The fact that the last full general council of the Alliance met 12 years ago in Nairobi, Kenya, automatically suggests that the present report should somehow review the main facets of the work accomplished since 1970. To understand what we are about we should set all that in its proper context of the contemporary theological climate, all within the whole oikoumene. Hopefully, such an enterprise would then suggest some pattern of emerging issues so that we could detect future study programmes of relevance for the family of Reformed churches. And yet, to say all that is only to state the ideal. At the outset we should be aware that this report will fall far short of that! Too much has happened for any review to be anything other than fragmentary. And the sheer cultural and theological diversity of our Reformed family scattered over the face of the earth places a variety of question marks alongside any attempt at systematisation of theological issues.

However, something has to be attempted. The present report will provide the committee on theology with one of its principal resource documents as it reviews the theological work of the Alliance and tests new mandates. That committee, composed of many delegates drawn from the Ottawa general council, will expect a certain summary of the main theological activities in which the Alliance has engaged in recent years. Not all can be expected to be familiar with former policies and decisions. Therefore, as we try to grapple with contemporary questions we shall of necessity have to look backwards at the road we have travelled - and perhaps in so doing understand the better what we have been about.

Here, I want to underline the tremendous responsibility thrust upon us as we attempt to locate those particular issues and challenges that confront our member churches throughout the world. Too often I feel we are overly concerned about getting the context right, all with the laudable aim of being relevant, and yet forgetting that the ultimate concern about "context" and "relevance" is rooted in the obedience of the faith. We are not in the last analysis engaged in a speculative venture, playing with ideas. The classic understanding of Reformed theology is motivated by the biblical demand that the gospel of God has to be lived out in responsible obedience. The Reformed accent on the theology of "the word" is directly connected with a vision of the church as the people of God summoned to a life of obedient faith. What is God saying to us and what is God demanding of us in our Christian living today? Translate that question into the contemporary situation of 149 member churches in 78 different countries, representative of all the continents, and we begin to see a little of our responsibility. No formal report can do justice to that.

This leads me to stress the necessary contribution from delegates and members of the committee on theology during our meetings in Ottawa. Much of what is written here has to be supplemented and corrected in live discussion.

Further, we do well to remember that all our thinking and debating and worshipping together in the course of the general council and its attendant committees, takes place within and forms part of a total theological event. We shall all come to Ottawa with specific questions and problems that ought rightly to be brought out into the open. But the very demands made upon us as we think through the theme of the council, "Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory", and the various section themes, will profoundly influence our attitudes on many matters of faith and churchmanship.

At this point, memory suggests that I share a certain cautionary tale from Nairobi 1970. The theme for the Nairobi, general council, "God reconciles and makes free", was worked out in the years 1967-68. At that time we were still struggling with the residue of the death of God theology in all its absurdity. Out of that context was born the conviction that in the Alliance theme for 1970 we should emphasize the reality of God and the centrality of the divine act of reconciliation. This would be a relevant word for the need of the day. But we had overlooked one serious element. We were meeting on African soil and the urgent question of reconciliation between the races and the dominant question of apartheid led not to a series of studies on the doctrine of God and the meaning of salvation, but to what became the major Alliance theme in the post 1970 period - "The theological basis of human rights". And I venture to believe none of us at Nairobi 1970 thought that was going to happen! Little did we realise at that time the quite tremendous build-up of interest and theological excitement that was to follow on over the years.

By analogy, can we learn from the preparatory processes for Ottawa, 1982? The Alliance celebrated its centenary in 1977 with a major world-level consultation with the theme, "The glory of God and the future of man". Out of that emerged an official study programme on the theological significance of "the covenant" and therefore a major emphasis on divine grace and the doctrine of the church, the covenanted people of God. When the executive committee of the Alliance began to probe various suggestions for the 1982 general council theme, the natural progression of thinking moved directly into an emphasis on the kingdom of God. Many contributing influences were at work at this point. The rising tide of concern about evangelism in our churches; the need for a church-centred theology to be corrected by a kingdom-centred theology; the continuing emphasis from the 1977 consultation on "the glory of God"; an awareness that as we move through the eighties we may well experience an increasing sense of cynicism, even despair, as humanity takes stock of the future. And so the theme was born out of a conviction that we need to be aware that the kingdom for which we pray is God's kingdom and the power and the glory are his alone. Only by rightly stressing that the kingdom is God's and not man's may we avoid the perils of a false triumphalism, etc, etc. What then may we expect to come out of Ottawa? The responsible answer to that is, wait and see! But delegates to the council and members of the committee on theology cannot opt out of the responsibility of facing up to the immediate challenges and opportunities confronting our churches in our situation today and assessing how best we may live out the faith wherever God calls us to be. And if we remain true to our heritage in Reformed theology there is a necessary catholic dimension in our belief and action. We do not claim to be the church of Jesus Christ exclusively, but recognise that we are part of the one holy catholic and apostolic church. Immediately the ecumenical question is posed. Whatever decisions are taken at Ottawa carry immediate implications for sister families of churches within the whole oikoumene. We do not live unto ourselves.

Later in the report we shall return to these questions of policy and future study programmes. But at the very outset I am tempted to trail my coat and hazard a guess! Given the various competing interests, the diversity of problems, the opportunities and the crises detectable on all sides, shall we not find ourselves as Reformed confronted by an urgent need to develop theologically and therefore realistically a greater sense of "mutual accountability"? That will imply much more specificity and shape and content for the Reformed family as a family of churches. It will certainly demand that we denounce as utterly false, confessionalism for the sake of confessionalism. On the other hand, if member churches in the family are not prepared to implement the koinonia of the faith at the point of an ever increasing mutual accountability in the faith, sooner or later we shall face the question, a family of churches or a myth? Indeed, if we fail at that point, shall we have anything to contribute at all to the wholeness of the ecumenical movement, seeking the visible unity of the one church of Jesus Christ? In short, the unity of the faith we seek to witness to within the fellowship of our own family of churches and beyond entails a certain deep-going ecclesiastical honesty, which refuses to turn its back on radical issues of disagreement. And that is an inescapable obligation laid upon us all by the very truth of the gospel.

And now what?

The rest of this report contains itemised material, hopefully a record of theological work accomplished, an indication of where we now are in the process of further implementation, as well as those specific issues referred to the general council at the request of the department of theology and the executive committee of the Alliance.

The department of theology

The chairman of the department is Prof Jan Milic Lochman, Switzerland, elected at the Nairobi general council, 1970 and reelected in 1977. The following members of the present executive committee serve on the department: Prof J L Abineno, Indonesia; Rev Sam P Buti, South Africa; Dr Rubens C Dariliao, Brazil; Prof Charles Johnston, Canada; Prof Guus E Meuleman, Holland; Mrs Prakai Nontawasee, Thailand; Prof Daniel Vidal, Spain; Prof George Yule, Australia; Dr R Stuart Louden, Scotland. Annually the full department meets for approximately two days of discussion during the meetings of the executive committee. Between meetings when necessary, decisions have been taken by correspondence. Since assuming my duties with the Alliance in 1965 as theological secretary, I have been privileged to serve the department of theology as executive secretary.

Obviously it is not possible to define in simple terms the complicated and involved responsibilities of a small unit serving a far flung international family of churches. But in addition to the by-laws of the Alliance, the general council of the Alliance at Frankfurt 1964 summarized expectations of the department thus:

To keep in touch with all theological colleges or seminaries of the Reformed family, helping to overcome any isolation, ascertaining needs and problems, and disseminating full information.
To assist churches, in all parts of the world, in unity negotiations.
To assist member churches in relations with Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism, always working in close collaboration with the World Council of Churches, to the end that our churches may participate intelligently and meaningfully in these dialogues.
To disseminate through the bulletin of the department, information about theological work in member churches, negotiations with other communions, interconfessional research, etc.
To assist in the interpretation of the meaning of the Reformed tradition in the present historical and ecumenical situation.
To sensitize, in so far as possible, the theological conscience of the Reformed world. (proceedings, 19th general council, Frankfurt 1964, p. 267.).

Such a statement may stand in need of revision, subject to the judgement and decision of the general council, dependent on whatever fresh mandates may be adopted.

Theological work in areas

With reference to the organizational structure of the Alliance there are two organized areas:

Caribbean and North American area

A theological committee of 21 members meets twice yearly; chairman, Prof Allen O Miller (United Church of Christ, USA). Annually it reports to the area council. Over many years this has proven to be a most useful instrument for research and study, witness the output of papers and publications, dealing not only with theological issues pertinent to the area, but in addition furthering the overall study recommendations of the Alliance world-level executive committee. In 1977, A Christian Declaration on Human Rights (Grand Rapids, MI : Eerdmans), a volume of studies (190 pages) was published by Eerdmans, USA, edited by Allen O Miller. This reflected in depth something of the Caribbean and North American area involvement in the ongoing Alliance study on human rights. At the time of writing, another volume is projected updating the result of the process of research on the biblical and theological understanding of "covenant", again directly related to the Alliance study programme.

European area

Prior to 1973 a European theological commission of 15 members met annually with Prof J K S Reid (Church of Scotland), chairman. At the area council in 1973 it was decided to fuse together the theological commission with the administrative committee of the area. From 1973 to 1980, the chairman was Prof Guus E Meuleman, (Gereformeerde Kerken, Holland), who was succeeded in 1980 by Prof D W D Shaw, (Church of Scotland). Unlike the Caribbean and North American area situation, the European area council meets only infrequently, every seven to eight years, and the theological work of the committee is confined to one annual session of three to four days. Here again the department of theology must acknowledge with gratitude the considerable expenditure of time and energy in working out theological papers that have greatly contributed to Alliance thinking. The christological issue focused at the Amsterdam council in 1973, "Who do you say that I am?" and the "covenant" theme dominated the Poiana Brasov (Romania) council in 1980, "I will be your God, and you shall be my people".

Member churches in general

There are good historical and ecumenical reasons, not to mention geographical considerations, why the Alliance over the generations has not attempted to structure other regions of the world. But in the absence of such organized activity we have to be alert to the ever growing volume of theological work produced on all continents. Reporting to the executive committee of the Alliance in 1981, I felt compelled to write in the following terms: "We must be aware of the massive ongoing theological work throughout the wider membership of the Alliance in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Pacific. Sometimes this involves unofficial groupings of churches, but for the most part it is dependent on the initiative and resources of individual member churches. Illustrations could be - the movement involving covenanting for unity in South Africa, where several of our member churches are strongly committed, or the implications in the contemporary missionary outreach of our churches in South Korea, etc."

"Much more ought to be cited. But in this connection a note of warning has to be sounded. Previous reports have referred to the importance of the department of theology building up a chain of theological correspondents, specially in the nonorganized areas of the world. In the last two years, pressures on staff time and secretarial help have made it impossible to maintain these contacts to our consequent loss of efficiency as a liaison service. In the post-1982 situation of the Alliance, this calls for urgent review, and in the opinion of the writer must be remedied if we are to be relevant as a family of churches at the growing edge of faith and witness."

Fortunately, the response of the 1981 executive committee was positive:

"The executive committee underlines the concern, expressed by the theological secretary in his report, that increasing pressures on office staff time have in recent years made it quite impossible to maintain and develop meaningfully the chain of theological contact persons established over the years in the member churches, and requests that this responsibility be treated as a priority in the post-1982 mandate of the Alliance." Ideas are not lacking as to how this situation can best be remedied, but the cardinal issue is the problem of staff resources and budget.

Interconfessional, world-level dialogues

In the nature of the case, this will be a somewhat lengthy section.

On the occasion of the 1977 centennial consultation of the Alliance, reports on the concluding initial phase of three major dialogues were received by the executive committee:

Reformed/Roman Catholic, "The presence of Christ in church and world" 1970-1977.

Lutheran plus Reformed/Roman Catholic, "The theology of marriage and the problems of mixed marriages" 1971-1977.

WARC/Baptist World Alliance, "Theological Considerations" 1973-1977.

Statement of Motivation

Prior to sending these three dialogue reports to the member churches for official comment and reaction, the Alliance worked out and approved a statement of Reformed motivation. Before examining the results of the various dialogues, we must be aware of the theological assumptions operating in the whole process.

The statement of Reformed motivation was:

"We have to face the question freshly of why WARC is engaged in the ecumenical movement at all. The short answer is that this is the will and command of Jesus Christ our Lord. A longer answer is that, faced by a plurality of churches throughout the world, we have a choice between claiming to be the one true church to which all others ought eventually to come and, on the other hand, seeking the fullness of Christ's church by entering into dialogue and fellowship with those other churches that share with us the gospel. If we may not claim a monopoly of the gospel there is for us no alternative to involvement in the ecumenical movement. Further, the church's existence in its plurality of visible churches is inseparable from its mission to the whole world; and a mission that is expressed in a conflict or competition of voices is no true mission. This is not just the psychological point that the world is not likely to be impressed by a divided witness. It is the theological point that the witness and those engaged in it have lost their integrity if they are content with such a divided witness. The commissioning of the church includes, not only the command to proclaim the gospel, but the promise of Christ's presence in all generations; and we may not seek to obey his command without seeking the fullness of his presence.

"This applies also in particular to the fundamental reason for engaging in... interconfessional dialogues. The motivation for them is, ultimately, God's reconciling initiative in Jesus Christ. Though we must confess that we have repeatedly betrayed the vision of Christian unity and continue to do so, Christians in the Reformed tradition have always claimed to be part of the one holy, catholic and apostolic church, and have prayed and worked for its purity and unity. These interconfessional dialogues are part of the unitive pressure inherent in the Reformed tradition. But the motivation to persist in these dialogues and others is surely not a zeal for corporate merger in general nor a sense of loyalty to the ecumenical vision of our predecessors. We must remain in dialogue for the simple reason that we have been freed by Christ for this joyful, painstaking, arduous activity. As members of his reconciled and reconciling people, we are compelled by his word and Spirit to bring to greater manifestation the glory of God in Jesus Christ and in the common life of those he has joined to himself. Conversely, we are freed to work to overcome more barriers to Christian unity that obscure God's glory. These barriers pose a false scandal for a world that finds ecclesiastical divisiveness an almost insuperable obstacle to believing the church's proclamation. That is why the prayer and thoughtful struggle for greater visible Christian unity is inseparable from our social witness, mission and evangelism: all these activities are the inevitable outworkings of Christ's freeing, correcting and renewing presence in and over his church.

"The growth in mutual understanding represented in these dialogues is not minimal... We therefore urge the study of these reports by members of the churches of the Alliance, and we encourage and most heartily welcome response to them from all levels. Such study and shared responses are indispensable for the continued task of dialogue that Christ wills of his people" (WARC centennial consultation, 1977, ecumenical workshop).

For the very good reason that the challenge of interconfessional dialogue is still with us, we need to ask ourselves, is such a statement still relevant? Are there necessary modifications? Can the vision find greater clarity?

Reformed/Roman Catholic - The presence of Christ in church and world

For seven years (1970-77), the joint Reformed/Roman Catholic commission engaged in intensive work, which was finally compressed into an agreed report of 39 pages. Readers should refer to the document with the above title for details of themes treated: Christ's relationship to the church, teaching authority in the church, the presence of Christ in the world, the eucharist, and the ministry. Out of a mutual desire to respect the integrity of the whole dialogue process and the commitment of both partners, the various reactions received from WARC member churches and the Roman Catholic/Episcopal conferences were examined by the members of the joint commission acting together at a five day meeting in May 1980, and the consequent findings were submitted to the executive committee of the Alliance and the authorities of the secretariat for promoting Christian unity of the Roman Catholic church. In August of that year, the executive committee of the Alliance welcomed the evaluation report noting "the realism and honest appraisal of the critical questions that remain between the Roman Catholic and the Reformed traditions..." While welcoming the agreements achieved on certain issues, the executive committee recognized the necessity of much further work and approved the recommendation that a new phase of conversations be commissioned, authorizing preparatory discussions to be implemented with the secretariat for promoting Christian unity.

The Reformed group charged with the responsibility of planning the second phase was appointed by the president and the chairman of the department of theology: Prof Paul Achtemeier, USA; Prof Jean-Louis Leuba, Switzerland; Dr Fridolin Ukur, Indonesia; and the Rev Richmond Smith (staff). A working session was held in Geneva, September 27-30 1981, with representatives appointed by the secretariat for promoting Christian unity, and the report of that planning group will come before the committee on theology and the general council. At this stage we may note that the recommendations are marked by a high level of seriousness. The plan envisaged is at least five years of work with a final report available presumably by 1988. The overall theme proposed is "Towards the unity of the church in the world of today", which would be worked through having special regard to the distinctive Roman Catholic and Reformed perspectives on central issues of ecclesiology. An examination of the full report in detail points to a clear follow-on from the first phase of the dialogue, "The presence of Christ in church and world". As to methodology, the proposed scheme of work accents the vital importance of a commission yet to be appointed that would adequately represent the theological/cultural variety of the Reformed family.

Lutheran and Reformed/Roman Catholic - The theology of marriage and the problems of mixed marriages

One of the interesting aspects of this particular dialogue project was that prior to entering into conversations with the secretariat for promoting Christian unity of the Vatican, the Reformed and the Lutheran World Federation spent two years in direct conversations to test whether or not both wings of the Reformation had in fact a common theological understanding of Christian marriage. On all counts the findings were unanimously positive. Thereafter commissions were appointed and the work progressed between 1971 and 1976, when the report was published and disseminated throughout the respective church families , leaders wishing precise information on the argumentation and development of the discussion should refer to the report with the above title. Reactions were duly ingathered and the joint evaluation commission met in Rome, October 1980, to assess the total result. The agreed report has sections on: the crisis and challenge of marriage today; the relation of Christ to marriage, with an interesting comment on the attempt to relate together "sacrament" and "covenant" with a view to reconciling two very different understandings of the theology of marriage; the lifelong nature of marriage and the issue of indissolubility; a thorough-going treatment of the problems of mutual pastoral care; concluding with an exposé of the norms of the Roman Catholic church regarding mixed marriages. It is clear that the report evidences both plus and minus points, but the somewhat negative tone of the whole is not to be glossed over - there is a tendency to look back to the past "in a rather static and juridical way". Obviously the touchstone of the whole dialogue is the mutual recognition of the respective churches as church of Jesus Christ. On receiving the evaluation report in August 1981, the executive committee resolved to share the recommendations with sister communions and with the WCC, and quite specifically to request that the issues under (3) below be referred to the planning group on ongoing Reformed/Roman Catholic dialogue. The recommendations were:

That the three Christian world communions encourage the development of case studies on the local and regional level, which describe the experiences of women and men in interchurch marriages, as well as official church practices relating to such marriages.
That the Christian world communions encourage congregational-level, living room conversations on the positive and negative aspects of interchurch marriage, as well as national/regional dialogues on the entire matter.
That the Reformed/Roman Catholic and Lutheran/Roman Catholic joint commissions explore questions of:
1. mutual recognition of ministry
2. mutual recognition of churches, and
3. the theological and philosophical assumptions that inform present practices of canon law and application of church regulations with special reference to the ramification of these questions for interchurch marriage.
That the World Council of Churches (commission and department of faith and order) be encouraged to carry out a study of the various nondoctrinal factors that play a role in interchurch marriages. Such a study should give attention to both the personal and the institutional dimensions involved.
That the respective Christian world communions give special attention to their ecclesial self-understanding, as it relates to the fundamental issue of mutual recognition of churches.

Now with all that said, there is still a certain lingering sense of, could we not have accomplished more? If there is immediate positive value in these findings, it is surely to reinforce the urgency of the intensely difficult task of achieving mutual recognition of churches and ministries. Given the particular context of the dialogue partners the focus is on both the theological and the philosophical assumptions that lie behind canon law. The Reformed have something to contribute in this double-fronted debate and we have to see to it that the discussion does not bypass the crunch-point of that particular theological/philosophical confrontation. One is tempted to add that the methodological insight of the whole Reformation is at stake both in stating the problem and finding the solution.

Reformed/Baptist - theological conversations

The report was published in 1977 and covered the previous four years of dialogue. The contents ranged over the centrality of scripture, the mutual questioning of ecclesiologies, the interrelationships of mission, church and baptism, the Holy Spirit and baptism and membership in the church, with a concluding section on ministry and ministries. The constant question throughout was, should the different understandings of baptism of necessity be church divisive? Reference should be made to the report in full. This particular dialogue has not as yet been jointly evaluated, although a considerable body of reactions from our own member churches is to hand. Last year, I reported how we remain in regular correspondence with the offices of the Baptist World Alliance, but because of a variety of difficulties on the Baptist side, not least the inevitable delay caused by several administrative changes, the Baptist commission has not yet received adequate theological reaction. However, correspondence continues and there is a distinct possibility that we may have more positive developments when we meet in general council, 1982. Meantime we should note that both the department of theology and the executive committee of WARC have made it quite clear that we feel it is incumbent upon us not to proceed unilaterally but to preserve the ecumenical integrity of our relationship in dialogue with the Baptist World Alliance and to act together with our partners when all parties are adequately prepared. We have to bear in mind that both world bodies possess very different structures that in itself makes for delay. Further, there is an important ecumenical issue at stake - the quite crucial centrality of the debate on the nature of baptism touches one of the nerve centres of the whole oikoumene, acceptance of each other because first baptised into Jesus Christ.

(With reference to the immediately following two subsections, as conversations are either at the initial stage or as yet without published reports, I have felt it useful therefore to give more attention to detail).

Anglican/Reformed

The first of a series of four meetings mandated by the Anglican consultative council and WARC took place at St Columba's House, Woking, London, January 19-24 1981. Sixteen participants were present from nine different countries. Cochairmen were the Rt Reverend EJ Tinsley, bishop of Bristol, and the Rev Dr John Huxtable, URC, England. In the event, this proved to be an extremely hard-working and harmonious group. By cutting behind the classic disagreement over the ordering of the church to the foundational understanding of the church as grounded on the sheer grace of God, the way seems to be opening up for a new rapprochement.

The agreed press communiqué is quoted in full:

"The initial consultation met in December 1978. Its report was approved by the Anglican consultative council and WARC in 1979. A central feature of that report was the accent on a new perspective from which to overcome the seemingly intractable problems in Anglican-Reformed conversations: '... a new perspective that sets the questions of church unity against the background of the reign of God inaugurated in the life, death and resurrection of Christ'. In developing this insight the original report stressed, '... all consideration of problems of the church and its unity must begin with inquiry into the nature of the relationship between church and kingdom.' We need to investigate in this connection the church's relation and mission to the world since the kingdom of God is the future of church and world alike.

"In pursuit of this approach, the meeting in January 1981 worked through the following presentations:

"The kingdom, the Messiah and the church's witness in Latin America. A Latin American perspective on christological thinking, by Prof J Andrew Kirk (Anglican);

"The incarnation and the unity of the church, by Prof George S Yule (Reformed);

"Christ, kingdom and church, by Bishop Lesslie Newbigin (Church of South India).

"Discussion was stimulated by initial responses prepared by Principal S Dawne (South Africa) and the Reverend John Nyesi (Kenya).

"Discussion of these papers led to two unanimous convictions. First, the church is constituted by the free grace of God in Christ; and for this reason Christian churches have to accept each other, since God in Christ has given himself for all, and we are accepted in Christ though unacceptable. Second, this same church is a provisional expression of the kingdom and does not fully actualize, in any of its manifestations, the promise of its own life."

At the time of writing, the next session will be January 11-16 1982. The programme of work envisaged as a development of these new directions covers the following: 1. What understanding should Anglican and Reformed churches have of the unity of the church? 2. What is the content, context and goal of the church's mission? 3. To what extent is doing the truth (orthopraxy) as distinct from believing the truth (orthodoxy), a condition of, means or result of Christian unity? (Examples of the critical fields of orthopraxy are action in regard to racism and poverty).

Participants

Anglican - The Rt Rev E J Tinsley, Bishop of Bristol; the Rev S Dwane; the Rev Canon R T Halliday; the Rev Prof J A Kirk; the Rev Dr Richard Norris, Jr.; the Rev John Nyesi; the Rev Canon Martin Reardon.

Reformed - The Rev Dr John Huxtable; the Rev Prof Christian Baeta; the Rev J Gordon Grant; the Rev Dr R Stuart Louden (in absentia); the Rt. Rev Lesslie Newbigin; the Rev Edwin S Pons; the Rev Dr Roy F Wilson; the Rev Prof George S Yule.

WCC observer - The Rev Dr Michael Kinnamon.

Staff - The Rev G B Braund, Anglican consultative council; the Rev Richmond Smith, World Alliance of Reformed Churches.

We should note that in terms of the original mandate of four meetings, we may expect the final session in 1984 with the report later that year.

Orthodox/Reformed

Moscow Patriarchate

Through the personal initiative of Bishop Tibor Bartha of Hungary, supported by president Dr James I McCord of the Alliance, the proposal to hold Orthodox/Reformed conversations was warmly received and furthered by the late Metropolitan Nikodim of Leningrad. So far, a series of three meetings have taken place, each involving a considerable number of Reformed delegates, with special reference to eastern Europe. Debrecen, Hungary, 1972 - a colloquium, probing the traditional Orthodox/Reformed frontiers of theological thinking, with special reference to worship. Leningrad 1976 centred discussion on the doctrine of the eucharist and the concept of diakonia for the whole of society. Budapest 1979 went to the heart of christology in relation to the contemporary witness of the church in the world, the complementarity of spiritual values and social responsibility according to the dogma of Chalcedon. In August 1980, the president of the Alliance reported to the executive committee that conversations continue re the planning of a fourth session either for 1982 or 1983, possibly to be held in Russia.

Ecumenical Patriarchate

In July 1979, president McCord led an official commission on the first world-level Reformed visit to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Istanbul, since the Reformation. The report of that historic occasion was published in Reformed World, Vol. 35, 8, p. 327. Integral to that report was the recommendation agreed by both parties that a series of further theological conversations should take place with the Ecumenical Patriarchate with a view to exploring the preparatory work prior to the inception of full official Orthodox/Reformed dialogue. After consultation the second Orthodox/Reformed conversation was held in Geneva at John Knox House, 15-18 February 1981.

Discussion centred on the understanding of the doctrine of the trinity and on the nature of authority in the church as interpreted in both Orthodox and Reformed traditions. Papers were presented by Metropolitan Emilianos of Silibri, Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Myra and Prof Hans-Helmut Esser, FRG.

The findings were unanimous that this period of exploratory research continue for at least one more session. Dates have been proposed for 1983. The focus of continuing study will be the trinitarian foundation and character of the faith and of authority in the church (as exhibited in the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan creed). Co-chairmen of the preparatory consultation are Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Myra and president Dr James I McCord. Commenting on the event at an official reception in the Orthodox Centre, Chambesy, Geneva, both cochairmen expressed their satisfaction at the evident progress made. In addition to the chairmen, participants were:

Orthodox: His Eminence Emilianos (Timiadis), Metropolitan of Silibri; His Eminence Damaskinos (Papandreou), Metropolitan of Tranoupolis; Mr George Lemopoulos (Geneva);

Reformed: Prof Jan M Lochman (CH); Prof Hans-Helmut Esser (FRG); Prof Istvan Juhasz (Romania) - in absentia; Prof Joe McLelland (Canada); Prof Thomas F Torrance (Scotland); Rev Richmond Smith (Geneva).

On the initiative of president McCord and with an approval of the February 1981 consultation, Prof Thomas F Torrance was invited to explore the possibility of editing and publishing in convenient format the papers of the meetings.

It has been convenient to group together the dialogues cited above as they share a widely international character - at world level. Obviously there is much more to the ecumenical task.

Interconfessional relations in general

In a strict sense it is quite absurd even to try to gather up some of the main elements in a paragraph or two. A fragmentary sketch must suffice.

If we think of specific areas of the world, the very considerable theological activity of North America comes to mind. To mention a few publications: Marburg revisited, 1966, the published papers of the Lutheran/Reformed conversations, sponsored by the North American area of WARC and the USA National Committee of the Lutheran World Federation; The New Man, Standard Press, 1973, covering the Reformed/Orthodox conversations since 1965 in North America. Still in the North American area, a whole string of publications on the very extensive Reformed/Roman Catholic conversations: Reconsiderations, New York, World Horizons, 1967; Ministry in the church and women in the church, both available in 1971; The unity we seek, Paulist Press, New York, 1977; Ethics and the search for Christian unity, USA, Catholic Conference, Washington DC, 1980. By the time this report is being read in 1982, conversations will be under way planned for Round IV - An ecumenical approach to the relationship of church and state.

If we turn from particular areas of the world and attempt to assess the situation at the national, local level, our perplexity increases. If we take eg Reformed/Roman Catholic relations in Holland, Scotland, Portugal, India and Brazil, the specifics of the vastly different cultural/theological context defy generalisation. Or merely to illustrate the same point, if we consider Lutheran/Reformed relations in Madagascar, Czechoslovakia, Canada and Indonesia, the agenda in each case is quite different. Case studies are endless.

Two comments: a) The sheer variety presented is a forcible reminder that theology has to be done within the realistic setting in which the people of God confess their faith. The indigenization of theology is frequently presented as a problem, whereas it should be welcomed as a sign that the doctrine of the incarnation is taken seriously. Our faith has to be "embodied" at a particular point of history in a particular cultural/political context. The seeming pluralism of the ecumenical debate in which so many of our member churches are committed must be understood ultimately as a plus point. b) But we do well to recognize at least one significant problem in all this. The transition from the global to the national/local theological agenda and vice versa is another form of the ancient problem of the church local and universal. There are some who believe the solution can only be found in some form of representative episcopate uniting the local and the universal. When that argument is expounded only in terms of authority and the functioning of the structures of the church it becomes utterly irrelevant. The more fundamental issue is whether or not the same gospel is confessed and believed when we cross international frontiers. Ecclesiologically, the local/universal problematic is a matter of doctrine and the substance of the faith once delivered to the apostles. As Reformed, how do we give answer when the question is bluntly put?

Lutheran/Reformed Relations

Throughout much of the history of the Alliance, it has been virtually axiomatic that the two great wings of the Reformation, Lutheran and Reformed, should move together in greater common understanding. It is noteworthy that already in 1888, three years after the founding of the Alliance, there is an official record of our concern about Lutheran/Reformed relations. To set the stage of the contemporary situation we quote from the report adopted by the Alliance meeting in general council, Nairobi 1970:

"Reformed/Lutheran conversations held in Europe, in the USA, and in other places since the 19th general council in Frankfurt 1964 resulted in the formulation of common theses or declarations that state that doctrinal differences that were long felt to divide the churches have lost such force. In Europe these conversations have nearly come to an end, and the Leuenberg conversations from 1968 to 1970 led to a definite proposal to the European churches in order to establish full church fellowship between them in the near future.

"This development in the relations between Reformed and Lutheran churches moved the executive committees of WARC and LWF to call a joint study committee in January 1968. It evaluated the results of the ongoing Reformed/Lutheran conversations and emphasized that differences separating Reformed and Lutheran churches proved to be differences within a common position, and that it is thus time to pursue conversations with all the means necessary to establishing full fellowship. The study committee also proposed to both executive committees to form a Lutheran/Reformed joint committee. It was convened for the first time in January 1970. Its task was to foster current Lutheran/Reformed conversations in various countries and areas; to facilitate the practical implementation of a theological consensus; to examine the role of the two world organizations in the life of the younger churches, and to explore ways and means toward closer working relationships between the two world bodies..." (Proceedings WARC uniting general council 1970 pp 168-9).

The same general council further instructed the Lutheran/Reformed joint committee to meet with "the additional remit of discussing the mutual understanding of their ecumenical commitment and their role in the further development of the ecumenical movement..." Since then, the European Leuenberg agreement became a reality in 1973 and to date some 98070 of all Lutheran and Reformed churches in Europe have entered into full pulpit and table fellowship on the ground of an agreed understanding of the gospel and the sacraments. It was in this same spirit of committed togetherness that the Lutheran/Reformed joint committee worked from 1970 to 1979 under official mandate from the LWF and WARC. In all, five sessions were held and annually reports were received and acted upon by the executive committees of both world bodies. In 1978 and 1979, a specific ad hoc working group was convened by both the LWF and WARC to consider the future of the full Lutheran/Reformed joint committee. An agreed common report was adopted in 1979 by both the LWF and WARC to consider the future of the full Lutheran/Reformed joint committee in the following terms:

"We believe that the concerns of both WARC and the LWF that lie behind the original formation of the Lutheran/Reformed committee are still present and of vital importance to us.

"After thorough discussion, we are convinced that in the present circumstances a change of structure is necessary. This is so because of the increasing multilateral and structural involvement of both world communities.

"Therefore instead of the present Lutheran/Reformed joint committee we recommend to our respective executive committees that three members of each executive committee be designated to take responsibility for evaluating, reporting and initiating recommendations on the ongoing working relationships between Lutheran and Reformed communities.

"These designated executive committee members would be available as needed for active involvement in ad hoc taskforce work for furthering Lutheran/Reformed relations at global or regional levels, which at times may take the form of pastoral care.

"We recognize among the several issues that are still relevant the following:

The relationship between the central affirmation of the Christ event as justification and the social commission of the church (Lutheran/Reformed joint committee minutes 1971, pages 4-5).
The practical implementation of theological consensus at every level of church life.
The role of the two world bodies in the life of the churches of Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Pacific, and also the minority churches throughout the world.
The ongoing evaluation of the confessional approach in the search for unity. In this context we welcome the development of dialogue between the World confessional families and the WCC in the one ecumenical movement". We also note the specificity of the Lutheran/Reformed concern that stems from a common understanding of the Reformation."

Consequent upon that, the Alliance executive committee received a report in 1981 from its three-member ad hoc monitoring committee. Because of the proximity of the general council within 12 months, and because of the nature of the report and the issues raised, the whole matter was referred to the 1982 general council for examination and subsequent action, thus:

Report of the Lutheran/Reformed ad hoc committee 1981

In accordance with the remit to evaluate, report and initiate recommendations on the ongoing working relationship between Lutheran and Reformed communities, we hereby submit to the executive committee, Wuppertal, in August 1981, the following considerations and recommendations:

The relationship between Lutheran and Reformed churches has found one of its expressions in the Leuenberg agreement that can therefore be considered as a model for further development.
The meaning of the Leuenberg agreement and its character as a model is shown in the following statements:
1. Among Lutheran and Reformed churches there is a far reaching common understanding of the gospel. The differences in doctrine mentioned in the traditional confessions do not affect the present state of church life.
2. The Leuenberg agreement leaves intact the binding force of the confessions within the participating churches. It is not to be regarded as a new confession of faith. Accepting the Leuenberg agreement does not prevent the churches declaring also their commitment to their own confessions or to their church structure.
3. In assenting to this agreement, the churches declare that their fellowship includes pulpit and table fellowship, mutual recognition of ordination and the freedom to provide for intercelebration.
4. The common understanding of the gospel on which the church fellowship is based has to be deepened, tested and continually made relevant in the light of the witness of holy scripture.
From this, result the following ecumenical aspects for Lutheran and Reformed churches:
1. Neither of the two communities is required to give up its own identity and at the same time each of them participates in the common witness of the Reformation and the development of its relevance.
2. In working on the joint heritage of the Reformation and on its various expressions in theological dialogue, both confessional communities will be able to recognize misunderstandings, false starting points and their unfortunate consequences and reach proper conclusions.
3. Finding a way of dialogue and fellowship the Lutheran and Reformed churches will be in a position to contribute jointly to the unity of the one church in Jesus Christ without forcing unification or remaining in an attitude of indifferent tolerance.
Although the Leuenberg agreement has developed from European churches nevertheless Lutheran and Reformed churches all over the world are concerned about it. Unfortunately, not all these European churches in question have been able to agree and to accept the Leuenberg agreement. One church from overseas (Evangelische Kirche am Rio-De-La-Plata) has entered into the fellowship of these churches. Even if some churches have not been able until now to accept the Leuenberg agreement and its consequent church fellowship, they should be stimulated to come to serious theological exchange in accordance with the Leuenberg agreement. With this in mind, the Caribbean and North American area of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches decided in February 1981 to undertake anew a Lutheran/Reformed dialogue. This conversation will not be for the purpose of planning mergers or altering the position of participants in ecumenical conciliar movements, but rather will have the goal of discovering further theological steps the churches may take together to build on what they have discovered.
We recommend both Lutheran and Reformed Communions to call upon their member churches to give witness to the essential unity in the Reformation heritage, based upon the conceptions of the Leuenberg agreement and seen under its perspective, and also to undertake the joint action this implies. Doing this they will be challenged to recognize afresh their own position and task in the whole oikoumene.
The Leuenberg agreement has formulated a way of understanding what confession means and this affects the way the two confessional communities understand themselves:
"Because these confessions of faith bear witness to the gospel as the living word of God in Jesus Christ, far from barring the way to continued responsible testimony to this word, they open up this way with a summons to follow it in the freedom of faith." (Leuenberg agreement).

The traditional confessions of the Reformation are hereby recognized as valid and as guides and at the same time the Leuenberg agreement points to something beyond them. The Leuenberg agreement indicates that the commitment to one's own confession cannot consist in being bound by formulae or in holding on to positions once taken, but these expressions of faith include also progression and development of the heritage. In this way the churches can avoid confessional narrowness and they can be freed to actualise the basic issues of the Reformation in the light of up-to-date problems and challenges.
In developing Lutheran/Reformed relations, we should be directed above all to express the existing communion in faith. Therefore the ad hoc committee recommends:
1. That the bilateral conversations with other confessional communities should be carried on through both the LWF and WARC together.
2. That subjects of priority for Lutheran/Reformed talks are:
  1. With regard to the responsibility of the member churches:
    - Evaluation of the theological development since the age of the Reformation and correction of later misunderstandings of its origin.
    - The doctrine of justification and the socio-political responsibility of churches and Christians.
    - Common worship, intercommunion and intercelebration.
    - Understanding and purpose of doctrinal dialogues with other confessions.
    - Possibilities of common testimony and common service of the churches.
  2. With regard to a common contribution to ecumenical issues and by way of assistance to member churches, a common response to:
    - One baptism, one eucharist and a mutually recognized ministry (faith & order study, Accra).
    - The witness of Jesus Christ as a basic condition of church order and church work.
  3. These subjects should first be worked out at a basic level by the LWF and WARC and then sent to the member churches for further discussion and deliberation in the hope of finding appropriate conclusions, so that the member churches may participate in their common ecumenical responsibility.
  4. Both Lutheran and Reformed communities are requested to deliberate on these recommendations on the occasion of the next general councils (Ottawa 82, Budapest 1984). Joint working groups are to be set up to carry out the preparations called for by the above subjects.

In formulating the above report, the ad hoc committee of the WARC executive committee attempted to draft a reply to a letter addressed to both the LWF and WARC respectively by the assembly of European and Reformed churches of the Leuenberg agreement, which met in Driebergen, Holland, February, 1981. The Driebergen assembly had expressed a clear desire that both the LWF and WARC should be more visibly involved in advocating the model of the Leuenberg agreement and in furthering Lutheran/Reformed rapprochement throughout the world.

We may note that the LWF world assembly will not meet until 1984, Budapest, and it is therefore not possible for both world bodies to commit themselves to a simultaneous response. However, whatever action the Reformed will take in Ottawa, 1982, it is to be hoped the decision will be in line with the traditionally and frequently expressed commitment to establishing greater understanding and cooperation between Lutheran and Reformed churches. Certain observations seem relevant. Although it is certainly desirable that both the LWF and WARC should do more together, and indeed a great deal of excellent collaboration has already taken place over many years, there are, however, certain given in-built limitations in developing a deeper level of cooperation between two world structures that are so different in themselves, the Lutherans having a Geneva-based staff of over 100 and the Reformed but eight persons. Nevertheless, although direct church-to-church relationships between Lutheran and Reformed communities are obviously the goal in the context of a lived-out communion among the churches, in many situations this will depend on some initiative even from the outside. At this point both the LWF and WARC have an inescapable responsibility.

Can we provide shape and content to that responsibility?

Church union

Reformed church history is strewn with unhappy chapters of dissension and schism, and perhaps this is so just because of the traditional Reformed concern about agreement in doctrine and taking the faith seriously. The other side of the coin is equally true, namely the concern about unity in the truth and "right" doctrine has compelled the Reformed, when at their best, to voice their commitment to seeking the visible unity of the one church of Jesus Christ. It is no accident that the last full general council of WARC in 1970 went on record, reaffirming "the obligation of the Alliance to foster unions in order to manifest the wholeness of the church in every local community". Indeed the constitution of the Alliance explicitly welcomes united churches and states that they are eligible for membership (constitution, art. II). This is no new departure in Reformed thinking. It is interesting to note that the first regular journal of the Alliance that appeared in the year 187 was entitled The Catholic Presbyterian! But it is one thing to affirm the Reformed conviction about the essential catholicity of the church from the point of view of ecclesiology and quite another matter to express the same doctrinal concern at the make-and-break point of overcoming the barriers to church union. Frequently, the executive committee of the Alliance has formulated agreed resolutions on the issue. One of the more recent was that accepted on the occasion of the centennial consultation of the Alliance in 1977. The statement is quoted in part:

"St Paul insists that the body of Christ is made up of the vast variety of mankind who have been made one. Jews and Greeks, male and female, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian and Scythian, bond and free, united by their common baptism into Christ's death and resurrection (Col 2.12-3.11) and (Gal 3.28). This fellowship in the Spirit given by Christ, precedes all else. It may well be that we are not truly reflecting the rhythm of the gospel when in church union negotiations we insist upon a consensus in all matters of faith and practice before koinonia. Does not this run the risk of Pelagianism and Pharisaism, suggesting that we accept each other only when we are righteous, whereas in fact we have already been accepted in Christ? "The scope of this unity must be total - the one new man in place of the two (Eph 2.13-16) - embracing every aspect of the life of the church, and giving full play to the diversity of gifts and the rich apprehensions of the gospel in various traditions. It must be neither the lowest common denominator of belief and worship, nor a legalistic uniformity, but a place where the Christian fellowship grows through reflecting upon the grace of God, into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

"As God reconciles all by grace alone so he reconciles churches. It is in this context that we should see the issue of intercommunion. In order to be healed, should we not together expose ourselves to the grace of Christ made present by his Spirit through word and sacrament? We should then be committed to seek the fullest unity with those with whom we have fellowship at his table. (See the statement at the general council of the Alliance, Princeton 1954).

The WARC is committed by its constitution to share the experience and insights that its member churches have been given within their history with all the churches within the ecumenical movement and particularly within the World Council of Churches, as together they seek to discover those forms of church life and practice that will enable the people of God more fully to understand and express God's will for his people.

"This is a call to all member churches to press forward in this endeavour seeking the visible unity of Christ's church."

This is not a question of speculative theology. We have to do with the inner, organic structure of the day-to-day life of our member churches. In the last issue of the biennial survey of church union negotiations 1977-79, published by faith and order of the WCC, no less than 36 of our WARC member churches, virtually 25% of the Alliance, are listed as involved in contemporary union negotiations, and some of these conversations are at an advanced stage. Prior to Ottawa, the current survey 1980-82 will be published and all delegates will receive a copy.

In the light of the total situation, what are the priorities for WARC as a whole? If the general council addresses a specific message to churches engaged in union conversations, are there particular theological perspectives to be borne in mind? Clearly a blanket affirmation of the importance of church union is less than adequate. We shall have to be perceptive of those new insights emerging in certain parts of the world, and to mention but one, the new urgency developing at the local level where in some cases to meet the local need of the local situation community type churches are springing up, sometimes regardless of the attitude of the larger parent church, and some of these congregations cut right across radically different denominational lines. That would tend to underline the position of the WARC 1977 statement that it may well be that koinonia has to come before consensus, and in not a few situations "local" concern is putting precisely that question. But what of the larger and necessary question of the relationship between the church local and the church universal? And how can church union in one national situation effectively transcend national frontiers? There is so much more.

In addition, we shall have to consider some of the key issues that are certain to emerge at a major world level consultation on church union sponsored by faith and order and due to meet in Sri Lanka, indeed at the time when this present report is being written, November 1981. At this stage we can only indicate possible areas of concern. Preparatory documents for the Sri Lanka meeting refer to problematic areas such as the movement of united churches towards a broader catholicity of faith; the relationship of organic church union to conciliar fellowship; and the relationship of organic unity to covenantal schemes of church cooperation. How can union serve as an impetus for mission? How can nondoctrinal obstacles be overcome? Is the episcopate an asset or a stumbling block in union negotiations? The relationship of united churches to the Christian world communions and to the WCC?"

Whether or not a specific message is addressed to us from the Sri Lanka church union consultation, the hard questions implicit in the quest for the unity of Christ's church will not simply go away. We shall have to give answer and that is an obligation that arises straight out of the imperative of the gospel itself.

Relations between WARC and the WCC

Such a paragraph heading is apt to be quite misleading unless immediately qualified. Clearly, this is no place even to attempt to sketch the general picture of the relations between the member churches of the Alliance and the WCC. A very high proportion of our 149 member churches is part of the membership of the WCC. On both the executive committee and the central committee of the WCC, the presence of the Reformed is certainly obvious. The fact that the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (one of the Alliance's founding members in 1875) officially withdrew from the WCC two years ago has been and is a great concern to many. However, by virtue of the constitution of the Alliance we must attempt some theological assessment as to how the two world bodies relate. The WARC constitution, article III, (9) specifically lists among the purposes of the Alliance: "To facilitate the contribution to the ecumenical movement of the experiences and insights that the churches within this Alliance have been given in their history, and to share with churches of other traditions within that movement and particularly in the WCC, in the discovery of forms of church life and practice that enable the people of God more fully to understand and express together God's will for his people." The fact that WARC and the WCC offices are housed in Geneva in the same building ensures daily personal contact at the level of staff relations. Personally I wish to pay tribute, out of more than 16 years service in the Alliance, to the immensely helpful collaboration between WCC staff colleagues and our own department of theology. Inevitably the lines of connection are theologically defined, and therefore we have related principally to faith and order, but not exclusively so. And this link has been further reinforced when some years ago on the invitation of faith and order the theological secretary of the Alliance was appointed by our executive committee as liaison officer for WARC to faith and order, with the privilege of attending faith and order commission meetings. All this has meant continuous contact, sharing in study development, and an increased awareness of the Reformed contribution both de facto and potentially in the wider oikoumene.

But we should pass from the general and somewhat personal to more specific matters.

1) In the context of the dialogue explosion, bilateral and multilateral conversations, cooperation between faith and order and the conference of secretaries of the Christian world communions (world confessional families ) led to a decision to sponsor a publication, analysing the results and direction of contemporary interconfessional dialogues so far evident. The third edition was published, Confessions in Dialogue (266 pages) in 1975 by the WCC. This is now a recognized and indispensable tool for all engaged in the ecumenical task.

2) A direct consequence of the previous study was the decision, again involving the Christian world communions and faith and order of the WCC, to sponsor a forum on current world-level and regional dialogues. Three consultations were planned and held between 1978 and 1980, each bringing together the leadership of the various commissions in dialogue for 5 days of discussion and probing of the shared experiences. Throughout, the Alliance was officially represented by Prof David Willis, USA, and Prof Sandor Czegledy, Hungary and the Rev Richmond Smith. The three reports testify to the urgent need of much more theological attention being given to the understanding of differing concepts of "unity", the problem of reception in the churches, the function of doctrinal authority, the nature of the consensus sought, the spiritual demands of a process of reception and decision making that binds different churches together, etc.

3) Inevitably the ongoing development of the different Christian world communions and the WCC in the post 1948 period led to a mutual questioning as to how the various Christian world communions and the WCC ought best to relate to each other in our contemporary "ecumenical age". Over the years, the department of theology and the executive committee of the Alliance have been consistently involved in thinking through the problems involved. To update our information on the present situation, we refer to a major consultation between the WCC and the world confessional families , as they were then still named, in October 1978, with 45 participants, 10 from the WCC led by Dr Philip Potter, and 35 from 14 different "families ", including the Roman Catholic church represented by the secretariat for promoting Christian unity, Vatican. The Alliance was represented by Bishop Karoly Toth, Prof Martin Cressey, the general secretary and myself. The work product of that consultation is entitled: Report of a consultation between the World Council of Churches and the world confessional families on their relationships. The main sections: The unity of the church, common witness and collaboration, and expressing the relationships between the World Council of Churches and the Christian world communions. We should note the interesting change in terminology adopted by the report. Instead of world confessional families the term is Christian world communions. It was thought that this may more accurately describe the majority of the "families ". Indeed later in November 1979 the conference of secretaries of the world confessional families officially adopted the change of name to Christian world communions, although reservations are still expressed in some quarters.

The report of the October 1978 Geneva consultation, was received by the central committee of the WCC, Kingston, Jamaica, January 1979, and a considered response approved. Certainly we shall welcome the positive stance of the WCC central committee, dealing seriatim with most of the matters raised in the October 1978 consultation. We may note that for WARC we could have considerable difficulties in following through realistically certain aspects of collaboration with the WCC on an ad hoc basis because of the vastly different administrative approach of the two bodies. I reported on that stage of the "dialogue" to the department of theology and the executive committee of the Alliance in 1979 and because of the continuing relevance of the matter I incorporate now what I then wrote, as there are issues here on which the Alliance executive committee has taken action.

There is a substantive issue of theological principle that the October 1978 report raised and that is not at all dealt with in the reply of the WCC central committee. I refer to the question of "structured relationships". Of course the accent on ad hoc collaboration is right and proper. We have to begin somewhere. But if we think to begin and end with "ad hoc-ery", we shall be guilty of that very error already for so long condemned in the church union movement, ie thinking to advance the ecumenical task by so much ecclesiastical carpentry in which we knock "the bits" together with so many screws and nails. We may have the wrong "bits"! Further, if we assume that our given structures are inviolate and they cannot be questioned, then surely we are guilty of a traditionalism that has become idolatrous and we have again manufactured our own gods. To try and flush the theological problem out into the open we can state it in its most dramatic form: Is the constitution of the WCC, Amsterdam 1948, adequate? Should we envisage a day when the world confessional families and the WCC together form part of a radically new structure? To draw out the implications of this I am using some paragraphs that I wrote in a memorandum prepared for the 1978 October, WCC/world confessional families consultation.

If we try to do our thinking from "the inside", what do we mean theologically by true universality? That term I take to be an equivalent for genuine catholicity. The wholeness of the church must be grounded in the givenness of the Christ who as Lord and Saviour of the church unites his people to himself through the Holy Spirit in the mystery of the bond of faith. Working from that trinitarian and christological centre, the dimension of the universal in our doctrine of the church must embrace both the local and the universal perspectives. And this ancient question of the faith (relationship, local/universal) is still quite without an answer that is acceptable on all sides. Further the allegedly ecumenical structures of our own day have not over-come the in-built polarisation of the problem. Clearly it is unacceptable that the church as the one people of God should have its life visibly fragmented at the point of geographical and political frontiers. And yet the constitution of the WCC, which accents in its membership the local, ie autonomous member church, which is inevitably set within a particular cultural and national context, and the world families of churches, which attempt to express a community of understanding at the universal level within particular traditions, are both underscoring complementary aspects of the church as people of God that we have not yet succeeded in bringing together. In spite of a considerable body of ecumenical writing and speaking of recent years that refuses to acknowledge the complementarity of the "local" and the "universal", does not the contemporary and growing interest in the motif of conciliarity demand that we rethink this problem? On the credit side one may cite, eg the recent report of the faith and order commission meeting, Bangalore, India, August 1978, that concerned itself with issues of conciliarity (committee I). Does not the vision of conciliarity ultimately point to a way of bringing together the spirituality and life of local churches truly united and the universal perspective? Of those traditions that have "already entered into union locally, but that linked through their respective world family of churches, gather up within themselves the rich diversity of tradition(s) witnessed to by the various world families? I am suggesting that the vision of conciliarity, when it begins to take on flesh, will inescapably bring the world confessional families and the WCC and other ecumenical agencies into a situation of such mutual recognition that common counsel and decision making are possible within one structured fellowship. And such taking of common counsel together will not be characterised by a distinction between those who belong and those who have only fraternal delegate status!

This direction of thinking leads to a questioning of the constitution of the WCC and of the constitutions of the respective world confessional families. Since 1948, the basis of membership in the WCC places the emphasis on the role of the member church in its national context. Do we not need to rethink what we are about, ecclesiologically, by such a self-imposed limitation in ecumenical witness? It is the contention of the present writer that the contemporary development of the ecumenical movement calls for just such a rethinking. The ecumenical scene in 1982 bears little resemblance to that of 1948. The post Vatican II explosion of world-level bilateral and multilateral dialogues have focused in a very new way the potential of the ecumenical contributions from the world families of churches with their respective traditions interpreted within a universal perspective. I simply wish to affirm that if we are to get beyond the contemporary polarising of the local and the universal, then we shall have to conceive of a radical restructuring of a future world council in which the local member churches and bodies representing wider cultural/theological apprehension, eg the world families of churches, can together complement each other within one instrumental unity. The fact that one continually argues for much greater collaboration between the WCC and the world confessional families suggests implicit recognition of this ultimate goal. Is it quite inconceivable that, whereas, eg faith and order and commission on world mission and evangelism, have a certain autonomy within the framework of the WCC as constituents of the whole, a future WCC may not also embrace autonomous bodies, representative of world Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, the Reformed, Methodism, etc, etc... in complementary relation to the specific insights of the member churches in their national local setting? Indeed, if within the present constitution of the WCC, member churches can retain their autonomy, is it beyond us to imagine that the same kind of open understanding of constitutional requirements should not also apply to the various world confessional families that along with the WCC could form an integrated instrument with vast new dimensions of ecumenical thought and action? In a word, do our present day ecumenical structures conform to the catholic/universal understanding of the church to which the New Testament witnesses, in which local and universal belong together? Such long range thinking will require us to abandon many of our contemporary models with their self-limitations. Whether all this belongs to the next generation or later it is incumbent on us to begin probing the theological issues now. To quote the president of the Alliance, Dr James I McCord, "Is our concept of councils sufficient to carry the contemporary ecumenical freight?"

It was an awareness of such concern, somewhat extensively developed above, that motivated the WARC executive committee in 1979 to take the following action: "The executive committee affirms its belief that the particular emphases of the Christian world communions and the WCC must be seen as complementary and as an integrated whole within the one common witness of the unity of the one people of God. The executive committee urges that this question of structure be given careful theological examination and kept open."

At its meeting in 1981, the executive committee reiterated its concern that "the theological question of structured relations between the Christian world communions and the WCC still awaits examination." To this must be added that at the most recent meeting of the conference of secretaries of the Christian world communions, North Carolina, USA, October 1981, discussion tended to centre on questions of ecumenical methodology, which fact serves to underline the above concern. We have to begin somewhere. How? Should the Alliance set up a working party to study and consult on what may be implied? We could begin by trying to explain our own statements about "complementarity" and "an integrated whole" and "one common witness"!

The Alliance study programme

A backward look...

Study mandates tend to run from one general council to the next, subject to whatever modification the department of theology or the executive committee may feel constrained to introduce in the interim. At the 1970 council (Nairobi), the Alliance received the work product of two major studies, requested by the 1964 general council (Frankfurt): "The Holy Spirit in church and world", developing the indispensable relation between Jesus Christ and the activity of the Spirit in the church and world, and "Oversight (episkope) in the church with special reference to union negotiations." Both studies arose out of a much wider programme of concerns dealing with the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and renewal in the church, and our understanding of "catholicity" with special; reference to problems of ministry and ordination. Long after 1970, requests are still received for these reports, particularly that of episkope.

The 1970 general council proposed the following subjects for ongoing study:

How to do theology. This might be expected to include methodology, the biblical tradition and modern interpretation; the indigenization of theology and the universality of theology, which in turn would include the role of theology in the churches, the role of theology in different cultures, the role of theology in the dialogues with other religions and Marxism, and theology and the laity.
The theological basis of human rights and a theology of liberation. This would include consideration of such questions as: how can I be free? Is God liberating or oppressing? Can the church be a liberating church? What does freedom mean when applied to institutions? Freedom as creativity - a biblical concept?
The participation of the laity in church, society and politics. This would include the ecclesiological question of the church universal and local; the congregation and the parish; the problem of nonparticipation in the life of the church; the special field of education of laymen as Christian laymen.

Pilot discussion papers on all areas of concern involved our theological seminaries and the member churches, with the result that by 1971 the Alliance resolved to focus on one study exclusively, the theological basis of human rights. The initial paper by Prof Jürgen Moltmann, Germany, stimulated a wide response from groups of theologians and churches throughout the world. By 1976, sufficient response material had emerged to justify a special consultation that the department of theology held in London, February of that year, chairman Prof Jan M Lochman, with 20 participants from 14 nations representing all 6 continents. The findings were published, Theological basis of human rights, and up to the present the report has gone through several major reprintings in English, French, German and Spanish. What is more to the point, the report has been very favourably received through the Reformed family and far beyond.

One immediate consequence was the publication of two important books, Gottes Recht Und Menschenrechte, Neukirchener Verlag, (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1977, c1976), editors, Jürgen Moltmann and Jan Milic Lochman, and A Christian declaration on human rights, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977), editor, Allen O Miller. Both volumes accent the variety of theological contributions from within the Reformed community.

At the centennial consultation of WARC, St Andrews, Scotland, 1977, a recommendation was received that the Alliance should continue to pursue the human rights theme, and that rather than proceed unilaterally we should try to initiate a broadly-based consultation involving our sister Christian world communions and the WCC. After much correspondence and consultation, we were able to enlist the support of Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed theologians, which led to a small inter-confessional conference, held in Geneva, May 1980. Professors of law and theology came together to explore the particular nature of the several theological approaches in the understanding of human rights with reference to law/gospel tensions, two-kingdom theology and problems stemming from natural law. Fortunately, the LWF has been able to publish the report of this limited research project. FN, Eckehart Lorenz, ed, How Christian are Human Rights? An interconfessional study on the theological basis of human rights (LWF: Geneva 1981). German edition: Erkämpft das Menschenrecht (LWF: Hamburg) End FN Reformed contributors were Prof Jürgen Moltmann, FRG, and Prof Peter Saladin, Switzerland.

We may anticipate that the general council in 1982 will carry all of this much further. See the next section, below.

In a certain sense, the centennial consultation in 1977 acted as a kind of watershed. Preparatory studies on the theme for 1977, The glory of God and the future of man, concentrated attention on the covenantal relation of the triune God with the whole of creation. In turn, the Alliance adopted in 1977 a proposal that study should be directed to the biblical concept of "covenant", attempting to elicit significant dimensions of the ecclesiological and ecumenical implications for the church today, as the people of the covenant. Basic starter papers were commissioned from Prof Joachim Kraus, Germany, Prof Kosuke Koyama, Japan, and Prof Roger Shinn, USA. The vast range of perspectives opened up proved at once both an inspiration and a source of frustration. Indeed there was no lack of response to the initial study. The European area council of WARC built the whole area council, Romania 1980, on the same theme of the covenant, and the theological committee of the Caribbean and North American area is about to publish a sizeable volume dealing with the subject in depth.

We should note that the influence of the covenant study has been quite considerable in formulating and shaping the 1982 theme: Thine is the kingdom the power and the glory. An emphasis on covenant theology, biblically conceived pointed to the inner connection between the one covenant of God grounded in grace and the theology of the kingdom, and therefore the mission of the church.

And looking forward...

The general council will expect precise recommendations from the committee on theology as to future mandates for the department of theology. To be sure discussion will not be lacking when the committee meets. We should also be aware of the thinking generated in the study sections of the general council, as well as possible recommendations coming direct from the council plenary.

In the following there is no attempt to systematise various options listed. However, it may be helpful to mention some briefly and sharpen a few questions, all this with the proviso that a "staff" paper must inevitably represent a certain arbitrary point of view. The necessary corrective will be supplied in the debate.

General council theme

The theme proper, thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, and the attendant subthemes have obvious missionary implications. But when we recall the definition of the subthemes we see at once that the potential post-Ottawa agenda could be very diverse. Section 1: The people of the covenant and the mission of the kingdom. Section 2: The power of grace and the graceless powers. Section 3: The theatre of glory and a threatened creation's hope. In what direction are we likely to move?

Reformed witness today

The executive committee has approved a proposal to submit a tentative draft document, Reformed witness today, for discussion, possible reworking and action by the general council, with a view to obtaining a response from the member churches. The various "distinctive theological issues" examined suggest several questions requiring much further work, worship, sola scriptura, confession and confessing, the catholicity of the church, human rights, racism, wealth and power, etc.

Human rights

Linking up with work already done by the Alliance and aware of the likely continuing demand that this continue, we should also be sensitive to the pressures possibly felt in Ottawa vis-à-vis particular cases of the violations of human rights. This is right and proper, but we must consistently ask ourselves how best we may support our member churches where sometimes they are in situations fraught with extreme danger and the very crunch point of the conflict is precisely the area of differing understandings of church/state relations in relationship to concepts of law and "rights". We divorce "political courage" and "sound doctrine" at our peril. And as a part of our continuing responsibility, I would hope that the Alliance would not only develop our own initiatives of recent years but equally engage in that much wider ecumenical discussion that impinges on the life of all Christian communions, irrespective of the varied cultures in which they exist.

World peace

All over the world, pressure is steadily mounting in the member churches, calling for a fresh examination of the issue of war/peace in the nuclear age, disarmament and unilateral nuclear disarmament, etc. Increasingly there is a certain new awareness of a new dimension to the old pacifist question. Is there a Reformed voice on this?

Ideology/Christian theology

How do we make the distinction? Criteria for the knowledge of God and theological truth. The doctrine of revelation and why do we opt for a particular hermeneutical standpoint?

Church and society

The gospel in society in all its cultural socio-political forms. The urgent relevance of this for the 66% of our 149 member churches located in Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Pacific. And the role of the church? How to avoid the extremes either of a false pietism that ignores the hurt of the world or of a social gospel that loses the heart of the gospel itself?

Church and state

The role of the church in relation to the state? And there are many parts of the globe where the classical Reformed position in this cannot even be affirmed. How does the church preserve its critical distance from the state and still be heard by the state? The prophetic function of the church? The church as institution and/or people of God?

Creation/redemption

Lying behind the above issues is the perennial problem of how we relate theologically the Christian understanding of creation and of redemption within the unified purposes of God to which holy scripture witnesses. What of the tremendous vision of the New Testament - "a new heaven and a new earth"? Yet the constant temptation of the church is so to spiritualise the doctrine of redemption that we cut the nerve of Christian obedience and responsibility within and for creation and the distinctive Christian ethic goes by default. Ultimately such a split in our thinking ends by questioning the incarnation and the resurrection of the body.

Reconciliation and atonement

The inner connection between creation/redemption can only be grasped through our apprehension of the divine act of atonement. Here there are no short cuts. Uncertainty at this point breeds hesitation in the proclamation of the wholeness of the gospel. Interpreting God's act of atonement in the life, death and resurrection and ascension of our Lord and Pentecost, how in fact do we affirm today the classic credal affirmation of the humanity and the deity of the Son? Inevitably our faith in the saving action of Father, Son and Holy Spirit confronts us with the final question of the meaning of the trinity. Today there are radically new questions put to the trinitarian and christological foundations of the faith - and not least in those areas of the world where the indigenization of theology is a major emphasis. How do we give answer?

Unity in order to mission

If this is the logic of the gospel, need we be surprised when the world passes by and we hear that the church has lost its credibility? Can we avoid the New Testament conclusion that disunity is sin? How do we affirm the unity of the church? Facing such a challenge we sense at once the disarray both within the oikoumene and within our own Reformed family of churches - in spite of all that we have so weightily said about Reformed catholicity!

Church and Israel

Again if we take our cue from the member churches, we shall sense a growing concern about the question of Christian/Jewish relations. Indeed the oldest of all ecumenical problems, church/synagogue! It would be natural for the Reformed to be involved in this for the very good reason that when we have been true to our biblical heritage we have always stressed the unity of holy scripture and therefore the inner relationship, binding together the Old and New Testaments. But where does that lead us in our understanding of the church as one people of God? In Holland, in the USA, in Switzerland, in Germany and in many other countries, the old question is put with a new force. Indeed, in Scotland at the general assembly, May 1981, a specific resolution was carried unanimously, addressed to the Alliance: "The general assembly instructs the overseas council of the Church of Scotland to initiate Christian/Jewish consultations between the Church of Scotland and our Jewish brethern, and urges the World Alliance of Reformed Churches to prosecute Christian/Jewish dialogue at a world level." To that the Alliance must give reply. Should we proceed unilaterally or how?

Theological education

Much is happening in this area of concern. Not least the fact that aspects of the north/south dialogue come through with the same polarizing tendencies. This is not to be taken as a reference to economics, although they certainly play a part! Rather the problem is best understood as part of a deeper issue, as in the question of the indigenization of theology. How should candidates for ordination be prepared? Are the traditional disciplines of study adequate? Or a very different perspective, which is relevant both for theological education and also for the whole range of the theological enterprise as such, namely, how may we overcome a fundamental split in our theological methodology? For too long biblical exegetes and systematic theologians have been doing their work without adequate reference to each other. Unless that abyss can be successfully bridged, we shall continue to grope about in the dark with theology seeking authority and finding none.

Alliance scholarship programme

Annually details of the scholarships made available through the Alliance by the courtesy of 17 different centres of higher theological learning (seminaries or theological faculties of universities) are circulated in English, French and German to the 200 Reformed seminaries of the Reformed family. In the average academic year, subject to the final resolution of visa and travel problems, approximately 17 students have the opportunity of at least one year of further theological study outside of their own country. In 1981, students came from Belgium, Cameroon, France, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Switzerland, Zambia. We have to note that this programme is simply a liaison service offered through the Alliance and does not entail budgetary outlay apart from the considerable costs of office time and mailing procedures. Board, tuition, and residence fees are paid by the receiving seminary, but the student has to find the cost of travel.

Publications

The Bulletin of Theology is published quarterly in French and German, some 20-22 pages typescript offset. Prior to 1970, we had also the Bulletin of Theology in English, but with a view to economies the English bulletin was conflated with the Reformed World. We should note that the bulletin does not attempt to rival any of our classic theological journals, but rather it provides a medium for the exchange of theological material often in areas of the world where there are serious restrictions on Christian printed material. Although the readership has always been small, some 200 in French and the same in German, WARC has understood the outlay on the bulletin as an essential investment for the good of our churches often placed in difficult minority situations. With regard to the Reformed World, with the appointment of a new staff colleague in cooperation and witness in 1979, the managerial responsibility of Reformed World has reverted at my request to that staff position, now in the hands of the Rev Aldo Comba. As theological secretary, I continue to have a consultative role as one of the editorial team, and I am responsible for the commissioning of one or two theological articles for each issue of the Reformed World. Fuller details on this particular journal are given in the report from the department of cooperation and witness.

Finance

This item does not refer to the day-to-day running of the department of theology or the specific travel assignments involving staff. Attention is directed instead to the particular needs of the dialogue, study/committee obligations of the Alliance for the very good reason, that whenever we have to move people across. continents major financial costs are incurred. Added to that, there is the very considerable outlay in the provision of interpretation and translated materials for the participants. It is traditional in our dialogue commitment that participants are free to write and speak in anyone of the three languages, English, French, and German. But for the marked generosity of some of our member churches that have consistently in the past borne the expenses of participants coming from these churches the budgeted expenditure would be more than doubled. I draw attention to this because there is a serious implication. The Alliance, by accepting this policy, has made it frequently impossible for participants to be appointed from certain parts of the world from which we could not reasonably expect payment of travel. If Asia, Africa and Latin America are to be adequately represented, then the budgeted recommendations have to be taken seriously as minimal requirements.

I would submit that any cut back on this budget would effectively silence the representative nature of any theological commission that attempts to speak for 149 churches scattered on the six continents. The dynamic outreach of the culture spread of the Reformed carries stark financial implications if we are serious about our ecumenical engagement.

Staff travel

It seems natural that the preceding section should be followed by a reference to staff travel. Since the 1970 general council, it has been my very great privilege to travel extensively in the service of the Alliance. Over the years visits to theological seminaries/faculties, church headquarters, attendance at consultations and conferences, preaching and lecturing have taken me through much of Asia and Australia, parts of Africa, Latin America, the United States of America, and both western and eastern Europe. It seems utterly preposterous to sum all this up in a sentence or two. But the one thing I should want to underline is that without a certain minimum of flesh and blood contact where mind meets mind and heart encounters heart, the administration and executive direction of a department of theology that is mandated to serve 149 churches in 78 different nations would be very much the poorer. Clearly the responsibility for travel and sharing must never be located only with the staff of the Alliance. Thankfully, there are many men and women from within the life of the member churches who travel and make contact across continents and oceans. And that must go on and indeed increase, if the people of God, the church of Jesus Christ, is to be a lived-out reality on earth. That I am persuaded needs no emphasis. Perhaps what ought to be said is this. If the Alliance expects the department of theology to function at its maximum efficiency, some consideration has to be given with some urgency to the realities of the situation, in which one person is expected curiously enough to be in two places at one and the same time, Geneva and some theological centre 5,000 miles away! To make that point is simply to raise the constant question of staff-appointments, budget, and what is the Alliance for?

Postscriptum - the personal dimension

In a single phrase - an immense sense of personal indebtedness. At various points in this report I have referred to staff colleagues and to the many who have so generously given of their time and energies in furthering the work of the department of theology of the Alliance. Without this tide of support little would have been accomplished. Over the years I have said all this before. Now with even greater certitude I must echo the same sentiment, as this is the last occasion I shall report to a general council of the Alliance. Twelve months after the close of the 1982 Ottawa event I shall demit office as theological secretary. By that time I shall have served the Reformed family for 18 years - a privilege, bringing much personal satisfaction and the forging of worldwide contacts. To all the officers of the Alliance and their predecessors my gratitude goes out for their encouragement, in particular to the successive chairmen of the department of theology, president Dr James I McCord and Prof Jan Milic Lochman, for their readiness to advise and to make themselves available. My final word is to pay tribute to the friendship and cooperation of all immediate colleagues, to my former general secretary, Dr Marcel Pradervand, and his successor Dr Edmond Perret, and in a very special sense to my own secretary, Mrs Colette Jacot, who since 1969 has given to the department and the Alliance a remarkable record of unstinting and loyal service. Laus Deo.