KEITH R. BOWES, M.A., S.T.M., Ph.D. attended the Fourth World Conference on Faith and Order at Montreal in July, 1563 as delegate of the Federal Conference of Churches of Christ in Australia. After University training in history at the Adelaide University (M.A.) and the Australian National University (Ph.D.), Dr. Bowes trained for the ministry at the Federal College of the Bible. During 1962-63 he undertook graduate studies at the Divinity School of Yale University, U.S.A., where he received the S.T.M. degree. He has ministered at South Melbourne, Mitcham and Camberwell in Victoria, and at the end of 1963 joins the Faculty of the Federal College of the Bible, Glen Iris.

      Faith and Order Conferences are not gatherings of the intellectual elite from the ivory towers of Christendom. The 300 or so delegates went to Montreal, Canada, in July, 1963 were not invited to deal with the theoretical questions of Christian unity. No, they were called together to investigate some of the vital issues which are confronting the Church today in its response to the will of God concerning Christian unity.

      One of the main aims of the Faith and Order movement (which is a part of the total work of the World Council of Churches) is to keep before the churches their obligation to manifest the unity which God has given to the Church in Jesus Christ. Co-operation between churches is desirable, and the progress in this direction is a great cause for thanksgiving, but cooperation is not enough. The will of God, as seen in the prayer of our Lord and in the writings of the apostles, is that the Church should fully manifest its God-given unity so "that the world might believe."

      The Montreal Conference, in which I had the pleasure to share as delegate of the Federal Conference of Churches of Christ in Australia, was constantly aware of contemporary happenings in the Church and in the world. We heard again the urgent voice of the young churches of Asia, Africa and the Pacific stating that denominational divisions are both irrelevant and destructive in the Church's mission to their own peoples. We listened in penitence to those who reported that when they preached reconciliation, the response of the hearers was: "Physician, meal thyself." We considered again the work of the Biblical scholars, who are firm in their conviction that the Scriptures present the Church as one not merely in an unseen "spiritual" sense but in a way clearly visible to all. And most of all, we pondered repeatedly the words of our Master as he prayed that unity, truth, holiness and mission should be demonstrated in and by His Church.

      The progress of union negotiations proceeding in various countries was also part of the contemporary situation that was considered. The World Council of Churches, of course, does not play any part in such negotiations, but member churches have become increasingly aware of the problems which have arisen and will continue to arise as churches seek to find a way through their existing divisions. And so, at Montreal we looked at five vital issues which continue to confront the churches.

      - What is the nature of the Church and its mission?

      - Why is it that we interpret the one Scripture differently?

      - What is the role of the ordained ministry in the Church?

      - What is true worship?

      - What can be done by local congregations to foster unity?

      How were these issues approached? In the past the method has generally been by "comparative ecclesiology" (ecclesiology is a technical term of theology which simply means the study of the churches). The various churches, in others words, compared their beliefs to see where they agreed and disagreed.

      This enormous task of understanding must still go on. Each new generation must go through the process of discovering what the other communions believe (and not just what we think they believe). But if all that is done is to compare, there can be little important progress. The ecumenical movement has come to see very clearly that difficulties do not disappear when understanding is obtained. Love is one answer to disunity, but it is not the only answer. Love cannot be separated from truth and holiness. To use the great traditional phrase of the Church, the concern of the ecumenical movement is for one Church, holy in its life, apostolic in its faith and catholic (i. e. universal) in its concern.

      Now the ecumenical movement is seeing increasingly that comparative ecclesiology is not enough. The Third World Conference on Faith and Order held at Lund in 1952 pointed the way when it suggested that "the way to unity is the way to the centre"--that by going deep together into some of the basic Christian affirmations, the churches could be enabled to see beyond their partial views and see the wider spectrum of the One Who is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

      This has been done at every ecumenical conference in the Bible study sessions, as together people searched the commonly accepted Word of God. But it is now beginning to be realised that in fact this method of study ought not to be limited to formal Bible study sessions, but rather should be the very basis for the ongoing discussions.

      This approach means accepting the common criterion of Christ and the common source of the Scriptures.

      Let me illustrate by referring to my own experience in Section 3, which met to consider "the redemptive work of Christ and the ministry of the Church." We began our work with the affirmation that all true ministry in the Church is the ministry of Christ Himself. We tried to work step by step from there. Discussion centred not around the traditional Anglican or Methodist or Churches of Christ views of the ministry but was focused on all the Scriptural evidence concerning the ministry of Christ and of the Holy Spirit As He guided the apostolic Church.

      Progress was slow. There were many frustrations. We had agreed that we ought to seek to penetrate behind our different confessional views to a deeper and richer understanding of the God-given unity of Christ with His Church, but our habitual ways of thinking so often seemed to prevent us from doing this. For example, to begin with, the ordained ministry was defined by the traditional phrase "the ministry of Word and Sacrament." Many seemed unable to be critical of that concept in the light of the ministry of Christ. Did this mean that the Word and Sacrament were the exclusive preserve of the ordained ministry? What about the laity here? But an even more important question was this: does not this traditional formulation limit the ministry to feeding the flock within the Church? What about the world? Did not God reconcile the world to Himself in Christ? And what about pastoral counselling, Christian education, chaplaincies in industry and institutions and a host of other things? In the end the traditional phrase disappeared from the Report and the concept of ministry was widened to include "watching in prayer, leading God's people, engaging in deeds of brotherly help,

teaching and pastoral care." Few will suggest that these phrases are completely adequate, but at least the process of rethinking has begun.

      We who belong to Churches of Christ, with our plea for unity on the basis of Scripture, must surely rejoice at this approach, which has been implicit in the basis of the World Council of Churches ("The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures") but which became explicit at Montreal. Our Movement in the United States, Britain, Australia and New Zealand has contributed to this approach, and our voice must continue to be heard at this important time.

      This is not to suggest that our contribution has been the greatest factor in determining the present approach. We should acknowledge, gratefully and humbly, that consecrated Biblical scholarship within all denominations has played the decisive role. God's Spirit is moving in the whole Church as He did in the days of Thomas and Alexander Campbell, convincing us of the sin of division and leading us all to manifest the essential unity of the Church.

      A contribution has been made by us. We also are being enriched by the contributions of other Biblical scholars who are saying things concerning the Scriptures that demand our attention. In an address to the Conference one scholar spoke for all when he said: "The historian simply cannot speak of an unbroken unity in New Testament ecclesiology." The disciples were faced with different situations in various places and the Spirit of God led them to respond differently according to the needs of the time. The unity of the New Testament is found not in static forms but in the living Spirit of Christ. Such is the considered verdict of the Biblical scholars. This does not mean that forms are unimportant, nor that we can find little basis for unity in Scripture. Only the Scriptures can be the basis for unity--but we must recognise the significant element of diversity within the undoubted unity of the New Testament.

      The significance of this Scriptural approach cannot be stressed too much. The churches are now desiring to go as deep as they can together to the basic affirmation of the Church that "Jesus is Lord." Never before have the churches so seriously sought to check the ways in which their traditions have diverged over against the person and work of Christ.

      For many it is a new venture. Progress to date has been relatively slow. But a beginning has been made and all see that it is full of promise. The way forward seems clear--it is "to submit all that our churches mean to us, and all that we can understand of others, to the judgment of Christ, Lord of us all" (a quote from the "Word to the Churches", issued at the end of the Conference).

      The way ahead, however, is not without its difficulties. The history of the Church clearly shows that acceptance of the apostolic writings does not of itself solve the problem of disunity. For the Scriptures have to be rightly interpreted. But what is right interpretation?

      Those who have been involved intimately with the ecumenical movement have long since realised that those who disagree with us are not dishonestly ignoring certain texts or manipulating Scripture for their own ends. They firmly believe that they are rightly interpreting the Scriptures under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. And so do we. The chief difficulty is that each stands within their own particular and limited tradition

(and Churches of Christ do have tradition no matter how much we disclaim it) and we interpret the the Scriptures accordingly, mistakenly thinking that at all tines we are avoiding subjective and arbitrary interpretation.

      At Montreal the delegates of the churches became increasingly concerned about this problem. The Conference did not solve it. What it did do (especially through the Report of Section 2, "Scripture, Tradition and the traditions") was to point out that at present the Church does not yet possess a common method of interpretation that would take each of us beyond our own limited traditions.

      Let it be added, nor do we in the Restoration Movement have agreement here. It is a matter for concern that a Movement which was born with a method of interpretation by which the Church might be united on the basis of the Scriptures has given so little importance to this vital question. Perhaps through this Conference God is calling us to once again give a lead here.

      The Montreal Conference suggested some ways in which we could commence:--

      1. A study of the Scriptures together, a study that brings together people of varying traditions. It is not enough to read Reports like this. We have to study together. Has not the time come for ministers' fraternals and local congregations to come together for joint Bible study?

      2. A joint study of the various materials used to train people in Church membership. This would include, I imagine, all Christian Education materials, to see if the whole Church is being presented and not just partial views.

      3. A joint study of the various Christian traditions of spirituality and prayer to achieve a proper understanding of our total heritage.

      4. A continued re-examination of each particular tradition in the light of Scripture. Churches of Christ are called to do this as well as all other churches.

      Some of these suggestions must be carried out at the top level. But others, and the list could be expanded, demand action at the local level. "The proving ground of unity is the local church"--so runs the Report of Section 5, "All in each place: the process of growing together. It continues:--

      "Here the process of growing together exhibits the fruits of the Spirit, the tensions of our divisions, and the strains and conflicts arising from the contemporary revolutionary situation . . . It is in the local community that the scandal of Christian disunity is particularly conspicuous and injurious. Therefore it is in each place, where people live, work and worship that our partnership in the Body of Christ has to be made manifest and lived out."

      Let us be honest with ourselves. While it is true that the movement for unity (of which the ecumenical movement is a part) has made considerable progress at the top level through its world conferences involving Church leaders, at the local level very little advance has been registered. For most of us, Christian unity has remained a nice sounding phrase because it has been kept at a distance. What is needed now is some action at the very heart of the Church--at the level of the local congregation. Montreal asked each congregation to consider these questions:--

      - Each Sunday as we draw around the Lord's Table, are we aware that in this act which ought to express our unity ("because there is one loaf, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of

- 7 -

the same loaf", 1 Cor. 10:17, R.S.V.) we in fact express our disunity? We do not partake of the one loaf because many other Christians in good conscience believe they cannot take the bread and cup in our services.

      - Do we think of ourselves as bound together with the other churches in our particular community in the mission that Christ has laid upon us all, or does the recognition of other churches in the same locality evoke merely a general sentiment of goodwill?

      - Do we heed Paul when he prays that we should comprehend with all the saints the fullness of the love of Christ? (Ephesians 3:18-19):

      - Do we absolutise the channels through which the truth of God has come to us?

      What can be done at the local level to arouse people to the call of God to manifest the unity of His Church? The Montreal Conference in several of its Reports, suggested that we begin by leading church members to understand more fully what it means to be the people of God.

      In particular, we need to be reminded about what our baptism means. We are baptised into Christ and thus into His body. Baptism is an expression of our unity in Him and ought therefore to be a call to manifest that unity. Our baptism is also a call to mission and an entrance into a new life, a holy life. Unity, mission and holiness are all demanded by our baptism.

      Then again, Section 4 at Montreal, whose subject was Worship, emphasised that true worship is focused upon Christ Himself and this too ought to bring us both an awareness of the unity which God gives us in Christ and of the disunity which is shown to the world.

      To worship in spirit and in truth is to be drawn together.

      These were not new emphases. It has been stressed many times before that as the Church is renewed by God through our dedication so we will know more concerning His will for unity. I have repeated these emphases, however, because they filled such a vital place in the thinking of delegates at Montreal.

      It was evident again and again that the ecumenical movement is not interested in compromise, a watered-down faith or shallow living. Rather it seeks through contact with the Holy Spirit in study of the Scriptures, in intensive worship and in holy living to be shown the mind of God for this day and age.

      Did the Conference make any specific suggestions about action in the local churches? Some have been mentioned already. But on the whole the Conference wisely felt that specific action could only be determined in the local situation. These two things, however, it did say:--

      1. That, whatever is done, it should be directed to the normal life of the congregation and not to some optional area of "ecumenical co-operation."

      2. There must be a willingness on the part of local and denominational authorities to accept responsible risks in making new ventures away from the traditional patterns of church life and into new patterns of working together.

      Was the Montreal Conference worth the effort and expense? At the end of the two weeks the delegates themselves were frankly self-critical. We felt that we had not been sufficiently conscious of contemporary problems like nuclear

disarmament, racial conflict and social change. We agreed that there had been much frustration and that we had by no means resolved many questions satisfactorily.

      But we believed that the Conference was greatly worthwhile for progress was made in mutual understanding, in accepting a common criterion, and in ascertaining unresolved issues.

      In one sense, however, it is too soon to make a judgment. Though the delegates have returned home, the Montreal Conference in one sense is not yet finished. The Reports of the Conference were not intended to be final statements on certain issues but invitations to member churches to continue to examine these .same crucial questions. If these invitations are accepted, Montreal will have tremendous effect on the life of the Church.

      The time appears opportune for Churches of Christ to take up this challenge, as in several States discussion with our Baptist brethren are causing us to re-examine the Biblical evidence for our faith and for the order in our churches. This could be but the beginning of an ongoing encounter on the road to Christian unity.

      Let us heed the final appeal of the officers of the Conference in their word to the churches . . .

      "We invite our churches to continue in every way they can to manifest the unity of life which is hidden with God in Christ. Today we see openings which only faith could discern yesterday. But there is still far to go. Our faith is in Him Who is calling us, for He is faithful and He will do it."

Suggested material for study groups:

      1. The study documents prepared for the Montreal Conference are excellent.

      "Christ and the Church"
      "Scripture, Tradition and traditions"
      "Worship"
      "Institutionalism."

      2. "Laity" No. 15, May 1963, contains a splendid discussion on the ministry.

      3. The Reports of the Conference will be printed early in 1964.

      For information on all these, contact Australian Council of Churches, 511 Kent Street, Sydney.