No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
Where does one look for theological thinking in the Ecumenical Movement today? The first answer is obvious. From virtually its beginning, the Movement comprised two wings, whose respective functions are clearly enough indicated by the names under which they began to operate. The Life and Work element promotes the greatest possible degree of cooperation; the Faith and Order component works for theological and ecclesial understanding and consensus. For many reasons, among which is certainly to be reckoned the powerful presence of so-called Third World Churches as members, chief attention has swerved perceptibly to the Life and Work aspect: social justice evokes more interest than justification by faith, and the tendency is to be more concerned with bread than with God. Despite this, the theological work of Faith and Order continues.
page 134 note 2 Carey, K. M. (ed): The Historic Episcopate (1954), p. 108.Google Scholar
page 134 note 3 Catholic–Methodist, Roman ‘Growth’, 1976, p. 98.Google Scholar
page 135 note 4 Louvain, F. & O. Commission, 1971, p. 86.
page 135 note 5 ibid., p. 82.
page 135 note 6 Anglican–Lutheran, 1973, p. 84.
page 135 note 6a Lutheran–Roman Catholic, 1972, p. 66.
page 136 note 7 See H. W. Montefiore, op. cit., p. 105.
page 136 note 8 Dupuy in Concilium 4/4, ‘Is there a real Distinction between the Function of Priests and the Function of Bishops?’
page 136 note 9 One Baptism, One Eucharist, and a mutually recognised Ministry — F. & 0. Paper 73, 1975. (A version of this important Paper, revised in the light of comments offered by the Churches, will be submitted to F. & O. Commission in 1982.)
page 137 note 10 Anglicans–Roman Catholics: Ministry.p. 13.
page 137 note 11 Louvain, p. 82; Roman Catholics–Methodists: Growth, p. 79.
page 137 note 12 Butler, Bp. B.C. in One in Christ, 1969, no. 1.Google Scholar
page 137 note 13 Dupuy, op. cit.
page 138 note 14 Anglicans–Orthodox, 1977, p. 27.
page 138 note 15 CD I/I, §4.1.4.
page 138 note 16 Co. of Compiègne (833); Co. of Meaux (845).
page 139 note 17 Louvain, p. 97.
page 140 note 18 So ad Gentes, § 5.
page 140 note 19 Cf. the radical view of Schillebeeckx, E.: Ministry (1981)Google Scholar: ‘the priest is simply the person marked out by the local community as its leader, and ordained’; the rule should be: ‘take de facto leaders and make them priests.’
page 141 note 20 N.b. the biblical prototype, Jn 20.21, denotes a parallelism of function; but thus early the device of parallelism is deflected to apply to structure.
page 141 note 21 This parallelism has been elsewhere noted: Louvain, p. 82, says: ‘in choosing and sending men to act and speak on his behalf, Christ continued (a) personal ministry, setting a precedent for the Church’; Ganoczy, (One in Christ, 1970, p. 386)Google Scholar says: ‘a Pope playing a moderating presidential and directing role … would be analogical to the relation of Jesus to his apostles, though not expressly based on any historical command of Jesus.’