News
Interview by Martin Hoegger (*)
Mel Robeck, faculty member at Fuller Theological Seminary, California, has been a member of the Faith and Order Commission for 20 years. As a member of the Assemblies of God (a Pentecostal church with a membership of 62 million), he represents his church in various theological dialogues. He tells me that he has gained so much from these meetings that he is now “more Christian”. I met him in the course of the Faith and Order Plenary Commission meeting, in Kolympari, Crete, which took place 7-13 October 2009, to discuss subjects such as the nature of the Church, the role of the Church Fathers, and the search for moral discernment, in particular as regards homosexuality. His presence is a good illustration of the fact that Faith and Order is the most representative theological forum in Christianity.
- What conception of church unity do Pentecostals have?
Pentecostals tend to spiritualize Jesus’ prayer for unity “that all of them may be one… so that the world may believe” (John 17:21). They do not think very much about visible Christian unity but rather, of a spiritual unity. They believe that what Jesus prayed for is already a reality wherever believers confess their faith in Jesus as Lord and Saviour. We are thus already united and are part of the same body. But I have never been convinced that that is the final answer. There must be something visible and tangible for the world to recognize that there is something different in the Church. In order to believe, the world must see something that points to their reconciliation.
We have, therefore, to stress the importance of unity for the sake of mission. Certain forms of visible unity can enable us to give a more tangible witness to what we believe. Certainly, for Pentecostals, the priority is to preach the Gospel and make disciples. And we have experienced immense growth, beyond what anyone expected. We have succeeded in taking the Christian faith to peoples that no other church has been able to reach. Unfortunately, we have also sometimes engaged in the damaging practice of proselytism by attracting to us Christians from other churches.
- What do you actually do to make Pentecostal churches more aware of the importance of being involved in the ecumenical movement?
I work hard to make Pentecostals aware that they are part of a larger body, the Church, and that it is in their interest to occupy the place due to them at the common table, so as to share their concerns, be challenged, and to challenge others, in truth and love.
The great difficulty is that we are mostly a lay movement, in which there are few well educated theologians. Leaders in my church are called by God and engage in personal witness, but they do not have much formal theological training. When they do think of the Church in theological terms, they often do not know its history, its language and its culture. They feel like fish out of water. The result is that it is difficult for them to discuss the subjects dealt with in forums such as Faith and Order.
Things are slowly beginning to change, however. The Pentecostal movement has been in existence for one hundred years, and only now are some of our theologians engaging in systematic theological study. So you have to take Pentecostals as they are and realize that, for the moment, they can only make a very limited contribution.
- How have you been involved in Faith and Order work on ecclesiology?
I was on the committee that produced the first draft of the document The Nature and Mission of the Church. Most of the members of that group came from the historic churches of the North, and it was primarily their concerns that were included. Now, discussion of that document during this meeting has clearly shown the criticisms coming for the churches of the South. They do not always recognize themselves in the document. I think that is a valid criticism, one that I, moreover, have often made in that group. Even though they have done a good job, I have not really been heard on that particular point. I did not wish to criticize beyond saying that in the Church there is much more than the past – even though, as a historian, I am a great lover of the past!
- Has the document been discussed by Pentecostal churches?
Yes, it has been in the USA Society for Pentecostal Studies and its equivalent in Europe. That is a positive development. Some articles on the subject have also been written by Pentecostals. A Pentecostal colleague at Fuller Seminary, Dr. Veli-Matti Kärkkainnen, has even taken this document as the basis for his course on ecclesiology with his students. He then sent their comments on to Faith and Order.
- There is another place where Pentecostals can meet leaders of WCC member churches, as well as the Catholic Church: the Global Christian Forum. How significant is that?
The setting up of the Forum is part of a process of becoming more open to one another. It is not in competition with the World Council of Churches. Its aim is to enable significant Pentecostal leaders to form relationships with leaders of WCC member and other churches. This has led those who have participated, to change their views about the WCC and Faith and Order, as being places where it is possible to discuss important issues. I would say that it is a place of transition, a place where they might move towards an institution like the WCC, towards a more formal structure. But that will take time. I think that we shall have to wait at least ten years before we see any tangible results in this regard. I must say once again that the Forum is not an organization intended to replace the WCC. If it were, I would have nothing to do with it. It is a place where trust can be built up, where people who have not had the opportunity to meet one another can meet, a place where people become open to the Spirit and to developing new relationships, from which the WCC can subsequently benefit.
What is the place of the Church Fathers in Pentecostalism?
- Another theme in this meeting has been the invitation to look back together at the sources of the first teachers and witnesses to the faith. What meaning do they have for you?
Pentecostals have very little knowledge of the Church Fathers. They are often ‘a-historical’. History has no real meaning for them. That seems odd for me, because I am an historian and I have studied Patristics. However, we Pentecostals do read the Bible, which clearly contains the history of a people and we see that as being of great value. We also accept contemporary testimonies of what God is doing in the lives of people. So I do not understand why we do not see the history of the Church as having the same or similar value. It is as if God had stopped speaking to God’s people after the death of the apostles and the writing of the New Testament, but has begun speaking to us once again, today. Pentecostals need to be introduced to a new understanding of Christian history.
An interesting thing to me is that in the fifth round of the International Pentecostal-Roman Catholic Dialogue, we decided to include the Church Fathers under the title ‘On Becoming a Christian’. We decided to examine passages from both Scripture and the Fathers. We reached this decision when, at a certain point in an earlier round of Dialogue, I realized that the Fathers were being quoted against us Pentecostals. I objected, and said that the Fathers belonged to us as well!
- What authority do you see the Church Fathers having?
Although we do not see them as having the same authority as in the Catholic and Orthodox churches, we do emphasize their essential role: they were linked to the church that had known the apostles; they provide valuable directions on issues of spirituality and theology on which we must work; and they are part of the ‘cloud of witnesses’ with whom we are in communion. It is, thus, necessary for them to sit around the table with contemporary theologians. Present-day theology needs to be universal and to include voices from all nations and all times. The Fathers give us access to the experience of the ancient church, and they give us encouragement, correction, strength, and discernment.
Moral discernment and the issue of homosexuality
- The meeting used the case study method in order to reach discernment on delicate moral issues that create tensions in the churches, such as globalization, stem cells, homosexuality and proselytism. What was your experience of that approach?
When I arrived, I found that I had been put in a group to evaluate a case study on homosexuality. I was afraid that it would be a waste of my time, because no one would listen to me. Homosexuality is an issue that is not often discussed by Pentecostals, at any level. At a recent meeting, my church, the Assemblies of God, it was decided that any pastor taking part in a same-sex blessing would be automatically excluded from ministry. Out of the six thousand delegates present, not one hand was raised against the resolution. You can understand that for us as regards homosexuality the matter is closed. But, in a certain sense, it remains open, for some ministers in my church are gay in orientation and some may even be secretly engaged in homosexual sexual practice. So it is an issue that concerns us as well.
- What was your experience in the working group during the meeting?
As I said, when I was put in a group that was going to discuss homosexuality, I said to myself that it was going to be a waste of time. But I was appointed the group’s reporter, which meant that I did not have so much to speak as to listen carefully. I found that the approach used was very good and wise. We did not discuss content, but methods by which the subject could be discussed. The case given us to study was excellent and very well written. It clearly showed that there are at least ten to twelve sources of authority on this issue, that the churches – WCC members and non-members – use, and to which they assign different values.
- What have you discovered and what enabled you to understand others better?
We discovered that there are different sources of authority (such as scripture, tradition, culture, experience, pastoral concern, etc.) and that knowledge enabled us to understand why there was no meeting of minds and why people did not understand one another. Simply because they were using different sources of authority. When someone puts forward an argument based on scripture, they are often answered with an argument drawn from other sources. If we were able to understand what level of authority we give to these various sources, we would be able to understand better why there is no meeting of minds, and to make some progress on the issue.
- What is one source that we should go into more deeply?
We are all interested in making a pastoral response to homosexuality. Even though there are different responses to this pastoral concern, it is a major problem on which we should work. The whole process that we have experienced here has been good. Even though in some cases we diverged quite radically in our group from the positions of our churches, this enabled us to listen without becoming ill-tempered. We did discover that it is possible to have a civilized conversation on this issue and to reach a better understanding of why a particular church has taken a particular decision.
- What, in your opinion, is at issue in this debate for the unity of the church?
The greatest problem is that there are churches that take unilateral action, such as the Episcopal Church in the USA, in which some leaders are convinced that they know the truth and they use that action to provoke others. Provocative action like that does not contribute to the unity of the church. But I must acknowledge that Pentecostals act in the same way in other areas. They tend to make quick judgments, and take independent initiatives, saying, “The Holy Spirit has spoken to me and so I must do this.” We all need to challenge one another but perhaps more importantly, to submit to one another in love. For that to happen, the invisible church is not enough: we need visible structures so that we can be mutually responsible to one another for the unity of the church.
(*) Rev. Martin Hoegger is a pastor of the Reformed Church of the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland, where he is ecumenical officer. He is moderator of the Council of Christian Churches of Vaud.