, which is collectivism. Because of the

historical and existential importance of these two myths, we will focus on them throughout our investigation. Whatever definition and context we choose, there seems to be a tight connection between the terms ‘self’ and ‘independency,’ since the latter is considered by most people to be a necessary condition for ‘being oneself.’ Consequently, we may suppose that by describing one of them we come to a better understanding of the other as well. And because a long tradition of the morality of self is known from the history of philosophy, we will take advantage of this tradition in order to get a deeper insight into the nature of the moral value of independency.

II. The Genealogy of the Self One of the most significant insights of Western philosophy is that the ‘self’ is not something already given, but it has to be created and formed.1 This may sound like a paradox at first hearing, for 1 See more about this in various texts on process philosophy, eg. WHITEHEAD Alfred North, Process and Reality. New York, 1929.

TÓTH Mihály: The Morality of Self

one may either ask “who” then creates the self, or “of what” it will be created. We cannot treat the whole issue within the limits of the present study; we can only point out that the problem is generated by the static conception of the subject long preferred by European metaphysics, and that the solution can be achieved by introducing a dynamic conception instead. Philosophy urges the self-determined, conscious and active formation of life at every age. This lesson, however, becomes particularly important in the young and mature adulthood. The life-forming role of philosophy was first highlighted in the late antique—Hellenistic and Roman—era.2 Philosophy did not simply mean a set of knowledge or science with some typical forms of behaviour added to it incidentally; but rather philosophy itself was a way of life, or in other words, a specific form of existence. The ‘love of wisdom’ is nothing but the exercise of cogitation, willpower and existence, the method of intellectual and spiritual advance. And the desired wisdom is considered a way of existence characterized by peace of mind (ataraxia), an internal liberty characterized by self-sufficiency (autarkeia), and cosmic consciousness. Although taking different, sometimes even extreme routes—an example for this was the true Sceptics, who in the end refused to take a concrete position on any possible issue—eventually each antique philosophical school came to recognize and emphasize the capacity of the human “I” of distancing itself from everything essentially foreign to its nature. In true philosophy one does not create theories of the cosmos, right acting or thinking; instead, one contemplates the world, filled with admiration of its wonders, and in addition to this one thinks and acts properly.3 “The carpenter does not come and say, ‘Hear me talk about the carpenter’s art’; but having undertaken to build a house, he makes it, and proves that he knows the art. You also ought to do something of the kind; eat like a man, drink like a man, dress, marry, beget children, do the office of a citizen, endure abuse, bear 2 The presentation of late antique philosophy is based on the following authors and works: FOUCAULT Michel, The History of Sexuality Vol. II: The Use of Pleasure. New York, 1990. 25–32., 95–108; FOUCAULT Michel, The History of Sexuality Vol. III: The Care of the Self. New York, 1988. 37–68.; MARTIN Luther H. et al. (eds.), Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault. Amherst, 1988. 9–49.; HADOT Pierre, Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault. Cambridge, 1995. 49–70., 81–125., 206–214., 264–276. 3 See HADOT Pierre, Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault. Cambridge, 1995. 267.

Subtlety of Self

unreasonable brother, bear with your father, bear with your son, neighbour, compassion. Show us these things that we may see that you have in truth learned something from the philosophers.” 4 Or another quotation: “Empty is the argument of the philosopher, which does not relieve any human suffering.” 5 Philosophy means permanent exercising, which does not take place in the framework of exact sciences, but within the experiences of the concrete, living, feeling, understanding and evaluating subject. The paradigm of the whole of philosophy is the artist, who knows and uses some general rules and techniques of her or his art, yet she or he creates an individual, original and unrepeatable work of art. Nevertheless, the aim of philosophizing is not creating a single work of art, but much more transforming ourselves into an artwork; consequently philosophy, thus conceived, can operate as the art of life. Keynotes of such a philosophy are most of all the ‘care of the self’ (epimeleia heautou), ‘training’ (ascesis), ‘art of living’ (techne tou biou), and ‘spiritual exercises’ (exertitiones spirituales). Its main topics are the relation(s) to ourselves, to the All—that is, to the Universe and the deity at the same time—as well as to our fellow humans. The starting point is the relation to ourselves. This does not primarily mean knowing ourselves intellectually— as the famous oracle of Delphi says, ‘Know thyself’ (Gnoti seauton—but paying active and alert attention to ourselves, that is ‘to be concerned, to take care of oneself’ (epimelesthai sautou 6). This primary relation always appears in a social context. On the one hand, philosophy is always pursued in a community, where the members follow their investigations together and while doing so they become intellectual and spiritual supporters for each other. The duty and mission of a philosopher is—in spite of ways varying according to philosophical schools, which were already mentioned above—to influence the community and to promote its good. Thus, a life truly rooted in philosophy necessarily means a commitment to ourselves and to the community at the same time. 4 EPICTETUS, Diatribai. III,21,46. 5 PORPHYRY, Ad Marcellam. 31. Original saying ascribed to EPICURE. 6 PLATO, Alcibiades I. 127d.

TÓTH Mihály: The Morality of Self

Care of the self does not simply mean virtue, i.e. the readiness for doing the right thing. It means much more an active relationship with ourselves and a whole bunch of activities originating thereof. The expression ‘epimeleia’ may refer to the activity of, first of all, the head of the family who takes care of the things around the house and of the family members (see XENOPHON).7 Second, it may refer to the acts of the monarch who works for the good of her or his subjects (see DION OF PRUSA8). Third, it can refer to the attitude of those who take care of the diseased and the injured (see PLUTARCH9). Finally, it may refer to the ritual services toward the gods and the dead (see PLATO). Similar activities can be turned and practiced toward ourselves in the following fields: dietetics, i.e. healthy conduct; oikonomia, i.e. housekeeping and economy; and erotics, i.e. love life. All these practical fields, defined in the way above, contain a complex web of contacts as well as series of specific questions, together with various techniques and skills related to each one of these. The use of these philosophical instruments in late antiquity was by no means confined to those who committed themselves to philosophy as a profession, or to the time that was dedicated to studying philosophy. The care of the self operated as a principle valid for everybody, for a whole life, together with each possible aspect of it. Life itself had to be changed to permanent learning and continual exercise. Each one of the philosophical schools (Pythagoreans, Socratics, Platonists, Aristotelians, Cynics, Epicureans, Stoics or Sceptics) represented a life model, a way of searching for wisdom and of applying rationality to reality. And despite occasional rivalries between the individual schools, the philosophical form of life did not necessarily involve one’s commitment to a single philosophical tradition while excluding all other traditions. Developing the right attitude toward time became especially important. Both Epicureans and Stoics suggested that we should 7 XENOPHON, Oikonomikos. V,1. 8 DION of Prusa, Discourses. III,55.

Subtlety of Self

live in the present and should neither mourn over the past nor worry about the uncertain future. This attitude, also called carpe diem (“seize the day”), did not at all mean irresponsible pleasure-hunting, but rather is derived from the awareness of the unique opportunity and value of existing in the universe and aims at maximizing this value. According to PLATO, philosophy is practicing dying, and the philosopher is the one who is not afraid of death because she or he contemplates the wholeness of time and being. And in the view of EPICURE, the art of dying is identical with the art of living. Among the techniques of the care of the self, the most significant ones are those of right life conduct, responsible for creating a healthy existence and by this, laying the groundwork for taking possession of all other practical fields. In general, various physical practices belong here; that is, body care, exercise for attaining and maintaining the right physical condition, as well as the temperate fulfilment of natural bodily needs. A much greater emphasis, however, has always been put on the ‘spiritual exercises’: meditations; readings; writing notes on things heard or read; or rethinking the already known but not yet sufficiently understood truths. Also, conversations with a confidant, a friend or spiritual leader; describing the state of mind in a letter or diary; and, finally, asking for counsel. An entire set of techniques for self-knowledge is at the service of the ‘care of the self.’ First of all, several exercises of writing have to be mentioned here. Recording our own inner state, in order to read and reconsider it later. Recording already attained insights, in order to be able to recall them in future situations. Compared with pure verbality, the purpose of such written practices is increasing intensity and broadening the range of effects. Their literal manifestation may vary from real or fictional letters through different types of diaries to philosophical essays or even poems. Philosophical meditation may mean preparing for a speech or an improvisation, by means of evoking the expressions and the arguments that can be used for convincing the audience. An even more important possible application is recalling former

9 PLUTARCH, Regum et Imperatorum Apophthegmata. 197d. (Quoted after FOUCAULT Michel, The History of Sexuality Vol. III: The Care of the Self. New York, 1988. 49.)

TÓTH Mihály: The Morality of Self

reactions recorded in specific situations of the past, in order to reactivate them in imagination and to estimate how one would act in similar future situations. The Stoics developed and preferred a very special form of meditation, the so-called ‘præmeditatio malorum,’ premeditation of evil. This means considering beforehand any trouble that may occur to us in the future, so that we can prepare for it in time and in a proper manner. Closely connected with meditations, we find practical provings or trials. On the one hand, these practices serve for promoting virtues; by them one can weigh how far one has already gone in acquiring individual readiness skills. On the other hand, they can effectively help in measuring the grade of independence from superfluous things. In the case of Epicureans, all this primarily meant the calibration of the pain limit. The Stoics, on the other hand, used them mainly for preparing for the coming hardships, just like a soldier prepares for war. One typical trial was when, after intensive physical exercises or bodily work, someone took a seat at an abundant table, thoroughly inspected the delicacies served, then gave his part to the servants and himself ate the food of the servants. In any practice of this kind, the final purpose is getting acquainted with the necessary minimum, which can be useful not only in emergencies, but also makes it easier to endure everyday challenges or frustrations. “We shall be rich with all the more comfort, if we once learn how far poverty is from being a burden.”10 The next important type of spiritual exercises is the examination of conscience. It always means an exercise divided into several parts and well structured in time. In the mornings, one has to think over the duties and obligations of the day in order to prepare for them. In the evenings, one is to remember back to the day that has passed and to examine it by means of questions, ascertaining what was accomplished and what remained unattained. The most important conditions are silence and quietness: “Can anything be more excellent than this practice of thoroughly sifting the whole day? And how delightful the sleep that follows 10 SENECA Lucius Annæus, Ad Lucilium. 18,1–8.

Subtlety of Self

this self-examination—how tranquil it is, how deep and untroubled, when the soul has either praised or admonished itself, and when this secret examiner and critic of self has given report of its own character! I avail myself of this privilege, and every day I plead my cause before the bar of self. When the light has been removed from sight, and my wife, long aware of my habit, has become silent, I scan the whole of my day and retrace all my deeds and words.”11 Another important technique is discernment, that is, the continuous filtering, examination and classification of thoughts and fantasies. This is a serious trial of strength of will on the one hand, but the guarantee of freedom on the other. According to the Stoic view, the main function of this practice is to distinguish between the things over which we have power or control and the ones over which we do not. The main idea of this consideration is that one should deal only with the former ones instead of wasting energy for the latter. Although the starting point, as it was mentioned before, is to clear the right relation to ourselves, yet the care of the self can by no means be confined to sheer individualism. Instead, it always requires and urges interaction with others. The imperative that we should take care of others has transformed whole forms of life and motivated the development of procedures, prescriptions and techniques, which have been followed, reconsidered, modified and taught through generations. After all, this imperative led to a social practice that established firmer relationships, the sharing of experiences and communication. Furthermore, it also provided an opportunity to create institutions. Whole communities—e.g. the Pythagorean or Epicurean schools—were organized on this basis. The advanced members played the role of leaders, but there were special exercises to change the roles, in order to practice readiness to accept help from the younger or the less respected ones. The Stoic teachers educated different groups of disciples, depending on the occasional interest of the students or their intention to prepare for civil life in general, for important positions, or for practicing philosophy as a profession. The institution of an existential adviser also existed, in relation 11 SENECA Lucius Annæus, De ira. III,36.

TÓTH Mihály: The Morality of Self

with families or other groups, whose duty was the moral support, counselling and exhortation of the clients. Such an advisor also had to operate as a mentor or mediator in all possible social or private affairs. Nevertheless, counselling is not confined merely to institutionalized connections. Natural and informal relationships—friendship above all—can also serve as its overall framework. Some philosophers gave explicit advice that when in need of healing the passions of the soul, one should look for the help of some acquaintance of good fame, rather than assistance by professional experts. Mutual participation in and commitment to the care for each other may open new dimension and give more depth to the already existing relations. The ‘care of the self’ was thus gradually transformed into the art of succeeding with the help of the other. Thus, some even called it the ‘salvation by one another’ (to di’allelon sozesthai), serving explicitly and purposely for the strengthening of social relations.

III. Re-evaluating Independency After all these considerations, we are equipped with the necessary conceptual instruments for reshaping our view of independency. This may help us to blow away the two major myths around it that were mentioned in the introduction, or at least to tame them down for the sake of a balanced synthesis. At the beginning of the treatise we already tried to clarify what independency is. In the present conclusion, first I want to raise the opposite question: what is independency not? The answer seems to be evident—it is dependency. Accordingly, in order to achieve independence one should avoid dependence. Frequent allusions to the morality of self-sacrifice, self-negation, self-defense, self-restraint, self-denial, self-control, self-preservation, etc., seem to suggest a similar stereotype. This stereotype would be that the independence of the self can be realized basically against the others, or might be primarily hindered by them. But finding what something is not, does not necessarily mean finding its contrary. For a broader understanding, we should also look for its alternatives. And as it was shown in the previous chapter, the

Subtlety of Self

alternative of extreme independence is interdependency; that is, a complex network of mutual relations. An even better term is integrativity. It means to realize the constitutive inner relation between the parts and the whole, acknowledging the self-value of the parts, and at the same time acknowledging the new quality and value of the whole. If we apply the new concepts to human relations, we recognize that affirming the value of the self does not exclude affirmation of the value of the community. Thus, seeking independence desperately may lead to isolation and so may be a destructive force from the point of view of the society. This is exactly the case of individualism. To the other extreme, building any group of individuals, regardless of their intrinsic self-values, will result in a monotonous multitude or a uniformed mass, which corresponds to collectivism. But according to the integrative model, the confirmation of the self within the context of the community has a positive effect for the society. It is, moreover, a constitutive element in any viable society. Thus, a consistent morality of the self is not opposed to a social ethos. And if independency is realized in this framework, paradoxical though it may sound, it also may contribute to forming integrated communities. Applying the same pattern, it can be shown that self-care and even self-love are not equal to selfishness; on the contrary, cultivated self-care and self-love serve as the basis and necessary condition for any true love directed to others.12 It is only exaggerated or deformed self-love that threatens altruistic love. Being oneself is possible together with and for the others.13 It also has to be remarked that the logic of the former argumentation cannot be reversed without any further consideration. The reason for this is that it is the community after all that consists of individual members, or in other words, individuals enjoy a relative ontological priority compared to any group made up of them. From this follows a systematic primacy of the morality of the self 12 FROMM Erich, The Art of Loving. New York, 1956. 53–58. 13 KRÄMER Hans Joachim, Integrative Ethik (Integrative Ethics). Frankfurt am Main, 1992. 75–126.

TÓTH Mihály: The Morality of Self

in comparison with any socio-ethical approach. On the other hand, social ethics has a practical priority in many questions, because by its nature it represents the interests of a greater number of the affected ones. Independency as a moral value fits well into the system of the ‘ethics of being,’ which is the reflective level of the morality of the self. This kind of ethics is characterized by the search for orientation by means of examples and advice, and has an eye on the future. Its counterpart is the more socially oriented ‘ethics of doing.’ The competence of it is controlling acts by expectations and rules (commands and prohibitions, respectively), and it is mainly rooted in the past.14 In the latter, we also find the complementary value of independency, which is solidarity. Finally, the philosophical advice concerning independency and its myths can be summarized as follows: “Dare to be independent! While striving for that, use any techniques that have been developed for this purpose in the past or presently. But always be aware of your inevitable embeddedness into social relations, and be in solidarity with those sharing the same human destiny.” Suggested Reading FOUCAULT Michel, The History of Sexuality Vol. II: The Use of Pleasure. New York, 1990. FOUCAULT Michel, The History of Sexuality Vol. III: The Care of the Self. New York, 1988. FROMM Erich, The Art of Loving. New York, 1956. GULA Richard M., Reason Informed by Faith. New York, 1989. HADOT Pierre, Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault. Cambridge, 1995. KRÄMER Hans Joachim, Integrative Ethik (Integrative Ethics). Frankfurt am Main, 1992. MARTIN Luther H. et al. (eds.), Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault. Amherst, 1988. WHITEHEAD Alfred North, Process and Reality. New York, 1929. TÓTH Mihály (1966) studied theology, philosophy and mental health. He is an assistant professor at the Pázmány Péter Catholic University in Piliscsaba, where he teaches ethics. He also gives classes in religious studies at Szeged University and participates in the mental health program of Semmelweis University in Budapest. His fields of research are the relation between science and religion, process philosophy and applied ethics. He is a co-founder of the Magyar and Central European Whitehead Association. His email address is toth.mihaly@btk.ppke.hu

14 A detailed exposition of this typology can be found in GULA Richard M., Reason Informed by Faith. New York, 1989.

Karl-Reinhart TRAUNER •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The Myth of Independency:

Between Self-fulfilment and Misanthropy The title of this paper includes two difficult words: myth and independency. Myth refers to the sphere of religion. The word “religion” either comes from Latin “relegare” or from “religare,” which means the connection, the hanging on to and belonging to a god. The meaning of “independency” is more difficult: the famous German Brockhaus Encyclopaedia lists four meanings of Unabhängigkeit, of which the first three meanings refer to maths and statistics. Only the fourth is related to our topic: independency in the sense of sovereignty.

Morality and Independence It is very interesting that independence is not treated in discussions of ethics. The word cannot be found in the indices of popular works.1 Independence and independency both come from Latin: (de)pendere also means hanging. It is the same as in German: the German word for “independence” is “Unabhängigkeit,” which is related to hängen (hanging). But dependere can also mean “be chained up,” like an animal or a slave. Independence therefore means—being free. As far as it applies to its meaning, religion and independence have a difficult connection: they are related to each other, but they also stand for opposites. Independency is a term for political and national independence. So independence is in contrast to myth. But this is my first thesis: independence and independency include a religious component in their meaning. 1 SCHMIDT Heinrich – SCHISCHKOFF Georgi, Philosophisches Wörterbuch. Stuttgart, 1978.; HERTZ Anselm – KORFF Wilhelm et al. (ed.), Handbuch der christlichen Ethik. Freiburg–Basel–Wien, 1993; KÖRTNER Ulrich H. J., Evangelische Sozialethik. Grundlagen und Themenfelder. Göttingen, 1999.; BISER Eugen – HAHN Ferdinand – LANGER Michael, Der Glaube der Christen. München–Stuttgart, 1999.; KIEßLING Manfred – STEMPIN Lothar et al. (ed.), Evangelischer Erwachsenen Katechismus. Gütersloh, 2001.

TÓTH Mihály: The Morality of Self

14 A detailed exposition of this typology can be found in GULA Richard M., Reason Informed by Faith. New York, 1989.

Karl-Reinhart TRAUNER •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The Myth of Independency:

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

And in that way, the title of this paper is true: independence is a myth. But if it is a myth, one has to ask if a myth is fit for making real policy with it. Nevertheless, a state as well has much to deal with myths; sometimes the origin of a state is a myth too. There are many examples of the connection between policy and myths from the very far past until today. But before I try to pursue this question, I have to realise that there are different spheres of meaning for independence. I want to mention two, which are important for my further thoughts. According to the personal sphere, independent individuality is the other side of the collective; and according to political matters independence means freedom from authoritarian structures with the aim of becoming an individual subject. Even though the word independence is descended from the old Latin, you will realise that beneath these distinctions there is the process of individualisation and differentiation, which is connected to humanism and reformation in Europe. In these times a totally new idea of personhood developed, which is based upon an individual understanding of personhood. That is also the reason the first modern anthropology book, with the title Liber de anima (“Book of the Soul” or “of Humankind,” 1540) was written by Philipp MELANCHTHON (1497–1560), the most important colleague of Martin LUTHER (1483–1546). It may be interesting to note that the first (semi-frontal) portrait—a certain sign of self-consciousness—can be seen in the Erzbischöfliches Dom- und Diözesanmuseum in Wien: it is the portrait of Archduke Rudolph IV “the Founder” (1339–1365). Differentiation and individualisation are the main characteristics of modern times, especially since the Enlightenment. Modern times can be characterized by different attempts to reach a maximum of independence; it has been an important motivational factor for political and social changes. So it is not astonishing that independence is—with regard to our Western world—a really young word.2 Not as a term, but belonging to its meaning, the search for independence can be found in nearly all state utopias. Fairly well-known is the Independence Day of 1776 in U.S. history; perhaps the “Independency,” the name of the movement of independence in XVIIth-century England is also known. 2 Brockhaus Enzyklopädie. Wiesbaden, 1974.; KLUGE Friedrich, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Berlin, 1957.; Stowassers Lateinisch–Deutsches Schul- und Handwörterbuch.

But apart from that, in European history independence or independency as political terms have a short tradition. As a Protestant theologian and historian with a Central European character, I think of the fighting of Martin LUTHER and the Evangelical–Lutheran German nobility against the RomanGerman Emperor Charles V.

Fraternity, Equality and Liberty If you ask someone, most likely the French Revolution would be mentioned as the source of our term; even though the word independence was not one of its three political slogans. They mainly fought for liberty, equality and fraternity. But these terms of the French Revolution of 1789—fraternité, egalité et liberté—have a close relationship to what we associate with independence. So, we can perhaps consider that the idea of independence became part of European intellectual history for the first time as a result of the Enlightenment in the French Revolution.

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

But today we know better; we know that the very positive aims of the French Revolution became converted exactly to their opposites. At the end of the revolution, terror, arbitrariness and misanthropy prevailed. The Napoleonic Regime was a logical consequence of that, and the Napoleonic Wars dominated European history in a terrible manner for nearly two decades with innumerable victims on all sides. In the liberation wars, the Germans tried to get rid of Napoleon and the French, and to constitute a united Germany. At that time, Germany was divided into a lot of small sovereign states. During these liberation wars the ideas of democracy and liberty arose especially in intellectual circles; as well as the idea of a compulsory military service, as a consequence of a democratic state structure. The development of the idea of a modern state was finalized and— resulting from this—war became monopolized by the state. In former times, war was waged by warlords—just in the way it is nowadays done in the Third World. The former slogan of fraternité, egalité et liberté, and the ideas of the Enlightenment as the intellectual basis of the French Revolution, had lost their power and were thrown into the dustbin—or rather, they changed exactly to their opposites. In the year 1784 the great philosopher Immanuel KANT defined the aim of the Enlightenment as “one’s release from one’s selfincurred tutelage.” Tutelage is perhaps the opposite term to independence. But as the French Revolution proved, the attainment of independence—in KANT’s words, “one’s release” —can also lead to terror and contempt for humankind. Perhaps the attempt to reach the highest possible level of independence is human hubris. At the beginning of the Bible we can read that humankind is like God, yet is not God: “God said, “And now we will make human beings; they will be like us and resemble us. They will have power … So God created human beings, making them to be like Godself.” (Gen 1,26.) Apart from the religious character of this statement, the quoted text from Genesis also gives a deep understanding of social and political manners: if one aims at the highest possible

Subtlety of Self

independence and freedom, one also becomes estranged from oneself and—possibly—from one’s own humanity. Humankind needs a political and a social corrective in its attempt to reach freedom. Obviously, unlimited and absolute freedom and independence have no safeguard against inhumanity and brutality, either.

The World After World War II The justified fight of many European countries for independence from the National-Socialist (Nazi) terror-regime was successful. All states were re-established roughly within the borders before 1938 except Germany, which was divided into two zones and lost all its Eastern areas to the other exception, Poland. Nearly fourteen million Germans had to leave their homes, and many of them could take nothing with them, sometimes not even their children. Sometimes immigration was chosen freely, but under the pressure of the political circumstances; sometimes there was a political reason to drive the Germans away, like in Czechoslovakia on the basis of the Eduard BENEˇs ’ Presidential Decrees of 1944. Other movements of people followed: to the towns where German-speaking people had lived in Czech countries, e.g., Slovaks were transferred. And then many of the states became Communist and part of the so-called Eastern Bloc. The real face of the Communist regime was shown in the freedommovements in post-war Communist states. For the first time in 1956, the Magyars tried to gain independency from Moscow and were defeated by the armed forces of the Warsaw Pact. Czechoslovakia met the same fate 12 years later, in 1968. In both states hard years of oppression followed. The “Communist revolutionary movement dismissed its children”: that is the translated title of a well-known book of Wolfgang LEONHARD,3 who had been a politician in an idealistic Communist sense, but was forced to leave the Stalinist Eastern Bloc. The children who were dismissed can be named as freedom, independence and equality. After all, the de-Stalinisation was not very successful, even though there had been some beginnings in the ’50s.4 3 BRUCKMÜLLER Ernst – URBANITSCH Peter (ed.), ostarrîchi-österreich 996–1996. Menschen, Mythen, Meilenstenine. Horn, 1996. 4 VAN DUELMEN Richard, Die Entdeckung des Individuums 1500–1800. Frankfurt am Main, 1997.; VAN DUELMEN Richard (ed.), Erfindung des Menschen. Schöpfungsträume und Körperbilder 1500–2000. Wien, 1998.

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

In the years from 1945 to 1955 Austria—after liberation from the Hitler-regime—was occupied by the allied forces and divided into four zones. It was also the experience of oppression by the Hitler-regime which led to a new Austrian identity. But Austria gained its political independence in 1955 as a neutral state; when all foreign forces left Austria for good. With the means of a so-called everlasting neutrality (immerwährende Neutralität), Austria expressed its independence from HitlerGermany as well as from the two political blocs.5 But only one year later, in 1956, Austria had to employ its army because of the Magyar uprising, and also in 1968 because of the so-called “Prague Spring.” Emil SPANNOCCHI (1916–1992), a general of the Austrian Armed Forces, even developed a system to defend Austria in a war between the two blocs.6 The world was divided into two political spheres, which worked against each other.7 The polarisation of the world, where one side was also dominated by an authoritarian regime with much oppression, was the disillusioning result of the attempts to achieve a new world order after the crucial fight against the National-Socialist regime. It may be that the Western world had more freedom in its internal affairs, but a polarisation always prevents freedom and independence. The fear of an atomic war determined the thinking not only of the young people. The word “overkill” shows how dangerously narrow-minded the political situation was. How can people do more than kill each other, or kill each other more than one time? Much money and much energy were invested into the defence structures. All this would have been invested in other things more profitably. Here it is not the place to answer the questions about why the Eastern Bloc broke down. But it did in 1989/1990. Consequently, the time of World War II finally ended. The bipolar world order has finally changed. The fall of the Iron Curtain was also a movement of independence from Moscow. As a result, independent states have been constituted. 5 SEIBT Ferdinand, Utopica. Zukunftsvisionen aus der Vergangenheit. München, 2001. 6 Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com): French “independant” is attested from c. 1600; Italian “independente” from 1598. Meaning “person not acting as part of a political party” is from 1808. U.S. Independence Day (July 4) first recorded under that name in 1791. 7 TRAUNER Karl-Reinhart, Heeresstruktur und Identität in der Epoche der Freiheitskriege. Österreichische Militärische Zeitschrift 1999/4. 451–462.

Subtlety of Self

The New Europe It is interesting that the movement away from Moscow did not lead to total political independency. In Romania the transformation from a Communist state to an independent state was connected with a revolution; in Russia the state converted from a Communist system to an oligarchy with great problems. Most of the former Eastern Bloc states joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) or at least NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP). Also, many of these states have joined the European Union (EU)—or are still trying to become members of this community.8 Even though the attempts to create a European Constitution seem to fail, the way of the EU will continue in the direction of the United States of Europe (USE)—however it may be called in the future—or perhaps a single European State. This is not only a phenomenon of the former Eastern Bloc states. Austria should be taken as an example again: in 1995 Austria joined the EU and PfP. Her neutrality was relativized by Austria’s participation in the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). The EU has achieved many good things, but many things could have been done better as well. Even though it is a fact that, e.g. the armies have become much smaller, they are also much more professional. Until 1990 the small country of Austria with about seven million inhabitants had an army with a mobilization strength of about 320.000 persons; today they are about to reduce their army to 55.000 soldiers. During the Cold War about eight hundred Austrian soldiers were constantly deployed in peacekeeping missions on Cyprus and the Golan Heights. From 1968 up until 1990, no soldier was employed in a military task in Austria itself. From 1990 to 2004, however, two battalions (ie. 2 x 500 soldiers) were deployed at the Magyar and, from 1997 to 2004, also at the Slovak border to assist the border police in curbing illegal immigration from outside countries. In 1991 a major conflict erupted very close to Austria, when Slovenia and Croatia declared their independence, heralding the collapse of Yugoslavia. There was fighting close to the Austrian–Slovenian border. 8 KANT Immanuel, Was ist Aufklärung? Berlinische Monatsschrift 1784/12. 481–494.

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

All Austrian soldiers left Cyprus some time ago, but in addition to the Golan Heights, battalions were sent to Bosnia-Herzegovina and to Kosovo. Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, Austria has permanently about 2.500 soldiers in military deployment. In the times of the Cold War, the European armies of both blocs officially had the task to defend their home countries. Nowadays they can be employed nearly worldwide not only for defending, but also—thanks to the Petersberg tasks—for the enforcement of the interests of the EU. That is only the military situation, but generally it is typical for the political as well (the military is a part of the political situation)— and also for the question of independency. Similarly, the economic or the social situation in Europe could be dealt with here. But on the other hand, in many regions of the world we have to notice a decay of states. Warlords—and not presidents or chancellors—are ruling there. It is hard to deal with them politically. They follow only their own interests. It is a terrible realisation that the threats to our states are increasing, and not decreasing, as many people hoped. The new dangers are characterised with terms like ‘asymmetric warfare’ or ‘network-centric warfare’ and occur as a result of globalisation. Asymmetry can be found in the field of public security, of economy, of military, even of ethical and moral ideas. Terrorism as a danger for our states—and not as a problem concerning domestic affairs—and the difficult war against terrorism 9 are also results of this development. The Iraqi- and Afghanistan-war is also a result of the war against terrorism and terrorists like Osama Bin Laden. They all found a supremely tragic climax in 9/11, when the Twin Towers of New York were attacked. Perhaps—hopefully—the EU will be a result of the ambivalence between independent freedom in private and in public areas and good relationships between each other and the neighbouring states. Perhaps—also hopefully—in the EU the same mistakes will not be committed that were made in the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, which was a former multinational-state model, neither by the politicians of the leading nations, nor by the politicians of the other nationalities. 9 Wikipedia. Die freie Enzyklopädie (http://de.wikipedia.org; FAULENBACH Bernd, Die Verteibung der Deutschen aus den Gebieten jenseits von Oder und Neiße. In Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte. 2002/51–52. 44–54.

Subtlety of Self

Lessons Learned: Independence in Partnership Our short historical overview—short and, without a doubt, full of gaps—has shown that the quest for independency has not been wholly successful, but has also led to negative reactions. Independency is not a religious term, but a radical political one. Only a relative independence can be a political aim; everything else can lead to a terrible failure. Total independence can turn into terror and misanthropy. But certainly it cannot be an aim to be oppressed, and in this meaning independence finds its positive purpose. But a change even to the better is always connected with insecurity. If you fight for something, you always fight against something, too. A maximum of independency has never been reached successfully, but nevertheless there have been steps forward— perhaps in the sense of the Hegelian philosophy (G. W. F. HEGEL, 1770–1831) of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. Or history might be determining us, as in the model of Oswald SPENGLER (1880–1936), who thought that there are certain cycles for each culture,10 and one cannot break out of this system. The Old Testament term shalom reveals that first of all, the relations between people (and their relationship with God) are important. Politics and the legal system have the task to support shalom.11 The world order must make sure that a maximum number of people can live in peace, freedom and positive independence. It is useless to oppress people or to work against them, because pressure causes counter-pressure. There are many examples throughout history and in the present. But we certainly have to accept that all attempts in our world are only fragmentary, and we have to deal with this failure. The solution—like the truth—can only be found in God’s realm at the end of time (and our world, too). Sometimes people do not realise reality. But what helps us to cope with reality is our conscience. God interferes with our thinking and enables us to gain a critical and differentiated approach to reality. Reality removes itself from a black-and-white scheme. Such bipolar thinking causes a loss of mental and political 10 LEONHARD Wolfgang, Die Revolution entläßt ihre Kinder. Frankfurt am Main–Berlin, 1961. 11 KOCH Hans, Bilanz der Entstalinisierung. In Der Europäische Osten 1957/2.. 67–72.

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

independence; perhaps it is a way to a situation which is “hopeless, but not serious.”12 This is a title of a well-known book by Paul WATZLAWICK, where he shows us how people can be captured in their own thoughts so that they cannot find solutions for their problems, even though these problems are not very serious in an objective sense. Overcoming such polarized thinking and obtaining independence in partnerships must be the aim of the future. Many things which were clear only twenty years ago, nowadays have lost their validity. This also has consequences for the ethical side of political questions.13 The old and fascinating slogan of Bertha SUTTNER, “Lay down your arms!” 14 seems to be too easy. Perhaps “solidarity” will become a keyword15. This concept can be found, for example, in the declaration about the social situation in Austria by the various churches. The reason is that it can bring reconciliation to our future, privately as well as in state policy.

And Us Today? It seems very clear that such a change of old and basic political paradigms takes a long time. And there are no signposts provided for us, because there is no political model for this development at all. But it makes no difference what will come; it will be the European future, and it will be our future as well. We all, with our differing identities, participate in history in different ways, but we do! Our history is part of our identity. It is useless to deny this. History means identity, but it also means a burden with fixed mental and personal attitudes, because of the special experiences we have had ourselves and were told about by our mothers and fathers, grandmothers and grandfathers, at school and in the different media. 12 SIEGLER Heinrich (ed.), Österreichs Souveränität, Neutralität, Prosperität. Wien–Bonn–Zürich, 1967.; JEDLICKA Ludwig, Vom alten zum neuen Österreich. Fallstudien zur österreichischen Zeitgeschichte 1900–1975. Sankt Pölten, 1977. 13 SPANNOCCHI Emil, Der österreichische Kleinstaat im strategischen Zukunftstrend. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Außenpolitik 1968/2. 67–98. 14 An early, terrible document of this situation is eg. published by the Nationalrat der Nationalen Front des demokratischen Deutschland Weissbuch über die amerikanisch–englische Interventionspolitik in Westdeutschland und das Wiedererstehen des deutschen Imperialismus. Leipzig, 1951. 15 KOGELFRANZ Siegfried, Diktatoren im Ruhestand. Die einstigen Ostblockchefs im Gespräch. Berlin, 1997.

Subtlety of Self

Our history also means all the mistakes and failures we have made and suffered in the past. But Jesus also says to us: “Whichever one of you has committed no sin may throw the first stone” (John 8,7). Independence must also be independence from the failures of our history and the search for successful attempts. The aim of modern policy can only be “justice, not vengeance”; this applies also when dealing with the very bad sides of our history.16 This quoted slogan comes from a Jewish author and former concentration camp inmate (KZ), Simon WIESENTHAL, who fought for justice for the victims of the national-socialist regime. It is hard to understand that many good-looking theories are not working. The Protestant theologian and physicist Albert SCHWEITZER (1875–1965) formulated his ethics of respect for life (Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben). In his book, he writes: “I am life that wants to live, surrounded by life, which wants to live.” Yet that especially causes many conflicts, and leads very often to the opposite of a respect for life. In a certain way, the thinking of SCHWEITZER finds a continuation in Hans KÜNG’s Global Ethics Project (GEP). KÜNG, a Roman Catholic theologian, tries to point out that the golden rule (“Treat others only in ways that you are willing to be treated in the exactly same situation”) can be found in every religion. That may be right, but there is the question of how this rule is concretely lived out in different religions and in various cultures. And there are a lot of different understandings of this golden rule.17 And it seems that human rights are not fully acceptable in a worldwide political discussion, because we have to realize that the idea of a person is understood differently in Western history than in other cultures. But that can never be an apology when we treat other people with other ideas in a way which is against our basic thinking. We 16 HUNTINGTON Samuel P., The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York, 1996; MARTIN Hans-Peter – SCHUMANN Harald, Die Globalisierungsfalle. Der Angriff auf Demokratie und Wohlstand. Reinbek n. Hamburg, 1998; HUNTINGTON Samuel P. – HARRISON Lawrence E. (eds.), Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress. New York, 2000.; MÜNKLER Herfried, Die neuen Kriege. Reinbek n. Hamburg, 2002.; KAGAN Robert, Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order. New York, 2004.; FASCHINGEDER Gerald – KOLLAND Franz – WIMMER Franz (eds.), Kultur als umkämpftes Terrain. Paradigmenwechsel in der Entwicklungspolitik? Wien, 2003.; BECKER Joachim – HÖDL Gerald – STEYRER Peter (eds.), Krieg an den Rändern. Von Sarajevo bis Kuito. Wien, 2005. 17 MADER Hubert M. – MICEWSKI Edwin R. – WIESER Andreas B., Terror und Terrorismus. Grundsätzliches, Geschichtliches; Reflexionen und Perspektiven. Wien, 2001.; GUSTENAU Gustav (ed.), Zur Theorie des Terrorismus. Wien, 2002.; Patriot Act of Oct. 24th 2001 in the USA. http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html. BÜLOW Andreas, Die CIA und der 11. September. Internationaler Terror und die Rolle der Geheimdienste. München, 2004.

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

have to follow our own ideas. Differentiation in addition to reconciliation seems to be a way out of this blind alley. In policy black and white sometimes have the same bloody colour; and our world is—to stay with this picture—rather grey. We are in the times before the last (as Dietrich BONHOEFFER states); and the last only is in God. “All life is problem solving,” says Karl R. POPPER18; and it is our lives that we are thinking about. If a person struggles for a maximum of independency, she or he will lose the world and heror himself, too. This cannot be an answer to the problems of our world. It is our task not to search for total independence, but to search for a positive way of dependence.19 Even the churches: they need the independence of states, but in a totally independent society they will not reach their aims. “The Lord asked Cain: ‘Where is your brother Abel?’ He answered: ‘I do not know. Am I supposed to take care of my brother?’ Then the Lord said: ‘Why have you done this terrible thing? Your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground. You are placed under a curse.’ And Cain said to the Lord: ‘This punishment is too hard for me to bear. You are driving me off the land and away from Your presence. I will be a homeless wanderer on the Earth, and anyone who finds me, will kill me.’ But the Lord answered: ‘No.’ And he put a mark on Cain to protect him” (Genesis 4,9–16). Suggested Reading HUNTINGTON Samuel P., The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York, 1996. HUNTINGTON Samuel P. – HARRISON Lawrence E. (eds.), Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human Progress. New York, 2000. KANT Immanuel, Was ist Aufklärung? Berlinische Monatsschrift 1784/12. 481–494. LEONHARD Wolfgang, Die Revolution entläßt ihre Kinder. Frankfurt am Main–Berlin, 1961. POPPER Karl R., Alles Leben ist Problemlösen. Über Erkenntnis, Geschichte und Politik. Darmstadt, 1999. SPENGLER Oswald, Der Untergang des Abendlandes. München, 1988. TOYNBEE Arnold J., Kultur am Scheideweg. Wien–Zürich, 1949. TRAUNER Karl-Reinhart, Heeresstruktur und Identität in der Epoche der Freiheitskriege. Österreichische Militärische Zeitschrift 1999/4. 451–462. TRAUNER Karl-Reinhart, Grundlagen und Struktur der (christlichen) Militärethik im aktuellen Spektrum des österreichischen Bundesheeres. In SCHOBER W. (ed.), Vielfalt in Uniform. Wien, 2005. 219–301. WATZLAWICK Paul, Anleitung zum Unglücklichsein. Vom Unsinn des Sinns oder vom Sinn des Unsinns. Wien, 1983. WIESENTHAL Simon, Recht, nicht Rache. Erinnerungen. Berlin, 1988. Karl-Reinhart TRAUNER, PhD theology and philosophy (history), is the senior chaplain of the Protestant military chaplaincy of the Austrian Armed Forces. This is an elaborated version of the lecture he gave at the World Student Christian Federation (WSCF)–Central European Subregion (CESR) summer seminar on the myth of independency in Brno, Czech Republic, 3–10 July 2005. His email address is karl.trauner@a1.net.

18 SPENGLER Oswald, Der Untergang des Abendlandes. München, 1988.; TOYNBEE Arnold J., Kultur am Scheideweg. Wien–Zürich, 1949. 19 REZAK David, Militärische Intervention als Problem des Völkerrechts. Eine Untersuchung bewaffneten Eingreifens in innerstaatliche Konflikte anhand des Kosovo-Krieges. Wien, 2002.; SCHMIDSEDER Karl, Internationale Operationen und Crisis Response Operations. Charakteristica, Bedingungen und Konsequenzen für das Internationale und Nationale Krisenmanagement. Frankfurt am Main, 2003.

Ivan VOJTASˇSˇÁK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Experience of Cooperation and Conflict As Reflected in the Vision of Central European Identity in the EU There were times in the past when Central Europe was considered a region that could be a model for a peaceful cohabitation of a pluralistic society and for tolerance. Presently the nations settled in this region are tested with new tasks linked with the construction of the European Union (EU). They have to prove the vitality of their particularity and uniqueness by their contribution to the cultural scene of the increasingly globalized world.

Central Europe as a Region of Tolerance Central Europe (CE) is the geographical region, which can be considered historically moulded by the ancient empire of the Habsburgs—i.e. the Austrian Empire. It is a European border region, in which the interests of numerous empires have come into play. These empires are the mentioned dominant Austrian, in contact with the Ottoman in the south, the Russian in the east, and the Prussian in the north. It is the area of historically dominant Western Christianity; but on its Eastern frontier it is in touch with Eastern Christianity, and in the South it borders on a Muslim influence. It could be said that Central Europe may be considered by connecting the imaginative line traced between the towns of Trieste in Italy, Chernivci and Lviv in Ukraine, Gdanˇsk in Poland and Cheb in the Czech Republic. This area of Central Europe had in history the reputation of a region of variety, plurality and tolerance. And yet the first modern

Karl-R. TRAUNER: Between Self-fulfilment and...

Ivan VOJTASˇSˇÁK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Ivan VOJTAS ˇˇSÁK: Experience of Cooperation and Conflict

cataclysm on the global scale dates its initiation to a terrorist act in Bosnian Sarajevo. The “Great War” had as consequences not only human victims, but new frontiers, ethnic cleansing, nostalgia and resentment. These sentiments are vivid even a hundred years later. Great empires fell into pieces and the first modern genocide took place. The victorious conception of post-war Europe was co-formed by President Woodrow WILSON. His ideas became normative for the creation of new states. These were formed as nation states, though they were as a rule composed of a majority state nation and minorities. The state-forming nationalities were considered as privileged and their members have occupied exclusive posts in the public services.

Totalitarian Ideology in the XXth Century The collective memory of the nations of Central Europe is marked by the universal impact of the European streams of thought, mostly by the so-called “streams of distrust,” which we could personify in Friedrich NIETZSCHE, Sigmund FREUD, Karl MARX, social democrats, Marxists, Leninists, Stalinists, in the exponents of relativism and nihilism. From among other ideological streams, we could mention liberalism and Christian ideology. We ought not to omit either utilitarianism or pragmatism, which have also marked the thinking of the European continent to some extent. The basis of the Marxism–Leninism is dialectical materialism. According to the Marxist theory, human behaviour is determined by affiliation to a social class, so the basic factor that determines human life is work. Marxism overly emphasizes the economic aspect of life. But human behaviour is determined by numerous factors, which we could divide into the following three groups: the economic, the territorial and the cultural. Marxism brought a utopia of the realization of the ideal, universal, no-class society, in which everybody would have certainty of a full development of her or his own talents and personality. In a similar way, the other totalitarian systems of the XXth

century made an attempt to realize utopias based on the myths of tradition, sacrifice, fatherland and race. But the inhabitants of Central Europe were influenced by Bolshevik ideals of a totalitarian nature already before World War II. After World War II, in 1945, a totalitarian regime was imposed on the whole region of Central Europe. After a short time it became obvious that the Bolshevik “scientific” ideology, based on relativism, offers neither certainty nor satisfaction, not even in the short run. The lack of liberty was perceived also by artists, actors or intellectuals, who accepted the Marxist dialectical paradigm, but soon had to aim to reform it by demanding the values of pluralism and tolerance. They wanted to give communism a human face. When the Magyar revolution of 1956 was being suppressed, the participants talked about sacrificing their lives for the values of Europe.1 In the heart of matter there was one universal value that was suppressed: freedom as premise for cultural identity and particularity. 1 PIOTRKOWSKI Jerzy, Postwar Central Europe, Art, History and Geography. www.pogranicze.sejny.pl/archiwum/ krasnogruda/pismo/8/forum/piotr.htm.

Ivan VOJTAS ˇˇSÁK: Experience of Cooperation and Conflict

More recently there were demands for cultural liberty and guaranteed human rights, e.g. free religious life, which was a decisive element in the creation of the independent union Solidarity (Solidarnos´´t ) in Poland and the Roman Catholic and civic dissent in Czechoslovakia.2 The nations of this region fell after World War II into the Kremlin sphere of interest, and thus under the surveillance and dirigisme of Stalinist and communist ideas. The political culture and the attitudes towards democracy and civic principles, even if similar in many aspects, varied quite a bit throughout the region. The reactions of members of a certain society are the results of numerous factors. According to the French sociologist Emmanuel TODD, it is first of all the anthropological component, which is formed foremost by a family type that comes into play. It is followed by the educational and formative component: alphabetisation, and then the factor of industrialization, which involves the control of birth rate. These series of factors as a whole determine the complex phenomenon of modernity.3 According to TODD, European thinking is marked by industrialization, by the decay of ideologies and by the appearance of new phenomena in its postmodern societies. Ideologically in Central Europe, it was the influence of Marxist–Leninist totalitarianism. The brutality of the dictatorship of proletariat, however, varied in the individual societies that subsequently determined also the reaction of the resistance movements. The basic scheme of European ideologies, according to TODD, is the following.

Table 1.

Scheme of European Ideologies

Family Type Basic Values Ideological Component _______________________________________________ Egalitarianism

Freedom and Parity

Kinship

Authority and

Communitarian Authority and Parity Absolute Core Freedom

Socialist AnarchoSocialisms

Nationalist Liberal Militantism

Social Disparity Communism

Ethnocentrism Christian Democracy Fascism

Labourism

Lib. Isolationism

2 LUXMOORE Jonathan, Babiuchová, Jolanta, Vatikán a rudy ´ prapor. Praha, 2003. 3 TODD Emannuel, L‘Invention de l’Europe. Paris, 1990.

Reactive Religious Christian Republicanism

Subtlety of Self

TODD in his work studies the decay of ideologies, the advancement of postmodern phenomena, and consequently the changes and the trends of social preferences and of values. At a political level it is mainly the retreat of traditional values, the manifestation of the post-industrial advancement of new technologies and spreading of global capital. This is linked to the demands of participation in governance by various groups of society, the activisation of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and the growth of self-consciousness of small or even marginal groups in society. One of the shortcomings of TODD’s book is that it studies the regions of Europe only from the perspective of the two main streams of Christian ideology: Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. In the case of Central Europe, we need to evaluate the influence of Eastern Orthodox Christianity, as well as the influence of Islam, which has been present in the region for a very long time. Today it is linked to the urgent question about the “Europeanism” of Turkey and her place in the unified Europe. For us in Central Europe there is another interesting question—that of the social attitudes and reactions of Greek Catholics. They were particularly cruelly affected by the suppression of Christian denominations after 1950, as well as by their struggle for revival. The aforementioned minorities are present in all countries of the region. To evaluate the collective memory and thinking of the groups and nations in the Central European region, we could use the results of the systematic studies of the scientific team headed by professor Ronald F. INGLEHART: World Value Studies (WVS). This material gives us a complete image of the changes in perception of values on a global scale. The evaluation of Samuel HUNTINGTON’s visions of the “clash of the civilizations” we find in a paper of Ronald F. INGLEHART and P. NORRIS.4 The authors here evaluate the building of democracy and the introduction of freedom into the Arab countries. The rate of the introduction goes by different speeds, as was supposed by American strategists. The authors also analyse the statement of Samuel HUNTINGTON 4 INGLEHART Ronald F. – NORRIS Pippa, Le véritable choc des civilizations. Le Débat, 2003/126. 76–84.

Ivan VOJTAS ˇˇSÁK: Experience of Cooperation and Conflict

that “the line of the gap and of the cultural differentiation goes between ‘Western Christianity’ and between ‘Orthodox Christianity and Islam.’” This border separates the two worlds, creates a separate space for these different political cultures that presuppose different participation of citizens in the decision-making processes of the society, different status of women and men, and different conceptions of gender freedom. In other words, the values that separate these two worlds are linked to eros, rather than demos. For the evaluation of the possible economic, cultural and social development, it is necessary to see three things. These are: in what measure democracy is accepted; what the requirements are for democratic institutions; and what qualities are demanded from the leaders of these institutions. The given regions could thus be rated on the basis of their measure of tolerance to the notion of gender equality and the achieved level of democracy.

Cultural Differences The level of democracy is rated by means of sociological tests, by the answers to the questions touching on political and social problems in society. The measured results are in percentages, and reflect the approval or disapproval, the agreement or disagreement to the following statements or questions. 1. The Impact of Democracy: Democratic regimes are powerless and require overmuch sophistry. Democracies do not lead to order. 2. Democratic Ideals: Democracy is not unproblematic, but it is the most proper form of public administration. Do you approve the idea of the creation of a democratic political system? 3. Strong Leaders: Do you approve the idea of a government of experts, who are not political and who decide upon their judgement of the best for their country? Do you agree with the idea of having a strong ruler, who does not take into account either election or parliament? 4. Religious Leaders: Politicians who do not believe in God are not suitable for holding public offices. 5. Gender Equality: Generally men are better political leaders than

Subtlety of Self

women. In the case of a lack of job opportunities, men ought to have more chances to obtain work than women. University education is more important for young men than women. A woman should have children in order to get the feeling of self-realization. If a woman wishes to have a child without a permanent partner, do you approve or disapprove of such a stance? 6. Divorce: Divorce must be always well-grounded, it may not be grounded at all, or there are in-between cases? 7. Abortion: Abortion must be always well-grounded, it should never be advocated, or there are in-between cases? 8. Homosexuality: Homosexuality must always be wellgrounded, it should never be advocated, or there are in-between cases? The obtained results of the cultural differences between the Western and Islamic societies are as shown in the table in percentages.

Table 2.

Western Societies Islamic Societies _________________________________________________

Impact of Democracy Democratic Ideals Strong Leaders 61 % Religious Leaders Gender Equality 82 % Divorce Abortion Homosexuality 53 %

68 % 86 % 61 % 62 % 55 % 60 % 48 % 12 %

68 % 87 % 39 % 35 % 25 %

These results give us an idea about, e.g., the fact that the support of democratic institutions is surprisingly equally strong in Western countries and in the Muslim world. A great majority considers democracy an effective form of public administration; 68 percent reject the idea of “democracy as a forceless regime.” Muslim countries give more support to religious authorities, which play a more active role in society than in the Western world. In the evaluation of the status of women in society, there is evidently a big difference.

Ivan VOJTAS ˇˇSÁK: Experience of Cooperation and Conflict

We have to differentiate particular values of the data in individual countries in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the level of democracy and tolerance of difference in the Muslim countries. These results we may inspect in the picture below. From this graph we may evaluate different degrees of tolerance in particular countries of Central Europe, as well as the position of Turkey in the tolerance scale, and the obtained democracy level. In the same way, we may consider the difference between the typically Islamic countries of Egypt (Sunni) and Iran (Shia).

Table 3.

Subtlety of Self

At times the whole world recognizes democratic values, but there are not yet global agreements about self-expression values, about the liberty of conscience and about interpersonal trust. Yet these values are decisive for democracy. Economic development causes changes of attitudes in all studied societies. Modernization brings systematic and foreseen changes in the role of gender: industrialization attracts women into the world of employment and drastically decreases the birth rate. Women enter schools and universities; they hold management positions. The post-industrial phase marks even more the advancement of gender parity. Strategic management of society must engage all societal resources in favour of human development all over the world. Culture permanently forms the way of societal development. It is obvious today that the events of 1989 have brought ideological paradigm changes, the shift from a directive model to a subjective model. But the way of thinking remains on the dialectical materialistic basis, or it is marked by relativism and nihilism, mainly in the thinking of young people. Culture is commercialized and becomes goods of trade. The dominant mass culture obtains global character; global elements grow, while the regional and local decrease.

Peace Process and Globalization

These questions are manifested in a broader vision there, where the values of tolerance, trust, political activism and the acknowledgment of individual autonomy form the values of selfexpression. In all the studied countries which were examined by WVS, acceptance of gender parity—of the key indicator for evaluation of the tolerance grade and individual freedom—is in close relation to the level of democracy in the society.

The twentieth century was marked by many new factors, strengthening on a global level. These are, e.g., globalization, terrorism or the creation of supranational relations between nation states. The actual situation has an imperative for the economic liberalization and territorial compromises that should lead to a peace that would satisfy all parties. A pragmatic attitude towards economy, rationality and openness is required. The increasing development of the European Union (EU), the international arbitrage of the peace process, and the attractiveness of international capital all help to overcome economic stagnation. These processes lead from the “zero-sum game” towards cooperation and partnership, in which there is no winner and no loser.

Ivan VOJTAS ˇˇSÁK: Experience of Cooperation and Conflict

If the conflict of the twentieth century subsisted in the antagonism labour vs. capital, then at the end of the century the victory was on the side of capital. Labour lost in each of its ideological manifestations. It lost those of the Orthodox Marxism (as in European social democracy), in the national Bolshevik soviet version, or in the form of the misty European attempts of the so-called “Third Way.” Nowadays our societies are unified in their attempt to work on new European structures. After years of hope, we have come to the first shocks. By refusing the Constitutional Proposal of the European Constitution, the inhabitants of France and the Netherlands have expressed their disapproval of the proposed text of the Constitutional Agreement. How has this text been accepted by the Central European members of the European Union? From this material we can understand that in the Central and Eastern European region there is an evident shift of sensitivity to values from the traditional towards rational-secular values. Another strong fact is that there is a presence of the sentiment of deception and loss of certainty. These factors are manifested in the higher indexes of suicide, which are most seen in Hungary and Slovenia. From these facts one may deduce an urgent need for finding solutions to personal crises present in society, linked mostly to the employment of young people and their effective formation for the future needs of the society, as well as the degree of satisfaction of the middle-aged and elderly generation. In this realm it is urgent to acknowledge the lack of authentic cultural satisfaction, the anti-cultural offer of the mass media, the shallow show vogue and the wide spread of pornography and other one-sided approaches to life in both print and electronic media. It is urgent to analyse the world of the values of individuals: to enhance anthropological understanding, to foster group and national identity, and to create solid relations in the international and global system. It is necessary to use effective instruments of analysis and problem-solving to the aforementioned burning issues of

European, as well as Central European societies. It is important to realize the reality of the processes spreading all over the world, to be aware of trends and to find effective measures of reacting. The main problem seems to be in the realm of education and formation of young people. It is important to prepare the young generation for the tasks of tomorrow, to make it capable of solving problems in a creative way in order to be strong in cultural, competitive and creative aspects of their activities. Only in such a way will they be prepared to solve the problems that they will encounter on their way. Ivan VOJTASˇSˇÁK, born in 1943, received his education at the Slovak Technical University. After graduation and post-graduate studies he participated in a two-year study programme of technical creativity and legal patents. For a number of years he worked as an advisor in the office of the Mayor of Bratislava. He was the secretary of the Justice and Peace Council of the (Roman Catholic) Slovak Bishops’ Conference and has been interested in Christian Social Doctrine for a number of years. He is married and has two daughters. His email address is: ivan_vojtassak@yahoo.co.uk.

Kate WILSON •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

No Place Like Home: A Nation off the Map

The Polish national anthem begins “Poland is not yet lost”—this was their soldiers’ hymn just after the partition. The Polish legions fighting in Italy in the 1790s hoped that, united in this marching song, they could liberate Poland too, and “march from the Italian land to Poland.” A hundred years later, this in itself seemed a myth of independence to many, but writers like Bolesl/aw PRUS (1847–1912) kept the idea alive. Bolesl/aw PRUS wrote descriptions of his journeys from the Russian sector into the Austrian one at the turn of the century (around 1895). At this point Poland had been partitioned for a hundred years and still had another twenty to go before regaining independence—and the hymn as their national anthem. How could writers in a country that had lost her independence preserve the hope of self-determination and still publish openly, rather than for “their desk drawer”? They had to write in such a way that the occupying powers would not notice it or they would be able to ignore it. The Polish journalist and novelist Bolesl/aw PRUS was a master of this art. His sharp and witty observations on society worked because they were always amusing. He knew his own territory and described it to other Poles—using the convention of a tourist travel diary to look at his country as if from outside.

Laughing at Oneself The writer Bolesl/aw PRUS himself was a great satirist and social commentator—he used humour not only to avoid the censor, but also to shake his compatriots out of their own self-congratulation. He fought as a soldier in the 1863 independence uprising aged just 15, but was more than prepared to criticise his homeland from

a positivist perspective, notably in his journalism and short stories. In his Most General Life Ideals (1905), Bolesl/aw PRUS systematized his positivist ideals of happiness, utility and perfection. These were serialised in the Warszawa Daily Courier (Kurier Codzienny) from 1897–1899. A book edition appeared two years later, with a revised edition in 1905. There he gave the Polish nation short shrift: “We are inclined to eruptive action, we do not like small and persistent effort, and we are entirely lacking in discipline, that societal virtue which disposes one to obey and teaches one how to command.” The recipe for this was clear to him: “In commending Utility to my compatriots, I am not recommending some contrived theory. I am merely disclosing to their eyes a universal fact and saying: ‘You must be useful, because the whole world is useful, because utility is one of the most universal laws. The more useful one can be to one’s intimates, to one’s neighbours, to society, to civilization, the better are one’s chances of existence. But one who is unable to be useful will perish helpless and unmourned.’” Bolesl/aw PRUS’ way of being useful was to describe his nation to herself—in a highly entertaining way. In his travel writing, he held a mirror up to his compatriots.

An Unremarkable Destination Bolesl/aw PRUS sets out on his journey to a less-than-stellar destination—the spa town of Siedlice (Zedlitzfelde). He knows that convention dictates a description of more glamorous and farflung locations, so his choice will need some justification. “The tendency to visit more or less wild corners of the globe is a nineteenth century characteristic. This tendency is one of the most weighty reasons as to why one fine day, at the Terespol Train Station we obtained, for the determined sum of rubles and kopeks, a ticket to Siedlice. “To Siedlice! … What for? “Indeed I had considered the pleasures of a longer stay in Philadelphia, but the news of the speedy arrival of representatives of Warszawa industry scared me off. I dreamed of seeing the monument to ARMINIUS in the Teutoburg Forest,1 but I recalled 1 In 9 CE, the Cherusci Germanic tribe, led by ARMINIUS, liquidated three Roman legions under the command of Publius Quinctilius VARUS in Teutoburg Forest. The battle established the Rhine as the boundary of the Roman Empire for the next few hundred years, until the decline of the Roman influence in the West.

Kate WILSON: No Place Like Home

that in the Warszawa Philharmonic for a relatively small fee I can, every week, see several hundred living, talking and sufficiently monumental Arminiuses. I desired to be in Miechów, where I had received a public and kind invitation by one of the church grandfathers, but I changed my destination having heard that the Miechów region had been visited by hail, locusts, and finally by the special correspondent of Kurier codzienny (the Daily Courier) ... What was left to me in these circumstances, if not a trip to Lublin and Siedlice? People meet with greater misfortunes in this world” (Travels, 49–50.). As a columnist for the very paper he lambasts, Bolesl/aw PRUS does not take himself too seriously. Yet he does have a serious point to make—he is not so free to travel as it first appears, and even if he was, he is not so free to write about it either. He disguises this fact by lamenting his difficulties in describing something about which everybody knows. Of course he cannot say anything about Poland, because he has expert critics all around him who know the reality. How much easier it would be to describe places that nobody he knows had ever been to! Yet under the Russian occupation against which he fought in his youth, it is also far from easy for Bolesl/aw PRUS to describe the Polish reality. His choice of imaginary destinations is far from accidental. “It is indescribably difficult to write as a correspondent at home, although on the other hand it is easy to do the same abroad … The most advantageous in this regard is Berlin, because in every pub there one can find a refined diplomat and in every alley an accomplished strategist, who for a few pfennigs or tankards of ale will inform a correspondent not only on the questions which the cabinet is addressing today, but also on the future map of Europe, which the Prussian headquarters intends to publish. “Exactly the same benefits are available to a correspondent who writes about foreign countries without leaving Warszawa; and although imagination is not one of the most reliable sources of information, it nevertheless provides one with a wealth of material which becomes more and more credible, the further abroad it reaches. “Yet woe to the home correspondent! “What shall, I, unhappy fellow, be able to think up about Siedlice? Absolutely nothing! The barbarism of the local 60

inhabitants does not extend to cannibalism or lack of knowledge of any clothing other than a modest waist covering. They live in homes equipped with all the externals of civilisation, they do not dye their teeth red, they do not scratch at tree-trunks, in a word they do not do anything worthy of particular note.” (Travels, 60–61.). So Siedlice is not exotic or remarkable. It is not noteworthy, because it is so familiar. It hardly seems worth writing about at all. So why does Bolesl/aw PRUS bother? He could stay at home and dream up tales of exotic lands, even if he is unable to see them with his own eyes. Certainly other people in Warszawa are more than capable of stretching the truth in this way. Most significantly of all, it is easy not only to make up such tales, but to redraw the whole map of Europe. Moscow cannot be mentioned by the Varsovian author, but the other partitioning power, Prussia, can be. Bolesl/aw PRUS on his travels shows how this map has already been redrawn, to redefine his homeland. This is why it is worth writing about.

Kate WILSON: No Place Like Home

The Other Poland Bolesl/aw PRUS makes a point of travelling from Poland to Poland—across an international border which he believes should not exist. He describes his arrival in Kraków on the night train from Warszawa. “As the light grew stronger, I saw that I was already in different surroundings. The Mazovian sands had been replaced by clay; and the land was no longer flat, but strongly contoured. Soon the final cry brought us to attention: Border! … “Showing passports and drinking coffee took about two hours. Having already bought an Austrian ticket I stepped slightly sleepily into the porch, near which carriages as yellow as canaries stood … A short while after the train departed, an Old Testament trader approached me with the question whether I would like him to change money for me. “—How much are you offering for a rouble? “—Fifteen flerins… “—In Warszawa I got one florin twenty for one rouble. “The trader cast his eyes to the heavens and grimaced. “—When did you change money in Warszawa? “—Yesterday afternoon. “—Yesterday afternoon is not today morning. The rouble has fallen, I just receeved a wire direct from Wien. Anyhow, for you I will give one flerin fifteen and a half. “A few hours later I received one florin and twenty cents per rouble in Kraków. It seems that they did not get a “wire direct from Wien” … The first impressions are unpleasant. Aside from the snail’s pace of the yellow carriages, one cannot get used to the idea that inside the second class contains narrow hard benches covered in slippery leather. The conductors are more like hospital assistants than chaplains of the new goddess Steam; their washed-out and creased uniforms have a pleasantly kitsch feel. The signalmen’s boxes are indeed white, but old, roofed with tiles that display a great tendency to collapsing into the dust from which they arose. Even the telegraph poles, which at home have an I-shape, here look more like the letter A, of which the upper part is accented by three crossbars with porcelain bells and wires” (Travels,142–145). This other Poland is different then. One has to cross borders and change money to get there, even if the rate is not always clearly

Subtlety of Self

dictated from the Austrian capital. The people have strange accents, and will cheat you if they can. The place is poor and old-fashioned. The reader is given the impression that urbane Warszawa is far superior to backward Kraków. Yet the cities are less than a day’s travel apart, and on the other side of the border, the people speak the same language. Still, being outside his partition, the Tsarist Polish Kingdom, Bolesl/aw PRUS is perhaps freer to comment about the Austrian partition of Galicia. Here he can take on the role of foreign traveller, not just of home correspondent, even though neither he nor his audience would draw these distinctions for this journey.

A Sight Worth Seeing It is when Bolesl/aw PRUS plays the classic tourist that he surprises himself—and his readers—with how much there really is to see. He makes a trip to the famous salt mines at Wieliczka, outside Kraków. He does not expect to be particularly impressed. Will this not just be another Siedlice, a rather unimposing site that is hardly worth the trouble? Bolesl/aw PRUS has always thought so, and his fellow travellers confirm this view. So it seems. Significantly, he meets others from his partition, and greets them as compatriots, different from the Galician Poles. Yet the carriage is his too; there are links made between the Kingdom and Galicia, and all the travellers are going home. “So we are travelling to Wieliczka. The day is cloudy; a light rain is falling on the earth, and on the platform of Kraków station there is a crowd of departing travellers. “Since my watch did not agree with that of the Church of Our Lady, and the Church clock did not agree with the station one, I arrived too early and as a result I had as much fun as a deaf person at a concert. The only entertainment was the picture of a few Germans eating pork and potatoes and reflection on the subject: how did I used to imagine Wieliczka? “Well, I used to imagine it like this: “It is a sand dune, with a few handfuls of grass and a few stunted pine trees on it. In the moment when with all my youthful energy

Kate WILSON: No Place Like Home

I run forward to see the mine, someone calls out: “—Stop! Stop!… “I look down and see a hole at my feet as vast as the Theatre Square in Warszawa, and as deep as from Christmas to Easter. A miracle indeed, that I did not fall in! … “We set off—Terespol style. “In my compartment (why should I not call it mine?) sat four men: myself and some three other gentlemen. I thought that they would talk about the mine, but they preferred to start talking about politics, later about poverty, and then again about politics and again about poverty. “—Are you going to Wieliczka, good sir? —I asked one. “—Oh yes! I have some horses waiting for me there … “—Bad! … —I thought. One of us is out already. “—And are you going to the mine, good sir? —I asked the second. “—No. I am going home. … “The third was also going home! At that moment the worrying vision overcame me that all the passengers in all the compartments were going home … I began to sweat. “One of the company (I do not even know why) won my affections from the first moment. As I live, I have never seen such a physiognomy, and he attracted me, because he smelled of ink … So I turned to him. “—Have you lived in these parts for long? “—For a few years. “—I suppose you have visited the mine a few times? “—Not once! —he cried gaily. —When I lived further away, I planned to go, but now I keep putting it off from one day to the next. “—And have you visited the mine, good sir? —I asked the second. “He had not either, and the third had not either, although all of them planned to a few times a year. (…) “Halfway to Wieliczka a friendly neighbour asked me suddenly: “—Are you not from the Kingdom, good sir? “—How could I be? —I asked, offended that no trace of higher culture was visible on my person. “—I am from the Kingdom too! … —cried the other, and his eyes sparkled. 64

Subtlety of Self

“We fell into each other’s arms. “—I am called so-and-so —said the one. “—I am this-and-that —I told him. “—Ah, it is you! … —cried my new friend. “—So it is you? … —I say, remembering something in that moment. “And again we fell into each other’s arms, my friend was indeed that Kraków satirist so well known at home, whose works will be familiar to Courier readers. (… in the mine …) “—Saint Anthony’s Chapel! —said the old guide. “—Saint Anthony’s Chapel! … Saint Anthony’s Chapel! … — voices, who knows whose, repeat after him. “Everything here is made out of salt. A well-formed ceiling, framed by squat columns, steps, a great altar and figures of angels. Everything of salt and everything grey black, like those great dirty heaps of ice which one sees on the streets of Warszawa. Here eight generations of miners begged God for aid and mercy, people who daily say goodbye to the rising sun, not knowing whether they will see it set! … “Imagine a very large church, in which you find yourself during an earthquake. Its high walls and thick ceiling suddenly burst, collapsing into great shapeless pieces, which fly from above and from the sides, they compete, outstripping each other, seeking to crush you. Suddenly some force stops them … they are frozen in motion, but they look at you like a wild animal waiting to pounce. In this black and enormous body you can imagine a moment of congealed life. The mysterious bit holds back the anger of the monster, but if it is released! … “We sail to the solemn sounds of an orchestra and colourful fireworks, which light up that great fang-lined maw from all angles. Passing a narrow door we see on the smooth wall to the right the statue of some saint who has been praying for travellers and miners for many ages. To the left again the notched and sculpted blocks of salt, arranged like stairs in such a way that instead of leading into the centre, they run forward, with each higher step hanging ever more threateningly over your head …

Kate WILSON: No Place Like Home

“When I recall these things today, I think that for those three hours I had a strange dream, whose content was subjects I had never known or felt before” (Travels, 219–235.).

Dreaming of a Home with No Address This dream is Bolesl/aw PRUS’ very myth of independence. There is something in Poland that is still asleep, that is waiting to wake up—something with ancient roots, a force that has been tamed. That is both beautiful and threatening—that is located just outside the historic capital city, Kraków, out of the way where noone is really looking, but everyone is travelling towards it; they are going home. Contemporary readers would have to be very thick-skinned indeed to miss the author’s point. Bolesl/aw PRUS covers his patriotism in layers of satire, but shows how deep and how far out of his way he has to go to find something to be proud of—even his compatriots are doubtful whether he will find anything at all, and they themselves cannot be bothered to try. The further Bolesl/aw PRUS travels, the more opportunity he has to show that the unremarkable destinations are also noteworthy, and that there are more sights worth seeing to be found. His style could not be more different from the Romantic poetry that Bolesl/aw PRUS grew up with, but the message has not changed much over the decades. His fellow travellers can talk of nothing but ‘politics and poverty’—he cannot write about these, but his message remains clear. The underground Poland is still there, hidden away, and has the potential to wake up. Bolesl/aw PRUS’ way of waking it was not through dramatic rebellion, because his generation had seen this fail, in 1863. He rather favoured slow effort and preserving memory, but this did not pay off in his lifetime. Bolesl/aw PRUS died just six years before his “strange dream” came true, through the explosive events of a world war. What would he have thought of the Poland regained, with its very different borders, patched together back onto the map from the sections he had crossed? No doubt he would have continued to be wittily critical, and he would certainly have found much to criticise. But that is another story…

Suggested Reading PRUS Bolesl/aw, Kartki z podróz˙y [Pages from Travel]. Warszawa, 1950. [Translations are my own.] PRUS Bolesl/aw, Placówka [The Outpost]. Warszawa, 1886. PRUS Bolesl/aw, Lalka [The Doll]. Warszawa, 1889. PRUS Bolesl/aw, Emancpantki [The New Woman]. Warszawa, 1893. PRUS Bolesl/aw, Faraon [Pharaoh]. Warszawa, 1895. PRUS Bolesl/aw, Najogólniejsze ideal/y z˙yciowe [Most General Life Ideals. (tr. KASPAREK Christoph)]. Warszawa, 1905. Kate WILSON is a Roman Catholic from Wales. She studied in Glasgow, Warszawa, Poznan´, Berlin and London, ending with a PhD on the politics of toleration in early modern Great Poland. She was a member of the WSCF ExCo and ERC, 1999–2004. She now directs the UK Programme of Action Reconciliation Service for Peace, a German charity, and researches for the East Looks West project on travel writers from Central Europe at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London. Her e-mail address is kaska36@hotmail.com.

Rebecca BLOCKSOME •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Image, Essence, Reality: Abstraction and Representation in Mediæval Art Wandering through the halls of mediæval art collections in Central Europe and elsewhere, we might marvel at the liberties artists took with their renderings of the natural world—bodies morph into elongated forms with over- or undersize appendages; architectural elements shrink and recede into space with no consistent perspective; lines dissolve into patterns and light radiates from impossible sources. Of course, in the modern era of “art for art’s sake,” such liberties are no longer anything to marvel at. Art now regularly departs from naturalistic depictions, to the extent that mediæval deviations seem slight in comparison. The autonomy of art from nature is a wellestablished principle, and we no longer necessarily expect a dependant relationship between ‘depiction’ and ‘depicted’—if indeed those categories still have meaning. But if we are not too conditioned by the past hundred-odd years of art history to remember that historically, representation was considered the prime function of art, we well might puzzle about how artists in the Middle Ages came up with such ‘modern’ formulations a thousand years ahead of their time. How was mediæval imagery freed from the bonds of nature and reality?

Nature/Reality This conundrum is especially compelling if we take into consideration that art in the mediæval era had a very narrowly defined role. Its purpose was wholly didactic in nature—to instruct and inform the masses, specifically in the realm of things spiritual. The Church’s complete domination over all aspects of

life ensured that the value of art, as of any human endeavour, was measured solely with respect to its furtherance of the Reign of God. Clearly, no “frivolous” or un-edifying art would officially be tolerated in this atmosphere; and furthermore, artistic expression as a whole was taking on an unprecedented importance and seriousness as the Church assimilated the idea of God’s incarnation as a sanctifying act in the tangible world. Early Christian writers such as CYRUS of Jerusalem suggested that in a broader interpretation of the incarnation, God is revealed throughout the whole of Creation, not merely in the person of Jesus Christ or in humankind in general. This opened the door to a new respect for the physical environment—“What had once been inaudible would now be heard; what had once been invisible could now be seen.”1

1 FRANK Georgia, The Pilgrim’s Gaze in the Age before Icons. In NELSON Robert S. (ed.), Visuality Before and Beyond the Renaissance. Cambridge, 2000. 102.

Rebecca BLOCKSOME: Representation in Mediæval Art

But then, how shall we explain the apparent contradiction between an official philosophy of respect for the natural world, and an official art which rejects naturalism? It seems clear that the mediæval understanding of naturalism differed somehow from our own, so that an abstract style of art was not incompatible with an accent on material reality. The paradox was succinctly laid out by Byzantine scholar Cyril MANGO in his 1963 work, Antique Statuary and the Byzantine Beholder: “Our own appreciation of Byzantine art stems largely from the fact that this art is not naturalistic; yet the Byzantines themselves, judging by their extant statements, regarded it as being highly naturalistic and as being directly in the tradition of PHIDIAS, APELLES, and ZEUXIS.”2 MANGO, however, overlooked a key point: the Byzantines had no such category as ‘naturalistic.’ They described their art as ‘lifelike,’ in terms relating it not to nature but to reality.3 Although the two terms have become essentially synonymous in the modern era, by following the train of mediæval philosophy we can understand their conception of reality, allowing us to draw a fruitful distinction between the two.

Seeing Is Believing According to early mediæval epistemology, corporeal things— the things of this world—have no meaningful existence in and of themselves, but rather serve merely as indicators of the Divine.4 As John Scotus ERIGENA wrote in his IXth-century treatise, On the Division of Nature: “In my judgment, there is nothing among visible and corporeal things which does not signify something incorporeal and intelligible.”5 This should not, however, be interpreted as a de-emphasis of the importance of material reality. Quite the contrary; mediæval philosophers and theologians realised that it was only through our thoughtful experience of our tangible environment that we could ever hope to gain awareness of the supernatural things which constitute ultimate reality. 2 NELSON Robert S., To Say and to See: Ekphrasis and Vision in Byzantium. In NELSON, 143–144. “MANGO’s paradox,” as it has come to be known, refers specifically to Byzantine art; yet his comments can be more broadly interpreted as referring to the entire genre of mediæval art. While the degree and variety of abstraction differed between the empires of Rome and Byzantium, abstraction in the sense of non-pictorial representation remains

Subtlety of Self

Particularly the visual environment played a leading role in this process of supernatural awareness; as indeed, sight occupied the position of prime importance among the five senses beginning in Hellenistic times. The Jewish philosopher, PHILO of Alexandria, wrote then: “Special precedence must be given to the sight, for God made it the queen of the other senses and … has associated it most closely with the soul.”6 By mediæval times, visual experience was clearly established in the culture as the crucial element in cognition. Knowing proceeded by imaging—verbal information could not be directly comprehended until “mental pictures” were formed and stored away in the mind. In fact, in the writings of the Church father St. Thomas AQUINAS, visio is treated as an equivalent term to apprehensio.7 Further elaborating this idea, the Polish natural philosopher Erazm Ciol/ek WITELO in 1270 sketched out two kinds of visual perception in his De Perspectiva: the grasp of visible forms through intuition (direct perception) alone—“seeing” in the most basic sense; and the perception through intuition with preceding knowledge—a combination of visible sensation plus memory plus imagination plus reason.8 It is this second type of perception that most concerned the mediævals as they pursued their quest for the visio Dei, the vision of God. The question of how exactly this process worked—how seeing an image on an altarpiece could give insight into the nature of God—was one of the major problems which preoccupied philosopher–theologians throughout the Middle Ages; and their solutions to it shed some light on the specific development of mediæval imagery.

Universal Questions Simply stated, the dilemma was: how can human beings conceive of universal entities, given that our experience is strictly limited to particular (i.e. tangible) entities? Known as the “problem of universals,” this question actually arose from PLATO; but it took on a special urgency for mediæval philosophers, as many of the divine qualities with which they were most concerned—e.g. being, unity, goodness, truth—were universal in nature.

a defining characteristic of mediæval art when taken as a whole. 3 Ibid. / 4 HAHN Cynthia, Visio Dei: Changes in Medieval Visuality. In NELSON, 178. 5 Quoted in ECO Umberto, Art and Beauty in the Middle Ages. London, 1986. 57.

6 Quoted in FRANK, 106. / 7 ECO, 68–69. / 8 Ibid.

Rebecca BLOCKSOME: Representation in Mediæval Art

PLATO originally posited that universal entities have actual existence, eternal and independent from the (individual human) mind; he called these entities Forms or Ideas. Numerous mediæval thinkers recognised the potential of the Platonic concept of Forms/Ideas and embraced the theory of universals as Divine Ideas eternally existing in the mind of God.9 In one of the most prominent efforts to develop PLATO’s Ideas, St. AUGUSTINE of Hippo proposed a doctrine of Divine illumination, which stated that knowledge of universals was impossible based on direct experience; therefore, our only knowledge of Divine Ideas could come from a supernatural revelation by the grace of God. This conception, however, tended to strongly de-emphasise the natural world; thus St. Thomas AQUINAS developed a countertheory, that of abstraction.10 AQUINAS, who was influenced by ARISTOTLE’s critique of PLATO’s ideas, further elaborated the theory of the capability of human intellect to process information acquired by the senses. The specific act of processing necessary for universal cognizance—that of recognising and extracting the essence of a thing, of separating in the mind what cannot be separated in reality—is abstraction.11 These two theories of abstraction and Divine illumination set up the framework for all other mediæval philosophers tackling this question; but they were considered rather as two endpoints on a continuum than as two antithetical positions. By the end of the XIIIth century, the Thomistic–Aristotelian view seemed to be prevailing, and abstraction was solidly established as the mode of perceiving the universal in the particular. Thenceforth the argument shifted from whether or not abstraction occurs to various aspects of how it occurs, particularly discussions about what exactly the universals abstracted are, what part they play in constituting knowledge, and how they factor into the encoding and communication of knowledge through the medium of language.12

9 KLIMA Gyula, The Medieval Problem of Universals. In ZALTA Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. 2004. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2004/entries/universals-medieval. 10 Ibid. / 11 Ibid. / 12 Ibid. / 13 Ibid. / 14 Ibid. 15 SPADE Paul Vincent, Thoughts, Words and Things: An Introduction to Late Mediæval Logic and Semantic Theory. 2002. 63–66. http://www.pvspade.com/Logic/docs/thoughts1_1a.pdf

Subtlety of Self

Semiotics and Significance It was the philosopher Peter ABÆLARD (Petrus ABÆLARDUS) who first explicitly added language into the problem of universals. In his XIIth-century Logica Ingredientibus, he speculates that according to ARISTOTLE’s definition of a universal—that which can be predicated of several things—the only truly existing universals are, in fact, words. This recognition broadened the scope of enquiry, from the relationship between mind and reality; to the relationships between mind, language and reality.13 From the original source for this argument, ARISTOTLE’s On Interpretation, he notes that words have meaning only to the extent that they signify concepts in the mind; thus a semantic aspect is added into the equation. A whole new set of issues arose with this addition, centring on the mode(s) of signification—what the relationship is between a word and its meaning, the thing it ‘represents.’14 Strictly speaking, the word significatio to mediæval readers did not mean “meaning”; rather, it meant “to establish the understanding of a thing,” and even more specifically, to establish the understanding of a thing which was not itself. In other words, a sign signified that which it brought into mind other than the direct impression it itself made on the senses.15 Thus a possible link was established between the intangible world of universals and the mundane everyday world of particulars, mediated through language in the act of representing something other than itself. Complex relationships were charted, e.g. by the French philosopher John BURIDAN, between written language, spoken language, universal concepts, and particular things. Generally it took the form that the written word human immediately signified the spoken word human, which in turn immediately signified the universal concept human. Only this universal concept human could immediately signify an actual (physically existing) human. Thus the written word human or spoken word human could only signify a particular actual human through an act of mediate signification, moving first through the universal concept of human. The important point is this: in mediæval thought, each and every sign primarily signifies not other actual entities (particulars), but rather universal concepts, which then in turn signify particulars. Between the sign of a thing, then, and the thing itself, there are always at least two steps.16 16 Ibid., 66–71.

Rebecca BLOCKSOME: Representation in Mediæval Art

In practical terms this means, at least so far as language is concerned, that there was no such thing as a direct representation of nature. Words were neither intended nor perceived as principally evoking the ephemera of the material world; they were conceived primarily as a means of communicating—and therefore in some sense embodying or manifesting—the otherwise incomprehensible world of abstractions.

Images as Words Although it might not appear so at first glance, this insight into the mediæval conception of signs and signification, as operative in language, is invaluable to our examination of the nature of mediæval imagery. To be more precise, exact parallels can be drawn between words and images as signifiers, because the mediæval mind conceived of them as one and the same. Surprising as this conclusion may seem, there is ample evidence to back it up. Mediæval art historian Michael CAMILLE remarks: “Optics and semantics were intimately associated in both theory and practice, in models and in making images. Seeing and reading, within the theoretical system described here, are presented as synonymous. This is the most radical idea for art history, that our dichotomies of ‘text and image,’ ‘word and image,’ even our bifurcated semiotics, is based upon thinking that would have been alien to the XIVth century, when seeing and reading were part of the same bodily operation, involving perception and cognition in the search for knowledge.”17 It is already a well-known trope that the elaborate scenes painted inside mediæval churches served as a “Bible for the illiterate.” The term “literature of the laity” (laicorum literatura) first appears in the Gemma Anima from the XIIth century.18 It is, however, generally understood in the most simplistic terms—that the images depict scenes from Bible stories, thereby allowing pious viewers to acquaint themselves with the content of those stories, even if they could not read the words on a printed page. There could, though, be another understanding of this phrase— that the pictures served the same function as the words of the Bible did, because they stood in the same relation to ultimate 17 CAMILLE Michael, Before the Gaze: The Internal Senses and Late Medieval Practices of Seeing. In NELSON, 216. 18 Possibly by HONORIUS of Autun. In CARRUTHERS Mary J., The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture. Cambridge, 1990. 222.

Subtlety of Self

reality. If the pictures were meant to be ‘read’ in the same way that the words of the Bible were read, they should bring to mind the universal concepts or Divine Ideas which underpin all of Creation, rather than focusing attention on Creation herself. Some indication of this is given already in the writings of Pope GREGORY the Great in the late VIth century. He maintained that letters (literatura) are signs of sounds, which in turn signify things, just as we have seen above. But he goes further to assert that images are a form of literatura as well; and he even provides support for this idea by noting that manuscript scribes are commonly listed as painters, proving the artisans themselves made no distinction between the two.19 Gilbert CRISPIN, the Abbot of Westminster, confirmed the textual function of imagery and took the argument even a step further, in his XIth century writings. Like Pope GREGORY the Great, he conceived of letters as signs of spoken words. But instead of pictures being simple substitutes for letters, he understood images as signs of writing—in other words, adding yet another abstraction into the chain: picture—written word—spoken word— universal concept—particular object.20 By this understanding, the important thing was not so much the content of the pictures, as it was their signifying function. As long as they were able to mediate between the human mind and the Divine Ideas, their representation of physical reality was secondary. It was understood by creator and viewer alike that the images were to serve only as a starting point, for visual perception to spark the mental processes leading to cognition.

Memory and (Re)presentation Returning to WITELO’s description of higher perception, any act of cognition is constituted by visible sensation plus memory plus imagination plus reason. Having analysed the first and last ingredients in this mixture—visible sensation as the catalyst, and reason as the ultimate process of abstraction from particular to universal—we turn now to the intermediate steps in the process. While clearly the mere sight of an element in the visible world made a strong sensory impact, particularly to a culture which placed such an emphasis on vision as the primary sense, the true 19 Ibid., 224. / 20 Ibid., 222.

Rebecca BLOCKSOME: Representation in Mediæval Art

impact of an image was felt beyond the level of direct perception, at the point where it intersected with memory. Memory likewise was considered a “sense” of crucial importance in mediæval culture, and it played a central role in the process of cognition. As words and images were identified with each other in mediæval thought, so too were the associated processes of reading and picturing. They were both understood as rhetorical activities which referred directly not to objects but to texts and were thus subject to the human memorative processes of reading and composition. The first component, reading, was subdivided into two phases: lectio, the direct presentation of the text; and meditatio, the creation of a representation of the text in the memory.21 According to the concomitant theory of representation, signs do not reproduce an entity in the objective sense; but rather they make it present to the mind by acting on the memory. The Latin word repræsentare derives from præsens, meaning “present in time.” Thus representation was understood not as mimetic, but as temporal—it made the perceived object literally present by recalling it into the mind.22 Engraved there, the image could continually serve as a basis for meditatio—“not … as a reminiscence, but as a constitutive force of character.”23 Thus the primary requirement for a representative image, a depiction, was not that it should somehow bolster the memory by supplying an accurate likeness of the depicted object existing independently of the mind, which was limited by its human frailties; and of the object itself, which was limited by its temporality. Instead, a depiction’s sole requisite was that it should evoke the depicted object in the memory, giving it real existence in the mind of the viewer. As images, though, primarily depicted not so much objects as concepts—abstract entities with no tangible, perceivable existence— they could not take on a universally normative form. Rather, they were exemplary, constructed to embody one specific conception (the artist’s) from which the viewer-reader could develop a variety of associations to make it personal.24 In this way the second component of remembering, composition, came into play.

21 Ibid. / 22 Ibid. 23 HAHN, 177. / 24 CARRUTHERS, 234.

Subtlety of Self

Imaginative Analysis Composition is the point where the viewer-reader changes from a passive to an active role. Beyond the simple absorption of material from an outside source, composition requires that the perceiver become the author, creating a personal representation of the material either in the mind (memory)—or, as in the case of writers and artists, in another tangible expression, a creation, which itself then entered the world of physical reality as an object to be perceived. In this sense, composition is equivalent to imagination, the third ingredient in WITELO’s account of higher perception. The act of imagination—literally, the making of an image—is the act in which the perceiver departs from the image provided to her or him and constructs a new one, based on but not identical to the one which she or he has already perceived. In other words, the act of imagining necessitates the active mental engagement of the viewer—a prerequisite for the process of abstraction. Significantly, this act of construction proceeds from a prior act of deconstruction, occurring in the meditatio phase—the analysis of the thing being represented into its constituent parts, in order to recognise those which are essential and those which are accidental. More than a mere distillation process, this deconstructing-to-construct serves to doubly engrave the objectconcept on the memory in both the acts of analysis and synthesis. Upon completion of the analytical phase, the accidental elements—those which belong to the particular existence of an object, such as its size, shape, colour, etc.—can be discarded, while the essential elements—those belonging to its universal nature—must be retained and incorporated into the new image synthesised by the imagination, in order for the representation to be true. Thus the mediæval understanding of imagery and imagination was simultaneously emancipative and restrictive. On the one hand, it was tremendously liberating as it legitimised artists’ personal “visions” of reality due to the crucial act of imagination; but on the other, images were still bound by the necessary correlation between image and essence—a relation divinely established, and therefore not only impermissible but also impossible to violate.

Rebecca BLOCKSOME: Representation in Mediæval Art

Art, though, was also limited by another criterion, universally acknowledged at the time: the need for art to be didactic, to teach or to edify its viewers in some way. So the challenge for mediæval artists, then, was how best to combine these freedoms and limitations inherent to their art, in order to create images of a type which would most benefit human understanding of the Divine.

Reality in the Abstract In order for viewers to comprehend the Divine Ideas underlying all of reality, a corresponding act of the imagination was necessary in them, whereby they recognised the essences signified by elements of their visual environment and created personal analogous images in their own minds. It was necessary to remind them, through imagery, that the things they saw were not ends unto themselves, but rather indicators of a higher truth. Abstraction—the deliberate distortion of natural phenomena into “non-naturalistic” imagery—perfectly fitted this requirement; thus it took root and flourished as the predominant style in mediæval art. As it emphasised the falsity of all things visual, it pointed to the non-temporal and intangible entities which constituted ultimate reality. Thus, paradoxically, ambiguity became the clearest method of communicating truth; the falseness of art proved its existential relation with the falseness of nature. Interestingly, though, to some degree both art and nature had equal roles as testimonials to the Divine, as all things corporeal were considered indicators of the incorporeal. Art and nature, fundamentally, stood in exactly the same relationship to reality. In fact, it would seem that images created by human artists were actually at a disadvantage, as they were products of mere mortal imagination, while nature existed by virtue of, and in, the imagination of God. Indeed, mediæval artists recognised this precedence of nature; this is why their abstractive tendencies were carefully moderated and never fully developed into a non-objective art with no reference to reality—even though theoretically this should have been possible, as the critical value of images resided not in their subject matter, but in the thought processes they evoked. But images produced by humans also had an advantage the

Subtlety of Self

naturally-occurring images did not: they could be manipulated to emphasise certain aspects, making obvious whichever divine truths the artist particularly wanted to focus attention on, according to the specific sensibilities of the human mind. They had the advantage of being fresh, new and individual, contrasted with the timelessness and objectivity of nature. And while timelessness and objectivity are perhaps more suitable to signifying the eternally existing Divine Ideas, subjectivity and temporality—re-presentation in the present moment—in the same way can be conceived as being a more suitable medium for those truths to be transmitted to humans, who share the same “limitations.” In this way the qualities inherent to both art and nature could be understood and respected; relationships of opposition and dominance could be redefined, so that there was no longer a question of autonomy by one or the other, but only the acknowledgement of their varied and complex interrelationships in mutual subservience to the Ultimate Reality of God. Suggested Reading CARRUTHERS Mary J., The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture. Cambridge, 1990. ECO Umberto, Art and Beauty in the Middle Ages. London, 1986. KLIMA Gyula, The Medieval Problem of Universals. In ZALTA Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. 2004. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2004/entries/universals-medieval NELSON Robert S. (ed.), Visuality Before and Beyond the Renaissance. Cambridge, 2000. SPADE Paul Vincent, Thoughts, Words and Things: An Introduction to Late Mediæval Logic and Semantic Theory. 2002. http://www.pvspade.com/Logic/docs/thoughts1_1a.pdf Rebecca BLOCKSOME graduated in 2002 with a degree in art from Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas, U.S.A. She currently lives and works in Budapest, Hungary, as the coordinator of the WSCF Central European Subregion (CESR) and the publications intern for the Europe Region. She is an editor of Student World and Mozaik. She is American Baptist; her email address is rblocksome@yahoo.com.

FEDOR Mónika •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

After Materialism or Before Postmaterialism? The Materialist–Postmaterialist Value Orientation in Hungary The value orientation of the Magyar population, as studies suggest, seems to be rather materialist. The picture of course is shaded by different probabilities of groups: elderly people are rather materialist, youngsters are mainly postmaterialist; people with better qualifications are rather postmaterialist and those with lower education are mostly materialist. What does materialist–postmaterialist value orientation mean in practice? How much are they typical of the examined Central European society? In our report, after a short theoretical summary we will present our research about the materialist–postmaterialist value orientation of the Magyar population. For this we have used the database of the European Social Survey (ESS), on which we did a second hand research First we examined the differences between generations; then the effect of qualification, satisfaction with the household’s income, gender and religious belief.

Previous Research on Values Value studies can be divided into two main groups: in some qualitative methods are used, and in others quantitative methods. Other studies in which these two are combined can be found as well.1 The most popular qualitative method is to analyse the values in literature. One of the most significant Magyar studies was done in the Section of Literature Scholarship of the Magyar Academy of Science. In this research, all the fiction (short stories and novels) written 1 SASAKI, 1998. 4,

between 1986 and 1990 was examined. According to this research, the Magyar population lives in a constant valueinsecurity, which is due to the paternalism of the state.2 On an international level we can find three different kinds of quantitative bases of value studies: the approach of Milton ROKEACH (1918–1988), Ronald INGLEHART (1934–) and Melvin KOHN (1928–). The basis of most of the research is the method of Milton ROKEACH, who distinguished target and instrument values. The respondents of the survey had to order them in two groups. Both groups contain eighteen elements. Target values are, e.g., a happy life or peace, and instrument values are patience or efficient work. Ronald INGLEHART worked out four- and twelve-element methods of value research. In the former the respondent has to choose two out of four targets of social politics, while in the latter the person has to do it two more times. In each group of four values, the first two are the materialist and the second two postmaterialist values.3 This method was used in the World Value Survey (WVS) in 1990 for the first time in international comparison. Melvin KOHN used a distinctly different method. He asked the parents which attributes they find important in raising their children. They had to choose from thirteen attributes (e.g. to obey the parents, to be thoughtful of others, to be honest, etc.). From the answers of the parents, Melvin KOHN judged the measure of their authoritarian conservatism and their capacity for having independent life and judgements.4 Hereafter, since we would like to analyse the materialist–postmaterialist value orientation, we will show the work of Ronald INGLEHART in details and base our own research on his approach.

The Concept of Materialist–Postmaterialist Value Orientation and the Silence Revolution There are more studies dealing with the changing values in advanced industrial societies. They show a shift from materialist toward postmaterialist values.5 The American researcher Ronald INGLEHART is famous for exploring these changes. He has been engaged in this field since the 1960s. Henceforth we 2 VERES, 1992. / 3 INGLEHART, 1990. / 4 KOHN, 1969. / 5 SCARBROUGH, 1995. 123.

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

shall take a closer look at Ronald INGLEHART’s postmaterialist theory and his theory of silence revolution, since these two are in a close relationship. According to the postmaterialist theory, the postmaterialist value orientation has two bases: the scarcity hypothesis and the socialisation hypothesis.6 The scarcity hypothesis can be described as follows: in a society struggling with scarcities, goods in a short supply will have a subjectively higher value. As an example, it is enough to think of the fact that during the regime change in Central and Eastern Europe, many people were ready to pay fortunes for barely obtainable goods. The characteristic of the socialisation hypothesis is this: people’s basic values reflect the circumstances of their childhood. For example, those children who are taught in their early years to save money will behave similarly later on, in their adult years. It is worth exploring the idea of the silence revolution now. This is what Ronald INGLEHART calls the difference between the values of generations. This is a transformation of the society during which the younger generation takes the older one’s place.7 At the same time the dominant values of the society are changing too, since the different generations have different values. To prove these theories Ronald INGLEHART uses Abraham MASLOW’s concept of the hierarchy of needs. In his opinion, the needs on the top of the hierarchy become important only if the ones below are already—at least partially— fulfilled. Ronald INGLEHART places the values into the hierarchy of needs and gets the following result: The materialist values are physiological sustenance and security. They are characteristic of people who lived in relative poverty before. The postmaterialist values are self-expression, belonging, intellectual and aesthetic needs.8 The latter are characteristic of those who live in favourable circumstances and did not need to worry about their basic needs. Thus it can be said that the security experienced in one’s life allows caring about the quality side of life instead of ensuring the everyday needs.9 Furthermore, Ronald INGLEHART puts an emphasis on the relation between economic growth and values, though it can be followed 6 INGLEHART, 1990. 56. / 7 INGLEHART, 1990. 54. 424. / 8 INGLEHART, 1990. 134. 9 SCARBROUGH, 1995. 125.

from the previous ideas that postmaterialism is spreading in wealthier societies.10 It seems that besides the (feeling of) personal security, education has a significant role as well.11 Comparing the generations, it can be seen that those who were born after World War II emphasised materialist values less and postmaterialist values more.12 This is probably due to the fact that they had experienced less necessity in other words they have not seen as much need as the previous generations, so they have grown up in a safety society. So it can be demonstrated that in a society where postmaterialist values are dominating, not fear but the feeling of welfare is typical of people’s everyday life. Due to the spreading of state education and more money spent on it, education has become more and more popular, so there are more highly qualified people among young people. According to the previous studies, the postmaterialists are mostly highly educated people, so consequently they have power over important parts of life, e.g. in the field of state and politics.13 10 INGLEHART, 1990. 57. / 11 INGLEHART, 1977. 21–22. / 12 INGLEHART, 1990. 56. 13 INGLEHART–ABRAMSON, 1992. 227,

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

Materialist and Postmaterialist Value Orientation in Hungary In the following, according to the conclusion of Ronald INGLEHART, we will try to confirm the presented hypotheses— firstly, that generations differ in their values. Young people are rather postmaterialist-oriented, whereas older people are rather materialist-oriented. Secondly, that highly qualified people are rather postmaterialistoriented, and less qualified people rather materialist-oriented. Thirdly, that people living in better circumstances are rather postmaterialist and those living in worse circumstances are rather materialist. Fourthly, that the materialist–postmaterialist orientation has nothing to do with gender. And finally, that more religious people are rather postmaterialist and less religious people are rather materialist. To confirm these hypotheses, we will use the database of the European Social Survey14 (ESS). The European Social Survey is a research done once every two years in twenty countries. For this report we are going to use the first database recorded in 2002/2003, which means 1655 questionnaires in Hungary. To measure the value orientation, we have chosen four definitely materialist and four postmaterialist variables. The materialist variables are the following: “it is important to be rich”, “to have money and expensive things”; “it is important to be successful and to achieve recognition”; “it is important that the government is strong and ensures safety”; and “it is important to seek fun and things that give pleasure”. The postmaterialist variables are the following: “it is important to think about new ideas and to be creative”; “to show abilities and to be admired”; “it is important to try new and different things in life”; “and to seek adventures and have an exciting life”. For these questions the respondents could give six answers ranging from “not like me at all” to “very much like me.” By these we have created two new variables, which provide the materialist–postmaterialist point of each respondent. Thus, everyone can have a maximum of 24 points for both orientations. The materialist–postmaterialist index is the 14 We would like to extend our thanks to the international team of ESS for making the database accessible and to the team of TÁRKI for giving free run of the weighted variables of the Magyar database.

A Flock of Doves

difference of the points: postmaterialist points annul materialist points. So the positive numbers show the degree of the postmaterialist orientation, and the negative numbers show the degree of the materialist orientation. Examining the index with a statistical method (with the t-test), it can be found that there is a slight structural shift. In this move, the mean is shifting towards minus one (-1). From this it can be concluded that the Magyar population is rather materialist. The index has been created as the difference of the materialist and postmaterialist points. For these two points a “paired sampled t-test” has been done. From this it can be seen that the shift may be caused by two factors: everybody tends to valorise materialism; or it is valorised by only a small group of society, but it causes a huge difference when looking at the whole society. We have divided the materialist–postmaterialist index—which is a scale variable—into three groups: materialists, postmaterialists and those with mixed orientation. We have taken the upper and the lower 25 percent of the population. Therefore, in the groups of materialists there are those whose index is under minus one (-1), and in the postmaterialist group there are those whose index is above three (3). Those having an index between these numbers are those with mixed orientation. As a result, we have 466 (28,9 percent) materialist, 543 (33,7 percent) postmaterialist and 604 (37,4 percent) mixedorientation respondents. According to Ronald INGLEHART’s forecast, in advanced industrial societies materialists should be slightly more numerous for 1990. He also predicted that by 2000 the rate of the two groups will be roughly balanced.15 Since he does not explain what he means by “slightly more,” the state of the Magyar society in 2002 can be evaluated in two different ways. On one hand, it can mean that we are ten to twelve years late in comparison with Western Europe. On the other hand, it can also mean that—if we understood the rate of the orientations above as almost balanced—the orientations in Hungary (and in Central Europe) are changing in the same way as in Western Europe.16 15 INGLEHART–ABRAMSON, 1992. 225. 16 Before concluding anything, it would be worth examining the orientation of other Central European countries with the help of this database and method.

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

The Differences Between Generations in Hungary In the following we will try to prove that there is a difference between generations in their materialist–postmaterialist value orientation—specifically, that the older generations are prevailingly materialist. As a first step, groups have been created according to their ages. First, following the example of Elinor SCARBROUGH, respondents are classified by decades. Since the two oldest groups are quite small, they are counted together. So in the oldest group there are those born before 1920. Examining the coherence, it can be seen that there is a significant relation between these variables; so it can be said that there is a connection between age and materialist–postmaterialist value orientation. This is true in Magyar society as a whole because of the significance level. Respondents born between 1931 and 1950 and after 1971 had the biggest role in rejecting the hypothesis of independence. In cross-tabulation it can be seen that in the group of elderly people there are more materialists. Exactly 78,9 percent of the people who were born before 1920 appear as materialists, though the frequency is quite low in this cell, so we should be careful with making conclusions. Of the next group (born between 1921 and 1930), 74,3 percent are classified as materialist. This decreasing tendency can be noted in the following two groups as well. A change can be seen in the next group (1951–1960): postmaterialism surpasses materialism (57,5 percent). The result is almost the same in the next group (1961–1970) as well. The big turn is in the group born after 1971. The rate in this group is almost the opposite of the oldest one. There are 75,4 percent postmaterialists here. In the youngest group, the turn is even more striking: 86 percent of them are postmaterialist. Thus, generally it can be said that people born before 1951 are rather materialist, but as increasingly younger generations are considered, there is a growing probability of them belonging to the postmaterialist group. People born in 1950–1970 are a sort of border-land. Many of them are postmaterialists, but the biggest change is in those groups whose members were born after 1971. So, three groups can be distinguished:

A Flock of Doves

Firstly those, who were born between 1900 and 1950: they are rather materialist. They were born before or not long after World War II, so they have experienced scarcity. Secondly, those who were born between 1951 and 1970: they are rather postmaterialist, but the difference between the two groups is relatively small. They are a sort of border group. Finally, those who were born after 1971: they are clearly postmaterialists. Most of them experienced the regime change as children or teenagers. Though the older ones might remember the times before 1989, which surely had an effect on their socialization, they have spent years of their young ages in capitalism already. These pieces of information seem to confirm Ronald INGLEHART’s silent revolution theory. According to this theory, young people are rather postmaterialist value-oriented. The high rate of postmaterialism in the group born after 1971 can be a result of the fading of socialism. In this decade the privations were lessening in the country.17

17 ROMSICS, 2000.

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

According to Ronald INGLEHART, the biggest change happened after World War II. The generations born right after are rather postmaterialist-oriented.18 That is why we had a look at 1945 as a border line. Is there a difference between the orientations of those who were born before/after 1945? According to our calculations, the respondents born before the war are rather materialist (70,6 percent), and those born after the war are rather postmaterialist (63,9 percent) value-oriented. It seems Ronald INGLEHART was right when he regarded World War II as a divide in the materialist–postmaterialist value orientation.

The Effect of Education Are highly qualified people less materialist than less qualified ones? To find the answer for this question, first we have set up four categories regarding the level of education. Then they will be examined in a cross-tabulation. In the chart it can be seen that postmaterialism is more frequent among those who are better educated. There is a huge difference between those who have finished primary school and those who have not; it must be noted that there are quite a few respondents in the group who did not finish primary school. Comparing those with finished and those with unfinished primary education, a huge difference can be seen on the score of value orientation. We can see that even a limited amount of education can cause a huge difference in value orientation.

A Flock of Doves

But before accepting this statement, it would be worth examining the relation of education and age, since as time goes by, education has become more and more popular. Of those born before 1950, 17,9 percent did not finish primary school; 51,3 percent of them finished primary school, only 19,7 percent of them finished secondary school, and only 11 percent of them have higher education. In the next age group, most of the respondents (53,2 percent) have finished primary school, and we can see that more highly educated people (15,4 percent) can be found here as well. As a logical explanation of the low education of the oldest age group, we can suggest the lack of comprehensive state education. Above this, younger people have experienced a higher level of security, which can question the role of education. Most of the people (58,4 percent) born after 1971 have finished primary school, and 32,2 percent of them have finished secondary school as well. So, there are only a very few of them who have finished higher education, but their age can be an evident cause of it.

Analyzing the relationship between the level of education and the materialist–postmaterialist value orientation, it can be seen that in the group of those born before 1950 the

18 INGLEHART, 1990. 56.

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

three most significant cells, which cause the real relationship between these variables 19, are the following: There are the highly educated materialists, though they are only 5,2 percent of the materialists of their age group. Then, the postmaterialist respondents, who have not finished primary school (7,7 percent). Finally, the highly educated postmaterialists, who are 21,2 percent of the postmaterialists of their age group. In the group of respondents born between 1951 and 1970, there are four remarkable cells. There are the materialists with less than eight primary classes, who are 7,4 percent of the materialist group. Then, the highly educated materialists, who are 8,7 percent of the materialists. Thirdly, the postmaterialists with less than eight primary classes, though there was only one respondent in this cell! Finally, there are the highly educated postmaterialists, who make up 21,2 percent of all of the postmaterialists. The result of the respondents who were born after 1971 is not significant according to the Chi-square test, which means whatever relations we got, they are presumably not true in the whole society.

The Role of Financial Circumstances Does the economic situation have an effect on materialist–postmaterialist value orientation? We will try to find the answer for this question by examining the responses given for the following question: “How do you feel about the income of your household?” It is obvious from statistics that there is a significant relationship between the feelings about income and materialist–postmaterialist value orientation in Magyar (and Central European) society. Of the postmaterialists, 63,3 percent live comfortably on their present incomes, and only 41,4 percent of the group feel their life is very difficult with their present net incomes. It can be stated that if somebody feels that her or his income is not enough, she or he tends to be a materialist very much, irregardless of the real amount of income. As long as the respondent is satisfied with her or his income (“living comfortably” or “coping”), there is much likelihood that she or he will be postmaterialist value-oriented.

A Flock of Doves

We must be careful, however, stating this. It cannot be said for sure that satisfaction with income indicates a postmaterialist value orientation. It is a possibility that if somebody has a postmaterialist value orientation for whatever reasons, she or he will be more satisfied with her or his income even if she or he has less money than somebody else for whom material needs are more important. Though the relationship is evident, according to the calculations above, the direction of the causality cannot be unequivocally stated.

The Role of Gender

Is it true that materialist–postmaterialist value orientation has nothing to do with the two genders? On the basis of the results of the statistics it can be said that there is absolutely no relationship between gender and value orientation.

19 It can be seen from the „standard residuals” but they are not shown in this report

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

The Effect of Religion Is it true that more religious people pay less attention to material needs than less religious ones? Is it true that more religious people are rather postmaterialist in their value orientation? To find out the answers, the responses for the question “How religious are you?” have been examined. The answers could be from zero (0) to ten (10). Zero means “not religious at all,” while ten means “very religious.” According to TOMKA Miklós, the most prevalent and effective method of examining religious belief is a five-levelled scale which expands from the answer “I am religious, I follow the teachings of the Church,” to “In my opinion, religion is not right.”20 For this report, however, an eleven-level scale will be used, since this is the best opportunity from the database available. As a first step, the most religious and least religious 25 percent of the sample will be separated. Following this, three groups can be defined. Between the two extremes there is the third group of those who are rather neutral towards religion. That is the reason why they will be left out from the following analysis in order to amplify the effect. Searching for the relation between religious belief and value orientation, a statistic test has been used. Its significance level shows that there is a relation between them. Surprisingly, as it can be seen in the chart below, more postmaterialist respondents 20 TOMKA, 1973.; ANDORKA, 1997 558.

A Flock of Doves

can be found in the group of those who find religion less important. Postmaterialists make up 61,6 percent of the non-religious group. Since many previous researchers have proved that more religious people can be found among elderly people,21 it seems right to examine these two variables (religious belief and materialist–postmaterialist value orientation) within age groups. To avoid too-small cells, the previously used three age groups will be used again. From the chart below it can be seen that age has a real influential role, but religious belief does not. We need to be careful with this result, because the level of significance is high in every cell, which means the relation is true only in the examined group, but presumably not in the whole Magyar society According to these results, it cannot be said that religious belief and materialist–postmaterialist value orientation are in relation within age categories.

21 ANDORKA, 1997. 556.

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

Conclusion of the Research

Kristin Maria NICKEL

According to the research above, age, education and economic surroundings have a significant coherence with the materialist–postmaterialist value orientation, as Ronald INGLEHART and later on Elinor SCARBROUGH have already proved. It is important to draw attention to the fact that education and age are in a close relationship, since younger generations have much better opportunities to study. That is why the relation between education and value orientation is not unambiguous. We have not managed to confirm the other two hypotheses. According to our research, it seems that materialist–postmaterialist value orientation has no relationship with gender, nor with the importance of religion within age groups. It seems to be obvious why gender has no relation with value orientation. The case of religious belief can seem to signify that in fact there is no relationship. But it is more likely that selfclassification is not reliable enough, and it would worth measuring it with other, more objective methods. A third possible solution would be to have smaller groups. Not the most and least religious 25 percent, but maybe 10 percent. They would be a more homogeneous group, but such a sample may be too small in turn. Since Central European countries constitute an organic political and cultural area not only in times past, but still today, it would be interesting to see the analysis of them as well and compare them with each other. Is the future of these countries between Western and Eastern, Northern and Southern Europe organic as well? We can certainly answer this question by examining the value orientation in all the countries of our region.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Suggested Reading ANDORKA Rudolf, Bevezetés a szociológiába (Introduction to Sociology). Budapest, 1997. INGLEHART Ronald, The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics. Princeton, 1977. INGLEHART Ronald, Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, 1990. INGLEHART Ronald – ABRAMSON Paul R., Economic Security and Value Change. American Political Science Review 1994/88. 336–354. KOHN Melvin, Class and Conformity. A Study in Values. Honewood, 1969. ROMSICS Ignác, Magyarország története a XX. században (The History of Hungary in the Twentieth Century). Budapest, 2000. SASAKI Masamichi (ed.), Values and Attitudes Across Nations and Time. Leiden – Boston – Köln, 1998. SCARBROUGH Elinor, Materialist–Postmaterialist Value Orientations. In SCARBROUGH Elinor, Beliefs in Government. Oxford, 1995. TOMKA Miklós, A vallásosság mérése (Módszertani tépelôdés) (Measuring Religiosity). Budapest, 1973. VERES András, Az értéksematizmustól az értékpluralitásig (From Value Schemes to Value Plurality). In SOMLAI Péter (ed.), Értékrendek és társadalmi-kulturális változások (Values and Changing Societies and Cultures). Budapest, 1992. FEDOR Mónika (1979) is a sociologist who graduated from the Pázmány Péter Catholic University (PPKE) in the Faculty of Humanities, in Piliscsaba, Hungary. She is a Roman Catholic board member of KÖD (Magyar SCM). Her email address is fedor.monika@citromail.hu.

Inequality in Transition Economies: Sharing the Benefits and Burdens of Post-Communist Change The sudden and dramatic changes in inequality and stratification of societies in post-Soviet transition economies have created serious concerns for the fragile political, economic, and social structures undergoing transformation.1

The Challenges of Transition: Recession and Inequality When the Soviet Union collapsed, entire configurations of institutions that shaped the transition countries were expected to change rapidly. Even though this change was desirable in many regards, much hardship has accompanied the radical transformation. In economic terms, the process of adjusting to a new structure involved the “twin impact” of significant recession and dramatic increases in income inequality in almost all transition economies.2 The stratification of societies in newly-formed democracies and market-based economies has the potential to threaten political stability, create social dissatisfaction with the new system, inspire resistance to essential reforms, and inhibit the functioning of the new economic system. The establishment of democracy and the collapse of the command economy implied an immediate movement away from 1 Hereafter, any reference to inequality refers to income inequality, rather than inequality of wealth (which concerns asset distribution) or earnings (which concerns wage distribution). 2 MILANOVIC Branko, Income, Inequality, and Poverty During the Transition from Planned to Market Economy.

Washington DC, 1998. 132. For a comparison of the Great Depression and transitional recessions, see Ibid, 25–26. According to Gini coefficient measures, inequality is believed to have increased in all post-Soviet transition countries, except the Slovak Republic (ibid, 40).

3 As presented in KORNAI János, Economics of Shortage. Amsterdam, 1980. Due to shortages and special privileges to managers and elite, equality did not exist to the extent that the formal system suggested.

FEDOR Mónika: Materialist Value Orientation

Conclusion of the Research

Kristin Maria NICKEL

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Kristin Maria NICKEL: Inequality in Transition Economies

the previous system, which had supposed guarantees for employment and certain types of equality.3 As the post-Soviet economies began their transition, some increase in inequality was believed to be essential for creating an incentive structure that promotes efficiency in a market-based economy. While guarantees for equality, however, are not compatible with an efficient market-based economy and a democratic society, neither are extreme inequalities, which create a social structure with high degrees of exclusion. While the transition brought clear benefits in terms of political and civil liberties, uncertainties remain about the economic and social benefits and costs of the shift “from unjust equality to just inequality.”4 Independent of the actual increases in inequality, the negative perception of unjust increases in inequality has serious consequences for the viability of transition and the improvement of welfare in transition economies.5

An Optimal Level of Inequality? While economists have a general consensus about the benefits of growth in an economy, the consensus about income inequality has been much more elusive. Some degree of income inequality can be understood as an important element for constructing a marketsupporting incentive structure. If the price and quantity demanded of labor is left up to markets, then earnings inequality, induced by the incidence of unemployment and wage differentials, is inevitable. In a competitive labor market, wage differentials should reflect the range of skills, education, and efforts among the labor force, as a return on investments in human capital or as incentives to induce greater effort. Even if there could be perfectly efficient labor markets, inequality results from natural and social inequalities in talents and unequal distributions of assets. Therefore, the existence of inequality can be seen as a natural and essential characteristic of a market economy. As can be seen by the prevalence of unemployment and inequality in developed market economies, market forces do not eliminate it; these factors persist and inequality remains. 4 CSEPELI György – ÖRKÉNY Antal, From Unjust Equality to Just Inequality. The New Hungarian Quarterly 1992/126. 71.

A Flock of Doves

But the limited efficiency of markets and unrealistic assumptions of perfect markets (such as a labor force that completely responds to labor demand) implies that inequality may exceed the theoretically necessary level for markets to function well. Transitional unemployment is necessary for movement towards an economy with market-determined wages. Longer-term unemployment represents structural challenges, such as a shortage of labor demand or a mismatch between the skills of labor supply and the labor demand. Assuming complete labor mobility and a supportive institutional framework, over time the market should set appropriate prices for labor. Although some degree of inequality allows markets to work effectively, a high degree of inequality is also thought to limit growth and development. The structure of a distribution with high inequality often includes a small group of elite and a significant “underclass” that is excluded from full participation in the economy and society. This type of inequality may restrict growth by preventing a significant portion of the population from active involvement in the formal economy. Even more clearly, it represents a challenge to development in that it implies significant poverty and social exclusion. By raising the question of “inequality of what?,” Amartya SEN argued that access to markets, as well as distribution of opportunities, are more important than the precise distribution of resources.6 Although complete equality of income and assets is not feasible in a free-market economy, equality of opportunities is considered an important aspect of a free, democratic society. Therefore, while the literature does not identify an optimal distribution of assets or income (nor a method for securing that distribution), the distribution of opportunities can and should be regulated. Furthermore, the precise relationships between inequality and other factors, such as growth, efficiency, development, justice, and social welfare, are ambiguous.7 Consequently, there is no accepted ideal level of equality for any economy. Even in the absence of this ideal level, however, it is possible to argue that there exist levels of inequality that are either too low or too high to be conducive to an efficient market-based economy. 5 ELSTER Jon – OFFE Claus – PREUSS Ulrich, Institutional Design in Post-communist Societies: Rebuilding the Ship at Sea. Cambridge, 1998. 61. 6 SEN Amartya,. Inequality Reexamined. Oxford, 1992. 12.

Kristin Maria NICKEL: Inequality in Transition Economies

Determinants of Inequality in Transition The increases in inequality have remained and, in some cases, still seem to be increasing; suggesting that changes in the structure of inequality are more persistent than other aspects of transition, such as recession.8 Although the depth and length of the recessions varied between economies, the recessions were all transitional. Is the new level and structure of inequality inherent in the new system, or also a transitional problem that should be overcome? Drastic increases in inequality have negative consequences for transition economies in terms of development, social justice, and even the efficiency of market economies. Further, the varied experiences of transition economies indicate that severe recession and dramatic increases in inequality are not the “inevitable fate of transition economies.”9 Different conditions and approaches during the transition led to a variety of outcomes in terms of the structure of inequality, which leads to the question: what are the determinants of income inequality in transition? There is a vast amount of literature exploring the factors that affect income inequality in post-Soviet transition economies. Branko MILANOVIC primarily attributes the increase in inequality to changes in the wage distribution associated with the shift from a large state-sector middle class (with relatively equally distributed wages) to more diverse sources of income and higher unemployment in the new private sector.10 Placing greater emphasis on the non-wage private sector, Francisco FERREIRA provides a theoretical outline of the importance of privatization of assets in determining the distribution of wealth and income through changing ownership of assets, varied returns on those assets, and shocks associated with the income-generating process.11 7 Among the multitude of publications on the relationship between inequality and these factors, see EICHER Theo

– TURNOVSKY Stephen (eds.), Inequality and Growth: Theory and Policy Implications. Cambridge, 2003. BROWN Chris, Global Inequality and International Social Justice. In Sovereignty, Rights and Justice: International Political Theory Today. Cambridge, 2002.

8 FERREIRA Francisco, Economic Transition and the Distributions of Income and Wealth. Washington DC, 1997. 378. 9 GRÜN Carola – KLASEN Stephan, Growth, Income Distribution and Well-being in Transition Countries. Economics of Transition 2001/2. 380. This is further demonstrated by the high standard deviation for economic growth and inequality among countries of Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia in ADAMS Richard, Economic Growth, Inequality and Poverty: Estimating the Growth Elasticity of Poverty. World Development 2004/12. 1989–2015. 10 MILANOVIC, 299–341. 11 FERREIRA, 1–2.

12 AGHION Philippe – COMMANDER Simon, On the Dynamics of Inequality in Transition. Economics of Transition 1999/2. 277–278.

Further expanding the list of factors that influence income inequality in transition, Philippe AGHION and Simon COMMANDER also include changes in the level and structure of public spending, tax reform, and trade liberalization.12 This set of literature explains the increase in inequality by a series of fundamental changes that occurred in every transition economy. These changes to the structure of the economy mainly represent the anticipated increase in inequality in transition.13 The determinants presented above do not explain the wide diversity of outcomes when comparing the structure of inequality between different transition economies. The structure and type of inequality varies drastically from one transition country to another, and the situations of transition economies are diverging with time, as shown by MILANOVIC.14 Some post-Soviet transition economies now face challenges similar to those of developing countries, while others have entered the European Union (EU). While it may have been more relevant to discuss inequality in transition economies in general in 13 Other literature, which offers explanations for the increase in inequality in transition include: FÖRSTER Michael – TÓTH István, Poverty, Inequality and Social Policies in the Visegrád Countries. The Economics of Transition 1997/2. 505–510. CORRICELLI Fabrizio, Income Distribution and the Dynamics of Reforms. The Economics of Transition 1997/2. 510–515. 14 MILANOVIC Branko, Inequality During the Transition: Why Did it Increase? In HAVRYLYSHYN Oleh – NSOULI Saleh (eds.), A Decade of Transition: Achievements and Challenges. Washington DC, 2001. 252–253.

Kristin Maria NICKEL: Inequality in Transition Economies

the early ’90s, the diversity of the situations of these countries makes this grouping less and less relevant. In attempting to find the general causes of increases in inequality in transition, there seems to be a large “unexplained residual,” which suggests the importance of considering “less quantifiable and observable factors—such as access to connections, the impact of corruption, the role of institutions, and the effects of haphazard and often arbitrary reforms.”15 In particular, the literature has neglected the importance of the quality of the institutional transformation for explaining the changes in inequality in transition. The modern literature in economic development has placed an increased emphasis on the formation of strong market-supporting institutions for growth and development. While many formal institutions, such as the banking sector, were understood as important for an economy, Douglas NORTH expanded upon this to suggest that both formal and informal institutions (including property rights, rule of law, or transparency) have a strong influence on the efficiency of an economy.16 Dani RODRIK outlines which institutions matter for “high-quality growth” (property rights, regulatory institutions, institutions for macroeconomic stabilization, social insurance institutions, and institutions for conflict management) and how to achieve such institutions.17 To varying degrees, transition economies are characterized by underdeveloped institutions, as presented by Ole NØRGAARD.18 As expressed by Oleh HAVRYLYSHYN and Ron VAN ROODEN, however, the role of institutional development is often neglected as an explanatory factor in econometric analysis.19 Institutions have a vital role in regulating markets and ensuring equal access to economic opportunities. RODRIK emphasizes the role of institutions for establishing the structure of a market economy, stating that “incentives would not work or would generate perverse results in the absence of adequate institutions.”20 15 Making Transition Work for Everyone: Poverty and Inequality in Europe and Central Asia. Washington DC, 2000. 116, 163. 16 NORTH Douglass, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York, 1990. 17 RODRIK Dani, Institutions for High-Quality Growth: What They Are and How to Acquire Them. Studies in International Comparative Development 2000/3. 5–10. 18 NØRGAARD Ole, Economic Institutions and Democratic Reform: A Comparative Analysis of Post-Communist

Countries. Cheltenham, 2000. 19 HAVRYLYSHYN Oleh – VAN ROODEN Ron, Institutions Matter in Transition, but So Do Policies. Comparative Economic Studies 2003/1. 4.

100

A Flock of Doves

Thus many economists—Hernando DE SOTO in particular—argue that institutions are vital for reducing poverty and inequality by incorporating the poor into the economy and reducing social exclusion. Given the important role of institutions for enabling economies to function efficiently and enable equal access to markets, the quality of the institutional transformation may have significant explanatory power for understanding the divergent outcomes of inequality in transition countries.

Two Sides of Institutional Transformation The transition from a command economy and communist political system to a market-based economy and democratic political system involves two sides of institutional transformation: the removal of old institutions and the development of new institutions.21 On the one hand, the task is to remove the institutions and centers of power that regulated activities under the Soviet Union, including the central planning agency and state-owned enterprises. On the other hand, new institutions need to be developed to establish the “rules of the game” under the new system, using Douglass NORTH’s understanding of institutions as the “humanly devised constraints that shape human interaction.”22 The quality of the institutional transformation (both the destruction of old institutions and the development of new ones) may be an essential, although difficult to quantify, factor for explaining the trajectory and outcome of transition, in particular in terms of income inequality. It seems natural that the process of destruction should be simpler than construction. Hence when institutional transformation is discussed for emerging economies, references are usually made to building up new institutions. For many transition economies, however, Ukraine and Russia in particular, struggles with the destruction of antiquated institutions that remain from the Soviet system caused dramatic increases in inequality and form a significant obstacle for the success of the transition more generally. These institutions became entrenched, making future reform 20 RODRIK, 4. / 21 NØRGAARD, 22–23. / 22 NORTH, 3.

101

Kristin Maria NICKEL: Inequality in Transition Economies

more difficult. Jon ELSTER, Claus OFFE and Ulrich PREUSS present the “orthodox paradox” of government-orchestrated “marketization” and “destatization” that reduces its own control over the economy.23 In transition, the state should support the development of high quality institutions for creating the competitive framework and incentive structure that facilitate a well-functioning, inclusive market economy.

Partial Reform Transition Equilibria Simon KUZNETS proposed the inverted-U hypothesis, claiming that inequality first increases, then decreases with development (measured by an increase in per capita income).24 This suggests that countries at a middle level of development experience the highest level of inequalities, which should decrease with further growth and development. Although the severity of the transitional recessions led to a focus on growth and stabilization, rather than equity, Carola GRÜN and Stephan KLASEN, as well as Branko MILANOVIC, find a high correlation between GDP per capita decline and increase in inequality.25 This suggests that there is no tradeoff between growth and equality in transition. The right set of conditions, reforms, policies, and institutions may promote both growth and equality, while the obstacles to growth may be those that also stratify the distribution of income in a transition economy. Related to the KUZNETS curve, GRÜN and KLASEN propose an inverted-U relationship between inequality and progress towards a complete transition (although neither established this relationship formally or empirically).26 This suggests that economies that have accomplished partial reforms will be more vulnerable to high levels of inequality than either economies at the beginning of transition or those that have accomplished the more complex aspects of transition, such as institutional development. Although many reforms are thought to lead to increased inequality, the situation of incomplete reforms which fail to 23 ELSTER et al., 160. 24 KUZNETS Simon, Economic Growth and Income Inequality. American Economic Review 1955/45. 20. 25 GRÜN and KLASEN, 245. 26 Ibid. 380.

102

A Flock of Doves

solidify these systemic changes with institutional development appears to lead to the most drastic increases in inequality. Related to the “pitfalls of partial reform” presented by Kevin MURPHY, Andrei SHLEIFER and Robert VISHNY, this understanding of the relationship between inequality and transition emphasizes the possibility for an economy to become trapped in a partial reform equilibrium.27

Club Convergence Related to the trap associated with partial reform, COMMANDER warns that inequality is “already entrenched” in many countries in the former Soviet Union.28 Economies such as Russia and Ukraine not only experienced the most serious transitional recessions, but also more severe increases in inequality. Many Central European countries, such as the Czech Republic, Hungary or Poland, experienced less severe recessions and also milder increases in inequality. This indicates a type of “club convergence,” where economies gravitate towards a situation with significant recession and high increases in inequality or a situation characterized by less severe conditions in terms of both recession and changes in inequality. The key to explaining the divergent outcomes in terms of inequality in transition is related to identifying the main factors that distinguish the economies in one club from the economies in the other. The “club convergence” phenomenon suggests that possible measures of success in transition seem to be highly correlated to one another. In their article investigating the relative importance of policies and institutional development for generating growth in transition economies (“Institutions Matter in Transition, but So Do Policies”), HAVRYLYSHYN and VAN ROODEN conclude that a strong institutional framework contributes to higher growth, but they maintain that policies still hold the most significant explanatory power. Their conclusion highlights the difficulty of isolating the effects any single aspect of change in the post-Soviet transition. The effects of specific determinants on inequality are difficult to detect in a quantitative analysis given the high degree of 27 MURPHY Kevin – SHLEIFER Andrei – VISHNY Robert, The Transition to a Market Economy: Pitfalls of Partial Reform. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 1992. 889. 28 COMMANDER Simon, The Impact of Transition on Inequality. Economics of Transition 1997/2. 503.

103

Kristin Maria NICKEL: Inequality in Transition Economies

multicollinearity between possible determinants. Therefore, it is difficult to discuss the determinants of inequality without considering a plethora of factors. Policies and the quality of the institutional transformation are instrumental in determining the trajectory of inequality in transition economies. Although policies and reforms have a clear influence on inequality in transition (which has been emphasized in the literature), the role of institutional development seems to be an essential factor distinguishing the diverging levels of inequality, which has been neglected in the literature on inequality. The structures and institutions that promote efficiency and prevent high levels of inequality must be established to avoid the self-enforcing partial equilibrium, characterized by the entrenchment of inequality. The importance of a successful institutional transformation is that it breaks down the old system, creating space for the development of a competitive structure that is regulated and inclusive, and therefore more likely to promote equality. The goal of a dynamic and equitable transition consists of promoting institutions that balance different aspects of transition: deregulation with appropriate re-regulation, social assistance with individual independence, open competition with employment creation, and so on. The intricate relationships between elements of transition suggest that the same approaches that encourage growth and development may promote equality, but disentangling the precise determinants of income inequality in transition remains beyond grasp. Suggested Reading CSEPELI György – ÖRKÉNY Antal, From Unjust Equality to Just Inequality. The New Hungarian Quarterly 1992/126. 71–77. EICHER Theo – TURNOVSKY Stephen (eds.), Inequality and Growth: Theory and Policy Implications. Cambridge, 2003. ELSTER Jon – OFFE Claus – PREUSS Ulrich, Institutional Design in Post-communist Societies: Rebuilding the Ship at Sea. Cambridge, 1998. FÖRSTER Michael – TÓTH István, Poverty, Inequality and Social Policies in the Visegrád Countries. The Economics of Transition 1997/2. 505–510. HAVRYLYSHYN Oleh – ROODEN Ron van, Institutions Matter in Transition, but so do Policies. Comparative Economic Studies 2003/1. 2–24. KORNAI János, Economics of Shortage. Amsterdam, 1980. MILANOVIC Branko, Income, Inequality, and Poverty During the Transition from Planned to Market Economy. Washington DC, 1998. NØRGAARD Ole, Economic Institutions and Democratic Reform: A Comparative Analysis of Post-Communist Countries. Cheltenham, 2000. NORTH Douglass, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York, 1990. SEN Amartya, Inequality Reexamined. Oxford, 1992. Kristin Maria NICKEL is an American citizen originally from Detroit, Michigan. She earned a Master’s in international relations from Central European University (CEU) in Budapest, Hungary; and a Bachelor’s in mathematics and economics at Davidson College in the United States. Currently she is teaching at a primary school for Roma children in Carpathia, Ukraine. Her email address is kristin_nickel@yahoo.com.

104

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The Air We Breathe: Capitalism and Mythology

Connecting capitalism with the problem of faith has had a very long tradition. Almost immediately, one thinks of the classic work by Max WEBER, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.1 However, he is not the only great thinker to have found some deeply rooted connections between the system of beliefs and capitalism. Another good example is Karl MARX with his dialectics. If the whole of ideology is created to explain why some own the means of production and some do not, then religion is also a “product” of the existing economic system. One also can not forget about Friedrich NIETZSCHE, with his concept of resentiment as an essential part of Christianity—a religion which is supposed to diminish the level of frustration among those who are not the beneficiaries of the economic system. Yet, the capitalism Karl MARX and Max WEBER were familiar with is completely different from today’s postcapitalism. As a result, the social problems it generates are very much different, and the system itself, as well as the people who exist in it, are bound to find different ways of dealing with this.

I Am What I Do According to Max WEBER, ascetic Protestantism remained in close relation with capitalism, as well as being the reason for its rapid growth. However, this does not mean that Protestant ethics were actually the same as capitalism; they were only “a speed-up factor.” The key role was played by, according to Max WEBER, inner1 WEBER Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London – New York, 2002.

105

Kristin Maria NICKEL: Inequality in Transition Economies

104

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The Air We Breathe: Capitalism and Mythology

105

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ: Capitalism and Mythology

worldly asceticism—behaviour typical for most members of a society and existing in everyday life. Its opposite is other-worldly asceticism such as monastic life.2 Almost immediately one thinks that asceticism and capitalism are two contradictory ideas: the first one says: “Accumulate capital, and get richer”; while the other says: “Possess, and want as little as possible.” Max WEBER claims that this contradiction is false, because a “waste of time is thus the first and in principle the deadliest of sins [and also] loss of time such as sociability, idle talk, luxury, even more sleep than is necessary for health, six to at most eight hours, is worthy of absolute moral condemnation.”3 Moreover, this attitude is not about doing any job, but about doing the one that is rational, effective, profitable and full time. The desire for poverty is something disgraceful and should be condemned to the same extent as laziness, because it does not praise God. Furthermore, those who do not take the opportunity to earn more contradict the goal of a calling (in German this is the term ‘Beruf’ which, according to Max WEBER, is strongly connotated with religion and faith) and, as a result, offend against God.4 What we see here is a double feedback mechanism: hard and continuous work is the most important value; the usage of its fruit, however, for one’s own pleasure or profit is a sin: “This worldly Protestant asceticism (…) acted powerfully against the spontaneous enjoyment of possessions; it restricted consumption, especially of luxuries. On the other hand, it had the psychological effect of freeing the acquisition of goods from the inhibitions of traditionalistic ethics. It broke the bonds of the impulse of acquisition in that it not only legalized it, but (…) looked upon it as directly willed by God. The campaign against the temptations of the flesh, and the dependence on external things, was (…) not a struggle against the rational acquisition, but against the irrational use of wealth.”5 This is how the process of ever-growing capital started—the acquisition of capital became possible thanks to a double selffeedback mechanism of the obligation of effective work and ascetic economizing, along with permanent self-control of one’s own doings. The psychological stimulant was the assumption that work as a 2 Ibid. 72–80. / 3 Ibid. 104. / 4 Ibid. 108. / 5 Ibid. 108.

106

A Flock of Doves

calling is the only way to gain mercy. On the other hand, thanks to the idea that to be an entrepreneur was also a calling, it was acceptable to use the willingness of ordinary employees to work. However, in the case of the latter the pressure on asceticism was much bigger than in the case of businesspeople.6 It had to lead to a situation where workers earned more and more; so, as a result, at some point they could save some money, but they were not allowed to spend their savings freely. As Max WEBER observed, the spirit of capitalism left its ancestors (Protestant ethics and asceticism) behind very quickly and spread to all societies, no matter what their religious background was, and eventually, became the universal secular attitude of the modern era. “One has only to re-read the passage from Benjamin FRANKLIN [“Time is money.”] (…) in order to see that the essential elements of the attitude which was (…) called the spirit of capitalism are the same as (…) the content of the Puritan worldly asceticism, only without the religious basis.”7 Nonetheless, with time something else did change: “The Puritan wanted to work in a calling; we are forced to do so. For when asceticism was carried out of monastic cells into everyday life, and began to dominate worldly morality, it did its part in building the tremendous cosmos of the modern economic order. This order is now bound to the technical and economic conditions (…), which today determine the lives of all the individuals who are born into this mechanism, not only those concerned with economic acquisition, with irresistible force.”8

I Am What I Buy Max WEBER himself pointed out that sooner or later, as a result of the accumulation of capital, the bonds of asceticism would have to be loosened, particularly in the case of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeois, provided they did not disgust or shock others too much, could afford not to be too obedient to the common rules of asceticism.9 What could not have been foreseen then was the fact that capitalism would change. The rule of continuous and effective work, along with asceticism, was bound to bring the creation of 6 Ibid. 116–120. / 7 Ibid. 123. / 8 Ibid. 123. / 9 Ibid. 120.

107

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ: Capitalism and Mythology

Net Disposable Income (NDI) to an extent which had not been known before. It included not only the bourgeois, but vaster and vaster groups of ordinary employees as well. Net Disposable Income (NDI) occurs when the spending on food, drink and various items connected with safety (such as rent, bills) do not exceed eighty percent of the income. The surplus is NDI. In the United States, workers started to gain NDI just after World War II; in Europe, not much later. The ascetic bonds had to be loosened, also because consumption was a very effective cure for the trauma of World War II. We very often use the term capitalism, when speaking not only about the eighteenth century and the nineteenth century, but also when meaning the twentieth century and the present days as well. Max WEBER claimed that the motive for a calling was created because of the solitude and fear of an individual who had to deal with permanent stress, caused by the existence of the rule of predestination. It says that it is predetermined who will be granted a state of grace and one cannot change this by means of her or his own doing. Actually, today’s capitalism is not the one Max WEBER knew. It has shifted from the paradigm of production to the paradigm of consumption; becoming postcapitalism, a totally self-referential socio-economic system. A short set of characteristics10 is shown in Table 1. (III. 98–122.; IV. 43.; VI. 63–64.)

Production________ 1. be rational 2. save money, avoid debt 3. asceticism, discipline, self-control

Consumption________ 1. trust your feelings 2. spend money, take loans 3. fulfilment of “needs and wants”;

life as the source of pleasure, excitement and satisfaction 4. work as a calling 4. work as the source of (as a value itself) satisfaction and the means of achieving goals 5. the rule of predestination 5. self-realization, life as a self-reflective project 6. demand exceeds supply 6. supply exceeds demand (ordinary products as well as signs) (ordinary products as well as signs) 108

Puritanism and Protestant ethics, which were the background for the spirit of capitalism, disappeared, but also a qualitative change of the socio-economic system took place (capitalism became postcapitalism). Thus, a new spirit of capitalism was bound to develop. This new spirit of capitalism, simply put, is postcapitalism itself. Postmodern capitalism is, to say it once again, totally selfreferential. It is the source of ideology for itself and the only thing that the system (postcapitalism) refers to. There is no ‘outside.’ This, of course, brings us to say that there is no ‘inside,’ for everything is ‘it.’ Jean BAUDRILLARD says, “Consumption is not a material practice, nor is it a phenomenology of ‘affluence.’ It is not defined by the nourishment we take in, nor by the clothes we clothe ourselves with, nor by the car we use, nor by the oral and visual matter of the images and messages we receive. It is defined, rather, by the organization of all these things into a signifying fabric: consumption is the virtual totality of all objects and messages ready10 GIDDENS Anthony, Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford, 1991. 98–122.; SZACHAJ Andrzej, Co to jest postmodernism? [What is Postmodernism?]. In POTOCKA Maria Anna (ed.), Postmodernizm. Teksty polskich autorów [Postmodernism. Texts of Polish Authors]. Kraków, 2003. 43.; BAUDRILLARD Jean, Symbolic Exchange and Death. London – Thousand Oaks – New Delhi, 2004. 63–64.

109

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ: Capitalism and Mythology

constituted as a more or less coherent discourse. If it has any meaning at all, consumption means an activity consisting of the systematic manipulation of signs.” 11 Thus, signs have lost any connection with what they used to refer to. We have shifted from the order of production (capitalism) to the order of simulacra (postcapitalism),12 where signs, and thus the whole system as well, are self-referential. They do not refer to anything that is ‘outside’ as was in the case of the Weberian spirit of capitalism, a calling by God. Figuratively speaking, postcapitalism could be described using terms connected to religious studies. There is a whole set of beliefs that ‘explains’ the reality: for example, capitalism is the best of systems, an individual can only be free and happy in capitalism, the one “who works hard, will get there.” There are also doctrines: the right to own, the free market, the freedom of entrepreneurship. There are places of worship: shopping malls, banks, financial centres, or television programmes devoted only to the economy. There are organizations and institutes: G8, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF). Finally, there is the area of sacrum: the “Invisible Hand of the Market”; and virtual money, the “wealth.”

This Is the Air Yet there is another, probably better, way of looking at the things—we could say that we live in a world where postcapitalism has developed its own mythology. Commonly used, the word ‘myth’ connotes something ‘fake,’ ‘false,’ ‘not true.’ This is because from the very beginning at school we are continuously reminded that Greek myths are only fables. For the Greeks themselves, however, they were not just ‘stories’ or ‘fables’: they actually did tell the story of the world and explained it to the people. This is what Roland BARTHES means when he uses the words ‘myth’ and ‘mythologies.’13 It is what we speak, think, act, breathe 11 BAUDRILLARD Jean, The System of Objects. London – New York, 1996. 200. 12 BAUDRILLARD Jean, Symbolic Exchange and Death. London – Thousand Oaks – New Delhi, 2004. 50. ff. 13 BARTHES Roland, Mythologies. Montreal, 2001. 109. ff.

110

A Flock of Doves

with. Yet, we do not realize it or notice it; we can not look at it as something ‘outside.’ It is the same as water for fish: if we asked a fish to describe the world, would it say that it is ‘wet’? If asked to describe the room you are in, would you say there is some air? It is ‘natural,’ obvious, something not worth discussion. Capitalism and its ideology by most of us (Westerners) is seen as something so ‘natural’ that one finds it extremely hard to be deeply critical about. In Max WEBER’s time, socialists or communists could propose something completely different, fight the whole system, propose a new one, prepare revolution. But today “the rhetoric of the market has been a fundamental and central component of this ideological struggle, this struggle for the legitimisation or delegitimisation of left discourse. The surrender to the various forms of market ideology (…) has been imperceptible but alarmingly universal. Everyone is now willing to mumble, as though it was an inconsequential concession in passing to public opinion and current received wisdom (or shared communicational presuppositions) that no society can function efficiently without the market and that planning is obviously impossible.”14

This Is Only My Job Shaquille O’NEAL is one of the biggest stars of the National Basketball Association (NBA). He refers to himself as ‘Diesel’ or the ‘Most Dominant Player in History.’ For the 2004–2005 season, for example, he was paid 27.696.429 USD (not including the income from advertising), the biggest salary of all the players in the NBA. Once he said: “I have never liked this sport. I prefer football. This is only my job. I come here every day and do the work. I hate basketball.” There is no doubt that most of the people in the world do believe in capitalism and want to be a part of it. This binds society so it does not collapse. We share the same consumption needs and we speak the same language of the market. We even sometimes, without noticing it, speak about our relations with others using the language of economy: “I had to make it up to her,” “You can not buy love,” and so on. We are children of consumptionism. Consumption is not only the

111

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ: Capitalism and Mythology

source of pleasure, but it also never comes to an end; it always exceeds its own limits, because it is based on a feeling of emptiness and need.15 People usually tend to want more; even if ‘objectively’ they do not lack anything. Exactly. If it were not for the ‘lack’ of something, there would have been no consumption. One of the examples which depicts this fact very well is the study cited by Robert K. MERTON, where each social class says they would like to have approximately twenty-five percent more money than they have at the moment. People do not buy, because they are brainwashed by the advertising industry. They buy, because they want to own in order to differentiate themselves from others. This differentiation becomes the source of one’s identity. Moreover, even those who can only participate in capitalism through the media (like people who live in non-capitalistic countries, eg. Cuba) are willing to ‘sink deeply’ into it. They are willing, even if this means literally sinking with your raft into the ocean, while trying to get to the U.S. coast. Passionate believers... On the other hand, there are some who disagree with the system. According to the classic analysis by Robert K. MERTON, we face the problem of deviancy when there is no cohesion between the common cultural goals and the universally accepted norms of behaviour that lead to these goals. The actual balance is held as long as individuals who are made to meet the two types of cultural requirements (goals and norms) are satisfied with the cultural goals they achieve thanks to fulfilling the norms. Naturally, there have to be some deviants. There are four types of deviancy in Robert K. MERTON’s typology: innovation, ritualism, retreatism and rebellion. They differ from each other, based on the attitude towards the cultural goals and norms. They can be accepted and rejected in different combinations. For example, a rebel is an individual who rejects both the goals and norms, but proposes new ones; while ‘innovator’ accepts the goals, but not the norms, so she or he breaks the norms to achieve the goals—a thief, for example.16 14 JAMESON Fredric, Postmodernism or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham, 2003. 263. 15 BAUDRILLARD Jean, The System of Objects. London – New York, 1996. 204–205. 16 MERTON Robert K., Social Structure and Anomie. In Social Theory and Social Structure. New York, 1968.

112

A Flock of Doves

Using Robert K. MERTON’s typology, there are always some rebels. The rebels, in Robert K. MERTON’s understanding, are people who not only disagree with the cultural goals and norms, but propose new ones while locating their source of frustration in the old ones. They usually do not originate from the lower classes, but exactly the opposite.17 It seems that we could put antiglobalists in this category: we have seen a few spectacular “rebellions” (Praha, Seattle, Davos). These said a harsh ‘No’ to the system, protested against globalization and proposed alternative norms and values. However this did not last long. Antiglobalists quickly became alterglobalists. They want capitalism, but with a ‘human face.’ One is immediately reminded of Fredric JAMESON’s words: “The rhetoric of the market has been a fundamental and central component of this ideological struggle, this struggle for the legitimisation or delegitimisation of left discourse.” Roland BARTHES states that there is always some dominant myth, and there is always an anti-myth. Of course, the rhetoric of the market is a dominant one. An anti-myth could be the rhetoric of alterglobalists. But what is also important is the fact that while the myth on the right wing is ubiquitous, is our air; the myth on the left wing is always weak, barren and piecemeal. It concerns only a small part of social life.18 It concerns only a small part of social life. An example could be the fact that alterglobalists found themselves fighting not against the ubiquitous globalization, but only for ‘a human face’ of the same system. Meanwhile, nobody who asks questions such as “Why do we have to work?”; “Why do we have to develop all the time?”; “Why do we consider a holiday a gift?” is treated seriously. “Yes. Myth exists on the Left, but it does not at all have there the same qualities as bourgeois myth. Left-wing myth is inessential. To start with, the objects which it takes hold of are rare (…) unless it has itself recourse to the whole repertoire of the bourgeois myths. Left wing myth never reaches the immense field of human relationships, the very vast surface of ‘insignificant’ ideology. Everyday life is inaccessible to it: in a bourgeois society, 17 Ibid.

18 BARTHES Roland, Mythologies. Montreal, 2001. 148.

113

Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ: Capitalism and Mythology

there are no ‘left wing’ myths concerning marriage, cooking, the home, the theatre, the law, morality, etc. Then, it is an incidental myth; its use is not part of a strategy, as is the case with bourgeois myth. (…) Statistically, myth is on the right. There, it is essential; well-fed, sleek, expansive, garrulous, it invents itself ceaselessly. It takes hold of everything, all aspects of the law, of morality, of aesthetics, of diplomacy, of household equipment, of literature, of entertainment.”19 Even if it is rightly assumed that (alter)globalists are rebels in Robert K. MERTON’s sense of the word, Shaquille O’NEAL’s words seem to illustrate a completely different type of aberration.

Masta’ Betrayed Us 20 Shaquille O’NEAL’s type of doubt and disbelief is not connected with frustration caused by a lack of cohesion in the social structure (Robert K. MERTON’s point of view). It is rather found among those who have access both to common cultural goals and to the commonly accepted ways and norms of behaviour leading to these goals. The frustration here is rather connected with emotional, physical, and psychological ‘overload.’ In this case (Shaquille O’NEAL is an example), an individual does not fight against the system, does not propose new ways, and does not withdraw. This is not resentiment either. Moreover, one locates the source of frustration in the system itself. Her or his disbelief has to be expressed/communicated somehow (in order to lower the level of stress/frustration), which becomes a way of building one’s identity. We live in a society where the best medium of communicating is consumption. So this is the way our disbelief is stated: we buy “different” products: We buy anticonsumptionist films (Fight Club, American Beauty, Matrix, The Beach); underground and niche music (jazz); music ‘against capitalism’ (Eminem); music ‘against the lack of individuality and conformism’ (Marylin Manson). We buy antiglobalist books (No Logo); anti-monopolistic computers (Apple); anti-cars (fashionably unfashionable Volkswagen Beetles, Smart). We become a Rebel Consumer. And it all happens within the very boundaries of the system,

114

A Flock of Doves

which is “amassing great sums by charging admission to the ritual simulation of its own lynching.”21 Is it possible to fight against the system while being outside of it? What we can learn from the example of Neo in Matrix is that every rebel who wants to fight the system has to accept its rules. However, every system takes into account some degree of disturbance and crisis. Suggested Reading BARTHES Roland, Mythologies. Montreal, 2001. BAUDRILLARD Jean, The System of Objects. London – New York, 1996. BAUDRILLARD Jean, Symbolic Exchange and Death. London – Thousand Oaks – New Delhi, 2004. GIDDENS Anthony, Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford, 1991. HEATH Joseph – POTTER Andrew, The Rebel Sell. If We All Hate Consumerism, How Come We Cannot Stop Shopping? http://www.thismagazine.ca/issues/2002/11/rebelsell.php JAMESON Fredric, Postmodernism or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham, 2003. MERTON Robert K., Social Structure and Anomie. In Social Theory and Social Structure. New York, 1968. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Agricultural and Rural Development Policies in the Baltic Countries. Paris, 2003. SZACHAJ Andrzej, Co to jest postmodernism? [What is Postmodernism?]. In POTOCKA Maria Anna (ed.), Postmodernizm. Teksty polskich autorów [Postmodernism. Texts of Polish Authors]. Kraków, 2003. WEBER Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London – New York, 2002. Jakub Jerzy MACEWICZ works at the faculty of sociology in the University of Bial/ystok in Poland. He is interested in the sociology of culture, in media and in communication as well as in linguistics and in sociology of the consumer society. His email address is: jakubjerzy@gmail.com.

19 Ibid. 148. 20 The subtitle, “Masta’ Betrayed Us”, refers to Gollum’s words in The Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. TOLKIEN. 21 HEATH Joseph – POTTER Andrew, The Rebel Sell. If we all Hate Consumerism, How Come we cannot Stop Shopping? http://www.thismagazine.ca/issues/2002/11/rebelsell.php.

115

Martina NOVÁKOVÁ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Integration of Refugees in Slovakia The Slovak Republic is developing her asylum system in response to increasing numbers of asylum-seekers and in order to ensure full implementation of international obligations as a member state of the European Union (EU), which the Slovak Republic recently joined in May 2004.

Asylum-Seekers in Slovakia Between 1 January 1992 and 31 December 2004, 44.767 asylumseekers were admitted into the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedure, of whom 563 were recognized as refugees. Another 2.747 had their applications for refugee status rejected, and 38.310 abandoned the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedure and left the country. The large number of asylumseekers abandoning the procedure indicates that for many, Slovakia is still a transit country. Out of the 563 refugees recognized by Slovakia by the end of December 2004, however, at least 300–330 are known to have remained in the country, 159 of whom have been granted Slovak citizenship. From January 2004 to December 2004, a total of 11.391 asylumseekers were admitted into the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedure, which represents a 35 percent increase over the same period in 2003. From this number, only 15 asylum-seekers were granted refugee status, which represents the lowest recognition rate in Europe during 2004. In 2003, only 11 asylum-seekers were granted refugee status, and in year 2002 it was 20 refugees. Generally, the number of asylum-seekers admitted into the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedure is not comparable with the

116

number of recognized refugees. This could point out one significant factor: the integration policy is not working, is not effective, and with numbers higher than 50–100, it could easily collapse. The composition of asylum-seekers has changed in the past two years, which have seen a large increase of asylum-seekers from Chechnya in the Russian Federation, especially since 2004. The main countries of origin in the process as a whole were India, Russian Federation—Chechnya, Georgia, Pakistan, China, Moldova and Bangladesh, between the months of January and September 2004. Eighty-six percent of the asylum-seekers are male, and only 14 percent are female, which leads to a slow but sure decrease of the female representation in the group composition of the asylumseekers. Female asylum seekers are for the most part Chechens, who come in families with children or as single-headed households.

Refugee Status Determination (RSD) Procedure An application for refugee status should be lodged with the Alien and Border Police (ABP), who should then forward the application to the Migration Office (MO); or, it can be submitted at designated Reception Centres of the Migration Office, where the Alien and Border Police is present to process the applications. The Migration Office is responsible for determining refugee status in the primary instance. Asylum-seekers who are rejected by the Migration Office may appeal to an independent Judiciary Appeal Committee (JAC, with courts in Bratislava and Kosˇice). This court determines refugee status in the secondary instance. Those asylum-seekers who are rejected at this instance may apply to the Supreme Court for judicial review of the Appeal Committee’s decision. Once admitted into the Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedure, asylum-seekers are accommodated for approximately thirty days under medical quarantine in a reception centre at Adamov-Gbely (with a 200-bed capacity), in Rohovce (140-bed capacity) in western Slovakia, or in Liptovské Vlachy (100-bed capacity) or Opatovská Nová Ves (180-bed capacity) in central Slovakia.

117

Martina NOVÁKOVÁ: Integration of Refugees in Slovakia

After completing quarantine, they are transferred to another reception centre in Western Slovakia, either at Brezová pod Bradlom (90- bed capacity), or Gabcˇíkovo (250-bed capacity), where they remain until the final determination of their respective claims. All five reception centres are managed by the Migration Office of the Ministry of Interior Affairs, which is planning to open a new centre in Humenné, eastern Slovakia, in 2005 or 2006 (with an estimated bed capacity of 300–500). At times of large numbers of asylum seekers, the Migration Office changes the regime of the two late reception centres, which normally operate under an accommodation regime (free leave of the centre with permission), and also changes the regime of the Integration Centre, which becomes a reception centre. Asylum-seekers are generally not allowed to leave the centres at Adamov-Gbely, Rohovce, Opatovská Nova Ves and Liptovské Vlachy, while under quarantine. They may come and go from the centres in Brezová pod Bradlom and Gabcˇíkovo, but are not allowed to work. Under the new amendment to the Asylum Law, they may enter the labour market if the decision on their case has not been issued by the Migration Office after one year. School-age children attend the local schools in Brezová pod Bradlom and Gabcˇíkovo, while younger children attend day-care facilities in the two reception centres.

Recognized Refugees Recognized refugees are granted permanent residence in Slovakia and enjoy de jure the same rights as citizens, subject to certain exceptions, such as the right to vote and to perform military service. In particular, refugees do not require a work permit and de iure they have the same access as citizens to public relief, social security and state healthcare, as well as to primary, secondary and tertiary education. In order to facilitate refugee integration, the Slovak Government issued Decision No. 105 of February 1996, adopting the “Complex Solution for the Process of Integration of Foreigners Granted Refugee Status into Society,” which is a basic framework for the

118

A Flock of Doves

integration process of recognized refugees, and according to which the Ministry of Interior Affairs should cooperate with other ministries, municipalities, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to help refugees. This help may include inter alia to learn the Slovak language, to attend vocational training courses, to obtain accommodation in social housing, to be accepted by the local community, or to obtain employment. This document is based on the principles of the migration policy of the Slovak Republic. The desired effect should be that a refugee (asylum-seeker) would become self-sufficient and able to exist without assistance from the state. The term ‘successful integration’ mainly comprises knowledge of the official language, having a job and a permanent residence. Responsibility for the process of integration from the point of view of the state administration lies with the Migration Office of the Slovak Ministry of Interior Affairs. The Slovak government officially declares its fulfilment of European Union standards in asylum policy and agrees with the Council Decision of 28 September 2000 establishing a European Refugee Fund (2000/596/EC): “The integration of refugees into the society of the country in which they are established in is one of the objectives of the Geneva Convention, and, to this end, there should be support for action by the Member States, intended to promote their social and economic integration, in so far as it contributes to economic and social cohesion, the maintenance and strengthening of which is one of the Community’s fundamental objectives.” In the same decision we also read: “It is in the interest of both the Member States and the persons concerned, that refugees and displaced persons who are allowed to stay in the territory of the Member States are given the opportunity to provide for themselves by working.” But in a practical way, integration is not a priority for Slovak official authorities. Since 1996 Slovak integration policy has not been changed, despite the fact that asylum legislation has been harmonized with the acquis communitaire. The attitude of state entities to the integration of refugees has not been changed, and it is considered

119

Martina NOVÁKOVÁ: Integration of Refugees in Slovakia

by non-governmental organizations as an element of the asylum system, which is not a priority, and no appropriate specialized attention is given to it.

National Integration Policy (NIP) Integration policy has not reflected the new transformation trends and has not been adapted to changed economic and social conditions. From our point of view, the main elements of integration policy—language training and vocational training of refugees—have been neglected for a long time. An effective national integration policy of the Slovak Republic is missing, resulting in a negative impact on integration of asylumseekers and refugees. This fact has lead to an increase of socioeconomic problems for recognized refugees—the lack of opportunities to succeed in the labour market, long-term dependence on the state social welfare system, and consideration of refugees by majority society as a “social burden.” Recognized refugees are facing very hard living conditions, especially in the first phases of the integration process: no knowledge of the official language, dependency on social welfare allowances, unemployment, and accommodation at periphery of towns, offered by the Ministry of Interior Affairs. At the beginning of the integration process, recognized refugees do not have sufficient and proper financial resources; they do not have the support of their family; and they do not have support from the local community. Furthermore, they do not sufficiently know Slovak society; they have no funds to buy basic sanitary tools, clothes, tools for kitchen or furniture. For a successful integration process it is important that recognised refugees are provided a minimum financial stipend, in order to acquire basic items. Only after reaching the basic level of maintenance, could recognized refugees start to be able to integrate also in the fields of culture orientation, language preparation, and getting to know the social system. In daily life, integration-related assistance is provided only by non-governmental organisations, funded mostly by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), although it is formally declared by the state as a provision.

120

The non-governmental sector covers the providing of social assistance, psychological and legal counselling, language training, vocational training, support in education, material support, and the raising of public awareness. Taking into account the status of recognized refugees as people with special needs (language, cultural and social barriers), the state does not create any special integration programmes focusing on facilitating the integration process. From the beginning, recognized refugees are considered by the relevant state authorities as people with the same rights and obligations as Slovak citizens, and with the same options for improving their living situations.

Development of Systematic Solutions For Slovak official authorities, refugee integration is not a priority and NGOs have to substitute for the role of the state. Because an official state integration policy is missing, the focus of NGOs is not only to provide “social assistance,” but also to develop systematic solutions and recommendations to the various state authorities. These can include: the creation of systematic solutions in language and professional training of recognized refugees and asylum seekers; and the creation of training programmes focused

121

Martina NOVÁKOVÁ: Integration of Refugees in Slovakia

on providing recognized refugees and asylum seekers with basic orientation, and with social and marketable skills. It can also include: providing supporting and motivational activities aiming to build independence and self-sufficiency of refugees and asylum seekers; the formation of positive attitudes of potential employers towards target groups. Furthermore, it can include: the constant and increasing raising of public awareness; and the formulation of recommendations for changing the general national integration policy in Slovakia. Changes in integration policy are necessary in the language preparation and in the accommodation policy, and it is known that increased co-operation among the central state administration, local institutions and non-governmental organizations could contribute to effective and positive improvement in the integration process. The necessity of cooperation between the Ministry of Interior Affairs, other respective central state bodies, as well as international organisations, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the state administration, municipalities and NGOs, comes to the fore in light of all these mentioned aspects. The creation of a functioning system of integration is one of the prerequisites for the fulfilment of obligations resulting for the Slovak Republic, originating from the 1951 Refugee Convention. Therefore, it is highly necessary for the Slovak Republic, and maybe for the other Central European countries, too, to find durable and sustaining systematic solutions to the integration of recognized refugees at a national and regional level. Martina NOVÁKOVÁ (1978) is a Roman Catholic from Ruzˇomberok, Slovakia. She studied social studies in Dolny´ Kubín. She participated in the Separated Children in Europe Programme and was a social counsellor for recognized refugees and asylum seekers in the Bjørnson Society. Currently she is a field coordinator of the People in Peril Association in Bratislava and a project assistant in the EQUAL Community Initiative. Her email address is martina_novakova@post.sk.

122

Daniel PASTIRCˇ ÁK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

There Are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit “There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in everyone.” (1Cor 12,4–6)

In 1Corinthians 12,4–6 we receive the key to open the mystery of unity in diversity. We are strangers yet neighbours, different yet joined by a common mysterious strength. Different languages, different cultures, different personality types, different traditions and denominations and yet one huge spiritual wave which soars in our different personalities, like an oratorio. What is difference and what is unity?

I. The Same Spirit The Spirit is one. What Spirit? Why one? Jesus said to the Samaritan woman: “God is spirit, and God’s worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.” (John 4,24) God is Spirit, Consciousness, which is invisible and penetrating everything. It is in you and around you. It is the source of being of all things. From it springs the light of your consciousness. The atoms and quarks, which weave the beautiful Gobelin tapestry of the cosmos in timespace, are dancing their complicated dance according to the law of the omnipresent Spirit. In the Spirit the whole universe has its hidden unity. “We were all baptized in one Spirit” (1Cor 12,13). The sacrament of baptism shows us the spring of our unity. The Greek word ‘baptismo’ means to be immersed and to soak up. This word signifies our internal initiation into God’s Spirit. The human being by baptism in the Spirit is immersed like a sponge in

123

Martina NOVÁKOVÁ: Integration of Refugees in Slovakia

122

Daniel PASTIRCˇ ÁK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

123

Daniel PASTIRC ˇÁK: There are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit

A Flock of Doves

the being of the Triune God, so that she or he is completely soaked in God. The formula of baptism—“I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” means that I immerse you in the substance of the Triune God. Christianity is about nothing less than transforming unification: to be born of God. On the day when the Spirit fills us, Jesus Christ says to us, “You will realize that I am in the Father, and you are in me, and I am in you” (John 14,20). What is the Spirit like? Where do we look for the Spirit? How does the internal life expressed in the ritual of baptism manifest itself in us? God is love and God’s Spirit is the Spirit of Love. It is the Spirit Who breathes the mysterious being of the Holy Trinity; the continuous stream of knowing and accepting each other in love, flowing from eternity to eternity between Father and Son. And this Triune God, loving and loved, is drawing us into God’s radiating centre by the Spirit of God’s Love. Jesus Christ obtained for us a share in this Spirit in the Garden of Gethsemane, when he prayed for the Apostles and for us, who would come after them, in these words “that they all may be one.” “And now, Father, glorify me in Your presence with the glory I had with You before the world began” (John 17,5). Through the words of Jesus’ prayer, as through an icon, we look at the glory which existed before the creation of the world: the glory of the uncreated being of God. What was that glory? “Father, I want those You have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory You have given me because You loved me before the creation of the world” (John17,24). The glory which was in God before the creation of the world is the glory of Love: it is the immortal radiance of eternal loving. Because the most appropriate name of the Triune God is Love. The glory of love is falling from Heaven to the Earth like a reflecting cascade. From the Father to the Son, from the Son to the Apostles, and from the Apostles to us. “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message” (John 17,20).

Here Jesus Christ is also praying for us. Here we are. We have believed. The words of the prayer flowed even to us, to baptize us into God’s glory. “I have given them the glory that You gave me, that they may be one as we are one” (John 17,22). What is that Glory? Where can we look for it? How can we find it? That glory appears where we in our diversity are united in the Spirit of Love, just as God is united in the diversity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Spirit is one. The Spirit of Unity; the Spirit of Love, which is here from eternity; the glory, with which the Father glorified the Son before the creation of the world. The first theme for meditation: “How deep is my being immersed in this Unity?

124

II. Different Charismas The Spirit, the Lord and God are One. There are various gifts of grace (charisma), of service (diakonia), and of the operation of power (energy). Different flowers grow from the same living soil. God’s garden is full of different colours, shapes and perfumes; each season brings different fruit. The one omnipresent Spirit manifests Herself in the subtle mystery of details. God reveals Godself in the mystery of individuality. God discloses Godself in the mystery of my and your unique personalities. From where does my existence come? From where does my consciousness come? How is it that I know that I am, and I also know that the world is around me? How is it that I know you are? Where does my sense of fantasy, desire, imagination and inspiration come from? From where is the unique composition of the characteristics that constitute me and that have never been anybody else before me or after me? Each of us is a unique composition of various manifestations of life forces—formed like an ingenious musical instrument. God’s eternal song and music vibrates through each one in a different way. From where do we get our power—to move our hand, to skilfully move our fingers, to jump, to run, to think, to speak, to dream, to envisage the invisible, to imagine the impossible, to create that which did not exist until now? We can relate to this spring of our life forces in the same way as

125

Daniel PASTIRC ˇÁK: There are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit

the gifted to the gift, or as the owner to her or his property: “These are my abilities! I can prove myself, therefore I am! My giftedness is me!” If I possess my life forces and if I find my values in them, my work will not have the character of service, but of self-realization. My activity among people will not be a manifestation of God’s power, but a struggle to establish myself in competition with others. The second theme for reflection is: Your whole being, your individuality, your uniqueness is gifted to you. You yourself are the gift of grace from God. Do you relate to yourself as the owner to her or his property, or as the gifted to the gift, with which she or he has been gifted in love?

III. Three Steps to Unity in Diversity 1. Accept Yourself as Gift A person does not need to reflect for very long to be aware that everything that is—beginning with biological life, to the most mysterious corners of the Spirit—is a continuous gift from the unique spring of being, which we can neither understand nor control. Every inhalation and exhalation is a gift. Every clear thought, every thrill of the senses, every perception of colours, shapes and perfumes, and every fervent feeling is a mysterious charisma. An important spiritual task on the road of life is to accept one’s own personality, its total colouring and direction, as God’s gift; as God’s expressed will of the direction one should take and where one’s life vocation lies. Some years ago, in a period of confusion, I prayed to God to rid me of my internal complexity, which prevented me from believing in a straightforward manner, without questions, as many people around me believe. Due to my intellectual and emotional complexities, and under the influences of a particular Christian environment, I almost felt guilty. During one such prayer, the enlightenment came to me. Suddenly, I came to understand the absurdity of my prayer. It was as if a squirrel prayed that God change it into a rabbit: after all, rabbits are the only proper creatures of God (at least according to rabbits).

126

They live simple and humble lives, and do not do extravagant deeds on the branches of trees. I understood and in time accepted that God created me with a soul that during my life would ask complex questions. Thanks to this cross I came to know the gift of grace and the gift of vocation, which God put into me from the moment of my conception. The person who understands that her or his whole being is the gift of grace, no longer directs her or his life as a rower her or his rowing boat, but rather as a sailor her or his sailboat. She or he does not work so hard by her or his own strength to manipulate her or his life, but sets her or his sails to receive the mysterious wind of the Spirit. Carried by unexpressed gratitude, she or he accepts the whole structure of her or his being as a gift of grace. And she or he, who is gifted, becomes a gift for others.

2. Give Yourself as Gift “It was God Who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists” (Eph 4,11). God gave Godself to us as gift, so that through us God can gift others. Let us accept our being as a gift from God, and give it on (to people and life) as a gift.

127

Daniel PASTIRC ˇÁK: There are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit

A Flock of Doves

In that way our charisma will become diakonia: our gift of grace will become service and every manifestation of our life energy will become a manifestation of the power with which God acts in us. Everything begins with a gift. The great artist of souls planted in us the seed of personality, which is to grow in us. Everything is there like an oak in an acorn, like a castle in a magician’s trunk: it just needs the fertile soil of character and the long process of growth. Shoot by shoot, twig by twig, branch by branch, leaf by leaf, until the first fruit is ripe and the thirsty pilgrim takes it to slake her or his thirst. A long road of personal and spiritual growth leads from the gift to the mission. In the end, the gifted becomes a gift for others.

My gift is your gift; your success is my success, because you and I are one in the Spirit of Christ. The third theme for reflection: To what extent do I accept myself as a gift; to what extent do I give myself as a gift; and to what extent do I accept other people as a gift?

3. Accept the Other Person as Gift Often an obstacle on the way to unity in Spirit, in the diversity of our gifts, is our unwillingness to accept gifts from others. We like “to give” as in this way we “serve” others with our gifts; we publicly show our human quality, our character and our abilities. For our performance we receive the reward of esteem and our values are affirmed with praise and thanks from external sources. One can quite easily accept oneself as gift; one can also find a way to serve others with one’s gifts. The one thing that one is incapable of, is accepting the giftedness of another person, coming to terms with the notion that one must accept the service of another person. If we do not learn to accept the other person as a gift, the other person becomes our rival. Then we do not know how to delight in her or his gift, because that gift does not belong to us. We do not perceive the service of the other as the complement of our activity, but as competition. We begin to envy the successful “servant.” At one conference on spiritual gifts the lecturer spoke of how for years he dreamt that he would one day become a great evangelist. As a Baptist, he certainly had his ideals; he prayed that he would be like Billy GRAHAM. But one day light dawned and he understood that God did not give him the gift of evangelisation; he gave him Billy GRAHAM. To accept the other person as a gift means to learn to rejoice with the rejoicing, to rejoice at the success of another.

128

IV. The Mystery of the Body of Christ “There are many gifts, but one Spirit.” That short sentence briefly expresses one of the deepest mysteries of the Christian faith: the Mystical Body of Christ. “It was in one Spirit that all of us were baptized into one body” (1Cor 12,13). “You then are the Body of Christ. Every one of you is a member of it” (1Cor 12,27). When Saint Paul spoke of the Church as the Body of Christ, it was not metaphorically, nor it was allegorically. Saint Paul did not say that we are like a body; he simply declares that we are the Body of Christ. If at Christmas we celebrate the feast of the first incarnation, at Pentecost we celebrate the feast of the second incarnation. At Christmas God became a human person. God incarnated Godself in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. His hands made, his mouth spoke, his feet moved towards their goal, his mind thought and his heart felt. At Pentecost the Spirit of Jesus Christ descended on the Church: on us, on our bodies. And so God in this world has, had and will have millions of hands, millions of hearts, mouths and minds: your and my mouth, your and my heart, your and my mind, your and my hands. We are the Body of Christ. Jesus Christ gave himself to us as the one universal gift of grace. That one specific gift includes all other specific gifts. And by that gift he united us to himself forever, as the bridegroom to the bride. In that very gift each of us has received our own personal gifts. We can imagine it as Jesus Christ is depicted by the great Byzantine mosaic, called “Christ, the Pantokrator”: he gives himself to us. To each he gives a stone from the mosaic. That stone is our charisma: our unique personal gift. By giving each of us a small piece (so that each of us would have something), he calls each of us from inside our individuality into the union of community. No one of us has all of Jesus Christ. Each of us has but a small

129

Daniel PASTIRC ˇÁK: There are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit

and unique part. We must bring together and assemble these rare stones, so that Jesus Christ may be whole. We must compose this mosaic again, so that Jesus Christ can appear in the world in which we live. This is the basic task of each generation. Once more, again and again, to assemble together the whole picture of Jesus Christ. What we say about individuals can apply to the whole Church as well. That is, to the entire spreading many-layered phenomenon of present-day Christianity. Every denomination, every confession and every tradition receives its own special stone (or a set of stones). Each is the bearer of a different charisma. The charisma of each denomination was given to serve the other denominations. No denomination has the whole Jesus Christ. Only in all of us together is the whole Gospel expressed; only in all of us gathered together is the whole Christian life manifested. What we said about individuals applies also to church communities. As denominations and as spiritual traditions, we need to accept ourselves as a gift from God. We should not disdain our spiritual origins, but be thankful for the roots of our church tradition. As church communities, we also need to become gifts for other denominations, confessions and traditions. We should not seek a way by which we, from our own store, can pour gunpowder on the shameful divisions that for hundreds of years Christians have perpetuated among themselves. But rather we should seek in our own tradition that which can become a gift for all the others. And, finally, we need to learn to accept other denominations and spiritual traditions as a gift from God. Then we will live worthily of the vocation to which we have been called and sent: the vocation to unity in the diversity of the Body of Christ, where there are many gifts, but the very same Spirit. The fourth theme for reflection is: Do I accept my denomination as a gift from God? Am I prepared to put my tradition at the service of other denominations? Do I accept other denominations and spiritual traditions as a gift from God? Daniel PASTIRCˇÁK (1959) is a poet, prose-writer and essayist. He graduated in Protestant theology in Bratislava, Slovakia. He works as a preacher of the Free Evangelical church (Bratská cirkev). His book Damian’s River (1993) was listed on the List of Honour of the International Board of Books for Youth. His other books are Tehilim and Cintet; the latter was honoured as the best Slovak book of the year for youth. He is also engaged in art and has exhibited in galleries in Slovakia and abroad. His email address is pastirco@isternet.sk.

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue Dialogue is the basic model for hermeneutics; therefore, no limits are to be set on the dialogue in advance by unequivocal interpretation of the situation. Hermeneutics is “a philosophical analysis and description of the process whereby understanding is reached.” 1 In this sense, the hermeneutics of goodwill and interpretative benevolence are part of a fundamental anthropology, since human existence itself is an act of comprehension and of understanding.

I. The History of the Idea Prior to a thorough and deep examination of ecumenical and interreligious dialogue, we need to focus on the historical reality of the important word, dialogue, itself. Both the term and its meaning have been present during the whole history of philosophy, right from its very beginnings, SOCRATES. For the sake of brevity, we only mention here the authors frequently referred to in ecumenical literature. In this first part of our paper, we do not intend to offer a whole list or any kind of full elaboration of these authors. We rather aim to underline the fundamental importance of some of the thinkers, philosophers and theologians, who are cited in the ecumenical texts and contexts.

1. Dialogos in Philosophy The very word dialogos, of Greek origin, is first used in the ancient Greek world, 2 with the original meaning of ‘to balance accounts,’ so to say, to harmonize debits and credits (dialogizomai). Since dialogos is from dia (which means through or between) 1 This article of OTT Heinrich is of fundamental importance for us: The Horizons of Understanding and Interpretative Possibilities. In SAMARTHA Stanley J. (ed.), Faith in the Midst of Faiths. Reflections on Dialogue in Community. Genève, 1977. 85–89. 2 The following historical panorama is partly based on the article: VERGHESE Paul, Will Dialogue Do? The Ecumenical Review, 1966/1. 27–38.

130

131

Daniel PASTIRC ˇÁK: There are Many Gifts, but the Same Spirit

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

130

131

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

and logos (with the meaning of reason or word), linguistically this term can be defined now as a “reasoned and logical discourse.” The opposite of dialogue is monologue, which is isolated and exclusive, self-righteous or solipsistic and egotistical. Essentially it was SOCRATES who successfully introduced this term into philosophy. He was the inventor of the dialectical method, as we can read in the texts of his most important disciple, PLATO, who uses the name of SOCRATES in his fictitious and literary dialogues. The contemporary theological resuscitation of the meaning of dialogue is due to the German Jewish thinker, Martin BUBER, who developed it into the theological thinking in his books Zwiesprache (1929) and Ich und Du (1923). He made two very important distinctions—drawing a line between observer and participant, and discussion and dialogue. The observers, in the first place, are able to describe the object of their observations in words. At the same time, the participants are addressed at the core of their being, and also respond with the whole of their being. On the other hand, discussion is an ana-lysis, a taking apart, which has the goal of objective understanding, while dialogue has the mutuality of the inner action as its basic element. Genuine dialogue has a twofold movement in itself: a turning toward the other, and an abandonment of self-isolation for an inclusive awareness. The personalist, dialogical philosophers following Martin BUBER, like Stefan ROSENZWEIG, Ferdinand EBNER and Emmanuel LÉVINAS all start with the same conviction. This conviction is that I do not exist without Thou, and we do not exist only for ourselves; we are in a genuine sense encounter and dialogue. Martin BUBER’s thoughts find their way to the ecumenical movement especially through Yves CONGAR OP. Yves CONGAR OP, who was a Roman Catholic theologian and a Dominican friar, himself had to face the interesting problem that this term of ours, dialogue, occurs not more than once in the New Testament (NT). 3 OUTLER Albert C. shows this parallel development in the article From Disputation to Dialogue. The Ecumenical Review, 1963/1. 14–23. 4 MACQUARRIE John analyses this expression of Ludwig WITTGENSTEIN in Religious Language and Recent Analytical Philosophy. In METZ Johannes B. (ed.), The Development of Fundamental Theology. Concilivm 1969/46. 164–165. 5 SLAVKOVSKY´ Adrián, Paradoxnost´ niektory´ch základny´ch postojov cˇloveka (Paradoxical Nature of Some Basic

Gentle Theology

2. Persuasion in Rhetorics There is a parallel development of the theory of dialogue, although it does not use the term.3 In the long history of rhetorics, which was one of the seven free arts (septem artes liberales), one can find the prototype of current ecumenical and interreligious dialogue in the era of the European Renaissance. In the Renaissance rhetorical school of the theory of persvasio collisione, which means persuasion in collision, one was supposed to and expected to state different opposing positions fairly and justly; otherwise one was regarded as not understanding the views of the other. In a similar way, in the postmodern way of thinking we are expected by the others to be able to change the register, to jump from paradigm to paradigm (following the expression of the sociologist Thomas KUHN), or to play another language game4 in order to have credibility in understanding each other. After the relatively short period of the Renaissance, it was later the Enlightenment era, and also the time of the XIXth century liberalism, which wrote this way of philosophical thinking on their flags. “It is out of the discussion (collatione) of a variety of opinions that truth is elicited.” This is a popular slogan from the theologian ERASMVS of Rotterdam, and not surprisingly, was infrequently cited in the age of polemical disputations.

II. Waving of Dynamics “Many dialogues are full of correct logical argumentation, and even then do not lead anywhere and create more tension and suffering rather than solve problems or persuade the other part. Many times the discussing partners differ in their unpronounced presuppositions. A deeper understanding of the paradoxical nature of our basic stances, and … a more nuanced approach towards our convictions, can have a positive influence on the communication between individuals, nations, cultures, religions and life-views.”5 There are various and different levels of the dialogue model. This model is applicable for individuals, for groups, even for whole cultures. In this article we are centring around the second

Human Stances). In ANDREANSKY´ E. (ed.), Filozofia a zˇivot – zˇivot filozofie (Philosophy and Life – Life of Philosophy). Presˇov, 2004. 120.

132

133

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

and the third level, even if the original model was intended mainly for interpersonal relationships. Let us now examine some definitions which were attributed to dialogue in the course of the history of ideas. Dialogue in general can be defined as “a sustained conversation between parties who are not saying the same thing, and who recognize and respect the differences, the contradictions, and the mutual exclusions between their various ways of thinking.”6 Genuine dialogue is “a spiritual journey in search of a shared clarity.”7 Another definition for dialogue can also be the following: “Dialogue is a style of living in relationship with neighbours.”8 “Dialogue is a common quest for liberty; and, as a consequence of progress in the liberty of each, a common effort to advance in the direction of Truth.”9 There is a firm place for dialogue “if diversity is not to become chaos, if unity is not to become mere uniformity.”10 After having a quick look at the history of the term dialogue in philosophy, rhetorics and also in theology, now let us see the fruits of a thorough analysis of what has been gathered and written on the vectors onwards and backwards. These vectors we call the dynamics of dialogue, and we will also attempt to synthesize our different findings.

1. Fusion of Transcendental Horizons The previous mention of polemical disputes leads us to our next question: Exactly why are we dealing with this problem, the theoretical background of conversation or of dialogue? The first and perhaps a kind of shallowish or superficial answer could be that we deal with this issue because the dialogical method is simply a fact to consider in the case of ecumenical and of interreligious encounters. 6 The definition is from TAYLOR John V., The Theological Basis of Interfaith Dialogue. International Review of Mission 1979/4. 373. 7 This other definition is from the article of ROEST CROLLIUS Ary A. SI: Harmony and Conflict. Bulletin (Pro Dialogo) 1992/3. 377. 8 SAMARTHA Stanley J. in Guidelines on Dialogue quotes the definition. The Ecumenical Review 1979/2. 162. 9 SAMARTHA Stanley J. quotes the definition of DUBARLE Daniel in Religious Pluralism and the Quest for Human Community. In NELSON J. Robert – BRILL E. J. (eds.), The Unity of Humankind in the Perspective of Christian Faith. Essays in Honour of W. A. VISSER’T HOOFT on His Seventieth Birthday. Leiden, 1971. 10 TRACY David sets up these limits of dialogue in A Plurality of Readers and a Possibility of a Shared Vision. In

In this case, however, the real meaning of the term dialogue still does not seem lucidly elaborated. On the other hand, there may be a second, a deeper, answer given—namely that our approach to the truth cannot be other than a dialogical one, at least in this era of postmodernity (or hypermodernity, or late-modernity). We must say, we have such difficult and such hard historical times behind us, while we have been eagerly searching for and fervently debating the notion of truth, especially of religious truth, that there are not many other ways remaining. The aims of any kind of dialogue are understood—and they should be understood—differently, when we speak about secular, about ecumenical or about interreligious dialogue. For example, the recent Vatican text Dominvs Iesvs, which was a document originally intended to speak about interreligious dialogue, applies the same way of thinking and self-definition to both ecumenical and interreligious dialogue. When the theories of dialogues were elaborated, they were structured towards interpersonal relationships. The discussion, the communication, and also the dialogue between the different traditions and worldviews has been mainly developed and improved in the circles of the XXth century’s ecumenical

BEUKEN Wim – FREYNE Sean – WEILER Anton (eds.), The Bible and its Readers. Concilivm 1991/1. 123.

134

135

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

movement, including or in close relation with interreligious “convergence.” Genuine dialogues usually begin every time any kind of tension arises due to a striving for a more complete identity, or due to dialectic antinomies, or impacts of the outside world. The fourfold purpose of dialogue is mutual advancement, elimination of prejudice, of intolerance and of misunderstandings.11 There is a pragmatic and a fundamental aim in dialogue. The pragmatic aim is to remove mutual misunderstandings and to serve common human tasks. The fundamental aim is the open exchange of witness, experience, questioning and listening.12 The aim of dialogue can be a fusion of horizons (using the technical term of Hans-Georg GADAMER), a consensus of conscience,13 or a partial convergence for a new common horizon. The purpose, aim and object of dialogue is “understanding and appreciation, leading to further reflection upon the implication for one’s own position of the convictions and sensitivities of the other traditions.”14 The path of dialogue is from anathema (excommunication) to dialogue, from dialogue to coexistence, from coexistence to convivence, and from convivence to cooperation. The final goal is reconciled difference, which is endured and productively shaped.15 Unlike dialectical dialogue, dialogical dialogue aims to stand under the Spirit of truth and of love that manifests Herself, shining through the logos of all the witnesses; to be led into a new self-understanding within a brand-new horizon. The dialoguepartners are taken over and are led by a Middle Third, that is, the Subject matter of the dialogue, which is the Holy Spirit.16

11 Francis ARINZE enlists these purposes in The Place of Dialogue in the Church’s Mission: Reflection on “Redemptoris Missio”. Bulletin (Pro Dialogo) 1991/1. 23. 12 MULDER D. C. emphasizes the two main aims of interreligious dialogue in The Dialogue Between Cultures and Religions. Kraemer’s Contribution in the Light of Later Developments. The Ecumenical Review, 1989/1. 15. 13 SAMARTHA Stanley J. uses this meaningful term, the ‘consensus of conscience’ in World Religions: Barriers to Community or Bearers of Peace? In Insight: A Journal of World Religions 1979/1–2. 14 TAYLOR John V. mentions these aims in The Theological Basis of Interfaith Dialogue. International Review of Mission 1979/4. 373. 15 MOLTMANN Jürgen meditates on the final aim of dialogue in the chapter called Theology in Interfaith Dialogue.

In MOLTMANN Jürgen, Experiences in Theology. Ways and Forms of Christian Theology. London, 2000. 20. 16 DURAISINGH Christopher in Issues in Mission and Dialogue. Some Reflections looks upon dialogical dialogue. International Review of Mission 1988/3. 409.

Gentle Theology

2. Healing Hereditary Wounds The obstacles for dialogue, for the most part, except for the danger of syncretism, are not specific to ecumenism or interreligiosity. At this point we are not going to take time to depict the history of strong pain and harsh suffering behind us, but we will just touch upon the points which are important because they form the main obstacles on the road to understanding each other. Let us remember the painful history, the different fighting and bloody wars among committed humans in the name of defending or spreading the truth, the hates and wounds between certain groups, who could hardly say that they really understood the others’ values and concerns. Our cultural, religious and contextual backgrounds fundamentally and essentially condition our experiences; and later, our experiences determine the way we think about or perceive the world. Therefore, experiences influence our concepts and our theologies. Nevertheless, we can also work on our experiences by changing our concepts. The healing of our memories is a responsibility for all of us. ‘Contemporary history’—that is, the vernacular politics—is also a difficult-to-overcome obstacle between us: politics are religicised, religions are politicised. Many times one can hardly manage to separate them. It is even more tragic that our historical experiences led us into a language of abrasive-pugnacious separation. This language is also one full of intolerance, of exclusivism, of tragically poisoned and hegemonic monologue, which in itself gave strong support back to the hostile deeds again. This circvlvs vitiosvs is to be overcome by dialogue, the ministry of reconciliation. The historical bonds are strongly connected with psychology and also with the morality and ethics of dialogue. The science of psychology is mainly concerned with making our deeply rooted attitude-categories and our culturally structured experiences more and more visible,17 transparent, and finally, understandable. There is a special danger which can emerge if we are not aware enough of the coherence of our paradigms or of our narratives. If 17 These terms are from the article: PEURSEN C. A. VAN, Gospel and Culture: Experience and Conceptualisation. The Ecumenical Review, 1987/2. 187–191.

136

137

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

we are too relaxed in considering the intransigence of our worldviews, we can fall easily into the pit of eclecticism. We should deal with the whole outlook of this behaviour in connection with the topic of interreligious dialogue, since this is the field where it is the most visible and also the most dubious. Syncretism, as we can see, is a form of eclecticism.

III. Means and Gentles Now we intend to collect some controversial but crucial elements, which we call means of dialogue; and which were revolutionary new paradigms during the last century. These varied and multifaceted changes have made possible for example the so-called “ecumenical miracle” so far, and further changes in them could pave the way for further convergences in our thinking. This chapter of ours follows the twofold aim of dialogue: speaking the truth in love (and thus dealing with truth, language and communication), and the ministry of reconciliation (dealing with community).

1. Involvement in Truth The whole wide field of epistemology is at the moment probably the most difficult area in any kind of dialogue, but especially in interreligious dialogue. One of the reasons for this is the fact that truth is understood as a statement, an affirmation, and not so much as a living, personal reality (like in the statement, “I am the Truth”). We just briefly touch upon this question here, since, together with ecclesiology, epistemology seems destined to be the cornerstone of gaining more visible catholicity for the One Church (Una Sancta). We pointed out in the previous passages that to rightly understand the Truth is one of the two fundamental and final aims of dialogue. Also, Truth is the “third partner” in dialogue. Aletheia, truth is a movement and a relation in which humans are caught up and involved.18 Without going into this point too deeply, let us just explain which kind of truth we mean when we use this term. Basically there can be three main kinds of truth distinguished here: the ontological, the existential, and the epistemological one. 18 DURAISINGH Christopher quotes this definition of LEHMANN Paul in Issues in Mission and Dialogue. Some Reflections. International Review of Mission 1988/3. 411.

138

Gentle Theology

The notion of ontological truth goes back to the ancient Greek philosophical writings of PLATO, who speaks about the good, the true and the beautiful. His disciple, ARISTOTLE, even gives a definition for the truth: “To say of what is that it is, of what is not that it is not, is true.” In this definition the truth is rather a claim which is not false, when checked against reality; and this very reality is that which the truth-claim is made about. Problems and difficulties that are more serious begin to gather and arise, however, when we try to use truth to refer to the reality itself. The end-station, the final destination, can and probably will be, that anything that is (that has being), is true. Obviously enough, it is not really a good and meaningful starting point for any kind of a dialogue. The existential truth, however, gives a kind of personal point of view. According to this understanding, truth is an encounter with the transcendent, and as a result of this encounter, a certain quality of life. In this usage of the word, the relevant question still remains: how can we judge the truths themselves? The truth does not only consist of following the truth, but it should also answer the question of the rightness of truths themselves. Especially religious doctrines can not have a purely theoretical or non-experiential truth.19 The third usage of truth is the epistemological one. We should define the truth which exists in the true-false dichotomy as follows: truth is that which can be clearly shown to be not false to the satisfaction of all concerned. In the huge field of religious and also of interreligious discourse, there is a wide range of other statements which really are or only can be called truth or true.20 We should be ready and well prepared to distinguish, however, the pseudo-epistemological usage of the word from the epistemological one. In the former usage, the truth-claims are not demonstrable and verifiable (although, in most cases, they are not falsifiable either), except in terms of what is called by John HICK the eschatological verification. These can only be proclaimed and can be testified to, which constitutes a real chance here and now for the existential truth. 19 BALTHASAR Hans Urs VON warns us to this truth in Truth and Life. In SCHILLEBEECKX Edward OP (ed.), Human as

Human and Believer. Concilivm 1966/21. 90. 20 The source of PICKARD William M. Jr.’s reasoning is Truth in Religious Discourse. The Ecumenical Review, 1985/4. 437–444.

139

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

Hence they rightly and exactly would be called truth-claims or truth-beliefs of the homo convictvs, the committed human person (the expression comes from Willem F. ZUURDEEG). Let us at this point mention something about the question of the possession of the truth. In our understanding, the pseudoepistemological truth-claims cannot be possessed; they only can be confessed and testified to. It is not the mere possession, but rather the sharing of truth that leads to enrichment. We strongly feel the possession of epistemological truth as a mere controversy in itself, if it is not connected sufficiently with nor transformed into existential truth. If the truth reaches and touches our inner self, it is not we who possess the truth; rather the Truth possesses us. At the end, truth itself seems to be of dialogical nature. Truth comes to us primarily, if not only, in the form of answers to questions—answers coming from weighing the evidence—and each new answer gives rise to further questions. The possessiveness of whole and full truth sounds very arrogant and seems to be in sharp contrast with the humble attitude of the one who is searching for the real meaning of what one believes and for the real face of the One in Whom one believes. While justice is blind, truth itself is dialogical, two-eyed. In an elliptical model of reality, we too are called to look at Truth through two eyes.21 There is not only a horizontal orientation in dialogue, but there is also a vertical one, where we have the task to understand the truth. Prerequisites for this vertical orientation are on the one hand, the giving up of the idea of possessing the whole truth, the true knowledge; and on the other hand, we can only attribute wellmeaning error to our partner in dialogue. In this way, we can recognize the partial aspects of truth, the particvlæ veri, in the other. Finally, the Greek and Hebrew concepts of truth, aletheia and emeth, constantly have to supplement each other. Aletheia signifies that which appears, emerges from hiddenness into manifestedness. Emeth, however, signifies an unqualified and ultimate certainty.22 Search for the truth happens through praxis, action-reflection and living dialogue.23 Plurality as a contemporary phenomenon does not relativise 21 SAMARTHA Stanley J. quotes ROBINSON John A. T.’s beautiful parallel on the elliptical model of the two-eyed Truth in Ganga and Galilee: Two Responses to Truth. In HICK John – ASKARI Hassan (eds.), Diversities of Religious Experience. London, 1981.

140

Gentle Theology

Truth; rather it relativises the different and varied responses to the Truth. In plurality or pluralism, we are almost forced to make a choice and to decide. The fundamentalist usually opts for truth at the expense of tolerance; while the radical liberal opts for tolerance at the expense of truth. But the genuine Truth makes tolerance imperative.24

2. Multilingual Vocabularies Linguistics has undergone a fundamental and radical development since the publication of the works of such scholars as Ferdinand DE SAUSSURE. Without the practical implications of this kind of developments in theology, however, there is no real chance for effective and true reconciliation: for the complete changing of language and of register, for example. “How we speak is as important as what we speak.”25 The use of rhetorics as the science of talking together has to focus not only on how we do it, but on how we might improve it26 in the future. The stony road from hegemonic monolingualism to inclusive multilingualism is very long and is paved by learning and changing; otherwise the different claims can never be communicable. Dialogue belongs to and it is indeed the very nature of every language. Even in Paradise God had certain questions to Eve and Adam: Where are you? Language has two main functions in this sense: it makes us heirs and a part of a tradition, heritage, and in the instance that it is mutually comprehensive,27 it makes us communicable, which means being at the same time understanding and being understandable. Neither of these sides is without the presence of dialogue: the acceptance of a tradition is happening in asking and answering, as well. We are responsible for the passing-on of our heritage further, to our children and successors. 22 OTT Heinrich discerns aletheia and emeth in The Horizons of Understanding and Interpretative Possibilities. In SAMARTHA Stanley J. (ed.), Faith in the Midst of Faiths. Reflections on Dialogue in Community. Genève, 1977. 85–89. 23 DEVANANDA Yohan sets these three areas in Living Dialogue. In ARAI Tosh – ARIARAJAH Wesley S., Spirituality in

Interfaith Dialogue. Genève, 1989. 77. 24 NEUHAUS Richard John sets up this new and revolutionary connection in Truth and Tolerance. First Things 1994/10. 25 BROWNSON James V. sees this connection in Speaking the Truth in Love. Elements of a Missional Hermeneutic. International Review of Mission 1994/3. 503. 26 BOOTH Wayne C. in his article compares the interrelated role rhetoric and religion are destined to play in each other’s life in Rhetoric and Religion: Are They Essentially Wedded? In JEANROND Werner G. – RIKE Jennifer L. (eds.), Radical Pluralism and Truth. David Tracy and the Hermeneutics of Religion. New York, 1991. 79. 27 DHAVAMONY Mariasusai SI sets this fundamental requirement of mutual comprehensiveness in his chapter called Christian Theology of Interreligious Dialogue. In DHAVAMONY Mariasusai SI, Christian Theology of Religions. A Systematic Reflection on the Christian Understanding of World Religions. Bern, 1998. 203.

141

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

We are responsible for our languages, as for talents given to us to cultivate them. We are called to pour our new wines into new wineskins, which means for the time being, the very language of consensus. In this sense, we can make a distinction between two types of language, the language of science (digital language) and the language of healing or therapy (analogical language).28 Digital language is objective, cerebral, and logical. Its functions are negating, subordinating, analyzing, hierarchizing, explaining and interpreting. Analogical language, on the other hand, functions as imaginary, metaphor, synthesis and totality. Some main characteristics of analogical language can be discerned: condensation, figurativity, pars pro toto, aphorism and ambiguity, pun, allusion. Analogical language was born from the desire to embrace the other.29 There can be another classification of language and literature: oral literature transforms, while literary literature informs.30 Even the choice of syntax and vocabulary is a kind of political act that defines and circumscribes the way facts are to be experienced. In a certain sense, it even creates the facts that can be studied.31 Therefore, cleaning up the vocabulary is one of the most important tasks in a dialogue.32 There is a language to be approached, “a language of degrees and measures, of proximity and quantity.”33

3. Communicating Existence With this next part, we focus on the crucial question of communication. The theories of communication are mainly derivatives, or consequences of the different paradigms concerning languages. We can distinguish and classify some of the dialogues taking place in the Bible, especially in the New Testament, some of them being epoch-making or paradigm-creating even for our time. Mere 28 Paul D. FUETER quotes and analyzes theses two kinds of languages in The Therapeutic Language of the Bible. International Review of Mission 1986/3. 211–213. 29 WARD Graham quotes the opinion of LACAN Jacques in Theology and Postmodernism. Theology 1997/6. 438. 30 This summary is from HOLLENWEGER Walter J.’s article, The Ecumenical Significance of Oral Christianity. The Ecumenical Review 1989/2. 262. 31 HOLLENWEGER Walter J. quotes the conviction of WINK Walter in The Ecumenical Significance of Oral Christianity. The Ecumenical Review 1989/2. 263. 32 THOMAS T. K. reviews a book by ELLER Verbard, who lends these important tasks to the title of his book:

Cleaning Up the Christian Vocabulary, by Verbard ELLER. The Ecumencial Review 1977/1. 100–101. 33 HUFF Peter A. hails and greets the documents of the Second Vatican Council with these summarizing remarks in Separation Incomplete, Communion Imperfect: Vatican II’s Ecumenical Strategy. One in Christ 1995/1. 62.

142

Gentle Theology

communication, however, is not yet a dialogue in the fullest sense of the word at all, but only one of its means. Communication can be defined as a reciprocal exchange of thoughts, of feelings and of desired actions between partners of equal status (equality) by means of signs, in a symbolic interaction, with the aim of understanding (content and relations).34 The meta-hegemonic discourse, prototypical for any good and meaningful conversation, has a Spirit that is of one being with the conversants; thus God as well can rightly be called a Conversation.35 Based on the well-known story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman from the Gospel of St. John (4,1–42), we can describe and name ten important steps, which are the ten phases of communication.36 The first phase of this communication is the perverted one, or the poisoning one, in other words: rumour has it that Jesus was making and baptising many more disciples than St. John the Baptist. Then, as a second step, comes the usual, everyday communication in the story. This is the realm of the various personal relations: Jesus Christ asks the Samaritan woman for a drink at Jacob’s well. Communication also can be impossible, when the walls of separation seem to be immovably solid between the partners in communication. The Samaritan woman reminds Jesus Christ of the long history of pain, suffering and hatred between and behind their two nations, between the Jewish and the Samaritan people. The fourth step to consider here is the language and the speech themselves, in other words the whole area of verbal communication. The Samaritan woman at the well immediately identifies Jesus as a Jew from His dialect, peculiar pronunciation and special accent. After these four levels our main topic follows here, which is the communication in dialogue and also the personal encounter with others. The two persons in the place of Sychar confront each other rather harshly, and this confrontation finally leads to a change inside these persons themselves. The element, which afterwards creates a space in the conversation, is the poetic communication or, in other words, the 34 BARTHOLOMÄUS Wolfgang gives this definition of communication in Communication in the Church: Aspects of a Theological Theme. In BAUM Gregory – GREELEY Andrew (eds.), Communication in the Church. Concilivm 1978/1. 97. 35 JENSON Robert W. deals in a whole article with this topic: On Hegemonic Discourse. First Things 1994/8. 36 The line of all that was mentioned beforehand could be seen in one of the outstanding exegeses by CHAPPUIS Jean-Marc. Now we are following his argumentation and classification concerning the ten phases of communication. His Bible study is called Jesus and the Samaritan Woman, The Variable Geometry of Communication. The Ecumenical Review, 1982/1. 8–34.

143

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

symbolic expression. Jesus plays with the different meanings of water. But talking with each other is not supposed to remain at this level; it has to touch the very persons themselves. With a question about the woman’s husband, the existential communication or the disclosure of human begins. Soon afterwards the theoretical, the spiritual or the theological communication starts, in which God Godself is manifested on Earth, in the very person of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Virgin Mary. Ninthly, the woman is challenged to make a Christian witness in a kind of narrative communication. She goes to her native city to proclaim the Messiah, Who most obviously arrived there. The tenth and final phase in their personal encounter is basically a mystery, a secret for all of us, and it provides a horizon for our communication. The main aim of every kind of our speech, of our communication or of our discourse should be the creation of a new and more honest community, or theologically speaking, a communion or koinonia. The process of change of register can be described in three levels. In the first level of communication, we usually superficially reduce the other (the other idea or, even worse, the other person) to the same, to one’s very self. In the next dimension of the change, we still continue to maintain this distinction, while at the same we also guarantee the relation. This is the level of the poetic or the symbolic communication. Finally, the third level is the one of self-giving, which only makes receiving possible. This change of register encompasses the transition from a binary to a ternary register, from a duality and even a duel to a trinity and reconciliation, and from an exclusive contradiction to an inclusive communion.37

Gentle Theology

IV. Plural Encounter in Community We have not mentioned so far the final and ultimate aim of the whole process of dialogue. This element is that we are called and sent out to build a community on this Earth. The community we seek is not only a simple community; it is rather a community of communities, or of communications. In other words, it is a genuine kind of communion (or koinonia). In dialogue we basically search for genuine community. In this kind of community we are held together by the values we share in common, in differentiated interrelatedness.38 To build up a community of communities, for example to design a fellowship of churches, of denominations or of confessions, we need to be very clear concerning the meaning and role of pluralism. Political pluralism means “the separation and division of powers, decentralized administration, regionalism, functionalism, representation, freedom of association and immunity from excessively bureaucratic state regulation.”39 Cultural pluralism, on the other hand, is attained “when members of different cultures accept a basic set of values that enable them to live harmoniously together, while they remain free to preserve their differences in other cultural areas.”40 All these units of pluralisms on different levels are the various communities. Community is the place where all the aforementioned elements effectively meet each other. “Communion is the conditio sine qua non of communication.”41 But the opposite is also true: genuine communication is a necessary condition for an effective and deep community. Above all, a shared truth constitutes the community.42 In Latin, the etymology of communio is com-munus, those who have the same task.43 39 TAYLOR R. J. defines both cultural and political pluralism in The Meaning of Pluralism in Ecumenism. One in Christ 1974/4. 369. 40 The other definition of pluralism is also in TAYLOR R. J., The Meaning of Pluralism in Ecumenism. One in Christ 1974/4. 369. 41 KHODR Georges underlines and also exemplifies the fundamental importance of community or koinonia in Christianity in a Pluralistic World: The Economy of the Holy Spirit. The Ecumenical Review 1971/2. 127. 42 CERTEAU Michel DE speaks about the question of language as a community-constituting factor in Is There a

37 BLANCY Alain of the Groupe des Dombes speaks about the three levels of changing register in From Sign to Symbol. A Change of Register. The Ecumenical Review 1981/4. 380–382. 38 SAMARTHA Stanley J. uses this term in his article Reflections on a Multilateral Dialogue. An Interpretation of a Meeting Held at Colombo, Sri Lanka, 17–26 April 1974. The Ecumenical Review 1974/4. 643.

Language of Unity? In SCHILLEBEECKX Edward OP (ed.), Tension Between Church and Faith. Concilivm 1970/1. 83–85. 43 WILLEBRANDS Johannes explains and underlines this etymology in The Future of Ecumenism. One in Christ 1975/4. 322. 44 MBITI John, too, defines dialogue in such a way: In Search of Dialogue in Community. The Ecumenical Review, 1987/2. 192–196.

144

145

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

The common language, the already existing communication, the shared truth and the same purpose constitute and build up a real community. Dialogue can even be defined as a face-to-face encounter with one’s neighbour, in community.44 Suggested Reading BISMARCK Klaus VON, The Christian Vocabulary: An Obstacle to Communication? The Ecumenical Review 1957/1. 1-15. BOOTH Wayne C., Rhetoric and Religion: Are They Essentially Wedded? In JEANROND Werner G. – RIKE Jennifer L. (eds.), Radical Pluralism and Truth. David Tracy and the Hermeneutics of Religion. New York, 1991. 62–80. BORTNOWSKA Halina, The Hermeneutical Process in Evangelism. Inviting Others to Learn with Us. International Review of Mission 1974/1. 64–76. MACQUARRIE John, Religious Language and Recent Analytical Philosophy. In METZ Johannes B. (ed.), The Development of Fundamental Theology. Concilivm 1969/46. 159–172. PICKARD William M. Jr., Truth in Religious Discourse. The Ecumenical Review, 1985/4. 437–444. SCHILLEBEECKX Edward OP, The Crisis in the Language of Faith as a Hermeneutical Problem. In METZ Johann Baptist – JOSSUA Jean-Pierre (eds.), The Crisis of Religious Language. Concilivm 1973/5. 31–45. SEGUNDO Juan SI, Fundamental Theology and Dialogue. In METZ Johannes B. (ed.), The Development of Fundamental Theology. Concilivm 1969/46. 69–79. SHARMA Arvind, Towards a Theory of Dialogue. Current Dialogue, 1998/32. 36–39. SLAVKOVSKY´ Adrián, Paradoxnost´ niektory´ch základny´ch postojov cˇloveka (Paradoxical Nature of Some Basic Human Stances). In ANDREANSKY´ E. (ed.), Filozofia a zˇivot – zˇivot filozofie (Philosophy and Life – Life of Philosophy). Presˇov, 2004. TRACY David, Beyond Foundationalism and Relativism: Hermeneutics and the New Ecumenism. In GREINACHER Norbert – METTE Norbert (eds.), The New Europe – A Challenge for Christians. Concilivm 1992/2. 103–111. WARD Graham, Theology and Postmodernism. Theology 1997/6. 435–440. NAGYPÁL Szabolcs (1974) is a graduate in theology, law and literature. He is a theologian in the Benedictine Békés Gellért Ecumenical Institute (BGÖI) in Pannonhalma; and teaches philosophy in the ELTE University in Budapest. He was chairperson of KÖD (Magyar SCM) and the WSCF-CESR; a member of the ERC and global ExCo. He co-edited the books: A Pentatonic Landscape: Central Europe, Ecology, Ecumenism (Budapest, 2002); The River Book: Identity, Culture, Responsibility (Bial/ystok, 2003); and medi(t)ations, (re)conciliations. Conflict Resolution and European Integration (Bratislava, 2004). He is the secretary of the Theological Commission of the International Ecumenical Fellowship (IEF). He is the editor-in-chief of Student World (1908), and was editor-in-chief of Mozaik (2001–2004).

Martin CONWAY •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Christian Unity and Discipleship in WSCF Over the past one hundred years the World Student Christian Federation (WSCF) has contributed, in different degrees, significant impulses to the exploration of Christian unity in at least three distinct contexts: that of its own movement, that of Christ’s world-wide Church, and that of the total human community. I cannot try here to do more than recall some of the key elements in this path of discovery.

I. Unity in and of a World-wide Student Christian Movement 1. Guiding Principles of the WSCF In regard to its own movement – the unity of this “world” movement brought into being by six men in the attic of an ancient castle, which within three years had members in twenty-two countries of Asia, Australasia, Africa, Europe and the Americas – it is often forgotten just how creatively John R. MOTT secured its freedom alike from undue North American domination and from the model of the student association within the YMCA in which he had himself been formed. Looking back in 1920, he defined the “guiding principles” of the WSCF in eight points 1 : A. The cornerstone principle of the whole construction is the “recognition of the supremacy of the Lord Jesus Christ and of his work as the only sufficient Saviour.” Any compromising of this principle has had immediate consequences for the whole life of the movement concerned. B. The second is that of the interdenominational and interconfessional character of the Federation (note: not undenominational, for it would never call its members to reduce 1 MOTT John R., The World’s Student Christian Federation: Origin, Achievements, Forecast. Genève, 1920.

146

147

NAGYPÁL Szabolcs: Hermeneutics of Intertraditional Dialogue

Martin CONWAY •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

146

147

Martin CONWAY: Christian Unity and Discipleship in WSCF

themselves to the lowest common denominator, but rather to cooperation in which each affirms the fullness of one’s own faith). The Federation does not stand for uniformity but for unity in diversity. C. The third is that of the independence, individuality and autonomy of each national movement. Each strikes its roots deep in its own soil, and thus each tends to be a true expression of a particular culture and tradition. The extent to which it achieves this determines the richness which it brings to the whole. D. The fourth is the complement of the third: the interdependence of the national movements and the mutual obligations which link them together. The stronger and more self-sufficient movements must have a sense of responsibility for the weaker groups; on the other hand, some of the smallest movements have been unusually productive of new ideas and methods. E. The Federation does not seek to control the internal policies of the national movements. The role of the international secretaries is purely advisory and inspirational. F. The Federation is “non-political,” that is, it refuses to take part in politics as such. On the other hand, it has been constantly concerned with developing in its members a sense of responsibility for social, international and racial affairs, and to subordinate all human relations to Christian obedience. G. The Federation seeks to be truly democratic in its methods of government and in its emphasis on the initiative of students. “If in any country the movement is permitted to drift out of the control of the undergraduates into the hands of professors or graduates, or of the paid professionals, or of any autocratic group even of students, it will cease to grow and fulfil its peculiar function.” H. Finally, everything in the Federation, its entire programme and all of its activities, must be looked at from a global point of view. It is difficult to accustom national leaders to think in global terms, but it is precisely to widen their horizons that the Federation exists. In the final chapter of her book on the Federation’s first fifty years, Suzanne DE DIÉTRICH reflected on precisely this often fragile but all-important practice of unity: “The Federation is a body whose members are the national movements. The life of the body depends on that of its members.

Gentle Theology

... The great flexibility of the Federation has permitted each national movement to develop its own characteristics. In a student federation, where the cultural element necessarily plays a large role, this liberty of expression is an extraordinary source of mutual enrichment. The Christian associations of Japan are truly Japanese, just as those of France are typically French. The unity of the Federation is the complete opposite of uniformity. This is why it must be constantly re-affirmed and re-covered. This unity consists in obedience to the same Christ. We know well that the same God ‘works in all and for all,’ but everywhere this work comes up against national and confessional boundaries, and the resistance of our spirits which are slow to grasp the thoughts of God. So unity is often an act of faith, a slow and painful effort to discern the Christian in someone who is so different by tradition, concept and outlook. We also must learn as movements to recognize the diversity of gifts and spiritualities. “These different movements also work in a world which is growing smaller, where currents of thought are exchanged and diffused with astonishing speed. It is interesting to see that certain questions are being raised at the same time by movements in two different parts of the world which have had no direct contact and would never have suspected their commonality of interests if the General Secretary of the WSCF had not been there to tell them, and to raise these questions in the next issue of The Student World or the next conference. ... In the final analysis, what really links the movements to one another is not so much what has been done as what remains to be done. Each generation must discover anew what constitutes its own task.” 2 Diversity, not uniformity; unity shaped by obedience to the same Christ; unity as an act of faith by which to discern that of Christ in very different traditions from one’s own; a world which is growing rapidly smaller; unity given in what remains to be done, so that each group in each generation must discover anew its own distinctive obedience. These remain just as true and challenging for the life of the WSCF today and tomorrow as at any other point in these hundred years. Indeed they are pointers to what WSCF people – with many others – have been discovering no less in the search for the unity of Christian churches, for which the WSCF has supplied so many 2

148

DIÉTRICH Suzanne, Fifty Years of History (tr. ABRECHT Audrey). Genève, 1993. 85.

149

Martin CONWAY: Christian Unity and Discipleship in WSCF

leaders; also in the more diffuse but no less urgent movement in favour of an adequate unity of the human family which the United Nations Organisation (UNO) exists to serve.

2. Actual Experiences in the SCMs Before we move on to those other levels of contribution, a word on both the national and local dimensions of the challenge that the SCM has discovered in its characteristic commitment to unity in Christ. At the national level, the WSCF has long expected and insisted that there should be no more than one movement per country; in cases where there were insurmountable reasons for two (or more) distinct movements which sought membership in the international body, they were encouraged to form a coordinating body which could take out WSCF membership for them both or all. This worked better in some cases than others; it required a significant measure of mutual respect and agreement between the different groups at the national level, which has by no means always been achievable. South Africa for many years provided an unusually clear, if sensitive, test-case. If the “separate” movements (divided along racial lines, yet which all too often depended on the leaders of the “white” ones for financial support) could work together in a genuine co-ordinating body that allowed them each and all to have a proper place in national affairs, then that body could be recognised as the “national SCM.” But if this was more appearance than reality, WSCF would feel an obligation to try and help them into a better arrangement – and the various attempts towards something of that sort easily became occasions of offence in one direction or another. To judge by the witness of Vasco SELEOANE, things in that country in respect of the internal unity in Christ of the previously “separate” movements have still a long way to go. So also at the local level, SCMs have all too often had to struggle for a form of relationships and organisation that corresponded to the truth of the Gospel they were discovering. At one time attention had to be given to what became the split between the “conservative evangelicals” organised in the “Christian Unions” and those who followed the more “open” or “ecumenical” policy that the SCM had already espoused at the national level.

150

Gentle Theology

In the British SCM the decisive steps were taken just before and after the First World War, while in Finland this was still a dominant issue in the sixties. Long before my generation this struggle had been lost in Britain, with both SCMs and CUs not expecting anything other than a permanent rivalry that could range between sheer indifference and bitter quarrelling – at neither end of the spectrum doing much good for the cause of the Gospel! At other times the dominant issue has been that of relations between the SCM and one or more “denominational societies,” often with the role of chaplains appointed by one or more denominations as an extra complication. At the international level, these were the questions underlying the paper on The Christian Presence in the University adopted by WSCF at its General Committee in Argentina in 1964. At the local level, the spectrum of response has stretched from more or less outright competition to attempts to engineer some twin-track or “joint” pattern(s), even arrangements by which a “Joint Christian Societies” took over the membership in the National SCM – arrangements which seldom proved very satisfactory or stable. One can hardly point to any lasting “successes” in achieving a visible unity. Not surprising, considering that the underlying theological questions (e.g. between “evangelicals” and “ecumenicals”) have not gone away, and the wider denominations have all too seldom found a practicable unity by which they could move beyond tearing student relations apart. At the same time, the SCM tradition continues to witness not only to the inescapability of the calling to unity for the sake of effective witness to a Gospel claiming to be true; but also to the value of seeking unity in an active process of search and experiment as infinitely preferable to sheer indifference to it, or in acquiescence to inherited divisions that actively harm the cause of the Gospel. Undoubtedly these struggles have absorbed a good deal of time and energy in inward-facing directions that could have gone into much more important and worthwhile missionary efforts on a wider canvas. On the British scene this was the burden of the decisive turn in policy agreed by the SCM General Council in April 1963, soon after Bishop Ambrose REEVES had become General Secretary. 151

Martin CONWAY: Christian Unity and Discipleship in WSCF

He had found student groups hopelessly bogged down in arguments with chaplains and denominational societies, and had called for a freedom and boldness in facing up to the great questions of the contemporary world as the heart of student Christian obedience. At the time it seemed indisputably right, and surely both attractive and exciting. Yet with hindsight one is aware that the nitty-gritty questions of organisation and relationships never go away; the net effect was that the SCM groups rapidly shrunk to small coteries of “radical” third-years and postgraduates, who lost touch with the more elementary needs and interests of the younger year-groups, and lost such standing with the chaplains and churches as they had earlier, in part, enjoyed. The ground “lost” at that time has never yet been convincingly “regained.” But the importance of such stories for the long-term health of the total Christian community is high. Here the vital discovery, which came early on in the history of several, if not all, SCMs towards the end of the XIXth century, was that these movements, and WSCF with them, needed – in contrast to the approach of evangelists of the stamp of MOODY and the STUDDs, as of the Keswick Convention and other such evangelical rallies – to see themselves as interdenominational rather than nondenominational bodies. That is, they saw the need to accept, indeed take seriously, the many different denominational traditions, cultures and particularities in which their various members had grown up, and in which they had discovered and inherited Christian faith, all of which would no doubt have their own specific contributions to make to the life of the “coming great Church.”

II. The Continuing Witness of Younger Generations What then of the contribution of the SCMs and WSCF into all this? That is hardly a question someone as old as me either can answer: my contacts with the student movement in this country, let alone across the world, are no more than occasional; or should answer: let the younger generation speak for themselves, as they no doubt will! But it is surely vital that any of us now in the older generations should be watching out for their contribution, and reworking our own in the light of it.

Gentle Theology

For now, here are four pointers from the tradition of WSCF that have always meant a lot to me, and which I trust will continue to function – no doubt in ways I can hardly imagine – in the hearts and experience of the new generations, with results that will continue to stir, trouble, provoke and enrich groups and communities well beyond those you and I can have in mind today! I expect the WSCF to go on demonstrating:

1. Adventure into Unknown Territory A readiness to heed calls to adventure into unknown territory, confident that there is more of God to be learned than anyone yet knows, and that it will be by going and experiencing that the learning can best be begun. The going may now not primarily be geographic; Emilio CASTRO spoke at Canberra of a “new mission to the structures” ; 3 SCMers from, say, Chile or China who can get study placements and eventual jobs in the International Monetary Fund (IMF) could perhaps help to open up the policies and pressures of such world “powers” to the kind of scrutiny and critique that will let economic institutions rediscover their true function as servants of humanity. On quite another side there is surely a key missionary task to be discerned in bridge-building, with quite new and testing qualifications, between the “indigenous peoples” of Australia, Canada, Siberia – and wherever such as those have had to suffer the incursion of powerful outsiders, driving the earlier cultures into poverty and oblivion – and the successors of the invaders whose “world” is called in question by the continuing cry of the earlier “owners.” Our ecological explorations, for one, would benefit enormously from intercultural learning at depth in those situations.

2. Inheritance and Integrity A spirituality by which one (group as much as person) can unassumingly live from one’s own inheritance and integrity, without fixed judgments or assumptions about those of the other, yet so as to enter into friendship and learn from the other. Yes, much in this learning will lead to a radical self-critique where the modern West is concerned. We who are Westerners can and must 3 KINNAMON Michael (ed.), Signs of the Spirit. Official Report of the 7th Assembly of the WCC, Canberra, Australia, 1991. Genève, 1991.

152

153

Martin CONWAY: Christian Unity and Discipleship in WSCF

witness to that from within, and as a function of much in precisely the best traditions of our culture. Let others say what they need to learn; and then we can all together consider what will be for the good of humanity as a whole. Meanwhile, a Western Christian can gladly witness that the Christian faith tells us not that Christians are likely to get things right, but that when, as all too often, we blunder into getting them wrong, God has shown in Jesus Christ that forgiveness is available to those who open themselves in repentance.

3. Good Relationships with Fellow-Adventurers A steady concern for good relationships with fellow-adventurers, whatever their background, culture or indeed faith. One of the best features of WSCF has been its willingness to hold consultative meetings with groups of very different outlooks but which had similar interests to our own. In my years in Genève, for instance, with both Pax Romana (which now sounds obvious, but I cannot forget being scolded ferociously, c. 1965, by no less than Willem VISSER T’HOOFT for committing WSCF too far to some joint project) and the International Union of Students (IUS) based in Praha and widely suspect in the West (rightly so!) as a largely Communist-run outfit. Tomorrow’s adventure partners will be very different, but probably no less contested.

Gentle Theology Suggested Reading CONWAY Martin, Look Listen Care – One Man’s Experience and Interpretation of the WCC Vancouver Assembly. London, 1983. CONWAY Martin, That’s When the Body Works. The Canberra Assembly of the WCC as a Foretaste of a Council of the Universal Church. Birmingham, 1991. CONWAY Martin, A Universal Faith in 1001 Contexts? International Review of Mission 1995/4. CRAGG Kenneth, The Christ and the Faiths. Theology in Cross-Reference. London, 1986. DE DIÉTRICH Suzanne, Cinquante Ans d’Histoire, la FUACE 1895–1945. Paris, 1947. LAMB Christopher, Belief in a Mixed Society. Tring, 1985. MCCAUGHEY J. Davis, Christian Obedience in the University. London, 1958. MOTT John R., The World’s Student Christian Federation: Origin, Achievements, Forecast. Genève, 1920. NEWBIGIN Lesslie, What is a ‘Local Church Truly United’? The Ecumenical Review 1977/2. 115–128. ROUSE Ruth, The World’s Student Christian Federation – A History of the First Thirty Years. London, 1948. Martin CONWAY is a lay member of the Church of England. He was a member of the Cambridge University Student Christian Movement between 1954 and 1958. He became the British SCM’s International Secretary from 1958 to 1961, then WSCF Study and European Secretary from 1961 to 1967. Since then he has served his own church, the World Council of Churches and the British Council of Churches, before becoming president of the Selly Oak Colleges, an interchurch, interfaith and international training centre in Birmingham, UK, from 1986–1997. He now lives in Oxford. His email address is: martinconway@abelian.net.

4. Belief in God the Holy Spirit Above all, a lively and steady belief in God the Holy Spirit; not of course as above Her partners in the Trinity, yet never overlooking the dynamic, contemporary, unpredictable character of the God who willed the universe into being in the first place and has showed us the essential clue to the divine nature and purpose in the human Jesus. In the human family, “religion” is often – and with good reason – seen as backward-looking. The WSCF tradition, without denying what comes from history, has sought to be at least as vividly open to God’s purposes for the future, and not just to the future for Christians, but to that future which in the risen Christ and by the leading of the Spirit God is holding open for all humanity.

154

155

Cheryl L. THOMSEN •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Healing of Memories: Beginning with Forgiveness

Jesus Christ is the model, the teacher, the norm for Christian living, for Christian character and for Christian relationship. Jesus Christ has modeled relationship for us via His relationship with the Father through prayer, the Spirit through faith and His relationship with others through dialogue, love, acceptance and forgiveness. This lifemodeling defines and guides us as we approach other religions, providing our analogical imaginations with the precedent to “Go and do likewise” (Luke 10,37).1

Called to Relationship Dialogue is the first task in relationship with other Christians and other religions. Dialogue is the task of “communicative praxis.”2 Dialogue engages in the truth. “To know the truth we must be engaged in the practice of communication with others; that means really talking with and listening to people who are significantly different from us.”3 We are called to engage with people we meet daily, with other Christians and with other religions. It is part of a basic communication model—part of being in relationship with others, part of being a global community, which we cannot avoid. Sociologists, anthropologists and psychologists speak of relationships, as do communication specialists and philosophers, in terms of the new physics that has evolved within the past hundred years. In this new model of being, quantum physics sees everything as being in relationship, no longer separate. Even our deepest core is made up of molecules that are in relationship with each other, never isolated. “Nothing, whether an electron or a human being, can be ‘an island unto itself.’ ‘Everything’ and ‘every-body’ are profoundly and dynamically 1 SPOHN William C., Go and Do Likewise. Jesus and Ethics. New York, 2000. 4. 2 HABERMAS Jürgen, The Theory of Communicative Action. Boston, 1984. 3 Ibid.

156

interrelated.”4 We are in relationship with everything that is around us. It is through dynamic relationship that we seek unity and the truth via conversation with others.

The Roman Catholic Legacy Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution of the (Roman Catholic) church, recognizes the church as linked with other Christian communities through the Holy Spirit.5 Roman Catholics should be aware that they too are called to dialogue and restoration of unity as defined in Unitatis Redintegratio. “The restoration of unity among all Christians”6 was of primary concern during the Second Vatican Council. The Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio) states that the division amongst Christian communities “contradicts the will of Christ”7, and through the movement of the Holy Spirit the restoration of unity may be achieved by all Christians. The commitment to ecumenism, dialogue and unity was reiterated and expanded upon in Ut unum sint by Pope John Paul II in 1995. Recognizing the signs of the times, we are called to further, deeper, ongoing, active dialogue between different churches and communities. “Ecumenism is directed precisely to making the partial communion existing between Christians grow towards full communion in truth and charity.”8 Ecumenical dialogue moves beyond the mere exchange of ideas into the “exchange of gifts.” In unity both parties are partners in dialogue and “each side must presuppose in the other a desire for reconciliation, for unity in truth.”9 There is no room for opposition between partners in dialogue. Clearly dialogue has become an “outright necessity, one of the Church’s priorities,”10 leading us deeper into the possibility of Christian unity and deeper into a dialogue of love. Margaret O’GARA focuses on four main themes in the encyclical Ut unum sint and the Apostolic letter Orientale lumen, beginning with the purification of memories. Relationships create memories and those memories—our pictures of the past—continue to shape our present thoughts and actions. 4 KNITTER Paul F., Introducing Theologies of Religions. Maryknoll, 2004. 10. 5 Lumen Gentium. Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm. 15. 6 Unitatis Redintegratio. Decree on Ecumenism. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm. 1. 7 Ibid. 8 John Paul II, Ut unum sint. On Commitment to Ecumenism. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm. 14. 10 Ibid. 31. 9 Ibid. 29.

157

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

Our memories that are painful and sometimes bad, hurt us and impact the future. Therefore to enter into dialogue, John Paul II calls us to face them and to purify them. Repentance and conversion are the first and possibly the most critical steps toward a purification of memories. Through this process Roman Catholics will be able to “re-examine together their painful past and the hurt which that past regrettably continues to provoke even today.”11 Continuing to examine our heritage by examining the gifts that we each bring to dialogue is the second theme of John Paul II’s writings. Citing the Eastern Church, John Paul II expresses in Orientale lumen how some forms of diversity add to our richness rather than separate us, expressing our own culture and heritage. “The pope believes that when we know the treasures of others’ faith, we will have the ‘incentive for a new and more intimate meeting ... which will be a true and sincere mutual exchange.’ He believes that this is the work of the Holy Spirit.”12 The examination and improvement to the papacy, which moves the church further than only asking for forgiveness, is the third theme found in the document Ut unum sint. Ecumenical dialogue regarding the papacy has already begun with Lutherans, “exploring ways the papal ministry could be exercised in new forms. ... The Dialogue members call for renewal of the papacy according to the Vatican II principles of legitimate diversity, collegiality and subsidiarity.”13 The final theme is the depth, to which John Paul II wanted to take ecumenical work. Ecumenical dialogue goes beyond the doctrine of the Church, and unity becomes a mission throughout the Church moving into the parishes and educational systems. Ecumenism is a fundamental, permanent, continuous platform in the formation of future priests, pastors, religious and lay workers. As the work of ecumenical dialogue permeates the Church, we may discover how close we really are. Ecumenical dialogue is the calling for each one of us as members of the Church.

Gentle Theology

John Paul II’s Ecumenical Example John Paul II’s papacy saw movement and development in his commitment to ecumenism. In 1984 a Common Declaration was issued between the church of Rome and the Syrian Orthodox church of Antioch identifying the steps that had been taken between the two churches to identify common unity and the differences that still exist that keep the two faiths from concelebrating the Holy Eucharist. Although the identity of faith is not fully complete, this document was able to allow for the collaboration of the respective churches in pastoral care, priestly formation and theological education.14 Luigi ACCATTOLI writes that John Paul II believed “the mission of the Church to the nations (ad gentes) calls for a revision of the historical image of the Church. ... The Pope is convinced that this reexamination is necessary for the proclamation of the Gospel to the women and men of the second millennium; but even prior to that, it is demanded out of a sense of loyalty and truth in confronting oneself, one’s own experience, one’s own conscience.”15 Later writings in John Paul II’s life reflected deeper upon ecumenism and the need for forgiveness. His allocutions since 1995 explored the relationship of justice, forgiveness and reconciliation.16 In his messages for the celebrations of the World Day of Peace, he spoke frequently of the urgent need for dialogue, the value of one’s own culture and the barriers caused by non-communication. “The path to take is the path of forgiveness and reconciliation. … From the Christian point of view, it is the only path which leads to the goal of peace.”17 He asked that forgiveness and reconciliation become everyday practices for all people in all cultures, building peace. “No one can silence the Pope, and only the Pope can really say mea culpa for the Roman Catholic church. To bring up its own 14 John Paul II – Mar Ignatius Zakka I Iwas, Common Declaration. In GROS Jeffrey FSC – MEYER Harding – RUSCH

11 John Paul II, 2. 12 O’GARA Margaret, The Ecumenical Gift Exchange. Collegeville, 1998. 37. 13 Ibid. 40–41.

158

William G. (eds.), Growth in Agreement II. Grand Rapids, 2000. 693. 15 ACCATTOLI Luigi, When a Pope Asks Forgiveness. The Mea Culpas of John Paul II. Boston, 1998. xix. 16 SCHREITER Robert J., The Ministry of Reconciliation. Spirituality and Strategies. Maryknoll, 2002. 128. 17 John Paul II, Message of His Holiness Pope John Paul II for the Celebration of the World Day of Peace. www.vatican.va/holy_father.

159

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

past against the church, or simply to confront the church with its past, could be equivalent to opposing popes of the past; and only a pope can contradict another pope.”18 Early in his papacy John Paul II reached out to the individual who attempted to assassinate him. Throughout his papacy, he asked for forgiveness more than ninety-five times for wrongs of the church. One of the most significant moments was around the millennium and the Jubilee Year, when John Paul II reached out to reconcile with those of the Jewish faith for the separation and hostility that has occurred between the two religions, including the actions of the Shoah. There is no future until we can rebuild the trust that has splintered us with other churches. Hope continues as Pope Benedict XVI addressed delegates of other church communities and religious traditions on April 25, 2005, asking that they “join with me in setting an example of that spiritual ecumenism which, through prayer, can bring about our communion without obstacles.”19

Foundational Forgiveness What is forgiveness? In the Bible forgiveness is a transformative process between the perpetrator and the victim consisting of the “encounter, of healing, of the releasing of new options for the future.”20 That new future is free of the past, of the legacies that haunt. Christianity as a religion of love sees God—the victim—as the one offering forgiveness. Jesus Christ on the cross says “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23,34). “The victimized Son intercedes for the world to the victim-God, pleading for forgiveness; for we, the human race, do not know that our violence—our sin—is breaking the heart of God and tearing the world apart.”21 18 ACCATTOLI. xxii–xxiii. 19 Benedict XVI, Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Delegates of Other Churches and Ecclesial Communities and of Other Religious Traditions. www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches. 20 MÜLLER-FAHRENHOLZ Geiko, The Art of Forgiveness. Genève, 1997. 5.

As we continually, daily, betray God by our choices, God continually forgives us as we are called to imitate and continually forgive the sins of others. There is no room for violence, only for love of fellow people and forgiveness of wrongs. Forgiveness sits in the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator or sinner, unlocking the bondage to mutual liberation. In light of the atrocities of Auschwitz and excessive social violence, Geiko MÜLLER-FAHRENHOLZ identifies six components to social and systemic forgiveness. First, the “Bible takes the victim’s side when it looks at forgiveness. The way in which the Bible speaks about it indicates that forgiveness of guilt and healing of suffering are inseparably bound together in a process that heals the wounds of those who were humiliated, as it heals the scars of those who abused their powers.” Forgiveness is a relational act. Second, there is an intergenerational component to forgiveness, for atrocities are woven into the story for generations. Third, being a part of humanity’s history, forgiveness is a public issue and the memories are healed as trust is developed together, as the perpetrator and victim walk together through their stories.

21 Ibid. 7.

160

161

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

Fourth, “forgiveness is about renouncing unjustified power, not about weakening the pursuit of justice.” And at the same time, forgiveness does not stop at justice, but “strives to heal the grief and re-establish the deepest qualities of humanity.” This fifth point is foundational for social forgiveness of any atrocity—a sincere confession by the perpetrator disarms her or him, and the victim is endowed with “priestly powers.” “This means nothing less than that every process of genuine confession destroys the distorted relationships between human beings.” They both regain their humanness. Finally, “the quest for what is truly human transcends the human race. ... The holy scriptures of the Abrahamic religions insist that the human-ness of the human race is grounded in the mercy of God. ... This is our calling and mission: to become mirrors of mercy.”22

Shifting Paradigms MÜLLER-FAHRENHOLZ reflects upon the split in the Church at the Reformation due to the power held in the Church as supreme controller over the Gospel of forgiveness through the sacrament of penance by priests, bishops and popes. At that time, Martin LUTHER wrote in the Augsburg Confession that only contrition and faith were needed for God to forgive sins. The people’s response to this shift in thought freed their consciences from the torment and fear of the power of the Church. The message of forgiveness moved quickly to a vertical relationship between the individual and Jesus Christ—to the individual who committed sin, and not the individual who suffered from the sin. Liberation theology reframed the situation once more in the XXth century and refocused on the one who suffered, the victim. Just as Jesus Christ suffered and identified throughout His ministry with the victims. “Every act of transgression constitutes a bondage that keeps the perpetrator and the victim locked together. The more violent the transgression, the deeper the bondage.”23 Forgiveness is the process that unlocks the bondage between the perpetrator and victim. They are both set free from their pain: the victim from her or his hurt, and the perpetrator from her or his guilt. 22 Ibid. viii–xi.

162

23 Ibid. 24.

Gentle Theology

Forgiveness happens in that moment—that snap of grace that liberates the victim from bondage and restores power and dignity to both sides. The snap of grace is that moment of immense beauty, joy and bliss. Five additional aspects of the forgiveness process have been identified by MÜLLER-FAHRENHOLZ, highlighting the interrelational systemic impact of forgiveness. First, there must be a confession to make amends, for acknowledgement is what is needed by the victim. Second, the “emphasis must not be on repairing the past, but on preparing a better way forward.” Next, “time does not undo evil, but carries the impact and weight of past deeds along. Yet, time also upholds the option to face our evil deeds rather than to keep denying them until our last breath.” There must be one within a group who breaks down and breaks the chain of denial that can hold an entire group. “There is something profoundly vicarious in a genuine act of confession; for it brings the unspoken—and unspeakable—words of all into the open.” The intergenerational impact of suffering needs to be accounted for, as the pain of the victim influences future generations. For individuals and groups, “genuine forgiveness is about unburdening the past in order to inaugurate a less painful relationship in the future.”24 Generally another element becomes part of the forgiveness process: trust. Trust frequently is negotiated by a mediating agent—a mediator, a counselor, friend or someone able to build a bridge of trust between two sides. This agent creates new and imaginative options or solutions for those in conflict. “While the double bondage of shame and hurt blocks the mind, forgiveness releases new images of togetherness. While anger and defensiveness cast the shadow of doubt over each fresh suggestion, the energy of mutual disclosure expresses itself in new avenues toward the future. Such images of fresh beginnings are the fruit of liberation from the bondage of past hurts.”25 The liberation from past hurts is part of re-membering, of bringing together that which was severed or broken and restoring the wholeness. Making a future possible. History is littered with memories of victimization, conflict and “selective remembering.” 24 Ibid. 28–30.

25 Ibid. 35.

163

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

Gentle Theology

Rewriting History

Truth and Reconciliation

When we read our history as a culture or as a Church, we find that we remember selectively, ignoring the pain of the victims. When we look at history through the eyes of forgiveness, we see in those victims what was denied and what was suppressed—a “deep remembering.” Remembering deeply, we see with new eyes and transform the past with new possibilities. Roman Catholics are called to as well to seriously look into their past and name their wrongs, remember in a new way the pain of the victims and the oppressed in history, ask for forgiveness, pray to be forgiven, and re-member. Acknowledging the victims in our history and the wrongs of our past allows the collective memories of those harmed to be grieved, cleansed and healed. Then we are free to look forward as a Church. We need models of forgiveness, so that we can experience forgiveness and reconciliation with those we are called to dialogue with. The pain of a victim does not disappear with time, but remains until transformed by forgiveness. Robert J. SCHREITER writes on forgiveness and reconciliation, pulling examples from the Easter stories showing Jesus Christ as the model for social reconciliation. This model for societies ravaged by violence and hatred, oppression and intimidation provides “structures and processes, whereby a fractured society can be reconstructed as truthful and just.”26 Reconciliation is the work of God that makes both victim and wrongdoer new creations. Jesus Christ is the victim and reconciler in the Easter appearance stories, Who transforms humanity “by healing and forgiving His disciples, commissioning them in turn to carry forth His message and mission to the whole world.”27 Jesus Christ accompanied others, created safe zones through hospitality, unfolded memories and remade the relationships, and commissioned His followers to go and do likewise. Jesus Christ decided through forgiveness, new relationships, to restore the balance of power—restoring and creating a new future for humanity. The Roman Catholic church, filled with ritual and history and grounded in Jesus Christ, has the ability to create a new future through trusting the grace of God, admitting their own failings and reaching out in forgiveness and reconciliation. 26 SCHREITER, 4. / 27 Ibid.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in South Africa becomes an unexpected model of large-scale forgiveness and healing. Desmond TUTU writes on the innate mandate to address the atrocities committed in South Africa: “It would be an oddly atomistic view of the nature of a community not to accept that there is a very real continuity between the past and the present, and that the former members would share in the guilt and the shame as in the absolution and the glory of the present. The Church is a living organization; otherwise history is of no significance, and we should concentrate only on those who are our contemporaries.”28 The TRC assumed a “victim-orientation” aimed at restoring personal dignity to the victims by allowing the victims to present their stories of what happened to them during apartheid, specifically during the period around March 1, 1960—the time of the Sharpeville massacre. Part of the process was providing material assistance for the victims, while the other part had them speaking out and naming their pain, suffering and truth, restoring their dignity. By restoring their dignity, distributive justice could be attained, creating equal opportunities for all citizens. A movement toward healing their past. Endemic to black African spirituality is the fundamental connectedness of all life. “In black African spirituality there can be no peaceful present as long as the spirits of the dead are not laid to rest.”29 The breadth of the TRC process allowed the spirits of the dead to be laid to rest. “The lesson South Africa is trying to teach us is that by turning to the victims and restoring their dignity, a space is created, in which lasting peace can build its home.”30 With the deep division that marked South Africa and the cooperation that occurred to heal those divisions, churches have another model to heal their past, provide dignity to all and create justice and lasting peace.

164

28 TUTU Desmond, No Future Without Forgiveness. New York, 1999. 276. 29 MÜLLER-FAHRENHOLZ. 92. 30 Ibid. 100.

165

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

Gentle Theology

A Multiplicity of Models

Dialogue in Practice

The events of September 11, 2001, have escalated the importance of promoting peace, justice, cooperation and religious dialogue. No longer are other religions “over there”; they are in our neighborhood, our community and our work place. There is also a shift in our global community, driven mainly by a global economy and a global communication; with the internet and the world-wide web, new models for interaction and dialogue will evolve. Paul F. KNITTER identified an emerging theological model for dialogue between religions. The acceptance model acknowledges that there are many true religions and asks how we can make peace with the sometimes radical differences that exist. It is a new way of dealing with the current world, allowing us to make peace with differences instead of claiming superiority and rightness. The paradigm of acceptance acknowledges the “real diversity of all faiths,”31 for religions are different. Unity exists with the recognition of diversity, with diversity producing vitality and giving life to all relationships, for there is diversity even within God. But what about the truth—is there not one truth? Paul F. KNITTER says: “Truth is always truths. It always takes different shapes and assumes different identities—to the point that ‘it’ is no longer one, but many. … If any one person or culture thinks they have the one unifying truth that will embrace all the others, it will not be a truth that others can see, but a truth that will be forced upon them. So truth, too, is dominated by diversity. ... Truth is plural, not singular, because (a) all human experience and all human knowledge are filtered; and (b) the filters are incredibly diverse.”32 The model of dialogue between religions, then, is more freeflowing and begins with each religion “laying out as clearly and authentically as possible what it is, and what it stands for; what then are the next steps for the conversation?”33 Listening to each other becomes the next step, as at that point they will need to determine the direction and form of conversation. Truth, trust and listening become underpinnings for this dialogue.

This model of dialogue offers up the possibility to uncover past differences and pain; and it offers cognizance of a reconciliation process needed to begin healing and forgiveness of the memories of a religion that may have experienced conflict, oppression, violence or war with the other religion. How the past haunts a victim and the fruitfulness of future dialogue needs to be reconciled before true, deep dialogue can continue. Deep dialogue only occurs with the restoration of relationship, not in divided broken relationship. Building this bridge to heal memories is the call for all believers in God. Paul F. KNITTER’s model requires dialogue around similarities and around differences, allowing those in dialogue to truly embrace the uniqueness of Jesus. The Global Dialogue Institute (GDI) speaks of the power of deepdialogue interculturally and interreligiously and provides us with a model to learn from others. “Deep-dialogue is a way of encountering and understanding oneself and the world at the deepest levels, opening up possibilities of grasping the fundamental meanings of life, individually and corporately, and its various dimensions. This in turn transforms the way we deal with ourselves, others, and the world.”34 In this design, believers of different faiths engage in dialogue to learn from each other, so to “promote better understanding of and creative cooperation among cultures and religions, while acknowledging and accepting their differences.”35 This dedication to dialogue in recent decades has already seen the three major branches of Christianity move closer to each other. Deep-dialogue allows us to seek out what is held in common and to discern true differences ethically, globally and spiritually. Deep-dialogue has as its first commandment the purpose “to learn, that is, to change and grow in the perception and understanding of reality, and then to act accordingly. ... We enter into dialogue so that we can learn, change, and grow, not so we can force change on the other.”36

31 KNITTER, 173.

166

32 Ibid. 175.

33 Ibid. 184.

34 The Power and Promise of Deep-Dialogue. http://global-dialogue.com. 1. 35 Ibid. 36 SWIDLER Leonard, The Dialogue Decalogue. http://global-dialogue.com. 2.

167

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

By opening and listening to another’s position in an attempt to understand, we take the risk that at “any point we might find the partner’s position so persuasive that, if we acted with integrity, we would have to change, and change can be disturbing.”37

Re-membering the Church When the Anabaptists and the Lutherans in the United States came together, the Liaison Committee determined that one of their initial goals was to “heal the memories of XVIth century conflict.”38 Early on they found that “right remembering” served them better by providing “an ongoing approach for examining potentially church-dividing issues within a framework of mutual respect and trust. ... It not only leads to the healing of painful memories, but also contributes in a continuing way to a deepening relationship between our two church bodies.”39 Both groups needed to address the martyr memories the Mennonites held of the one thousand killed by Lutheran princes during the XVIth century. Martyr heritage is part of the Mennonite remembering of their history, whereas the Lutherans remember their own persecutions, and many are unaware of their treatment of the Mennonites. There is a hidden complexity to remembering rightly, and this continues to be a theme for the Liaison Committee. “We were left with a complicated picture of a multilevel discussion that warrants continued conversation in order that right remembering may become a lens, through which issues that continue to divide our two churches may be reconsidered.”40 As these two churches practiced educational dialogue on points of convergence and divergence, they concluded to continue “right remembering,” and to join together in social ministries and educational exchange programs to learn first-hand from each other. The Mennonites and the Roman Catholic church came together from 1998 to 2003 to open up dialogue that had not previously existed, starting anew. Even with differences, both found Jesus

Gentle Theology

Christ as the foundation for their faith, and they could come together in their teachings on peace-giving witness in the world as peacemakers. They delved together into the divisions of their history to re-read and reinterpret the past together. Four points were the focus toward the healing of memories of churches divided with hostility and conflict since the XVIth century. First was the purification of memories by facing the past and purging “from personal and collective conscience all forms of resentment or violence left by the inheritance of the past on the basis of a new and rigorous historico-theological judgment, which becomes the foundation for a renewed moral way of acting.”41 They began by re-reading and studying history together with a new lens. Vatican II statements acknowledging the culpability of Roman Catholics in ruptures of the Church and promoting dialogue toward unity proved foundational for this purification of memories. Second, a spirit of repentance on both sides acknowledged the harm done on both sides, due to separation and conflict, to the body of Christ. Confessions by both sides, seeking forgiveness (including the John Paul II March 12, 2000 Day of Pardon, and a statement of the Mennonite church) of the wrongs they have done to each other, led to a commitment to “self-examination, dialogue, and interaction that manifest Jesus Christ’s reconciling love.”42 Third, dialogue between partners recognized the Christian faith that is shared even in spite of the years of separation, while acknowledging the differences. Healing of memories leads finally to a new relationship consisting of continued study and service together. “Dialogue has fortified the common conviction that it is possible to experience reconciliation and the healing of memories.”43

41 International Theological Commission, Memory and Reconciliation: the Church and Faults of the Past. Vatican, 1999. 5.1. 42 Called Together to be Peacemakers. Report of the International Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and

37 Ibid. 38 Evangelical Lutheran Church in America – Mennonite Church USA Liaison Committee, Right Remembering in Anabaptist – Lutheran Relations. www.elca.org/ecumenical/ecumenicaldialogue/mennonite/index.html. 39 Ibid.

168

the Mennonite World Conference. www.bridgefolk.net/calledtogether.htm. 43 Ibid. 45.

40 Ibid.

169

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

Moving Forward When a system—marriage, family, work, education, politics or religion, of any size—breaks down and disengages from dialogue for a period of time, healing will need to occur, allowing the victims and the perpetrators to come together peacefully. Roman Catholics would be remiss to think that they can engage in dialogue with other religions with which they have been in conflict for hundreds of years without acknowledgement of past injustices and a sincere, genuine offer of forgiveness. Pope John Paul II modeled forgiveness as a practice to break down barriers in relationships, healing memories, building unity and new bridges for dialogue. As partners in dialogue, listening to the movement of the Holy Spirit leads us to a new relationship and remembrance of the past. Models throughout history, beginning with Jesus Christ, call us into a new unity founded on re-membering, setting each other free—the victim and the sinner—through forgiveness, prayer, peace and dialogue. Suggested Reading ACCATTOLI Luigi, When a Pope Asks Forgiveness. The Mea Culpas of John Paul II. Boston, 1998. International Theological Commission, Memory and Reconciliation: the Church and Faults of the Past. Vatican, 1999. KNITTER Paul F., Introducing Theologies of Religions. Maryknoll, 2004. MÜLLER-FAHRENHOLZ Geiko, The Art of Forgiveness. Genève, 1997. O’GARA Margaret, The Ecumenical Gift Exchange. Collegeville, 1998. SCHREITER Robert J., The Ministry of Reconciliation. Spirituality and Strategies. Maryknoll, 2002. SPOHN William C., Go and Do Likewise. Jesus and Ethics. New York, 2000. SWIDLER Leonard, The Dialogue Decalogue. http://global-dialogue.com. TUTU Desmond, No Future Without Forgiveness. New York, 1999. Called Together to be Peacemakers. Report of the International Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Mennonite World Conference. www.bridgefolk.net/calledtogether.htm. Cheryl THOMSEN is a graduate student in the University of San Francisco, Phoenix Cohort, scheduled to graduate in 2006 at the completion of a three-year part-time M.A. in theology program. She was born and raised as a Lutheran in Minneapolis, graduating with a B.A. in sociology from Augsburg College. In 1990 she converted to Roman Catholicism. She has been deeply involved at the Franciscan Renewal Center in Scottsdale for the past fifteen years. Here she heads the Communion Service Ministry, a very active, progressive ministry with the shortage of priests, and is currently on the Board of Directors. Her email address is cheryl.thomsen@cox.net.

John George HUBER •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry This paper represents research by what could be called a “tamed ecumenical optimist.”1 This present effort hopefully will reflect a greater measure of ecumenical realism that serves as a corrective to what was an overly optimistic appreciation of the four interconfessional initiatives selected for the research project.2 This is our thesis: Despite the significant interconfessional agreements that have been reached on a bilateral and multilateral level, some remaining challenges—primarily ecclesiological—need to be identified in order to realize a more objective evaluation and a more complete consensus. Recent interconfessional developments are called “initiatives” for the sake of originality and to emphasize the intentionality of these ecumenical efforts.3 The initiatives represent a pro-active commitment to the pursuit of Christian unity and the breaking down of historic walls of separation.

Initiatives and Convergences Some Faith and Order convergences (which also included Lutheran participation) are added to this research in order to explore important ecumenical contributions that are being made by the wider spectrum of confessional traditions through the facilitating role of the World Council of Churches. This section will focus on the Eucharist, because we are convinced that this issue should be given high priority in the ecumenical quest for unity. 1 This term was inspired by the title, Leaves from the Notebook of a Tamed Cynic, authored by Reinhold NIEBUHR. Chicago, 1929. 2 What follows is adapted from one of the chapters of a major research paper that was written for the Master of

Ecumenical Studies program at the Bossey Ecumenical Institute in Switzerland. The title of the paper is: ‘The Real but Imperfect Communion’: Significant Agreements and Some Remaining Challenges in Four Recent Interconfessional Initiatives Involving Lutheran Participation.

3 The term ‘initiatives’ is used in the Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism (1993) to describe the decisive ecumenical action taken by the Holy See and “bishops, synods of Eastern Catholic churches and episcopal conferences.” Origins 1993/23. 134. But it is used in this paper to indicate that ecumenical efforts are also being initiated by churches outside the Roman communion.

170

171

Cheryl L. THOMSEN: Beginning with Forgiveness

John George HUBER •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

170

171

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

The interconfessional initiatives have realized a unity that is authentic, but still incomplete, a “communion” that is “real,” but “imperfect.” Although the expression was used by Pope John Paul II in Ut Unum Sint4 to invite “Church leaders and their theologians to engage ... in a patient and fraternal dialogue” regarding the papacy as an “office of unity,”5 its broader ecumenical application will be demonstrated in what follows.6 Faith and Order is the component of the World Council of Churches that is committed to seeking doctrinal agreement. One of its early historic interconfessional milestones is the First World Conference on Faith and Order at Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1927.7 In contrast with the Life and Work movement, whose initial conviction was that “doctrine divides and service unites,”8 Faith and Order—as its name implies—attempts to deal with the theological and ecclesiological issues that stand in the way of Christian unity. The bylaws of the Faith and Order Commission define its fundamental aim as follows: “To proclaim the oneness of the Church of Jesus Christ and to call the churches to the goal of visible unity in one faith and one Eucharistic fellowship, expressed in worship and in common life in Christ, in order that the world may believe.”9 It is this statement of purpose that prompts the study of an ongoing Faith and Order initiative in Eucharistic Convergence. The term “ongoing” indicates a commitment to interconfessional study that extends into the future and also includes a process of reception. The primary Faith and Order document for demonstrating a convergence on the Eucharist is Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (BEM), finalized and accepted during the Commission on Faith and Order meeting at Lima, Peru, in 1982.10 4 Encyclical Letter of the Holy Father John Paul II on Commitment to Ecumenism. Boston, 1995. 96. Some parallel expressions in the encyclical are: “real although not yet full communion” (45); “basic but partial unity” (78); and “the communion between our communities, even if still incomplete” (84). 5 Ut Unum Sint. 96. 6 The writer, however, is also aware of the narrower ecclesiological intention disclosed in the “Decree on Ecumenism” of the Second Vatican Council, which speaks of those who “believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are brought into a certain, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church.” ABBOTT Walter M. SI (ed.), The Documents of Vatican II. New York, 1966. 3. 7 GASSMANN Günther (ed.), Documentary History of Faith and Order 1963–1993. Faith and Order Paper 159. Genève, 1993. vii. 8 VANELDEREN Marlin, Introducing the World Council of Churches, Revised Edition. Genève, 1992. 21. Its first major conference was held at Stockholm in 1925. 9 FALCONER Alan (ed.), Faith and Order in Moshi: The 1996 Commission Meeting. Faith and Order Paper 177. Genève, 1998. 323. One of the principles of Faith and Order, also included in the bylaws, guarantees that in interconfessional studies “no one shall be asked to be disloyal to her or his convictions nor to compromise them. Differences are to be clarified and recorded as honestly as agreements.” Ibid., 324. 10 Faith and Order Paper 111. Genève, 1982. 9–17.

172

Gentle Theology

This Faith and Order paper also provides a definition of convergence and consensus, as well as an explanation of the process of reception that is recommended to the churches as a means of attaining a greater level of unity. Some points of similarity and dissimilarity will be noted between this Faith and Order convergence on the Eucharist and the agreement recorded in the U.S. Lutheran–Roman Catholic Dialogue III Report on Eucharist as Sacrifice.

I. BEM as a Major Faith and Order Achievement Before focusing specifically on the exact wording of the agreement reached on the Eucharist in BEM, a concise history and an assessment of the significance of this document will be now presented. As the Preface indicates, the three statements on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry are “the fruit of a fifty-year process of study, stretching back to the first Faith and Order Conference at Lausanne in 1927.”11 The Preface then identifies Faith and Order meetings at Accra in 1974, Crêt-Bérard in 1977, and Bangalore in 1978, which preceded the decisive Lima meeting in January 1982.12 Max THURIAN of the Taizé Community in France gave leadership to a steering group that worked further on drafting the final text from 1979 to 1982. He notes that part of the history of BEM involves a change in Faith and Order methodology. The first stage, from Lausanne 1927 to Lund 1952, made “doctrinal comparisons between the definitions given by the different churches of their own identity,”13 a process that was called “comparative ecclesiology”14 at the Lund Conference. The next stage was “that of common building on the Biblical and Christological foundations” in order to “formulate a consensus.”15 The culmination of this lengthy procedure of study and consultation was the unanimous passage of the following motion 11 BEM. viii. 12 Ibid. For three other concise, but more detailed histories of BEM, see Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses. Faith and Order Paper 149. Genève, 1990. 6–16.; GASSMANN 22–25.; and RUSCH William G., Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry—and Reception. Journal of Ecumenical Studies 1984/21. 129–143. 13 THURIAN Max (ed.), Churches Respond to BEM: Official Responses to the “Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry” Text. Faith and Order Paper 129. Genève, 1986. 3. 14 TOMKINS Oliver S. (ed.), The Third World Conference on Faith and Order Held at Lund, August 15 to 28, 1952. (London, 1953. 15.

173

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

at the Lima meeting of the Faith and Order Commission in 1982: “The Commission considered the revised text on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry to have been brought to such a stage of maturity that it was then ready for transmission to the churches, in accordance with the mandate given at the Fifth Assembly of the World Council of Churches, Nairobi 1975, and re-affirmed by the Central Committee, Dresden, 1981.”16 One clue to the significance of BEM is its fulfillment of this ecumenical assumption presented in its Preface: “If the divided churches are to achieve the visible unity they seek, one of the essential prerequisites is that they should be in basic agreement on baptism, Eucharist and ministry.”17 The interconfessional significance becomes rather obvious, when noting the exceptionally wide range of confessional identities represented among the more than one hundred theologians who gathered at Lima. Included were Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Old Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Reformed, Methodist, United, Disciples, Baptist, Adventist and Pentecostal, according to a list on the back cover of the BEM document. Although the Roman Catholic church is not a member of the World Council of Churches, this communion has been represented as a full member on the Faith and Order Commission since 1968.18 A glowing appraisal of BEM was made by the Faith and Order Commission during its meeting in Budapest, Hungary, in 1989: “This fruit of many years of ecumenical discussion has become the most widely distributed, translated and discussed ecumenical text in modern times.” Then statistical evidence for this evaluation is offered: “Some 450.000 copies translated into thirty-one languages”; “over a thousand written reactions have so far been published”; and “never before have more than one hundred and eighty churches reached out to each other by responding officially to an ecumenical document.”19 15 THURIAN 3. The Lund Conference spoke of the need “to penetrate behind our divisions to a deeper and richer understanding of the mystery of the God-given union of Christ with his Church.” TOMKINS 15. 16 KINNAMON Michael (ed.), Towards Visible Unity, Commission on Faith and Order, Lima, 1982. Faith and Order Paper 112. Genève, 1982. 83–84. But William G. RUSCH points out that “the Commission on Faith and Order at Lima did not approve the text. This distinction is important. It transmitted the text to the churches.” RUSCH 139. 17 BEM. viii. 18 GASSMANN viii. 19 BEM 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses. 155.

174

While the Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order was in session in 1993, Günther GASSMANN—who had been Director of the Faith and Order Secretariat since 1984—described the wider impact of BEM as having “helped to enrich and renew theological thinking, worship and practice in many churches.” He added: “BEM has become an ecumenical reference text, which is evoked in bilateral conversations and negotiations between churches.”20 Examples of this latter claim are the references to BEM in three bilateral documents. These are: Concordat of Agreement between the Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America of 1997; Following Our Shepherd to Full Communion: Report of the Lutheran–Moravian Dialogue with Recommendations for Full Communion in Worship, Fellowship and Mission of 1997; and Called to Full Communion: The Waterloo Declaration of the Evangelical Church in Canada and the Anglican Church of Canada, 2000. In addition to these illustrations from bilateral conversations that have used BEM as “an ecumenical reference text,” there is also the papal encyclical, Ut Unum Sint, which mentions “in particular, the Lima document: Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (1982).” This historical survey of BEM and evidence for its significance sets the stage for examining the agreements recorded on the Eucharist. 20 BEST Thomas F. – GASSMANN Günther (eds.), On the Way to Fuller Koinonia: Official Report of the Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order, Santiago de Compostela 1993. Faith and Order Paper 166. Genève, 1994. 14.

175

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

II. Convergence on the Eucharist as a Step toward Consensus When Pope John Paul II proposed “the Eucharist as the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ” as one of five dialogue topics in his encyclical of 1995, he included it as one of “the areas in need of fuller study before a true consensus of faith can be achieved.”21 The Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry document makes a distinction between consensus and convergence. Referring to the “Lima text,” the Preface says, “We have already achieved a remarkable degree of agreement,” but then adds: “Certainly we have not yet fully reached consensus (consentire), understood here as that experience of life and articulation of faith necessary to realize and maintain the Church’s visible unity.”22 The BEM document thus indicates that consensus is not simply doctrinal. It is first of all experiential: such consensus is rooted in the communion built on Jesus Christ and the witness of the apostles. As a gift of the Spirit, it is realized as a communal experience, before it can be articulated by common efforts into words. Full consensus can only be proclaimed after the churches reach the point of living and acting together in unity.23 In the meantime, says the BEM document, prior to a more complete consensus, “The churches have begun to discover many promising convergences in their shared convictions and perspectives.” The BEM text “aims to become part of a faithful and sufficient reflection of the common Christian Tradition on essential elements of Christian communion,” so that “in the process of growing together in mutual trust, the churches must develop these doctrinal convergences step by step, until they are finally able to declare together that they are living in communion with one another, in continuity with the apostles and the teachings of the universal Church.”24 This Faith and Order document, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, articulates a convergence on the Eucharist under three main 21 Ut Unum Sint 79. 22 BEM. ix. The Preface, authored by William LAZARETH (Faith and Order Director) and Nikos NISSIOTIS (Moderator), is not part of the Lima text, according to Günther GASSMANN. 23 Ibid.

176

Gentle Theology

headings: (I) “The Institution of the Eucharist”; (II) “The Meaning of the Eucharist”; and (III) “The Celebration of the Eucharist.” Because the section on meaning is the longest and most theological of the three, this will be given primary attention in what follows. In light of the broad spectrum of denominations represented in the production of BEM, it is significant that the agreed text uses the terms ‘sacramental meal’ and ‘sacrament’ in reference to the Eucharist.25 Perhaps this sacramental vocabulary contributed to some churches in the Reformed tradition seeing in the BEM document “a ‘catholicizing tendency,’ which they say subordinates the Word to the sacraments.”26 For this writer, BEM’s affirmation that “in accordance with Christ’s promise, each baptized member of the body of Christ receives in the Eucharist the assurance of the forgiveness of sins (Matt. 26,28) and the pledge of eternal life (John 6,51–58)” is especially meaningful because of the critique of this document by representatives of The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod (LCMS). The official LCMS response claims that “the most serious deficiency … is the almost complete absence of discussion about what we regard as one of the major benefits of the Eucharist, namely, that in it God graciously offers ‘forgiveness of sin, life and salvation.’”27 While insisting that the Eucharist is “essentially one complete act,” BEM arranges its eucharistic statement of agreement under the following five “aspects”: (A) “Thanksgiving to the Father”; (B) “Anamnesis or Memorial of Christ”; (C) “Invocation of the Spirit”; (D) “Communion of the Faithful”; and (E) “Meal of the Kingdom.” It is under the category of “The Eucharist as Anamnesis or Memorial of Christ” that BEM makes clear the deeper meaning of anamnesis: “It is not only a calling to mind of what is past,” but “Christ himself with all that he has accomplished for us and for all creation (in his incarnation, servanthood, ministry, teaching, suffering, sacrifice, resurrection, ascension and sending of the Spirit) is present in this anamnesis, granting us communion with himself.” 24 Ibid. Note the ecumenical goal, “communion,” to be further documented below. The three stages of the quest for Christian unity—“comparison, consensus and conversion”—that include a series of ten steps, from conflict to communion, as described in Alan D. FALCONER’s article, Beyond the Familiar Landscape. In FALCONER, Faith and Order in Moshi. 40–53. See endnote 13 for the ten steps. 25 BEM. 10–15. 26 VANELDEREN. 162. 27 The LCMS Response to the Commission on Faith and Order of the World Council of Churches to the Text of “Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry.” Prepared by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod. Saint Louis, 1985. 13.

177

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

In light of the centuries of debate among representatives of the Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed churches regarding the presence of Christ in Holy Communion,28 this strong affirmation of Christ’s presence is worth quoting in full: “The words and acts of Christ at the institution of the Eucharist stand at the heart of the celebration; the Eucharistic meal is the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, the sacrament of his real presence. Christ fulfills in a variety of ways his promise to be always with his own even to the end of the world. But Christ’s mode of presence in the Eucharist is unique. Jesus said over the bread and wine of the Eucharist: “This is my body ... this is my blood.” What Christ declared is true, and this truth is fulfilled every time the Eucharist is celebrated. The Church confesses Christ’s real, living and active presence in the Eucharist. While Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist does not depend on the faith of the individual, all agree that to discern the body and blood of Christ, faith is required.” (13)

III. Some Points of Similarity and Dissimilarity between BEM (1982) and L–RC III (1967) When the Eucharistic agreements in Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (BEM) of 1982 are compared with those of the Lutheran–Roman Catholic Dialogue III Report, Eucharist as Sacrifice of 1967 (L–RC III),29 there are numerous points of similarity. Despite the former being a later multilateral document, and the latter being an earlier bilateral statement, both use the term “Eucharist” as a primary designation of what is also called the Lord’s Supper or Holy Communion. Both documents refer to the Eucharist as the Church’s “sacrifice of praise”; make a connection between the Eucharist and the “forgiveness of sins”; call the Eucharist a sacrament; affirm the presence of Christ; and relate the presence of his body and blood to the words of institution: “this is my body ... this is my blood.” They both identify the role of the Holy Spirit in regard to Christ’s presence; speak of the Eucharist and the Lord’s Supper as an

28 EMPIE Paul C. – MCCORD James I. (eds.), Marburg Revisited: A Re-examination of Lutheran and Reformed Traditions. Minneapolis, 1966. 40–51. 29 Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue III: Eucharist as Sacrifice. Published Jointly by Representatives of the USA

Gentle Theology

“effective sign”; and state that Christ’s presence does not depend on the faith of the individual or believer. There are at least three points of dissimilarity when BEM and L–RC III are compared. A primary difference in the wording is the emphasis on anamnesis or memorial in BEM, and an absence of this language in L–RC III. Günther GASSMANN once pointed out that the accent on anamnesis can be traced to a contribution by the Groupe des Dombes, an independent ecumenical group of Roman Catholics and Protestants in France. Another factor is that the main focus of L–RC III is stated as Eucharistic sacrifice and presence. A second point of dissimilarity is the use of “real presence” in BEM, and its omission in L–RC III. The Lutherans and Roman Catholics, however, say that “our confessional documents have in common affirmed that Jesus Christ is ‘really’, ‘truly’ and ‘substantially’ present in this sacrament.” Technically, the formulation “real presence” is not located in the Lutheran Confessions of the XVIth century. Among laity and clergy, however, it remains a popular way of describing the presence. A final point of dissimilarity between the two statements of agreement is the connection between the Eucharist and concerns of the world that are so prominent in BEM. The reference to “a kingdom of justice, love and peace in the Holy Spirit” is one example. The “search for appropriate relationships in social, economic and political life” is another. In this context of linking “secular” problems to “sacred” solutions, BEM states: “All kinds of injustice, racism, separation and lack of freedom are radically challenged, when we share in the body and blood of Christ. ... Reconciled in the Eucharist, the members of the body of Christ are called to be servants of reconciliation among women and men, and witnesses of the joy of resurrection.” Again, the absence of these kinds of references to social and other issues of human need in the L–RC III statement may be due, at least in part, to the narrower objectives set by the dialogue team. In summary, it is interesting to note that, despite the points of dissimilarity, there is a partial convergence of Eucharistic faith that is evident when the BEM and L–RC III agreements are viewed together.

National Committee of the Lutheran World Federation and the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, 1967.

178

179

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

IV. The BEM Process of Reception and its Results The Preface of BEM concludes with an invitation to “all churches to prepare an official response to this text at the highest appropriate level of authority.” An outline of four points is presented “in support of this process of reception.” William G. RUSCH explains the significance of Point 1: “The question BEM poses to all Christians is not whether we find our denominational confessions in it, but rather whether we find in BEM ‘the faith of the Church throughout the ages.’ ... And, if we do, what does this mean?”30 A target date for responding to this 1982 document was set for the end of 1984. During the Vancouver Assembly of the World Council of Churches in 1983, an Issue Group Report on “Taking Steps Towards Unity” explained that the official responses to BEM submitted by the churches are “an initial step in a longer process of reception.” Then they went on defining reception as “the long-range process, by which the churches seek to recognize the one apostolic faith in and through the words of the text and freshly to lay hold of the new life which that faith promises.”31 From the time that BEM was released in 1982, the Faith and Order Commission received one hundred and eighty-six official responses from various Protestant, Roman Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox and other churches, and published these responses in six volumes, dated from 1986 through 1988, edited by Max THURIAN.32 A summary listed and analyzed all these responses, prepared by the Faith and Order Commission in Faith and Order Paper 149, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses. Of particular interest is the fact that there is a total of ninetythree Lutheran responses and one common official response from the Roman Catholic Church. This latter communion offered an appreciative comment: “BEM is perhaps the most significant result of the (Faith and 30 RUSCH. 140. This former Director of Faith and Order in the NCCCUSA has authored Reception: An Ecumenical Opportunity. Philadelphia, 1988.; GASSMANN Günther, From Reception to Unity: The Historical and Ecumenical Significance of the Concept of Reception. In PODMORE Colin (ed.), Community–Unity–Communion: Essays in Honour of Mary Tanner. London, 1998. 117–129. 31 GILL David (ed.), Gathered for Life: Official Report, VI Assembly World Council of Churches, Vancouver, Canada

24 July–10 August 1983. Genève, 1983. 46. The date for official responses was extended to the end of 1985, anticipating a Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order expected in 1987 or 1988, which was finally held in 1993. 32 BEM 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses 3. Summary of US Churches’ BEM Reception Processes.

Gentle Theology

Order) movement so far,” thus typifying the “positive, sometimes enthusiastic, appraisal” that came “from churches of all traditions and from all parts of the world.”33 As would be expected, the ecumenically dedicated Lutheran Church in America (one of the three predecessors to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) said it “rejoices over the convergence in the text with its promise of the realization of great visible unity of the Church.”34 Despite its largely critical review of BEM, with “serious reservations,” even The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod was able to offer this positive assessment: “At many points the ‘faith of the Church through the ages’ is clearly set forth, and we rejoice at the progress that has been made in achieving a common expression of some aspects of that faith.”35 As for the ongoing process of reception, some of the issues in BEM that need further theological reflection, as a result of the official responses, are being studied by sub-committees. The topics include “Scripture and Tradition,” “Hermeneutics,” and “Ecclesiology.”36 As more agreements are reached on the Eucharist and other theological questions, the Message of the Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order suggests that “the task before the churches now is to receive these convergences into their life.”37 In this way, Faith and Order attempts to live up to its insistence that “BEM calls neither for surrender, nor compromise, nor total acceptance, and certainly not for ambiguity or confusion. It calls rather for common affirmations by divided churches struggling towards universal communion. ... Thus the process of response is itself a visible sign of our movement into unity.”38

33 BEM 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses. 17–18. The Roman Catholic response is in Vol. VI of Official Responses, edited by Max THURIAN. 34 Ibid. 18. Also see Vol. I of Official Responses. 35 Ibid. 34. Also see Vol. III of Official Responses, 141. 36 Alan D. FALCONER, personal interview by telephone, 19 April 2001. Examples of this ongoing reception and study process are published under Major Programmes of Faith and Order. In FALCONER, Faith and Order in Moshi. 57–179. This section also includes helpful articles on reception. 37 BEST–GASSMANN. 226. 38 BEM 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses. 157.

Journal of Ecumenical Studies 1984/21. 22–33.

180

181

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

Pauline Target for a Petrine Trajectory This research began with the proposal of a thesis: “Despite the significant interconfessional agreements that have been reached on a bilateral and multilateral level, some remaining challenges— primarily ecclesiological—need to be identified in order to realize a more objective evaluation and a more complete consensus.” But how can Christians whose communion is real but imperfect realize a communion that is more perfect, with a more complete consensus? Significant agreements like the U.S. Lutheran–Roman Catholic dialogues, the Faith and Order convergences on the Eucharist and in defining the ecumenical goal, the international Lutheran–Roman Catholic consensus on the doctrine of justification, and the relationship of full communion between the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and five other churches, indicate a theological basis for a communion that is real, together with a consensus that is emerging. As for remaining challenges, ecclesiological obstacles to a more complete unity have been brought to the surface, indicating that not only matters of faith, but also of order need to be addressed.39 A major ecclesiological challenge is the insistence by the largest Christian church that “the communion of the particular churches with the church of Rome, and of their bishops with the bishop of Rome, is—in God’s plan—an essential requisite of full and visible communion.”40 The ongoing dialogues, studies and reception process connected with the interconfessional initiatives are dealing with these kinds of ecclesiological issues. Meanwhile, Pope John Paul II reminds us that the doctrinal and ecclesiological problems that separate Christians will ultimately have an eschatological solution. He speaks of a “full communion” that “is already perfect” among “the saints—those who, at the end of a life faithful to grace, are in communion with Christ in glory.” This all-embracing, all-inclusive fellowship, not yet realized here on Earth in this life, is possible because “these saints come from all the churches and ecclesial communities, which gave them entrance into the communion of salvation.”41 39 The writer has learned to appreciate the personal dimension of authority in episcopally ordered churches, in contrast with the documentary emphasis of the historic Lutheran Confessions. A relationship with a bishop, rather than a document, may be a resource to prevent institutional schism. But the resignation of ELCA Bishop Paul EGERTSON, because he participated in the ordination of a lesbian, indicates other remaining challenges for unity. http://listserv.elca.org/archives/elcanews.html. 40 Ut Unum Sint: Encyclical Letter of the Holy Father John Paul II on Commitment to Ecumenism. Boston, 1995.

Gentle Theology

But prior to this future eschatological reality of perfection in glory, can there also be an existential experience of a more perfect communion here and now? The writer offers several insights from ecumenical, confessional, Biblical, and experiential sources. This is an effort to locate an approach to visible Christian unity that goes “beyond the limits of the familiar landscape” and the ordinary dialogical and ecclesiological channels of the ecumenical movement. A four-point agenda is submitted for consideration. First, some ecumenical sources point to the necessity of “conversion” and a “change of heart” as a prerequisite for communion. Included among the advocates of this inner spiritual process of transformation are: Alan D. FALCONER42 of the Faith and Order Secretariat; the Groupe des Dombes43; Pope John Paul II44; and Robert TUCCI SI, in his address at the Uppsala 1968 Assembly of the World Council of Churches.45 Second, a confessional source, drawn from the Church of the Augsburg Confession, reminds us of the centrality and sufficiency (satis est) of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the foundational basis for unity (Augsburg Confession, Article VII). In the language of the Decree on Ecumenism of Vatican II, it is like saying that highest in the “hierarchy of truths”46 is the Good News of God’s cross-shaped love proclaimed and celebrated in Word and Sacrament. 42 Beyond the Limits of the Familiar Landscape. In FALCONER Alan (ed.), Faith and Order in Moshi: The 1996 Commission Meeting. Faith and Order Paper 177. Genève, 1998. 43–52. It includes forgiveness and “a vision of kenotic ecclesiology.” 43 For the Conversion of the Churches (1993). In KINNAMON Michael – COPE Brian E. (eds.), The Ecumenical

Movement: An Anthology of Key Texts and Voices. Genève, 1997. 164–166.; The Conversion of the Churches. In GROS Jeffrey – MCMANUS Eamon – RIGGS Ann (eds.), Introduction to Ecumenism. New York, 1998. 105–109. 44 Ut Unum Sint. 15, 34, 35. He also cites the Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redintegratio) 7. The Pope exemplifies a spirit of conversion and spiritual renewal in his prayer for forgiveness for sins of the Roman Catholic Church “against … Orthodox sisters and brothers.” That We May Walk Together in the Ways of the Kingdom. Papal Address to Orthodox Archbishop Christodoulos of Athens and All Greece, 4 May 2001. http://www.zenit.org/english/archive/0105/ZE010504.htm. He also speaks of “full communion, which is neither absorption nor fusion, but a meeting in truth and love (Slavorum Apostoli 27).” Other requests for forgiveness are in the Apostolic Letters Tertio Millennio Adveniente (1994) and Novo Millennio Ineunte (2001). 45 The Ecumenical Movement, the World Council of Churches and the Roman Catholic Church. In GOODALL Norman (ed.), The Uppsala Report 1968: Official Report of the Fourth Assembly of the World Council of Churches, Uppsala July 4–20, 1968. Genève, 1968. 327. “The union of all Christians in the one Church of Christ cannot be the victory of one church over another, but the victory of Christ over divisions, our conversion to Christ.” 46 Decree on Ecumenism 11. The Notion of Hierarchy of Truths—An Ecumenical Interpretation. A Study Document

Commissioned and Received by the Joint Working Group of the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches (1990). In RUSCH William G. – GROS Jeffrey (eds.), Deepening Communion: International Ecumenical Documents with Roman Catholic Participation. Washington, 1998. 561–571. 47 LINDBERG Carter, Luther’s Motif simul iustus et peccator as an Approach to the Novus Homo and to the Nova Creatura. In MANNS Peter – MEYER Harding (eds.), Luther’s Ecumenical Significance: An Interconfessional Consultation. Philadelphia, 1984. 159–181. Note a Roman Catholic critique of this concept in ALLEN John L. Jr., Cardinal Ratzinger: The Vatican’s Enforcer of the Faith. New York, 2000. 232–233.

97. 41 Ut Unum Sint. 84. BRODD Sven-Erik, A Communion of Martyrs: Perspectives on the Papal Encyclical Letter Ut Unum Sint. The Ecumenical Review 2000/52.:223–233.

182

183

John George HUBER: Eucharistic Convergence in Baptism

Martin LUTHER’s concept of simul iustus et peccator (at the same time justified and sinful) is a realistic paradoxical acceptance of our state of human imperfection that finds its perfection not in ecclesiological solutions, but in God’s soteriological forgiveness revealed in Jesus Christ within a communion of saints and sinners.47 Third, a Biblical source provides what could be called a “Pauline target” for a “Petrine trajectory.”48 The New Testament’s projections of Peter’s gradually expanding role of leadership among the disciples appear to this writer to have been extrapolated by the Roman Church into papal primacy, which has become the sine qua non for full communion (Dominus Iesus 17), with the implication of greater perfection. This is counterbalanced by a Pauline passage in Philippians 3,12–14 that affirms a perfection that is not yet attainable, but is in the process of becoming, as we press on toward the ultimate goal.49 Fourth, an experiential source called the Bossey Ecumenical Institute of the World Council of Churches near Genève, Switzerland, is where “many have testified to life-changing experiences in this ‘ecumenical laboratory.’”50 In addition to the academic discipline of lectures, seminars, assigned readings and writing research papers, there is the daily relational experience of an interconfessional, intercultural and international community of Christians living, studying, dining, playing, praying, singing, dancing, debating, forgiving, celebrating, worshiping and, at times, sharing the Eucharist together. Students and faculty experience first-hand—not just in ecumenical textbooks—“the real but imperfect communion.” The Institute is presented here as an illustration of the ecumenical importance of these personal, experiential encounters. Also significant in this regard is the basis for consensus (consentire), which is defined in the Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry Faith and Order document as “that experience of life and articulation of faith necessary to realize and maintain the Church’s

Gentle Theology

visible unity. ... Full consensus can only be proclaimed after the churches reach the point of living and acting together in unity.”51 As a result of this research regarding significant agreements and some remaining challenges in recent interconfessional initiatives involving Lutheran participation, there is a new realistic understanding about the ecumenical paradox of a communion (koinonia) of Christians that is “real but imperfect.”52 Despite this imperfection, the now Cardinal Walter Kasper, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, reminds the churches that “more common ground has been reached in the last almost forty years than in the 450 years since the Reformation.” He then adds a word that seems intended for a tamed ecumenical optimist: “More than ever we need a new ecumenical optimism.”53 Suggested Reading Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry. Genève, 1982. Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 1982–1990: Report on the Process and Responses. Genève, 1990. BEST Thomas – GASSMANN Günther (eds.), On the Way to Fuller Koinonia: Official Report of the Fifth World Conference on Faith and Order, Santiago de Compostela 1993. Genève, 1994. ABBOTT Walter M. SI (ed.), The Documents of Vatican II. New York, 1966. FALCONER Alan D., Beyond the Limits of the Familiar Landscape. FALCONER Alan D. (ed.), Faith and Order in Moshi: The 1996 Commission Meeting. Genève, 1998. 40–53. GASSMANN Günther (ed.), Documentary History of Faith and Order, 1963–1993. Genève, 1993. JOHN PAUL II., Ut Unum Sint. Vatican, 1995. RUSCH William G., Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry—and Reception. Journal of Ecumenical Studies 1984/21. 129–143. BURGESS Joseph A. – GROS Jeffrey (eds.), Building Unity: Ecumenical Dialogues with Roman Catholic Participation in the United States. Paulist Press, 1989. 91–124. WEBER Hans-Ruedi, A Laboratory for Ecumenical Life: The Story of Bossey, 1946–1996. Genève, 1996.

–

Rev. John George HUBER, D.Min., is Evangelical Lutheran, a retired pastor of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, currently the Chair of the Faith, Order and Witness Committee of the Ecumenical Council of San Diego County, California, United States. His e-mail address is john.huber@ecunet.org.

48 Peter in the New Testament also suggests the possibility of “the effect of theological retrojection upon exegesis.” 168. 49 The root Greek word,, ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬, !"#"$%&, can mean “bring to an end, bring to its goal or to accomplishment in the sense of the overcoming or supplanting of an imperfect state of things by one that is free.” This same word is !"#$%s (all), 1Corinthians used in John 17,23, “that they may be brought to complete unity” (NIV). Also see π¬¬¬¬s 10,17, for a Pauline Eucharistically inclusive target. 50 WEBER Hans-Ruedi, A Laboratory for Ecumenical Life: The Story of Bossey, 1946–1996. Genève, 1996. Also see LINDNER John et al. (eds.), Ecumenical Formation: The Case of the Ecumenical Institute at Bossey. Theological Education 1997/34. 51 BEM. Faith and Order Paper 111. Genève, 1982. Preface, ix.

184

52 Perhaps the title of an American motion picture also expresses this less-than-perfect reality: As Good as It Gets (1997), directed by James L. BROOKS. 53 KASPER Walter, The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification: Cause for Hope. Centro Pro Unione Bulletin 2000/1. 6. Note disagreement between Cardinal KASPER, who “argues that the diocesan … church takes precedence over the universal Church, whereas Cardinal RATZINGER holds that the universal Church is prior to the local church,” while “Cardinal DULLES sides with RATZINGER’s argument.” Cardinal Dulles Weighs in on Ratzinger–Kasper Debate. http://www.zenit.org/english/archive/0105/ZE010528.htm.

185

OROVA Csaba •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Baptism and Eucharist in an Ecumenical Perspective: For the 40th Anniversary of the Second Vatican Council The Second Vatican Council as an event of the Church is a part of that living Tradition which interprets Jesus Christ’s life, death and resurrection since the days of the apostles. In the Council the Roman Catholic church wished to answer the present challenges by converting to this Tradition’s sources and renewing herself. This renewal appears in the doctrine and pastoral work interpreted in the framework of the Church as community. In the documents of the Council the main characteristic of this community-principled image of the Church is the unity, which finds expression in the intention of the restoration of unity; in other words, in ecumenical endeavours. In the following, we will present an overview of the teachings on baptism and Eucharist in the conciliar documents of Lumen Gentium and Unitatis Redintegratio that contribute to the shape of an ecumenical image of the Church.

I. The Council as the Basis of Ecumenical Commitment in the Roman Catholic Church In the XXth century, connections among Christian communities have been transformed significantly. From an ecumenical point of view, two events rise above the others: the World Council of

186

Churches (WCC) was established in 1948 in Amsterdam, and the Second Vatican Council gathered between 1962 and 1965 in Rome. In regard to the Roman Catholic church, public conversations with non-Catholics were still prohibited, or bound to permission by the Code of Canon Law issued in 1917 (can. 1325). In 1949, the Ecclesia Sancta pontifical instruction already encouraged serious consideration of the efforts towards unity. At the end of the last century, Pope JOHN PAUL II spoke explicitly about the irrevocable ecumenical commitment of the Roman Catholic church. The most radical change, however, in the Roman Catholic ecclesial selfunderstanding happened at the Second Vatican Council. It recognized that “in some real way they [the non-Catholic Christians] are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too She gives Her gifts and graces whereby She is operative among them with Her sanctifying power. Some indeed She has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood” (LG 15). The Council interpreted and displayed this “joining in the Holy Spirit” first of all in the sacrament of baptism and confessing the common faith. As a consequence, the Council prepared the way for recognition of all baptized persons as belonging to the mystical Body of Christ, and their baptism “must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation” (UR 3). In addition, the Council affirmed that “baptism itself is only a beginning, an inauguration wholly directed towards the fullness of life in Christ. Baptism, therefore, envisages a complete profession of faith, complete incorporation in the system of salvation such as Christ willed it to be, and finally complete engrafting in Eucharistic communion” (UR 22). Nevertheless, the Council did not produce ecumenical unity of the Church, but rather expressed that these sacraments have special roles toward the One Church. Thus, seeking its identity and self-interpretation, the Roman Catholic church must regard how the Second Vatican Council determined the way of unity in its documents. There are several ecumenical-minded insights in these documents; for instance, “Many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of her [the Roman Catholic church’s] visible structure” (LG 8); “hierarchy of truths” (UR 11); emphasizing variety (eg. UR 4); noting the “teaching office is not

187

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

above the word of God, but serves it” (Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum 10).1 Within this narrow framework, however, we can only deal with the most important documents that reflect on baptism and Eucharist in an ecumenical perspective. The Lumen Gentium (LG) dogmatic constitution on the Church, and the related decree on ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio (UR), have largely contributed the notion that ecumenical commitment has been a (sometimes lifeless) part of the Roman Catholic identity since the Second Vatican Council.2 Before having a look at these documents, we have to make an oft-used notion clear. “Ecclesiology” as a reflection starts from the Christian experience that the Church is the “place” of this experience and, in a sense, “matter” at the same time. In another way, Christians find themselves in the community of believers from the beginning, by virtue of their faith; nevertheless faith in God relates to the Church as well, since it is part of the activity and means of God.3

II. Baptism as the Bond of Unity The letter to the Galatians, which emphasizes that from one Gospel comes one faith, also stresses one baptism as the source of unity. “For in Christ Jesus you are all children of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (…) For you are all one in Christ Jesus”(Gal 3,26–28). Christ forms his Church “by washing of water with the word” (Eph 5,26). The meaning and significance of baptism have been key questions in ecumenical dialogues from the beginning. Nevertheless, requests of the Orthodox in the ’50s and especially the Second Vatican Council in the ’60s gave a new impulse to study this question. The main reason for this is that they placed it in an ecclesiological framework.4 Below, we will have an overview on the contribution 1 The wording of the conciliar documents may seem cautious, so it is worth to read them in the light of earlier Roman Catholic church documents to recognize their novelty. Or they may seem as self-evident; then it is worth to read them in the light of ecumenical documents. 2 Although the theological genre of UR is “decree,” which does not have the same authority as LG, according to the intent of the conciliar fathers and Pope PAUL VI, the interpretation of the doctrine of the Church in LG must be done in the ecumenical sense expounded in UR. Correlative interpretation of these documents is strongly emphasized by Walter KASPER, prefect of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, in his study Council Clearly Makes Ecumenism Binding as the Work of the Spirit. 3 Cf. WIEDENHOFER Siegfried, Ekklesiologie. In SCHNEIDER Theodor (ed.), Handbuch der Dogmatik. Düsseldorf, 1992. 54–55. 4 Cf. GASSMANN Günther (ed.), Documentary History of Faith and Order 1963–1993. Genève, 1993. 23.

188

Gentle Theology

of Lumen Gentium and Unitatis Redintegratio to the better understanding of the ecclesiological significance of baptism.5

1. The Lumen Gentium on Baptism Writing on the mystery of the Church, LG 7 speaks about Christ’s Mystical Body, with which Christians are united through baptism. The basis of this unity is that through baptism Christians die and rise again, similar to Jesus Christ. In the chapter of the Church as the People of God, LG 10–11 in the first place speaks about common priesthood on the basis of baptism, through which Christians are born again and are “consecrated as a holy priesthood.” Dealing with practising the common priesthood—through which believers become members of the Church—in reference to baptism, LG speaks on a commitment to take part in the liturgical service and confession of faith given through the Church.6 The same chapter, after explaining the catholicity (universality) of the People of God, to which both the Roman Catholic faithful and all who believe in Jesus Christ (LG 13) belong or are related to in various ways, in LG 14—primarily addressing the Roman Catholic faithful—Jesus Christ appears as the way of salvation in his Body, which is the Church, “for through baptism as through a door people enter the Church.” The LG declares baptism as a condition of salvation for those explicitly knowing that God has given the Church as an instrument of salvation. After these, in relation to the non-Catholic Christians, with whom the Roman Catholic church is “in many ways linked,” LG 15 puts emphasis on baptism already in the very first line. From these many ways of relating, the significance of baptism is that “they are united with Christ” through it. Baptism is also an instrument for the disciples of Christ to “be peacefully united (…) as one flock under one Shepherd,” who is Jesus Christ himself. The fourth chapter of LG is about the laity, who are “by baptism made one body with Christ and are constituted among the People of God” (LG 31). Talking about dignity and referring to the 5 On baptism see also other conciliar documents: Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) 6–7., 64–71.; Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity Apostolicam Actuositatem (AA) 3.; Decree on the Mission Activity of the Church Ad Gentes (AG) 7. 6 This article does not deal with the “essential difference” (originating from ordination), but at the same time mutual “interrelation” (originating from true equality with regard to the dignity through baptism) between common and ministerial priesthood, which is so important from an ecumenical and ecclesiological point of view (LG 10, 32).

189

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

pictures of the “Body of Christ” and the “People of God,” LG 32 speaks about the unity of the Church originating from baptism. This dignity originating from common baptism demolishes the racial, national, social or gender discriminations within the Church. The unifying frame of the “wonderful diversity” appearing in the structure and government of the Church is the “true equality with regard to the dignity” won in baptism. Speaking about the apostolic activity of lay believers, LG 33 points out that through baptism (and confirmation) they participate “in the salvific mission of the Church herself.” Lay women and men, partially through baptism, become able to be “at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church herself,” to whom “every opportunity may be given”. In the sixth chapter about nuns and monks, LG 44 expounds the basis of life for those who bind themselves to the three evangelical counsels by vows, in the grace gained by baptism. The religious participate in the Church by dying for sins and dedicating their life to God by living out Jesus Christ’s poverty, chastity and obedience.

2. The Unitatis Redintegratio on Baptism Let us have a look at the UR’s statements on baptism. In the first chapter about Roman Catholic principles on ecumenism, UR 2— as a foundation of the unity of the Church—cites Galatians 3,27–28: “All you who have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ ... for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Analyzing the relationship of the Roman Catholic church to the “separated brethren,” UR 3 confirms that despite existing divisions, because of the faith in Jesus Christ and true baptism,7 non-Catholic Christians “cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic church embraces them as sisters and brothers, with respect and affection.” This statement, together with LG 14, is an extremely important step forward in the understanding of the Roman Catholic church in respect to gaining salvation. In spite of all the serious obstacles to full and visible ecclesiastical communion, “all who have been justified by faith in baptism are members of Christ’s body.” The text of the document of the Council proceeds when it expresses that all baptized “are correctly accepted as sisters and

brothers by the children of the Catholic church,” since it means that through baptism Christians are already in one Church. Although, some of the differences affect or break the visible unity of this one Church. Since the UR also says “the brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion,” which means the true baptism as well, baptisms made by other communities also “must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation.” After speaking about the churches of the East and recognizing their “true sacraments” (UR 15), UR 22 declares about separated Western communities that through their baptism members are “truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ,” that is, into the one Church. It is an extremely important teaching of the Council that among Roman Catholics and the separated Eastern and Western churches baptism “establishes a sacramental bond of unity, which links all who have been reborn by it.” At the same time, by the complete profession of faith as Jesus Christ willed it to be, this bond raises the desire and lays a charge on them to become “finally complete, engrafting in Eucharistic communion.”

7 In the Council’s context, “being truly baptized” means baptism using water and the Trinitarian formula.

190

191

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

At the end, speaking about the separated Western Christians but with an evident significance for the Eastern Christians, UR 23 declares that also their Christian life is strengthened by the grace of baptism. From the understanding of the Council, it is clear that baptism is an outstanding element of the unity of the Church. The Second Vatican Council has recognized the conception of the royal priesthood of all believers. And, it has placed pastoral ministry into the context of the ministry of the whole People of God. The Council has put much ecclesiological emphasis on baptism, which has brought a big change in ecumenical dialogue; though, of course, there are still unanswered questions in this field. As the BEM says:8 “The inability of the churches mutually to recognize their various practices of baptism as sharing in the one baptism, and their actual dividedness in spite of mutual baptismal recognition, have given dramatic visibility to the broken witness of the Church. The readiness of the churches in some places and times to allow differences of sex, race, or social status to divide the Body of Christ has further called into question genuine baptismal unity of the Christian community (Gal 3,27–28) and has seriously compromised her witness. The need to recover baptismal unity is at the heart of the ecumenical task as it is central for the realization of genuine partnership within the Christian communities.”

III. Eucharist Expressing and Bringing about the Unity of the Church Like baptism, the Eucharist has had a significant role in ecumenical dialogue since its very beginning. Since the Second Vatican Council deepened the ecclesiological correlation of Eucharist, also the ecumenical documents has been dealing more with it since then. In the following we will examine two Council documents, Lumen Gentium and Unitatis Redintegratio.9 8 World Council of Churches, Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (BEM). Baptism 6. The BEM has been the most important ecumenical document issued by the WCC since it was formed. It is also referred to as Lima Document (1982). “Those who know how widely the churches have differed in doctrine and practice on baptism, Eucharist and ministry, will appreciate the importance of the large measure of agreement registered here.” (Preface) 9 On Eucharist see also other conciliar documents: Decree on the Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite Orientalium Ecclesiarum (OE) 26–27.; SC 2., 6–10., 12., 15–20., 27., 33., 38., 41–42., 47–101.; DV 10., 21., 24.; Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests Presbyterorum Ordinis (PO) 2., 4–5., 13., 18.; Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life Perfectæ Caritatis 6.; AG 9., 14., 39.; AA 3., 8.

192

Gentle Theology

1. The Lumen Gentium on Eucharist In the first chapter of LG, which is about the mystery of the Church, speaking about Jesus Christ’s mission in LG 3, the Church as “the Kingdom of Christ now present in mystery” appears in correlation with the sacrifice of the cross. This work of our redemption is carried on in Eucharist and “the unity of all believers who form one body in Christ is both expressed and brought about.”10 The text opens an “ecumenical” perspective in an original and universal sense, since “all people are called to this union with Christ.” After reading about the “royal priesthood” in the second chapter which is about the People of God, LG 10 speaks about the sacrifice again in relation with the common priesthood. In baptism, believers are consecrated as a holy priesthood and together “present themselves as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God.” In the balanced approach of the text, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood (which makes the Eucharistic sacrifice present) are destined for each other, since the ministerial priest offers the Eucharistic sacrifice to God “in the name of all the people.” The faithful, on the other hand, “in virtue of their royal priesthood, join in the offering of the Eucharist” and they likewise exercise that priesthood in self-giving. Dealing with exercising common priesthood, LG 11 speaks about “the sacred nature and organic structure of the priestly community” (that is the Church). It is brought into operation through the sacraments (and the exercise of the virtues) when the members create, express, restore, take part in and serve the unity of this community. “All in the same way, but each in that way which is proper to her- or himself,” on the one hand, they all take part in the work of the Eucharistic sacrifice. The Eucharist is in the framework of the Church, the font and summit of the whole Christian life. On the other hand, with this participation they “manifest in a concrete way that unity of the people of God.” From an ecclesiological and ecumenical point of view, it makes us think that in connection with the Eucharist the text is about the unity of the People of God, to which “belong or are related to in various ways both the Catholic faithful and all who believe in Christ” (LG 13) and this unity is “suitably signified and wondrously brought about.” 10 See the aim of baptism, since we are incorporated through baptism in the Body of Christ.

193

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

Also in this chapter on the People of God, in relation with the mission character of the Church, LG 17 formulates that building Christ’s Body happens by the Eucharist. On the other hand, it confirms that “the priest alone can complete the building up of the Body in the Eucharistic sacrifice.”11 In the third chapter on the hierarchical structure of the Church, and in particular on the episcopate, conciliar fathers affirm: “Those ministers, who are endowed with sacred power, serve their brethren, so that all who are of the People of God, and therefore enjoy a true Christian dignity, working towards a common goal freely and in an orderly way, may arrive at salvation” (LG 18).12 In relation with the consecrating duty of the Church, LG 26 connects tightly the service of the bishops offering the Eucharist, since beside the collegial tasks, bishops are servants responsible for the local churches, where “the faithful are gathered together by the preaching of the Gospel.” It is the local church, where “the mystery of the Lord’s Supper is celebrated, that by the food and blood of the Lord’s Body the whole brotherhood may be joined together.” This paragraph illuminates the service of the bishops with an Eucharistic argumentation due to the unity of the Church: “The partaking of the body and blood of Christ does nothing other than make us be transformed into that which we consume”; that is, Christian community takes form in the one Body of Christ. In relation to the order of the Church, the bishops are responsible for the legal celebration of the Eucharist. In the seventh chapter on the eschatological nature of the pilgrim Church and her union with the Church in Heaven, speaking about the community of the whole mystical Body, LG 50 claims that in the pilgrim Church “we are inspired with a new reason for seeking the City that is to come and at the same time we are shown a most safe path, by which among the vicissitudes of this world, in keeping with the state in life and condition proper to each of us, we will be able to arrive at perfect union with Christ, that is, perfect holiness.” The summit of this seeking is the celebration of those redeemed by offering the Eucharistic sacrifice. 11 See also LG 34 on laity. 12 Since non-Catholics in various ways “belong or are related to” the People of God (LG 13), this sentence put an extremely great responsibility on the episcopate. In accordance with that, the Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church § 755. and the Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism confirm: “the bishops (…) are responsible for ecumenical policy and practice” (Directory 4).

194

Gentle Theology

2. The Unitatis Redintegratio on Eucharist After the review of the dogmatic constitution LG, let us examine the paragraphs about the Eucharist of the tightly dependent UR decree on ecumenism. After declaring its teaching on the Church by the Council in Lumen Gentium, the Decree affirms its aim: “Moved by a desire for the restoration of unity among all the followers of Christ, it wishes to set before all Catholics the ways and means by which they too can respond to this grace and to this Divine call” (UR 1). It is worth noticing that the text calls the wish to restore to unity a Divine call and grace. So ecumenical endeavours—which are from a moral point of view compulsorily continuous—are the answers to this call. It is extremely important that in the first chapter which is about the Catholic principles on ecumenism talking about the unity of the church, the first paragraph of UR 2 co-ordinates its first statement on Eucharist into the Trinitarian foundation, into the words of Christ praying for unity: „in His Church He instituted the wonderful sacrament of the Eucharist by which the unity of His Church is both signified and made a reality.” Here we can clearly recognize that from a theological point of view, the Eucharistic unity of the Church cannot be emphasized more than binding it closely to the one communion of the Holy Trinity. Namely, the text connects the visible unity of the Church realized in Eucharist (as a sign and a means) directly to the central truth of the Christian faith. It is connected to the summit of the hierarchy of truths. After confirming the doctrine of apostolic and Petrine ministry, to fix this foundation the text closes with the following definite and indicative sentences: “This is the sacred mystery of the unity of the Church, in Christ and through Christ, and the Holy Spirit is energizing its various functions. It is a mystery that finds its highest exemplar and source in the unity of the Persons of the Trinity: the Father and the Son in the Holy Spirit, one God.” In the third chapter on churches and ecclesial communities separated from the Roman Apostolic See, we can read about the Eucharist in regard with Eastern Churches. UR 15 pays tribute to the Eucharist celebrated in the Eastern liturgy as the source of the life of the Church. The text uses the language of the Eastern tradition: through the Eucharist, Christians of the East “enter into

195

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

communion with the most holy Trinity, being made sharers of the Divine nature.” It determines that by the celebration of Eucharist in the Eastern churches, “the Church of God is built up and grows in stature.” In relation to Eucharist (and ministry), it derives the verity of these sacraments from apostolic succession.13 In the same chapter, in relation with separated Western churches and ecclesial communities, and admitting the witnessing power of these communities and their reverence to the Holy Scripture, UR 22 appoints the complete engrafting in Eucharistic communion as a destination of baptism. Thereafter, confirming again the significance of the being or absence of the sacrament of ministry, UR 22 puts the standpoint (“we believe”) of the Roman Catholic church in a very balanced way, saying that though these communities “have not retained the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness (…), nevertheless when they commemorate his death and resurrection in the Lord’s Supper, they profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ.” According to the conclusion of the Council document, “Therefore the teaching concerning the Lord’s Supper (…) must be the subject of the dialogue.” To sum it up, the Second Vatican Council displays an extremely close connection between Eucharist and Church. This brought a significant change in the course of ecumenical dialogue, especially as regards the question of the singularity of Jesus Christ’s sacrifice and his Eucharistic presence at the same time. Nevertheless, there are many open questions in ecumenical dialogue. Today it is already clarified that the double reality of the singular sacrifice of Jesus Christ and its commemoration is not only a Roman Catholic characteristic. As the BEM says:14 “The Eucharist is the memorial of the crucified and risen Christ, i.e. the living and effective sign of his sacrifice, accomplished once and for all on the cross and still operative on behalf of all humankind. The Biblical idea of memorial as applied to the Eucharist refers to this present efficacy of God’s work when it is celebrated by God’s people in a liturgy. Christ himself with all that he has accomplished for us and for all creation (in his incarnation, servanthood, ministry, teaching, suffering, sacrifice, resurrection, ascension and sending of the Spirit) is present in this anamnesis, granting us communion with himself. The Eucharist is also the foretaste of his parousia and of the final kingdom.” 196

Gentle Theology

IV. Dialogue Restores Time The stake of the ecumenical question is the unity of the Church as the sign and means of salvation. The Lumen Gentium and the Unitatis Redintegratio, each time they talk about baptism and Eucharist as the sacrament of the incorporation into the People of God and the entrance to the community of the Holy Trinity, highlight the unity of these People. After the Council, Roman Catholic theology and practice—as parts of the reception process—must seek this ecumenical dimension. This change and converting to the Spirit of Dialogue affect in several ways the self-understanding of ecclesial communities in contrast to past interdenominational controversies. An implicit assumption is emerging in the ecumenical movement: we can (or should) create an ecclesiology which points beyond divisions. Since Canberra (1991), the World Council of Churches declared it has been seeking the possibility of this “ecumenical ecclesiology.”15 Largely owing to recent ecumenical insights, the visible unity of the Church is one of the most burning questions for contemporary theology.16 This new impetus may contribute to overcoming the crisis of the ecumenical movement, which comes from keeping away the application of ecumenical results. From a Roman Catholic point of view, the significance of the ecumenical dimension in the self-understanding and practice of the Church has been expressed deeply and in a wider sense by Ghislain LAFONT OSB,17 a Benedictine monk and theologian: “In the Roman Catholic church, relations today called ecumenical were born together with the liturgical movement and in the same time of opening toward historical reflection and politics. “This conformity in time is by no means an accidental circumstance: if the Church gradually discovers herself as spiritual and structured community, then—as a natural way—she opens towards other communities. 13 The text encourages us to have “some worship in common (communicatio in sacris)” with this argument. 14 BEM. Eucharist 5–6. 15 Cf. GASSMANN 3., 20–22., 25–29.; GROS Jeffrey FSC – MEYER Harding – RUSCH William G. (eds.), Growth in Agreement II. Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level, 1982–1998. Genève, 2000. 937.; WAINWRIGHT Geoffrey, Church. In LOSSKY Nicholas – BONINO José Míguez – POBEE John S. – STRANSKY Tom F. – WAINWRIGHT Geoffrey – WEBB Pauline (eds.), Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement. Genève, 1991. 184–185. 16 CF. WIEDENHOFER 84–89. 17 LAFONT Ghislain OSB, Histoire Théologique de l’Église Catholique. Paris, 1994. 408–409. The author remarks in a footnote: “What I am telling here briefly on ecumenism, mutatis mutandis, holds true of interreligious dialogue as well.” In LAFONT 408–409.; see also 31–35.

197

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

“The style of this opening is revealed by the fact that ecumenical relations took shape in dialogue. Dialogue, at least methodologically and temporarily, means the equality of the partners in the spirit of common revision of memory, shared responsibility and endeavour, which aims to overcome obstacles originated in divisions. “In other words, dialogue restores time. This common intention aims at establishing the future together and making it speak; at the same time probing into the past of language, in favour of discernment and banishment of evil hidden in it. “In the course of ecumenical dialogue, there is a new emphasis on participants themselves: dialogue implies the mutual recognition of the partners; therefore—at least partly—they give up the standpoint of exclusionary unity and self-defence. This was a characteristic of the Roman Catholic church in the subsequent period of the Council of Trent [i.e. after 1545-63]. “Finally, dialogue raises the question: who is speaking? On behalf of whom? Dialogue touches the essence of the ecclesiology of ecumenical partners—especially of the Roman Catholic church.” Forty years after the Second Vatican Council, in Central Europe where there are many hindrances coming from political and historical circumstances, Roman Catholics should apply the ecumenical results of this Council. Suggested Reading BÉKÉS Gellért OSB, Krisztusban mindnyájan egy. Keresztények egysége: Utópia? (In Christ all one – Unity of Christians: Utopia?) Pannonhalma, 1993. GASSMANN Günther (ed.), Documentary History of Faith and Order 1963–1993. Genève, 1993. GROS Jeffrey FSC – MEYER Harding – RUSCH William G. (eds.), Growth in Agreement II. Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level, 1982–1998. Genève, 2000. KASPER Walter, Council Clearly Makes Ecumenism Binding as the Work of the Spirit. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/card-kasperdocs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_20031110_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html LAFONT Ghislain OSB, Histoire Théologique de l’Église Catholique. Paris, 1994. LOSSKY Nicholas – BONINO José Míguez – POBEE John S. – STRANSKY Tom F. – WAINWRIGHT Geoffrey – WEBB Pauline (eds.), Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement. Genève, 1991. MEYER Harding – VISCHER Lukas, Growth in Agreement, Reports and Agreed Statements of Ecumenical Conversations on a World Level. Genève, 1984. SCHNEIDER Theodor (ed.), Handbuch der Dogmatik. Düsseldorf, 1992. OROVA Csaba (1976) is a graduate in Roman ecumenical ecclesiology. He is a researcher Budapest, Hungary. He is a board member (ThIG) in WSCF-E and the PrepCom of csabor@enternet.hu.

198

Catholic theology. Currently he is writing his PhD dissertation on at Békés Gellért Ecumenical Institute (BGÖI) in Pannonhalma and of KÖD (Magyar SCM), a member of the Theology Interest Group Kontaktstelle für Weltreligionen (Wien). His email address is

Peter Sˇ AJDA •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Religious Neoromanticism

as Substrate for Monocultures Religious neoromanticism is characterised by mistrust towards the present moment. It fears the “temporary, escaping, accidental” (Charles BAUDELAIRE) and drowns in fantasies of the future, legends of the past, and the security of dream-worlds. It tends to mythologise the past and daydream about the future, often in exciting apocalyptic terms. To continue with Charles BAUDELAIRE’s terms—flânerie is considered by the neoromantic paradigm to be the only counter-alternative to neoromanticism.

Escape from the Present Moment as Serum Against Immediacy Flânerie and its sacralisation of the escaping molecules of time is a powerful referential tool, from which neoromanticism draws its negative identity. It perceives the reckless sans-souci mentality of flânerie as the embodiment of levity par excellence and attempts to counter it with its serious, rigid and romantic life-attitude. Religious neoromanticism sees its raison d’être in pointing out to believers the danger of living in immediacy. It recognizes the thinness of the veneer of immediacy and draws the conclusion that the arbitrary and unpredictable nature of the present moment requires sound defense mechanisms. The believer is therefore called to become rooted in the events of the past in order to be prepared for the events to come, which implicitly means becoming rooted in a specific blend of a retrograde-eschatological mentality.

199

OROVA Csaba: 40th Anniversary of the II. Vatican Council

198

Peter Sˇ AJDA •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Religious Neoromanticism

199

Peter ˇSAJDA: Religious Neoromanticism as Substrate...

The timeless aspirations of a human individual are not meant to come into direct touch with immediate reality, but rather to approach it armed with a system of mystifications that induces a specific vision of the world and uses a characteristic language.

Mystifications Religious neoromanticism feeds on strength-infusing mystifications. Mystification in this case is a systematic usage of a filter or prism that helps to interpret reality in a way that fits a certain logic and infuses the chosen identity with strength. Such a prism becomes a pattern of interpretation and communication and helps to create an ideological tradition that twists historical reality in a desired way. Self-deception of this kind requires a certain degree of ignorance and naïveté that are acclaimed as virtues and important defense mechanisms against evil that enters the human via the critical mind. Neoromantic religious mystifications are directed at the masses, but as a rule are fabricated and codified by individuals who are in a certain sense detached from the crowd; although every single individual is responsible for her or his own lack of ‘courage to know,’ as Immanuel KANT pointed out in his essay Was ist Aufklärung?. This lack is largely contextually conditioned and constitutes the field where mystifications are sown. They are sown by the chief bearers of the neoromantic paradigm, whose characteristics will be sketched out later. For the purpose of this study it is sufficient to outline just a few of the most common mystifications occurring on the agenda of religious neoromanticism in order to enable the reader to find a reference in her or his own experience.

Historiographic Mystifications In the neoromantic vision there appear to be glorious and dark periods in the history of humankind—and more specifically, in the history of Christianity. It shall be noted right at the beginning that drawing a map of the mutual interdependence of historical realities is seen in neoromantic logic as an attempt to make history confusing and untransparent. Normally the period of early Christianity is idealised, as are

200

Serpent as Substrate

periods of Christianisation, significant mission activity or spiritual (eg. mystic, pietist and illuminist) revival. Also the period of the constitution of a concrete neoromantic identity receives the stamp of an enlightened age. In Roman Catholic neoromanticism, the foundation of great religious orders and the spread of monastic institutions are considered a return to early Christian ideals and a period of general revival of piety. In more extreme cases, the same category is applied to periods of the reign of “Roman Catholic” monarchs that tended towards a mono-denominational constitution of the states they headed. Also hierocracies (e.g. the Jesuit rule in Paraguay) can appear as examples of historical periods where the purity of faith was safeguarded even by public institutions. Periods of consolidated papal power are contrasted to periods in which the papacy suffered under restrictions imposed by the rulers of this world. It is obvious that Protestant neoromaticism poeticises the sixteenth century, the consolidation of Protestant state churches, as well as those pre-Reformation periods in which “heretics” fought for their right of self-determination against the authoritarianism of the corrupt Roman church. Authors like Gottfried ARNOLD or Carl ULLMANN found precursors of the Reformation in the period of the dark Middle Ages in the German mystics (e.g. Meister ECKHART and Johannes TAULER), and saw on the basis of the witness of Martin LUTHER and Philip MELANCHTHON in these preachers an alternative to “useless” scholastic speculation. For an Orthodox neoromantic mind, the glorious period might be the time of the great Councils held in the East and the pre-Islamic flourishing of spirituality and theology in the Eastern Mediterranean. Needless to say, such reglemented memories are an optimal way of eluding self-criticism and forgetting the historical faux-pas of one’s own tradition.

Geographic Mystifications Geographic mystifications work both locally and globally. The Christianised part of the globe can be understood as chosen by God as the epicentre of civilization, sound doctrine and erudition.

201

Peter ˇSAJDA: Religious Neoromanticism as Substrate...

At the same time, the rest of the world can appear as a vast mission area governed by beliefs of inferior quality and a significantly lesser condensation of truth. Also, Europe is divided according to the prevailing denomination of the countries in the map of the neoromantic mind. The map of the world appears to a neoromantic eye as one with sacred and profane places. Cities like Rome, Jerusalem or Constantinople are caught in a net of stereotypes, and their history and development is viewed in a manner that emphasizes or omits their realities in conformity with the accepted ideology. They are linked to a specific literary heritage that creates a place for them in a given identity in a strictly polarised way. Sites of pilgrimage also have their place on the neoromantic map. They are the places of apparitions, wonders and conversions, adorned with legends. The ongoing continuity of wonders is not doubted and it is advised to become a homo peregrinus. It is not, however, advised to become a homo viator. The religious travel map of a neoromantic Christian is not to be confused with the map of a spiritual traveller. The list of sites to be visited for religious purposes is part of tradition and cannot be modified on the basis of individual piety. A neoromantic Roman Catholic is encouraged to journey to Lourdes or Rome, but not to the place of martyrium of Dietrich BONHOEFFER or to Optina Pustyn. Similarly, a neoromantic Evangelical–Lutheran would be discouraged to make a pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela. Places of spiritual renewal of other traditions carry the potential for ideological infiltration. Local geography follows the same reasoning in segregating the sacred from the profane. Meister ECKHART’s idea that if a person does not have God outside the Church, she or he does not have God inside the Church either, is neutralised by a firm belief in the lack of theophany in the profanum.

Biographic Mystifications Biographic mystifications are based on the recurrent game of emphasizing the timeless and playing down the timely in human life. Valued figures are presented as persons living all their life according to an unchanging set of principles. Their closeness to God is also manifested through slightly

202

Serpent as Substrate

relativised divine attributes in human form. Discipleship is, as a rule, interpreted in outer conformity with Jesus Christ’s lifestyle and the maximum number of conversions in a saint’s life equals one. The errors and shortcomings linked to human behaviour in the present moment are deleted from the biographies of spiritual and doctrinal aristocrats. All misogyny, anti-Semitism, opposition to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception or support of a wrong patriarch are omitted from the tradition that shall with time acquire the aura of timelessness. The anxiety of martyrs, weak sides of saints, errors of the teachers of the Church, or the greed of reformers, are phenomena intrinsically connected to the unpredictability of the present moment and thus worthy of oblivion. The depiction of the work of God in memorable people’s lives tends to be devoid of all processuality and resembles rather the act of a deus ex machina, thus observing a strict division between kairos and chronos. It is also very symptomatic that the authorship of saints, of teachers of the Church, or of popular preachers, becomes gradually enlarged with a considerable number of apocrypha that carry their name. Already in the early Church, anonymous works aspired to the authority of the Apostles. The corpus of the works of mystical authors (e.g. Johannes TAULER) at times grew so much that in modern times whole generations of researchers had to invest their energy into the deconstruction of the legend-like haze surrounding the author. Obligatory quotation of the authorities of doctrine is a mark of the reglementation of intellectual production. This serves to satisfy the neoromantic eye that is frequently contented with the visual appearance of a text, whose orthodoxy is assured by the mentioning of approved authorities. Authors whose production was put in the ‘Index of forbidden books’ often found their way into religious literature through the useful instrument of citatio tacita, evading the neoromantic eye by being hidden among quotes from recognised authors.

203

Peter ˇSAJDA: Religious Neoromanticism as Substrate...

Mystifications as Origin of Language Games It is obvious even from the limited number of examples given above that mystifications involve language games. These usually rely on two basic techniques: omitting and over-emphasizing, both of which have different forms. Omissions as a rule either conceal objectively negative phenomena and failures of one’s own tradition, or silence voices that oppose the leading programme of the given paradigm at a given point of time. Both active and passive omission deep inside require a belief that partial truths made latent have a limited life. At a popular level, over-emphasis may take the form of a sweetened or inadequately pompous depiction; at a more sophisticated level it is usually expressed in a fixed logic of “consistent” terms and concepts. These partake in a comfortable untouchability and call for a particular piety that is considered indispensable. An important institution of neoromantic language games is the institution of timeless truths. These are the most basic part of the agenda and their number tends to grow with time. As a rule, no difference is seen between the proposition itself and its potential interpretations. They are considered one and the same thing. The origin of dogmas and their evolution is normally seen in a bipolar way, where only the result is worth remembering. It is obvious that religious neoromanticism tends more towards kataphatic than apophatic language. In fact, a large portion of the authors on the ‘index of forbidden books’ of a given tradition would be those using apophatic ways of expressing religious reality. Neoromanticism, which is inseparably connected to the masses, lives in fear that apophatic language would dim doctrine for the ordinary believer and corrupt the image of God in the human mind by using paradoxes and riddles (e.g. negatio negationis). Similarly, other question-opening ways of expressing religious reality (e.g. irony or humour) must be considered profane and thus unfitting. Even partial usage of doubt for discernment purposes is interpreted as an unequivocal path towards total doubt, where no more absolute truth exists and de omnibus dubitandum est. Thus, essentially, religious neoromanticism has an inherent tendency to confine intellectual discourse to the realm of the profanum. 204

The Codifiers of Religious Neoromanticism As it has been mentioned above, the main driving force of the neoromantic paradigm in religion is not the crowd. The crowd is one of the bearers of the paradigm, but it needs a spiritus movens to stick to a permanent identity and to avoid volatility. This spiritus movens is as a rule an above-average sub-genial individual. In rare cases it is a genius. The main characteristics of this individual are her or his lack of a holistic view of life and a reduced capacity of integration of what happens in the present moment. This individual is the master of mystification, the great storyteller, the old person of the tribe. At night by the fire she or he tells the stories of dragons and angels, the fire of hell and the shine of the celestial kingdom. The bi-colour nature of the dualistic vision of life (day versus night) is a powerful tool of attracting the attention of the masses. But the acceptance of the division of realities into right and wrong can in more complex situations lead to depressiveness. For this reason, romantic elements are needed to turn inner strife

205

Peter ˇSAJDA: Religious Neoromanticism as Substrate...

into the battle of a saint against a dragon. But as the dragon loses much of its scariness when seen from close up in daylight, so do neoromantic legends when examined in their interconnectedness with the “profanum” of the present moment. For this reason, the magician of the tribe has to ensure that this very moment (now) and this very place on Earth (here) are not interpreted as the ‘suburb of Heaven’ and the ‘Paradise at hand’ (Theologia Deutsch). Equally, the human is not to perceive her- or himself as in statu viæ, but as an entity cut apart by the past and the future. If, namely, past and future happened to be integrated in the hic et nunc, dualism would lose much of its strength-infusing potential and the pillars of neoromantic logic would collapse.

Neoromantic Monocultures The neoromantic world is a tribal world. In religion it is a world of religions-in-opposition. Religions compete against each other or are even in conflict with each other. The same goes for Christian denominations. Even if the structure of mystifications in the competing traditions is similar, they are not perceived as generally related. Identical formulas infusing the elements of romanticism and legendarism can be used by several distinct traditions, but they are normally identified as exaggerated and critically addressed only in the ‘other.’ Tribal masters of mystification are sacred figures and thus should not enter each other’s cultic zone. Therefore they cannot meet and enter into genuine dialogue. The side-by-side existence of neoromantic tribes is reality that does not relate to a specific kind of identity. But on the other hand, it should be stated here that Christianity is no exception to the rule. It does have the capacity to adopt a tribal character and disintegrate into a variety of herds in mutual rivalry. It can become divided into monocultures that cultivate an ideology that prevents them from realising that their system of beliefs is based on mystifications of all possible kinds that have become codified as indispensable components of the deposit of faith.

206

Serpent as Substrate

We have chosen to call the principal element of this capacity to split neoromanticism, because the romantic emotional setting created through mystifications seems to be its chief source of energy. We preferred the term neoromantic to romantic, because we do not here speak of a one-time historical phenomenon, but rather of a recurrent tendency that appears in an ever-renewed form whenever it is raised to life by a tribal legend-maker, who considers her- or himself an irreplaceable instrument of the will of a god, whose presence in time and space fluctuates like the price of oil in our days. Suggested Reading ARNOLD Gottfried, Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzer-Historie. Leipzig, 1700. BAUDELAIRE Charles, Le Peintre de la Vie Moderne. In Œuvres Complètes. Paris, 1976. CˇERNÁ Zdislava, Deˇjiny rˇádu kazatelského. (Czech samizdat.) DENIFLE Heinrich Seuse, Die deutschen Mystiker des 14. Jahrhunderts. Fribourg, 1951. ECKHART Meister, Reden der Unterweisung. In Deutsche Predigten und Traktate. Zürich, 1979. FISCHER G., Die Wiederentdeckung der Mystiker im 19. Jahrhundert. Freiburg, 1931. FOUCAULT Michel, Qu’est-ce que les Lumières? In Dits et Écrits. Paris, 1994. KANT Immanuel, Was ist Aufklärung? In Berlinische Monatsschrift. Berlin, 1784. PLATO, The Sophist. In Complete Works. Indianapolis–Cambridge, 1997. ULLMANN Carl, Reformatoren vor der Reformation. Hamburg, 1842. Peter SˇAJDA was born in 1977 in Bratislava, Slovakia. He completed his studies in modern philology in 2001 at the Philosophical Faculty of the Comenius University in Bratislava. He is Roman Catholic and a member of the Order of Preachers. He was a member of the European Regional Committee (ERC) of WSCF Europe, an editor of Student World, and the chairperson of WSCF CESR. He is the editor-in-chief of Mozaik. His email address is sajdus@yahoo.com.

207

Serpent as Substrate

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Critique of Religion and Christian–Muslim Dialogue The title of this paper contains two catchwords: critique and dialogue. In human relationships, it is often difficult to strike the right balance between listening and receptive dialogue one the one hand and critical discussion on the other. This is also a challenge in Christian–Muslim relations: to find a good balance between acceptance and argument, between dialogue and discussion. Let me, before I proceed, explain my personal background for choosing the title “Critique of religion and ChristianMuslim dialogue.”

Radical and Liberal From 1979 to 1983 I served as the general secretary of the Student Christian Movement (SCM) in Norway, after having spent much of my energy in the ’70s as an activist in the Student Christian Movement and the closely related movement, Christians for Socialism. I think it is fair to say that the Student Christian Movement in the seventies was rather critical to central expressions of Western Christianity. For instance, Marxist critique of religion as the opium of the people made a great deal of sense to us, faced with a type of Christianity that was preoccupied with personal morality and the eternal fate of the individual. Such an attitude seemed irrelevant in view of the struggles for socio-political justice and ecological balance. Becoming aware of the Palestinian struggle, we confronted also the uncritical support for Israel prevailing in conservative Christian circles that were otherwise not much concerned with religion and politics. 208

We were also strongly influenced by feminism, and its unmasking of the deeply patriarchal structures in Christianity. Nor could we accept a type of sexual ethics that restricted love relationships to the framework of marriage only. The issue of gay liberation, however, did not enter the agenda of the Student Christian Movement in Norway until the ’80s. In a sum, we were critical of the socially conservative nature of Western Christianity, advocated third world liberation theology, promoted feminist theology and demanded a more liberal sexual ethics. Therefore, we were both radicals in socio-political terms and liberals in cultural terms. But our critique of Christianity was not a critique of religion as such. On the contrary, we were deeply pious liberals and radicals, living a life of prayer and devotion. We were calling not only for a political renewal of (mainly) Protestant Christianity, but a liturgical one as well. Those were the (student) days … But what about the issue of interreligious relations in those times? Until the mid-’80s, the question of interreligious dialogue was outside of my horizon. In the Student Christian Movement, we were deeply impressed by the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua in 1979, which for some time brought liberation theology to power. But we were not particularly interested in the Islamic revolution that took place in Iran during the same year, and which has lasted much longer than the revolution in Nicaragua. It was not until I was appointed as a pastor to a multicultural parish in Oslo in the mid-’80s that I turned my attention to interreligious, and in particular Christian–Muslim, relations. Since then, I have spent an increasing amount of my personal and professional energy on Christian–Muslim dialogue at local, national and international levels. In the Norwegian context, I took up the challenge to interpret Muslim concerns to a public audience that did not always take an understanding attitude towards Islam, to put it mildly. Before long, I found myself defending the religious rights of a Muslim minority that largely held more conservative views than my old Christian opponents on lifestyle and even more so in women’s issues. In general, the Norwegian Muslims I related to from the late ’80s

209

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

were also more fundamentalist in their approach to the Qur’an than the Christian conservatives in relation to the Bible. So what had really happened to me? Was I totally confused—or maybe just a good Lutheran? I am thinking of Martin LUTHER’s explanation for the eighth commandment: “You shall not lie.” According to LUTHER’s Small Catechism, the eighth commandment enjoins upon us not only to abstain from lying about our neighbour. It also obliges us “to defend her or him, say good things about her or him, and see the best side of everything she or he does,” even though we might disagree with her or him in crucial issues. Actually what I think happened was this: I had discovered a religious minority that was just as vulnerable in a Christianmajority society as, for instance, women were in a maledominated church. But I still have not resolved the question of how to balance my commitment to gender equality with my advocacy of religious minority rights—rights that may endanger the interests of women or homosexuals. Are we, if we want to be liberal, obliged to defend the right of conservative Muslim or Christian communities to discriminate against women and gay people? How can we combine a liberal defence of religious minority rights with a radical commitment to gender justice? To be sure, this is not a question of how to balance a Christian concern with a Muslim one. In the second generation of Muslims in Norway, gender equality is high on the agenda and in 2002 the only purpose-built mosque in Norway elected a young woman as their spokesperson. From 2000 to 2003, even the president of the Islamic Council in Norway was a woman. Nevertheless, discrimination against women is probably more widespread in Muslim immigrant cultures than in general society. Nor in Christian circles has full gender equality been achieved yet, although strong progress has been made in most churches during the last two decades—with two female bishops in the Church of Norway as the most striking symbol of what has been achieved.

210

Serpent as Substrate

The question of how to balance women’s rights with religious group rights is therefore a common challenge for Muslims and Christians, since both liberal and conservative attitudes to the position of women are well represented in both camps.

Critical Dialogue In interfaith relations, the task before us is to find the right balance between accepting differences on the one hand, and engaging one another in critical dialogue on the other. As I see it, a critical dialogue between Christians and Muslims should not shun a radical re-examination of our holy traditions. Both Christians and Muslims like to reassure one another and the general public that human rights are in perfect agreement with the Bible and the Qur’an respectively. That may be so. But it is a historical fact that mainstream Christian theologians long considered the modern idea of individual human rights as a threat to religion. And when Muslim theologians endorse human rights, they often add the reservation “as long as it is not in conflict with shar‘ia.” In my view, we should be honest enough to admit that the modern idea of non-discrimination between the sexes and between religious groups is a historical novelty. The idea of non-discrimination may certainly draw some support from our holy scriptures, but it is also contradicted by them. Both the Bible and the Qur’an were shaped in deeply patriarchal cultures that are sometimes challenged but also confirmed by the Scriptures. As for interreligious relations, we may certainly find some support in our scriptures for the modern idea of tolerance and non-discrimination, but the Bible and the Qur’an are both deeply marked by religious conflict and a competitive attitude towards other faiths. And we cannot easily say that those who advocate gender discrimination or a confrontational attitude towards other faiths are totally mistaken in their interpretation of the scriptures. A critical dialogue, then, must address the hard fact that dominant interpretations of Christianity and Islam have supported practices and attitudes that modern liberals must firmly

211

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

confront: discrimination against women; authoritarian attitudes; religious intolerance; even violence in the name of God. To be sure, our scriptures have also proved to inspire the opposite: more rights to women; peaceful coexistence between different faiths; non-violent conflict resolution. But which tendencies have been stronger hitherto, and which tendencies will have the upper hand in our present world? And can we honestly say that our scriptures are totally innocent of what liberals prefer to term discriminating and confrontational misuse?

Critical Dialogue or Mutual Accusations? What I am implying now is that a critical dialogue between Christians and Muslims must also address—and respond to—a more fundamental critique of religion and its actual function in society. Both Muslims and Christians have often warded off necessary self-critique by criticising or attacking the other. As a religion born after Christianity, Islam accepts the previous revelations to Moses and Jesus. But Muslims have always criticised the actual form of Judaism and Christianity—often accusing Jews and Christians of having altered or falsified their revelations. In societal terms, Jews and Christians were generally better off in Islamic empires, compared with the regrettable fate of Jews and Muslims in Christian Europe. There are notable exceptions, however, to the general rule, such as the unfortunate fate of the Armenians. It is also clear that followers of Moses and Jesus were always regarded as subordinate citizens in Muslim lands. As for Christianity, the dominant attitude towards Islam was either to see Islam as an aberration of the true Christian faith, or Muhammad as the Anti-Christ. In the Middle Ages, Islam was also accused by Christian theologians of being a violent religion that spread its faith by the sword, and a religion of sexual pleasure that allowed a man to take four wives and enticed the believers with virgins in paradise. The accusation of Islam being a violent religion is, of course, quite ironic in view of the violent expressions that Western Christianity took on in the same period, during the Crusades.

212

As for being preoccupied with sexual pleasures, that accusation against Islam should probably be seen as the sweet Oriental dream of a Christian Europe that insisted on monasticism as the supreme form of religious morality.

European Critique of Religion: Christian Self-critique? To what extent, then, have Christianity and Islam allowed for self-critical examination of one’s own religion? In Muslim societies, there has generally been little space for criticising dominant expressions of Islam. This has been different in European history, where critique of religion has been carried out—and to a certain extent, allowed— since the Enlightenment. The target of the Enlightenment critique has for contextual reasons been mostly Christianity. Trying to summarize the Enlightenment critique of Christian religion, we will find that it contains three different elements. First, a rationalist critique of superstition and the belief in divine intervention, contrasted with a strong faith in the human potential to change everything. Then, a modernist critique of authoritarian forms of religion that were seen to hamper social and political progress. And finally, a

213

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

moral critique of oppressive and violent religion, against the background of religious wars in Europe. Underlying all these forms of Enlightenment critique of religion, we will find two strong convictions. First, the criterion of a sound religion is whether or not it supports the moral autonomy of the individual. It is this autonomy that allows the individual to criticize religion on moral grounds, on behalf of humanity. Secondly, Enlightenment critique insists that all religious traditions, including Holy Scriptures, must be open to historical-critical examination. This requires a new and critically minded community of experts on religion, in the framework of independent universities. Later developments have added new elements to the critique of religion. As we know, Marxist critique of religion has criticized religion for diverting the attention of the masses from social and political issues and for veiling class differences. Freudian and other types of psychological critique have accused religion of subduing the natural impulses of the human being and for locking up the human mind in authoritarian thought structures. In the European context, it is important to note that the critique of religion has not necessarily been anti-religious. In one way, Enlightenment critique of religion has challenged the churches from the outside, as secular humanists continue to do in a combined rationalist and moral attack on religion as such. But given the fact that many Enlightenment philosophers considered themselves Christian, it was also a form of self-critique. The churches have often defended themselves against what has been perceived as unwarranted attacks from the outside. Christian theology, however—as conducted at independent universities—has largely adopted the modern idea of individual autonomy and the method of historical criticism. To some extent, Christian university theology has also opened up for a moral discussion of holy texts and religious doctrines. For instance, my Faculty of Theology has recently offered a course on “Problematic Bible Texts.” Here, the students are invited to examine critically some difficult issues, such as Biblical accusations against the Jews. Other topics are the condemnation

214

Serpent as Substrate

of homosexual practices in the Bible; the subordination of women as called for by the apostle Paul; and Jesus’ radical ethics in the Sermon of the Mount, which seems to call for asceticism and does not even allow for legitimate self-defence. Considering the fact that Western Christianity has, to some extent, been able to accommodate and even institutionalize religious self-critique, one might ask whether Christianity has also got some internal potential for critical self-examination. In the Judeo–Christian thought, there is actually an old tradition of morally based critique of religion, as expressed by the great prophets in the Jewish Bible, who daringly criticized anointed kings for their injustice and idolatry. In Judaism, there is even a tradition of engaging oneself in critical discussion with God, as expressed in the Book of Job. Taken as a whole, the Judeo–Christian Bible with its many books can be read as a never-ending critical dialogue. It is a dialogue between exclusive and inclusive visions of God; between oppressive and liberating forms of faith; between violent and pacifist religion; and between strict adherence to the letter of the law and the freedom of love. Even within the Christian New Testament, we will find that the apostles Paul and James hold markedly different views about the relation between faith and good works.

Muslim Self-critique What about Islam, then? Is there a similar tradition of internal discussion within Islam? And what kind of Muslim self-critique can be found today? Historically, there is no doubt that Muslim cultures have often accommodated a vigorous internal debate between theologians and philosophers. They also did so concerning debates between orthodox defendants of shari‘a and religious mystics; and about almost all conceivable ethical and theological issues. In modern times, however, there has been less space for an open and critical debate within Islam. I see two reasons for this. First, many Muslim-majority countries today have a serious democratic deficit and do not allow for open debate about anything, and certainly not about religion. Secondly, in the Muslim world, a critical approach to religion has

215

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

not been institutionalized in the way it has happened in Europe, where religion has long been studied critically at the universities. But things do not have to be like that in the Muslim world. I see no problem with “Islam itself” in having a more open and selfcritical dialogue about religion. In the early Middle Ages, Islamic empires allowed for a more open debate about religion and philosophy than in Europe. As for today, in Indonesia (which is the largest Muslim-majority country in the world) we find both a fresh and functioning democracy and state institutions for Islamic studies that actually invite a critical investigation of shari‘a and Islamic thought in general. Proceeding to the question of Muslim self-critique in the West, I will highlight three different expressions of critical selfexamination. First, many young Muslims in Europe are very outspoken in their critique of certain practices that have been widespread in traditional Muslim (and for that matter, Christian) cultures. Such practices are the discrimination or marginalization of women; forced marriages; and authoritarian forms of religious leadership. The underlying premise of Islamic cultural critique is that such practices are not in conformity with the Koran. Whereas the Koran is always presupposed to support liberal reform in these areas, the Hadith collections are often subject to a more critical investigation. The second form of intra-Islamic critique that I have come across in Norway is a more silent protest from ordinary Muslims against religious leaders that call for a “perfect” form of Islam that only very few people are able to practice. This has also to do with internal differences between Muslim cultures. For instance, I have heard Bosnian and Iranian Muslims in Norway complain that the kind of halal and prayer time regime called for by Pakistani, Arab or Somali imams makes it very difficult to interact with other Norwegians in a relaxed manner. These critics call for religious appraisal of a less legalistic, in a sense less “perfect,” but on the other hand a more open and flexible Islam. The third type of Muslim self-critique is even more radical, and calls for a general revision of dominant forms of Islamic preaching

216

Serpent as Substrate

and practice. One example is the book The Trouble with Islam. A Wake-up Call for Honesty and Change by the female Canadian Muslim Irshad MANJI. MANJI, who is a well-known media personality in Canada, lives in an open, lesbian partnership. In her book, Irshad MANJI criticizes not only the dominant view of gender relations and sexuality in Islam, but also the authoritarian responses that she received from the mosques when she (as a youth) tried to ask difficult questions about Islam. Perhaps even more controversially, she criticizes the widespread negative attitudes towards other faiths (in particular, anti-Jewish attitudes) that she finds in many Muslim circles all over the world. But Irshad MANJI is not one of those radical critics who are on the verge of leaving Islam. On the contrary, she insists on reading the Koran with fresh eyes, on her own terms, not in an individualistic manner, but as a respected member of the interpreting community. Another example of a radical Muslim self-critique originating from North America is a book edited by Omid SAFI: Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender and Pluralism. This book too contains an essay that calls for a more open attitude towards homosexuality in Islam, implicitly arguing that the Qur’an might be a lesser problem than the Bible in this respect. On the question of religion and violence, an article from September 2004 in the newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat (which is sponsored by Saudi money and widely read in both the West and the Middle East) has caught international attention for its selfcritical challenge to Muslim cultures. The article was written by Abdel Rahman AL-RASHEED, a leading Arab editor. Abdel Rahman AL-RASHEED is not content with proclaiming (as nearly all Muslims do) that Islam is totally against all forms of terrorism. Under the heading “A Wake-up Call: Almost All Terrorists are Muslims,” he writes: “It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims.” Instead of explaining away attacks on civilians perpetrated by Muslims in Chechnya and Iraq as a desperate response to violent political oppression by Israel, Russia or the United States, he admonishes Muslims to examine critically the enemy images and

217

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

the (potentially violent) revolutionary ideology that is preached in many mosques. The examples of critique just cited all come from inside the believing Muslim community. In addition, another critique against Islam was conducted by former Muslims that have left the believing community. One forceful example is Ibn WARRAQ’s book Why I Am Not a Muslim, which has also been published in Norway by the Humanist Association. This is clearly an example of a critique of Islam that is both rationalist and moral in its approach, but essentially fundamentalist in its many unwarranted generalizations about Islam. Books written by “apostates” typically accuse Islam of being inherently expansionist, totalitarian and against the interests of women. Similar accusations against Islam can be found in pamphlets produced by Muslim converts to Christianity, such as Mark GABRIEL in a book called Islam and Terrorism. GABRIEL, who seems to have converted to a rather fundamentalist form of Christianity, characterizes the history of Islam as a river of blood. He presents it as a matter of fact that Muslim theologians regard the peaceful verses of the Koran as abrogated by the belligerent ones. He also warns his fellow Christians that Muslims who involve themselves in dialogue are almost always trying to conceal their ambition of world hegemony under the veil of multiculturalism. This form of critique of Islam is currently being embraced by conservative, confrontational Christians, as in the new Christian right in the United States or the Norwegian right-wing politician Carl I. HAGEN, who has recently tried to strike an alliance between anti-Islamic politicians and charismatic Christians. At the same time, secular humanists in Norway have redirected their critique of religion from Christianity to Islam, coming dangerously close to the kind of critique purported by fundamentalist Christians. What we are witnessing then is a clash of fundamentalisms: humanist fundamentalism, Christian fundamentalism, and Islamic fundamentalism. All agree that there is only one saving truth—be it atheist rationality, Jesus Christ, or the qur’anic

218

Serpent as Substrate

revelation. And all seem to imply that there is only one truth about the other faith, thus denying the very real pluralism in all these traditions.

Critical Dialogue and How to Deal with Moral Disagreement The question is: how can we deal with religious and life-stance pluralism, then, without becoming either fundamentalists in response or laid-back liberals who do not take anything seriously? I believe that the only remedy is critical dialogue. But before we can engage each other in critical conversation, there must be trust building. One important aim of trust-building dialogue is to deconstruct the deeply ingrained stereotypes on both sides about the other. In the Norwegian context, Christian and Muslim leaders have engaged themselves in trust-building dialogue for fifteen years or so, partly in forums where also Jews and the secular Humanist Association have taken part. In this process, several leaders of different faith communities have become each other’s trusted friends. In Norway, Christian–Muslim trust building has also taken place in the groundbreaking dialogue and diapraxis between the Student Christian Movement and the Muslim Students’ Association. On this foundation of trust, which must still be reinforced, I think we are now ready to address also the hard issues together. Earlier this year, in the national Contact Group between the Church of Norway and the Islamic Council, we were able to produce a common statement on the issue of Palestine. But in a recent debate about suicide bombings, the Church of Norway and the Islamic Council released two markedly different although not antagonistic press statements; the Islamic one being more “understanding” in its attitude to Palestinian suicide bombers. I think we can tackle such differences, but we must also be willing to discuss them together in a critical way. In many issues involving religion and politics, one critical question is that of aims and means.

219

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

I also believe that we need to discuss more what we mean by the notion of political religion itself. As I have explained, in the ’70s I called for a more politically radical Christianity committed to the cause of the underprivileged. As the years have gone by, I have got serious doubts about whether political religion is such a good idea after all. I have been discouraged by politicized and violent forms of Christianity that identify Christian religion with national identity (as in Serbia) or with the absolute good (as in current U.S. policies). I have also been discouraged by political Islam, which often takes authoritarian and violent forms in its legitimate resistance to foreign dominance. But I still firmly believe that true religion must be prophetic in the social and political realm, unmasking illegitimate lordship and calling for justice. I have, however, come to think that revolt in the name of God is a dangerous idea. Identifying one’s own cause—be it as just as it may—is not that in itself totalitarian? In my view, Christians and Muslims who are committed to the cause of social and political justice should rather struggle together under a different banner than religion. For those who fear that Muslims in Norway shall go political in the name of Islam, I have good news: Norwegian Muslims seem to distribute themselves evenly over the entire political spectrum, joining hands with Christians and atheists in almost all kinds of political parties. These are the realities on the ground, behind all slogans of “Christian” or “Islamic” solutions to this or that social ill. When Christians and Muslims take concrete political actions, they are always divided among themselves—and hence also united politically right across religious divides. This is also the case when Christians and Muslims respond to current conflicts on the global scene. Christians are deeply divided among themselves over, for example, the issue of Israel and Palestine. Muslims may seem united in their opposition to U.S. interventionism, but they are divided among themselves when it comes to finding a political model for the future in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the case of Afghanistan, many Christians and Muslims in

220

Serpent as Substrate

Norway joined hands against the “war on terrorism” that was waged by the United States and her allies. But other Christians in the West supported the U.S.-led war, as well as some in the region itself. The United States was even able to rally important Muslim support for her policies from both the Pakistani government and the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan (that was no less Muslim than the Taliban). In the case of women’s issues, we have also seen that Christians and Muslims are deeply divided among themselves. We should not be discouraged by this fact. For does not this mean that Christian and Muslim feminists have every opportunity to join hands against patriarchal attitudes in both communities? On the one hand, the fact that moral and political differences cut right across religious divides opens up for controversial interreligious alliances. On the other hand, the painful differences we face both within and between the religions challenges us also to live respectfully with moral disagreement. On the question of women’s and gay rights, churches worldwide have had to face what has been called a “morally well-grounded disagreement.” On the question of religion and war, too, Christians have had to live with a long-established disagreement between pacifists and adherents of the just war theory (that prevails also in Islam). In most of the issues I have touched upon in this lecture, both Christians and Muslims will have to live with different views of what is morally right, and what can be justified or not on the basis of the scriptures. In general society, I think there are good reasons for establishing a liberal form of multiculturalism that allows both liberals and conservatives to practice their views freely, without illegitimate intervention from the state. But there must also be some limits to what I call legitimate disagreement. Christians and Muslims should be able to agree on some fundamental restrictions to religious freedom—related to protection of life, health and personal integrity. To take a concrete example: neither Christian nor Muslim communities should be forced by the state to employ homosexual partners. With regard to possible sanctions against

221

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

homosexuality, however, it is not acceptable to say (as some Muslim students in Norway did when the issue was raised in 2004) that it is up to each state to decide how homosexual practice should be punished (in the worst case, by the death penalty). In my critical dialogue with Muslims, as a liberal Christian, I will argue that homosexual love relationships are not against Christian or Muslim ethics. Obviously, we will have to live with different views in this respect, both intra- and interreligiously. But I will draw an absolute line against any form of punishment for homosexuality, be it in the name of Islam, Christianity or any other ideology. As for interreligious relations, I will oppose any kind of religious mobilization that does not respect the integrity and vulnerability of the religiously other. I will also oppose any kind of political religion that aims at world hegemony in the name of one faith. Absolutist forms of religion can simply not be reconciled with peaceful multireligious coexistence. These are just a few examples of where the limit to legitimate moral disagreement (in my view) should be drawn: against any kind of religious attitudes or actions that violate the integrity of the individual, or the religiously other. In my interpretation, Christian belief supports such a position, which can draw inspiration from Jesus Christ’s bordertranscending practice and his enduring care for the vulnerable individual. But I admit that I would perhaps not have seen this as clearly, were it not for Enlightenment critique of oppressive and intolerant religion, and modernity’s focus on the integrity of the individual. Oddbjørn LEIRVIK is an associate professor in interreligious studies at the Faculty of Theology, University of Oslo. He is an ordained Lutheran pastor and a former general secretary of the Student Christian Movement (SCM) in Norway (from 1979 to 1983). This article is based on his lecture prepared for the conference “Young People as Agents of Muslim–Christian Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue,” held by the World Student Christian Federation (WSCF) Europe and the Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations (FEMYSO), in cooperation with the Student Christian Movement (SCM) in Norway, in October 2004. His email address is o.b.leirvik@teologi.uio.no.

222

Jamie MORAN •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Hard Wakan

It is important to situate the most essential values of human life in a frame that illumines what they ‘really’ are, and what they are not.

I. Moral Values: What They Are Not Modern understanding and practice of morality seems stuck on one or another of three basic stances: a morality that is too harsh, punitive, rigid (authoritarianism); another morality that is too flabby, permissive, weak (liberalism); still another morality that is too above it all, in some romanticized, idealized, or falsely spiritualized ‘world’ that escapes too easily from what is arduous at the ground level, and tends therefore to be either facile about the challenge of that level, or cruel in expecting too much from it. Authoritarianism is a disease of ‘heart,’ liberalism a disease of ‘mind,’ and being above-it-all a disease of ‘soul.’ Authoritarians are hot, but blind, in heart; liberals are cold, but sophisticated, in mind; above-it-alls are elevated, but dissociated, in soul. Most people, if they are honest, will be able to identify which of these three is their more likely ‘home.’ But we can also jump around from position to position, like musical chairs. Thus, sometimes people start authoritarian and, discovering the secret fear and violence in authoritarianism, turn liberal; or, they start liberal, and discovering the hidden sentimentality and selfishness in liberalism, turn authoritarian. Sometimes those who are above-it-all, discovering the secret evasion (safety-seeking) and baseless arrogance in this position, simply become disillusioned and embrace cynicism, once their beautiful bubble gets punctured by reality’s sharp edge: then they glory in tearing off the wings of everyone else’s butterfly. Authoritarianism is quintessentially about a heart that cares in the wrong way: it wants to coerce love, truth, goodness. It does not trust the freedom of the human person. It often produces a cramped, inhibited human being, who is offended if other people are too free: they must conform and be cramped, too.

223

Oddbjørn LEIRVIK: Christian–Muslim Dialogue

222

Jamie MORAN •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Hard Wakan

It is important to situate the most essential values of human life in a frame that illumines what they ‘really’ are, and what they are not.

223

Jamie MORAN: Hard Wakan

Liberalism is quintessentially about a mind that values its freedom to range widely, but will not engage the difficult and the intractable as it impinges on the heart; authoritarianism at least feels this difficulty and intractability, but it is too afraid of its danger, and seeks an un-free, formulaic solution. By contrast, liberalism funks the challenge and skates over it, leaving the problem ‘free’ as a sign of its own (profound) indifference to it. Liberals ultimately are self-indulgent, and leave others to do as they want out of non-engagement with the things in existence that throw us all together in very tough and binding ways. Being above-it-all is quintessentially an abuse of the ‘intimations of immortality’ WORDSWORTH famously referred to, in that it is about a soul that wants its natural sense of beauty, potency, and possibility, not to be ‘disfigured’ or ‘limited’ by life’s losses, ugliness, and need for sacrifice. Thus this soul prioritizes joy over suffering, life over death, and more important, expansion over restriction. If the authoritarian is over-aggressive and under-sexed (which is why sexual lust and lasciviousness so often explode out when the authoritarian is trying most fervently to keep to the party line), while the liberal is over-sexed and under-aggressive (which is why aggressive nastiness so often explodes out when the liberal is fervently trying to be tolerant, but this tolerance is questioned), then the above-it-all is in a lovely cocoon wafting on clouds, yet one fashioned by a pride that thinks this cocoon makes them above all honest need, and reinforced by a vanity that allows its glory and other positive attributes to be over-estimated—an inflation which holds up only so long as the ever-higher trip does not eventually have to ‘fall to earth.’ Authoritarians and liberals may dispute with each other, but the above-it-all is beyond all that; they have the octane fuel that places them outside of all that mess and contention, as they are superior to it. Mytho-poetically, authoritarians are “Satanic” (moralistic and accusatory), liberals are “Mephistophelean” (mentalistic and relativist), and above-it-alls are “Luciferian” (narcissistic and omniscient). Black and white; grey; colours with no guts, only pastel. Simplistic and cruel; wishy-washy and unconcerned; too airy and light-weight.

224

Serpent as Substrate

It is easy to be harsh and precisely definite when you are fearfully over-simplifying. It is easy to be permissive and endlessly nuanced when you are selfishly indifferent. It is easy to be in the cosmic pudding when you do not have to touch down in the lowlands. We have all been there, done it, got the T-shirt. That is the statement of what true morality is not. It is not authoritarianism/conservatism, which tries to forcefully suppress the real problem of human existence in its ambiguity; it is not liberalism or relativism, which tries to rationally evade this problem’s bite; it is not being above it all or superiority, which tries to rise higher out of the problem’s weight. None of these ‘answers’ works. They make the problem worse: we need to embrace, not run from, the ambiguity, bite, weight, of the real problem of human existence. For our heart is inescapably ‘bound hand and foot’ to that problem.

II. Moral Values: What They Are The statement of what true morality is starts with the honest, brave, generous, humble, patient, and respectful acknowledgment that the problem of human existence is hard. It cannot be suppressed, evaded, risen above. It has to be engaged. It has to be committed to. It has to be accepted and suffered; there is no way out of it. There is only a way through. Authentic values help us find, and walk, that way. There are two other moralities that do not help this walk. One is the psychopath’s amorality: have a nice day, get out of my way. Psychopathy is interesting not as a clinical disease, but as a false stance in existence’s dilemma. The psychopath’s out-and-out criminality arises from her or his refusal of vulnerability; she or he thinks she or he can get through, or get an advantage, by toughing it out. But there are many reasons why this is false, one being that we need our vulnerability as much as our strength to face up to existence. Another is that we need our sensitivity: we cannot act on the world unless we accept that the world can also act on us. The other morality that does not help the walk is political radicalism, without a corresponding spiritual radicalism to anchor it. We must be prepared to go through hell and high water, to let

225

Jamie MORAN: Hard Wakan

ourselves be changed by the bracing nature of existence, and then we can wisely alter worldly conditions. But it is another illusion to think that external changes of environment, however just and necessary, can entirely take the sting out of being in this world. The problem in human existence has an irreducible core, because it was put there by God, and it was intended. There are many ways to express this most basic existential fact, but Zen does it as well as any: “This life is a fire pit. With what attitude of mind do you think you can avoid being burnt?” True values do not prevent us from being burnt. They help us to get burnt, so that instead of being destroyed by the burning, we are broken and remade by it; burned to ash, hollowed out, rendered transparent, so that a fire and a light and a living water can seize us and bestow upon us a new love, a new creativity, a new truth, a new goodness, one worthy of both our suffering and our genuine potential for greatness. In Hasidic Judaism, they do not speak of a spiritual master, or expert, or learned or upright person; they refer to a person who is ‘proven,’ someone tested and proved by existence’s problem. Morality helps us to go through this, to emerge out on the other side. The testing is hard because it is deep, but then so is the proving it brings. The whole thing is paradoxical, costly, hedged by uncertainty and jeopardy and suspense. Existence puts us on an edge, in a gap, on a cross; but the process justifies itself by its result. Its result is the changed human being. Thus morality, truly understood and practiced, is about the heart. Everything else comes in to it, of course: mind, soul, body, inner and outer, visible and invisible, history and nature, the Cosmos and the Earth. But quintessentially it is driven by and about the heart. The deep heart. The passionate, suffering heart. The brave, willing heart. The heart capable of the most vicious, cowardly, pretentious smallnesses, yet also called to ascend to greatness and descend, plunge all the way down into, depth. For, as Saint MACARIUS of Egypt rightly said, “The human heart is an unfathomable abyss.” Morality addresses one thing only: the struggle—both terrible and beautiful, both fearful and wonderful, both agonized and ecstatic—in the heart, for a new heart, a heart greater and deeper.

226

Serpent as Substrate

Flamenco speaks of the ‘duende’—the struggle in the heart that produces ‘cante hondo,’ deep song; and it says we must ‘bear it in the kidneys.’ BODHIDHARMA said, “You will bear the unbearable and endure the unendurable to reach holiness.” Morality’s true story concerns our deep song, and the long, hard road that leads to our transfiguration, and thus the real divinisation of our humanity. The Lakota call this road ‘hard wakan,’ the sacredness that is unyielding, inflexible, relentless, because it will not cease from smashing us to bits until we are undone and redone, crucified and resurrected. Hard wakan is also God’s ‘heartlessness’ in not giving up on us, on not allowing anything less than our true greatness through our true deepening. It is God’s determination to break our heart, so a new one can be made which will become the home of God’s heart. Morality stabilizes us in this hard walk; keeps us at it, waves the Zen stick at us which just says, walk on. Bear. Endure. Be patient. Persevere to the end. Or in Saint Paul’s incredible words, hope in everything. Yet all hope and all despair burn up before we reach our end. Morality hints at the value of the walk and what profound things, not just for us, but for all of creation, are at stake in it. In the end we will not just see everything as God sees it, a felicity of the holy mind and holy soul, but we will acquire the capacity to love everything as God loves it, and act for that love as God acts, bearing and enduring all things, in a Passion that is only spiritually kindled in the holiness of the heart. The deep heart. Not the heart of superficial attachments, nor driven, deluded and devouring, ‘fallen’ passions. Not even the desiring heart. But the deeply given, suffering heart, taking the hit of existence and struggling to let itself be opened fundamentally, and fundamentally made self-transcending in the true ecstasy, the ecstasy of self-sacrificing and self-sharing love. ‘One who loves, acquires another self.’ ‘For one who loves, what happens to the other happens to the self.’ ‘Love is to rejoice with those who are joyful and mourn with those who grieve.’ Hard wakan is the kindling of fire; and with fire, comes light; and with light, comes living water. From the true black and white comes colour, rich, earthy, and finely shaded. There is no other Way. The easy route doesn’t go anywhere. The Hard Way, alone, moves. 227

Jamie MORAN: Hard Wakan

Once in movement, then mysterious, miraculous, magically transformative powers are released. Rock and Sea, as Celtic Christianity saw the two primal powers in life. The way is hard for the heart because it resists true greatness and depth. Yet it accords to its yearning too, because whatever the falls, errors, weaknesses, illusions, temptations, the heart is buffeted by, there remains in it a spark of that holy fire of divine heart which seeks to fulfil that calling built in. This spark wants release, and thus constantly says to us, against all the odds in this world that say the converse, be great, go deep. God has not made existence a problem to trip up the heart and stop it. Paradoxically, only the wound of existence, as I have always called it, which breaks and remakes every human heart which is subjected to its test, can save and prove that calling. For those who respond to it, the rock is a pillow that comforts and renews, strengthens and encourages. But for the arrogant and falsely self-confident, it is the sharp stone on which they stumble. Morality reveals to us we are a conflicted being, yearning for and called to great-heartedness and depth of heart, but also inclined toward smallness. Every evil passion in the heart—every dishonesty, cowardice, meanness, hatred and hostility, envy and jealousy, luxuriating softness, rationalization, judgmental hardness, inauthenticity, disrespect, pride, vainglory, betrayal and infidelity, lies to self and others, and lack of risk-taking, lack of bearing and enduring—is in a vital sense a failure of the true passion, yet passion must carry on and grow through the failure to something not merely its converse, but something won from the agonized struggle. Something greater than small-heartedness emerges from the struggle with it, because it has to go deeper really to overcome it. Thus generosity does not just invert or oppose meanness, but by carrying it and suffering it as an inner wound, an inner pain, an inner restriction, gradually overcomes it with something that answers its smallness by having to become deeper. Thus, too, only love is greater than ‘good,’ because it is deeper than ‘evil.’ Love is generous, and above all the other values, because it is ecstatic. To fight and journey in this process of life-long struggle and change is the mark of self-knowledge and self-awareness, of honest self-appraisal, but it is more than that. It is the mark of real

228

human dignity. It is the proof we have not given in or given up with regard to that spark that drives the heart. It is the real spiritual passion. Just as existence wounds us in the sense that we must bear and endure many outer things that are hard, so too must we bear and endure many inner things that are hard. Both are the mark of our heart’s willingness, of our heart’s struggle, through Passion’s conflict within itself of lesser and greater, shallow and deep, inauthentic and authentic, to attain a purified and sanctified passion. A holy passion. Both my Cherokee ancestors and the Eastern Orthodox Christian saint who is among my most admired, DIONYSUS the Areopagite, said: “Fire is in all things, seeking the substance on which it can burn.” In the Cherokee Tradition, the Earth is red because it is created of a substance capable of being kindled by divine fire. If it is the destiny of the heart to catch fire, then morality understood in the true way is what helps us stay with, and dive into, that whole process. When we reach holiness we shed morality, because the fire is in our heart, and the two are and act as one. But morality tells us where we are going, providing both inspiration and constancy on a road that is dusty, long, and hard.

229

Jamie MORAN: Hard Wakan

For the hardest thing facing our heart, ultimately, is not even existence’s dæmonic blow, nor our inner struggle as we engage with and commit to it, but the commandment God will not go back on, which is that our heart grow to the greatness of God’s Heart, through a paradox of our heart’s depth. Our heart rests on emptiness, nothingness, unfathomableness, into which we dread to fall, should we risk love’s self-sacrifice and self-sharing. For in stepping out of self, we sense the giddy feeling of no ground beneath us. Yet, every self-giving action we risk to that abyss brings God’s Fire ever more into it, so that in the end the abyss we fear to fall into, endlessly, becomes the only ground—a ‘groundless’ ground—upholding our frail heart. Yet that proves sufficient. That becomes the indwelling of the divine love, a ‘mad love,’ a ‘suffering love,’ as Russian Christianity describes it. When we can love—not when we are loved—we feel upheld by love. When we act as God’s heart in this world, we know there is a great and deep Heart that upholds our little heart and ultimately will not let it ‘fall,’ but will bring it through a hard journey and battle to a final celebration, a celebration recognizing no winners and losers, no haves and have-nots, but a common destiny shared by, enjoyed by, relied on, by all. Knowing the abyss is not empty, because we have leaned on it and acted from it, is the peace that passes all understanding. It is the heart’s joy, because it signifies a victory. The human heart that houses the divine heart is real freedom, for only love makes us free. The experience of being free to choose or not choose love, important to our struggle as it is, is revealed in the end as a half-way, a necessary half truth. Only love is free. Only love knows. Only love sees. Only love acts. Only love bears and endures everything, for the sake of what it is given to. That is its passion. The holy heart reads hearts, and perceives realistically and compassionately, because it has been in the same desert and crossed it on the same bony track. True values point us there, but we still must walk. We are given to hard wakan. It cannot be magicked away. It leaves scars, but these are also the marks of glory. Jamie MORAN was born in the United States of America, of Red Indian and Celtic descent, but he married and now works in England. At 22, he converted from Tibetan Buddhism to Russian Orthodox Christianity; he works as a therapist and senior lecturer on counselling and psychology at a university in London. He is writing a novel on the conflict between settlers and indigenous peoples in the American West of the XIXth century, and he is a sub-chief in the Cante Tinze (Brave Hearts) Warrior Society of the Oglala Lakota (Sioux) at Pine Ridge, South Dakota. His email address is J.Moran@roehampton.ac.uk.

230

Andrzej RASZYK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Father and Son

According to the Bible, one of the most influential books not only of past generations but of our times as well, the wealth of a father can be judged by the number of his sons. Many times it seems that there is no greater joy for a man than to have a male descendant. This relationship, however, works in both directions: the delight of the son is to fulfil the will of his father. The tragedy of the father is to lose or to sacrifice his son, for whatever reason.

Your Will Be Done, Father Nowadays, as many times before in history, the epic of the Patriarch Abraham’s sacrifice in Genesis is presented as an outstanding example and model of heroism which is far beyond our everyday usual human understanding. Fortunately for Isaac, the necessity of the sacrifice is lifted from Abraham at the final moment. But later in history, mirroring this story, there is a Father who actually offers His Son—God, Godself. The son, who chose to sacrifice His own life following the instructions of His Divine Father, is called the Son of God, or Jesus Christ. And this very Son many times speaks about His full and ultimate commitment to the will of God the Father: “I and the Father are one. The one who sees me sees my Father as well.” Voluntarily he offers himself up to His Father: “Your will must be done, not mine.” The answer of God to all this is: “You are my own dear Son. I am well pleased with you.” It is a short, but nevertheless characteristic, description of the Father and Son relationship in Biblical understanding. Using that description as a lens for our own times, we can easily notice that a tragic conflict situation has developed between the two mentioned persons. In our culture as well, we are spectators to the heroic fight between fathers and their sons.

231

Jamie MORAN: Hard Wakan

230

Andrzej RASZYK •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Father and Son

231

Andrzej RASZYK: Father and Son

Serpent as Substrate

Who Is My Father?

Fight for Blessing

Literature (fiction) is for many of us a deep and truly personal experience. Reading is not just an escapist indulgence; it can conversely be an attempt to solve our problems by integrating accumulated knowledge and wisdom into our own lives— learning the hard lessons of experience vicariously rather than first-hand. The more we read books, the more we are looking in literature for ready recipes or ready-made solutions for our real-life situations. In the past, the only literature many people had access to was the Bible, so this became the common source from which most role models were drawn. Those who grew up in the Christian tradition were told to follow the good example of Jesus Christ. Even if they could not read the stories themselves, illiterate people of previous ages could look at the frescos on the interior and exterior walls of their churches and find there the stories of the Bible in a pictorial form (the so-called biblia pauperum, or poor people’s Bible). In the same way as all those people over all those centuries were guessing at the meaning of those stories, we also can read the same Bible stories and make our own investigations into their significance. In the meantime, though, our possibilities have multiplied and we are encouraged to reach for other books as well. The fertile soil of our minds is watered by many diverse literary founts. Examples which might first come to our mind are: Honoré DE BALZAC with his Till Eulenspiegel effect and his novel, Reptile. Or Edgar Allan POE with his collected works, and his grief after Ligea. Other excellent examples can be: Charles BAUDELAIRE (whose poems are best read in a darkening graveyard scenario, starting at dusk). Or, Milan KUNDERA, with his beautiful erotic descriptions. Perfume by Patrick SÜSKIND; Tortilla Flat by John STEINBECK; the writings of Aldous HUXLEY and Jerzy KOSIN´SKI; and other authors too numerous to mention, all left their mark on the way we perceive the world today. They form the basis of a rich EuroAmerican literary tradition, a wealth of stored knowledge available for our use.

During the last centuries men left their house to defend, or to fight for the independence of, their nation and homeland. While the fathers were fighting, the sons were left alone in the house with their mothers, who were preparing them for the next patriotic self-sacrifice. Later the industrial revolution came, and the fathers often spent sixteen hours a day in the workshop, or in later ages, in the factory. The fathers, the story-tellers, the men who passed on legends, cultural epics, heroic poems, myths, who helped with preparations for initiation rituals—they were missing. Due to these revolutionary changes, the caring and respectful relationship between father and son slowly began to erode. It was replaced by a more distant relationship, one where the son no longer strove to fulfil the will of the father, but rather to satisfy his own needs and desires. As the role of the father figure diminished, the contemporary notion of the father-and-son relationship sharply diverged from the original Biblical model. In the Bible we find the approval of the father, the bestowing of his blessing, as a very important event which could have an enormous influence upon the future life of all his sons. Back to Genesis: Jacob, with the help of a little treachery, received the parental blessing of Isaac, a blessing which was later confirmed in his fight with Yahwe. There he received the name Israel, which literally means “the person who struggles with God.” So even there we find human relationships falling short of the divinely-modelled relationship between Father and Son. Tragically, in this fallen world dysfunctional relationships have become the norm; we can no longer speak of the ideal parental bond, but only of its numerous mutations.

232

Influential Anxiety As literature helps us to understand life, so too can literary analysis carry over into life-analysis. Recognising “malformed” offspring throughout literary generations, we gain an awareness of the disfigured relationship between “father” and “son,” antecedent and “procedent”, which has seeped into our culture and mindset and now governs our perception of the world.

233

Andrzej RASZYK: Father and Son

Harold BLOOM, professor of humanities at Yale University and professor of English literature at New York University, developed a theory of poetry which is based on six relations. These relationships concern the poem which was first—the father—and the poem which was created under its influence—the son. They are described in his renowned work, the Anxiety of Influence. He first and foremost speaks about the term clinamen, a kind of poetic misreading. It means that the precursor and his son are in harmony up to a certain moment, but then the son swerves to take a new path, which he believes the father should have chosen. Tessera, another of his important terms, describes completion and antithesis. The poet uses terms from her or his parents, but with a different or opposite meaning, as if the original work did not follow them far enough. Kenosis in his poetic and literary vocabulary depicts a reduction from divine to human status, a motion of discontinuity. The latter poem empties out, humbles the poet’s godhood, but at the same time it lowers the position of the previous, parental poem as well. Demonization is another crucial phenomenon which basically reduces the uniqueness of the earlier work and at the same time, of the earlier author. It implies the parent could not fully grasp the implications of the power underlying her or his poem. Askesis is a movement of self-purgation which seeks to reach the final state of solitude. In this, the poet tries to forget about her or his human and cultural endowment in order to separate herself or himself from her or his parent, mother or father. All this culminates in the term apophrades, which describes the sudden return of the dead. It is the name of the impression we get, upon reading a son-poem, that the father poet actually wrote it himself. It is a cannibalistic effect, as if the son consumes the father, subjugating him to the role of a dependent. These are BLOOM’s six revisionary ratios; generally they do not occur in isolation, but rather as an admixture in any given poem. One of them, however, tends to dominate. Similarly, one poem can be influenced by several ante-poems, but we can surely trace back the one important parent, mother or father. Likewise, as human sons and daughters attempt to assert their independence from their antecedents, both biological and cultural, they manifest a complex ménage of relationships: continuity and discontinuity, domination and subjugation, community and isolation. 234

Serpent as Substrate

Absence of the Father While reading Fight Club, the excellent debut novel of Chuck PALAHNIUK (1996), some passages directed my attention again to the old subject of the father-and-son relationship. I was in particular struck by the crucial sentence, which one hears repeated so often: If you are male, and if you are a Christian (and live in America), your father is surely your model of God. Everything is correct so far. Constant apophrades—the poet makes a full circle. The son fills in the shoes of his father. The human father becomes the archetype for the heavenly father. The dilemma shows up in the next line: And if you never know your father, if your father bails out, or dies, or is never at home, what do you believe about God? Then, what do you end up doing? Most probably, you start to spend your life searching for a father and for God. In such a situation, the son exists in a vacuum. He cannot follow, cannot abound, cannot reverse or cannot even react. Lacking such a figure, the available substitutes are meagre. The initiation ritual at best becomes a computer game; role models become a collage of pop culture heroes. Thus the common mythology of the tribe is reduced to a mere collection of cartoons. Hence our present-day predicament: If God is to be understood primarily as a father, and we can no longer understand fatherhood, how can we possibly comprehend God? Few questions could better encapsulate the anguish and alienation experienced by those to whom both God and father are strangers.

Numbered with the Grains of Sand It is not enough to be numbered with the grains of sand on the beach. Let us now trace back the main character in Fight Club, Tyler DURDEN. In his way of thinking we can find many important and useful conclusions. For example, what happens if God does not like us? What happens if we are God’s middle children? It does not seem too farfetched to believe that God hates us. But this is not even absolutely the worst thing that can happen. Like a small child, Tyler DURDEN also considers getting God’s attention by being bad or evil, since this would be a much better

235

Andrzej RASZYK: Father and Son

situation than getting no proper attention at all. In many senses, God’s hate is much better than God’s deadly indifference. The different poetic relationships mentioned earlier, especially askesis and demonization, captivated Tyler DURDEN. He employs them as an effective weapon against his own father. We can thoroughly examine his methodology and his main aims: “Burn the Louvre and wipe your ass with the Mona Lisa.” In this way, it seems at least, God would know our names. In the book, the very project of Tyler DURDEN is called Mayhem. This elliptically refers to the Biblical Manachem or Menachem in the Old Testament, which literally means: the person who comforts me. We can read in a short note about king of Judah that he did what the Lord considered evil (2Kings 15,18). But to comfort the conscience of Tyler DURDEN, he tells himself that this person rightly got the attention of God Godself.

Prodigal Son It is obvious enough that in the minds of a number of our contemporaries, the excellent movie Fight Club was not clearly understood as a satire, but rather as a peculiar solution for a specific problem—where children are growing up playing on the streets with a key hanging around their necks; when the family is no longer the firm foundation of society. We are witnesses to the degeneration of one distinct stage of human development: youth. Young people are self-destructing, rotting, uncontrollably metastasising—but with no chance for real development. This is a paraphrase of the words of Federico FELLINI, from one of his letters, where he writes about the root causes of Fascism and Nazism. Ignorance, spiritual poverty, and idiotic wishes: they are the foundations of treacherous ideology. Without a proper relationship to those who come before, we cannot properly perceive our own role in the world around us. Without a valid source on which to draw, we are eternally condemned to distortions and misrepresentations, cumulatively pushing us further and further from the truth. And, there is more. In a global village, it is difficult to be noticed in a proper sense. Terrorist groups are trying to get attention by

using more and more sophisticated ways, to let people know about their demands, be they just or unjust. But in a world full of aimless deaths, we can still detect small lamps of hope, like the Bible, our culture, or literature as a whole. Tyler DURDEN, when finishing his lecture about his philosophy, used the following sentence: “If the prodigal son had never left home, the fatted calf would still be alive.” Suggested Reading BLOOM Harold, The Anxiety of Influence. New York, 1973. BLOOM Harold, A Map of Misreading. New York, 1975. DOBRACZYN´SKI Bartl/omiej, III Rzesza Popkultury i inne eseje (Third Reich of Pop Culture, and Other Essays). Kraków, 2004. HUXLEY Aldous, Brave New World. New York, 1998. KOSIN´SKI Jerzy, The Painted Bird. New York, 1995. KUNDERA Milan, The Unbearable Lightness of Being. New York, 1999. PALAHNIUK Chuck, Fight Club. New York, 1996. POE Edgar Allan, The Complete Tales and Poems. New York, 1982. STEINBECK John, Tortilla Flat. New York, 1995. Andrzej RASZYK is an Evangelical-Lutheran from Poland. He studies Polish literature and language at Silesia University. His specialisation is comparative literature. His email address is araszyk@o2.pl.

236

237

Serpent as Substrate

Adam PRYOR •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Am I Going to Hell?

Universal Essentialization and its Implications as Applied to the Problem of Soteriological Eschatology “Are you saved?!?” I could hear the man shouting at me from the street corner. Amidst the beauty of the blue sky and the warm Louisiana summer, the shouts of clattering evangelists fill the air. As I look around from my car that idles at the red light, I see at least twenty people standing around this busy intersection. They all have cans that they are shaking, and the cacophony of questions rushes toward me like the clattering of church bells. “Have you been saved?” “Are you and your loved ones going to Heaven?” “Are you a true Christian?” “The end is near!” Finally, one of the members of this zealous group knocks on my window. I roll down my window and he tells me, “Please give a donation for the construction of the new sanctuary for New Hope Baptist Church, and in return we will pray for the salvation of your soul.” Just at that moment, the light turned green and I sped off. However, as I reflect back upon this isolated incident, I have begun to realize that these few Christians standing on the side of the road were asking some profound questions. It makes me question: have I been saved? Are my family and friends actually going to heaven? What happens to us after we die?

What is Eschatology? All these questions deal with the broader topic of eschatology. George FORELL defines eschatology as the study of “the ultimate destiny of humanity and the world.”1 The “ultimate destiny of humanity” is certainly not a small topic; in this regard, eschatology deals with questions about death, resurrection and eternal life. However, as Jürgen MOLTMANN says, “The real heart of 1 FORELL George W., The Protestant Faith. Philadelphia, 1960. 228.

238

eschatology, and the basic concept which constantly employs with varying content, is doubtless to be found in the promise and expectation of what is known as the ‘Kingdom of God’ and the ‘lordship of God’.”2 This essentially means that the most central concept of eschatology is salvation through Jesus Christ. Theologians’ opinions about salvation throughout history are both varied and divided. However, out of the plethora of thoughts that theologians have raised with reference to salvation and eschatology, one point remains clear within all Christian eschatological hopes: the only way to achieve salvation is through Jesus Christ. As Gregory BOYD puts it so clearly, “There is no salvation outside of Christ.”3 Past the point that we can only achieve salvation through Christ, though, theological thought on the matter of salvation is a diverse subject. When we think about salvation, the first question that comes to our mind is, whom does God save? This is certainly not an easy question to answer. However, when we try to answer this question, only two responses come to mind: God only saves some people, or God saves everyone.

Conflict in Scripture At this point, we have reached the central question of salvation in regards to eschatology, and we have found the two answers that can resolve it. However, each of these answers leads to radically different points of view. Although both of these answers are viable, I believe there is more Biblical and logical support for the concept of universal salvation. This is not to say that it is impossible to support the concept that God saves some people while some people are damned. We see many passages throughout Scripture that could support this point of view. For example, in Mark 9,43 Jesus says, “If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.” There are examples like this one from Mark throughout the New Testament of the bible. Another example can be found in Matthew 7,13–14 where Jesus says, “The gate is wide and the road is easy that leads to destruction, and there are many who take it. For the 2 MOLTMANN Jürgen, Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology. Minneapolis, 1967. 216. 3 FORELL, 237.

239

Adam PRYOR: Am I Going to Hell?

gate is narrow and the road is hard that leads to life, and there are few who find it.” A final example comes from Revelation 14:11, “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever. There is no rest day or night.” All of these passages seem to suggest a dichotomy within a person; they suggest that some people will achieve eternal salvation and reach the Kingdom of God, while others will not. The concept that some people are saved and some people are damned makes sense logically as well. After all, God did give us the free will to accept or reject God’s love for us. If we say that God saves everyone, does this not undermine a person’s free will and the importance of the choice that this person must make to either accept God and salvation or reject it?3 Certainly all of these questions and points are valid concerns in opposition to a universal homecoming for humans. However, I believe there is a stronger case that we can make for universal salvation. Direct support for universal salvation in Scripture is not easy to find. We see the actual term apokatastasis panton (which is the Greek term for the idea of universal salvation) once in the New Testament. However, the reference to the idea of universal salvation in this particular passage in Acts is only referring to the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.4 Yet, there are passages in the New Testament that do make a more sound case for universal salvation. We can find a Biblical example supporting this concept in 1Corinthians 15,24–28. In the passage, Paul writes that God will reign over the world until a time when “all God’s enemies are under God’s feet,” and God will be “all in all.” This passage is clearly referring to a universal homecoming that is not limited to any particular group of people; rather it is a universal homecoming that describes the salvation of all things at a time when God is in all things. There are other passages throughout the New Testament that support the idea of universal salvation as well. One such passage can be found in John 17,22–24. In these verses, John is quoting Jesus as he is in prayer to God. In the passage, Jesus is asking that God show all the people of the world God’s love for them.

4 SCHWARZ Hans, Eschatology. Grand Rapids, 2000. 338.

Serpent as Substrate

Traditional Concepts of Universal Salvation Since we can interpret scripture in so many different ways, it is difficult to justify a soteriological issue, much less universal salvation, without the aid of theology and reason in addition to Biblical interpretation. Many theologians over time have both proposed the concept of universal salvation and questioned the concept of a final judgment, in the sense that it results in eternal damnation or eternal salvation. One such theologian is Jürgen MOLTMANN. He states, “It is essential to take the universal horizon of hope and promise embracing all things.”5 He also shows us that we can relate the concept of salvation in the Greek, to the Hebrew concept of shalom. Although this does not seem particularly significant, this connection asserts that salvation is not just something related to the soul, but it relates to all creation.6 Karl BARTH also makes an interesting plea for universal salvation. BARTH emphasizes the grace of God that is upon everyone. In this way, he argues that each person is predestined toward grace.7 Although both of these theologians make interesting arguments in favor of universal salvation neither one seems satisfactory. Both seem to fall into the classic pitfall that I described earlier: if we say that everyone is saved, does this not undermine a person’s free will and the importance of the choice that one must make to either accept God and salvation or reject it? For both BARTH and MOLTMANN the answer to this question must be yes. Both men are promoting a theology that is inadequate in its preservation of a person’s freedom. Although this seemingly supports an eschatological outlook that promotes some sort of final judgment, this is not necessarily true. In refuting the eschatological perspective of BARTH and MOLTMANN, we reach a stumbling point in the ideas of theologians like FORELL who believe that there is a final judgment. Who are we, as persons, to limit God’s love for us? We have no right (in a theological sense) to dictate to God how God may or may not love us. However, in asking this question we seem to be right back at the point where we started. Since there is so much contradiction in Scripture and diversity of theological thought that leaves unresolved questions, it seems that we cannot say there is a better argument for either eschatological outlook in regards to final judgment or universal salvation. 5 MOLTMANN, 220. / 6 MOLTMANN, 329. / 7 SCHWARZ, 345.

240

241

Adam PRYOR: Am I Going to Hell?

Dichotomy and Universal Essentialization Yet Paul TILLICH, in his Systematic Theology, presents an argument for universal salvation that makes it a far better eschatological outlook than the alternative. TILLICH asserts it is illogical that a loving God would send only some people toward eternal salvation. Rather than accepting a straight salvation for all people, TILLICH describes salvation through his concept of “essentialization.”8 TILLICH describes essentialization as “profoundly dialectical.”9 When referring to this term, TILLICH means “a creative synthesis of a being’s essential nature with what it has made of it in its temporal existence.”10 Now, what does that mean in English? Essentially, TILLICH is explaining the problem with the traditional concept of universal salvation. As MOLTMANN, BARTH, and others before them have described, we see that God saves us in our entirety. In the eschatological perspective of a final judgment the same issue is raised, although it can be seen in the negative: one is either wholly saved or wholly damned. However, this concept of total salvation or total damnation is not a factor for TILLICH, since he describes this type of holistic view as “making the finite infinite.”11 Rather than saying that God either completely saves or completely condemns a person, TILLICH proposes his concept of essentialization. This concept is an attempt to undercut the stigma of absoluteness that we traditionally apply to salvation. It is showing that one is neither completely saved nor completely condemned. Perhaps an example will help to clarify this point. Imagine that there is a candle in a long dark hallway. At the point where the candle is sitting, there is a point of pure light. However, as you move away from the candle, the amount of light that the candle is emitting grows less and less, and the darkness that surrounds you is ever increasing. Eventually, you will reach a point where the light of the candle cannot reach anymore and complete darkness envelops you. Now, if we imagine that the light represents goodness and the dark represents evil in our lives, then we have just described TILLICH’s concept of essentialization. For TILLICH (and the Christian faith), everybody is both righteous and a sinner; no one is completely good nor completely evil. 8 SCHWARZ, 344. 9 TILLICH Paul, Systematic Theology. Chicago, 1963. Vol. 3. 406. 10 SCHWARZ, 344. / 11 TILLICH, 3:407.

242

According to TILLICH, at the time of judgment all of the good things, the light, in a particular person are subject to eternal salvation. Conversely, all of the bad things that exist within our lives are subject to eternal damnation. Since one is neither completely condemned nor completely saved, the concept of essentialization is, as TILLICH said, “particularly dialectical.”12 From this eschatological perception, universal salvation still exists without undermining human freedom. The eschatological view of a two-fold outcome for eternity is ever present in Jesus’ urgency for all people to “make an immediate decision here and now.” to follow God.13 We see this urgency expressed in passages throughout the Gospels, such as Matthew 8,22 where Jesus says, “Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their own dead.” However, TILLICH’s universal essentialization does not undermine one’s free will or the urgency of Jesus’ call in the gospels. One is still free to make choices either for or against God. However, because of God’s unlimited love for us, we are all, to some extent, saved. In addition to the apparent logical sensibility of universal essentialization, we can also support the concept through Scripture. For instance, Genesis 1 states that as God created all 12 TILLICH, 3:406. 13 BRAATEN Carl E. – JENSON Robert W. (eds.), Christian Dogmatics. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984. 491.

243

Adam PRYOR: Am I Going to Hell?

things God considered them good, and since God created all of the things on the earth this means that all things that God created are in their most basic sense good. When we extend this concept to eternal damnation, we realize that God would be damning something that God already had deemed good! “Even the saint remains a sinner and needs forgiveness and even the sinner is a saint insofar as one stands under divine forgiveness.” is an example TILLICH himself used to describe his eschatological perspective.14 Yet, no matter how we describe it, universal essentialization is certainly the best eschatological perspective with regard to universal salvation; it promotes the ideals of universal salvation without undermining the importance of one’s decision to accept or reject the love and grace of God. Suggested Reading BOYD Gregory A. – BOYD Edward K., Letters from a Skeptic. Colorado Springs, 1994. FORELL George W., The Protestant Faith. Philadelphia, 1960. MOLTMANN Jürgen, Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology. Minneapolis, 1967. SCHWARZ Hans (BRAATEN Carl E. – JENSON Robert W., eds.), Christian Dogmatics. Philadelphia, 1984. SCHWARZ Hans, Eschatology. Grand Rapids, 2000. TILLICH Paul, Systematic Theology. Chicago, 1963. Adam PRYOR is originally from Baton Rouge, Louisiana, U.S.A., and is a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. He is working toward a double major in philosophy and theology with a minor in sacred music studies at Lenoir-Rhyne College in Hickory, North Carolina. He is also a member of the Lenoir-Rhyne Chapter of the Lutheran Student Movement. His email address is PryorA@mail.lrc.edu.

14 TILLICH, 3:408.

244