Church and Unity: Wolfgang Vondey on Ecclesiology and Ecumenism
A recent collection on Pentecostalism and Christian Unity suggests that Pentecostals are historically and theologically defined as an ecumenical movement.7 In this process it has become clear that the pursuit of Christian unity goes hand in hand with one’s self-understanding as a church: ecumenism and ecclesiology are two sides of the same coin. Nevertheless, the broader ecumenical movement has shown that finding our communal identity often requires that we also define the kind of unity we seek.8 Of course, we retain the connections with other churches and movements from which we emerged. In fact, we foster these connections so that the pursuit of a robust ecclesiology becomes unattainable without a robust ecumenical commitment. Pentecostalism, in particular, embraces in its many voices potentially all Christian traditions. Ecumenically speaking, this should result in a relentless pursuit of unity—not a “pentecostalization” of Christianity but a “Christianization” of Pentecostalism. However, ecclesiologically speaking, this commitment does not mean we inevitably end up with a single understanding of the church. The more appropriate expectation, for Pentecostals as for Evangelicals, is a variety of ecclesiologies. This plurality is not the nemesis of ecumenical unity; it is its theological presupposition.
If my assessment is correct, then Pentecostals will have to adjust their practices in order to preserve a genuinely Pentecostal way of being church. The influence goes both ways, of course: Pentecostals have become more evangelical in their worship just as Evangelicals have become more Pentecostal in their practices. The result is an Evangelical Pentecostalism that now possesses its own ecclesiology. The comments at the end of my response to the book, Exploring Ecclesiology, was not made from that perspective. Rather, they are a reflection from the history and worldview of classical Pentecostalism that is fading from the North American landscape as it makes room for global forms of Pentecostal faith and praxis. The result will undoubtedly be a proliferation of Pentecostal ecclesiologies of which some will be more Evangelical than others while all will need to be ecumenical in essence. A chief outcome of this development may be that we find more clarity on what exactly accounts for a genuine Pentecostal ecclesiology that is applicable to the variety of voices emerging from global Pentecostalism.
Notes
1 Cf. Wolfgang Vondey (ed.), Pentecostalism and Christian Unity: Ecumenical Documents and Critical Assessments (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2010).
2 For a distinction of classical Pentecostalism see Vinson Synan, “Classical Pentecostalism,” in The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, eds. Stanley M. Burgess and Eduard M. van der Maas (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 553-55.
3 See Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, An Introduction to Ecclesiology: Ecumenical, Historical and Global Perspectives (Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 2002), 68-78.
4 See Wolfgang Vondey, Beyond Pentecostalism: The Crisis of Global Christianity and the Renewal of the Theological Agenda, Pentecostal Manifestos 3 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 141-70; “Pentecostal Ecclesiology and Eucharistic Hospitality: Toward a Systematic and Ecumenical Account of the Church.” Pneuma: Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies 32, no. 1 (2010): 41-55; “Pentecostal Perspectives on The Nature and Mission of the Church: Challenges and Opportunities for Ecumenical Transformation,” in “The Nature and Mission of the Church”: Ecclesial Reality and Ecumenical Horizons for the Twenty-First Century, edited by Paul M. Collins and Michael A. Fahey (Ecclesiological Investigations 1; New York: Continuum, 2008), 55-68; “A Pentecostal Perspective on The Nature and Mission of the Church.” Ecumenical Trends 35.8 (2006): 1-5.
Category: Ministry, Spring 2011
Followers
Fans
