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: 17 February 2016
Ecumenical networks are largely taken for granted by those whom they involve. The longer one is active in church life, particularly at national or international level, the more significant they become. The different layers of responsibility and the timespan involved in personal friendships are both integral to any understanding of them. Recent discussion within the WCC about the ‘reconfiguration of the ecumenical movement’ has raised once again the basis of representation in the council, a topic which goes back to some of the earliest discussions about its structure in the mid 1930s. The key issue is the tension between a relatively informal grouping, based on networks of people who already know one another, and a formal structure, based on the official representatives of the churches – which also assumes that its members will be churches rather than Christian associations of various kinds. It is a commonplace of ecumenical historiography that the formation of the WCC depended heavily on a pre-existing network of personal friends. But very often there is relatively little analysis of its nature. In fact, it is inherently difficult to analyse, because the official records give next to no information about it; better sources are letters and memoirs, notwithstanding any personal bias. Such bias may actually be key evidence. This paper uses the discussions about a future WCC in the 1930s as a focus for analysing the networks involved. The issue is well summed up in a letter from Henry van Dusen to William Temple in July 1938 about whether the proposed World Council should be exclusively composed of official church representatives. Van Dusen, who clearly felt personally threatened by this, pleaded for the inclusion of co-opted members, since without them ‘elements of vital importance for the Church’ would never find their way into the Council. The issue of how to secure sufficient women, young prople and the non-ordained has never gone away.
1 Van Dusen to Temple, 17 July 1938, General Secretariat Correspondence, WCC Archives, Geneva.
2 Clements, K., Faith on the Frontier: A Life of J. H. Oldham (Edinburgh and Geneva, 1999), 333.Google Scholar
3 Visser’t Hooft, W. A., Memoirs (London and Philadelphia, PA, 1973), 78–9.Google Scholar
4 Bilheimer, R. S., Breakthrough: The Emergence of the Ecumenica Tradition (Grand Rapids, MI, and Geneva, 1989), 14Google Scholar, quoting Dusen, H. P. Van, For the Healing of the Nations: Impressions of Christianity around the World (New York, 1940), 140–1.Google Scholar
5 Visser’t Hooft, Memoirs, 9–22 29–33 35–6, 40–1
6 Rouse, Ruth, ‘Voluntary Movements and the Changing Ecumenical Climate’, in eadem and Neill, S. C., eds, A History of the Ecumenical Movement, 1517–1948 (London, 1954), 309–49, at 343–4.Google Scholar
7 Woods, E. S. and MacNutt, F. B., Theodore, Bishop of Winchester (London, 1933), 19–20, 25–8 32–3 109–11 118–25 138–56 162–3 286–92;Google Scholar Sundlder, B., Nathan Soderblom: His Life and Work (London, 1968), 337–8, 366.Google Scholar
8 Jasper, R. C. D., George Bell, Bishop of Chichester (London, 1967), 11, 13–15 18–25 31, 59–60;Google Scholar Sundkler, , Söderblom, 218–33.Google Scholar
9 Blane, A., ed., Georges Florovsky: Russian Intellectual and Orthodox Churchman (New York, 1993), 37–41, 46–7 58–60 72–4.Google Scholar
10 Bria, I.and Heller, D., eds, Ecumenical Pilgrims: Profiles of Pioneers in Christian Reconciliation (Geneva, 1995), 96–102.Google Scholar
11 Bent, Ans van der, ‘Dibelius, Otto’, in Lossky, N. et al., Dictionary of the Ecumenical Movement (Geneva, 1991), 295Google Scholar, states that he was present at Edinburgh in 1910. As he was not an official delegate, he was probably a steward, since his name appears on a list of suggested stewards: see Stanley, Brian, The World Missionary Conference, Edinburgh 1910 (Grand Rapids, MI, 2009), 7Google Scholar, citing Letter of W. M. Cargin, 15 March 1910, SCM Archives, Box A21, University of Birmingham Library.
12 Dibelius, O., In the Service of the Lord (London, 1965), 254–60.Google Scholar
13 Ibid. 249, 254–5
14 Sundkler, , Söderblom, 405–7.Google Scholar
15 Jackson, E.M., Red Tape and the Gospel (Birmingham, 1980), 234.Google Scholar
16 Hopkins, C. H., John R. Mott, 1865–1995 (Geneva and Grand Rapids, MI, 1979), 634, 669.Google Scholar
17 Jackson, , Red Tape, 231.Google Scholar
18 Söderblom, N., ‘The Church and International Goodwill’, Contemporary Review 116 (1919), 309–15, at 314 (italics mineGoogle Scholar).
19 Jasper, , Bell, 95–6.Google Scholar
20 Sundkler, , Söderblom, 413–8, quotation at 416.Google Scholar
21 Visser’t Hooft, W. A. The Genesis and Formation of the World Council of Churches (Geneva, 1982), 26.Google Scholar
22 Ibid. 33; Visser’t Hooft dates the last quotation to a meeting of Life and Work at Chamby in 1935.
23 Visser’t Hooft, W. A. and Oldham, J. H., Tite Church and its Function in Society (London, 1937), 118.Google Scholar
24 Ibid. 209; cf. Clements, Faith on the Frontier, 325–7.
25 Hooft, Visser’t, Genesis and Formation, 104.Google Scholar
26 Ibid. 105.
27 Ibid. 50–1; Jackson, Red Tape, 234.
28 Hooft, Visser’t, Genesis and Formation, 62, 65; cf. The First Assembly of the World Council of Churches, Amsterdam 194S (London, 1949), 216–17.Google Scholar
29 Hopkins, Mott, 670.
30 Hooft, Visser’t, Memoirs, 100–4, quotations at 102.Google Scholar