Ecumenism's future: what to look for under Benedict XVI.

Pope John Paul II often said that the commitment of the Roman Catholic Church to ecumenical dialogue is "irreversible." How Pope Benedict XVI will carry out this irreversible commitment is a complicated question.

On one hand, the new pope presents some appealing characteristics to churches with whom the Roman Catholic Church is in dialogue. On the other, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) under then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's presidency posed many problems for ecumenical dialogue.

First, in some ways Benedict XVI appeals. In Germany Joseph Ratzinger studied Protestant theology and taught with Protestant colleagues. Especially familiar with Lutheran positions, he personally intervened to help bring about an ecumenical highpoint, the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification." When the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church declared in 1999 that some sixteenth-century condemnations did not apply today to the other church's actual teaching about grace, John Paul II called it an "ecumenical watershed." Many other churches were envious of this major breakthrough.

Though less familiar with Evangelicals and Pentecostal Christians, the new pope also offers some inviting characteristics to them. They welcome his clear stand against relativism and his emphasis on true doctrine. When the CDF under Ratzinger's leadership stressed the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and the "gravely deficient situation" of members of other religions in Dominus Iesus in 2000, Evangelicals and Pentecostals applauded. The countercultural stand that Ratzinger adapted from his study of Augustine and Bonaventure blends easily with some Evangelical and Pentecostal warnings against the dangers of the modern world. John Paul II's charismatic preaching style and his emphasis on evangelization also resonated with these groups. They admired his consistency in opposing abortion, war, capital punishment, and euthanasia. They hope for more of the same from the new pontificate.

Benedict XVI is the first pope to have earlier served as a theologian in the Roman Catholic-Orthodox dialogue. Some Orthodox found dialogue difficult during the pontificate of a pope from Poland, where Catholic-Orthodox relations have been strained. They hope for a fresh start in East-West dialogue with the new pontificate. Since Vatican II, some Orthodox and Anglicans have been warming up to the possibilities offered by a world-level spokesperson for the church. In its Final Report of 1982, the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission even argued that a "universal primacy" by one bishop among the bishops is "part of God's design." Many Anglicans were intrigued by the fresh possibilities for leadership and conflict resolution at the world level offered by John Paul and now Benedict.

The 1999 declaration on justification was only one highly publicized ecumenical achievement of the last pontificate. In fact, the Roman Catholic Church has been officially in dialogue for over forty years with an increasingly wide range of churches, from Orthodox to Pentecostal, from Presbyterian to Mennonite, from Anglican to Disciples of Christ. Each of these international dialogues has written remarkable agreed-upon statements filled with theological breakthroughs and suggestions for church structural reform. Leadership for this work came from the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity (PCPCU), but it is good to remember that the ecumenical agreements of recent years were also vetted by the CDF. Hence there is a large body of fresh innovative theological reflection, already approved by Ratzinger's office, ready and waiting to be harvested in the new pontificate.

So much for the new pope's ecumenical credentials. Now for the painful memories.

During the last pontificate, ecumenical dialogue frequently experienced the yo-yo effect of rapidly rising and falling hopes regarding the papacy. While John Paul II gave theoretical support to the renewed collegial understanding of his role envisioned by Vatican II and welcomed by other churches, at times his actions appeared to contradict this vision. Frequently these mixed messages came through the CDF.

Anglicans and Protestants were disappointed, for example, by the cool reception given to the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission's Final Report. The Commission had presented an important reconceptualization of infallibility and had even proposed Anglicans' recovery of full communion with the bishop of Rome, but this breakthrough work was met with hesitation and criticism by the Vatican. Anglicans and Protestants were also disappointed when John Paul II restated the teaching against the ordination of women in Ordinatio sacerdotalis in 1994, presented now as "definitively to be held."

Even more alarming for all these dialogue partners--Anglicans, mainline Protestants, Orthodox, Evangelicals, and Pentecostals--was the subsequent judgment of the CDF that women's exclusion from priestly ordination had been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium. Just when ecumenical dialogue had been emphasizing the limited character of infallibility and the importance of a collegial exercise of papal teaching, Rome seemed to be producing new infallible statements. Protestants and Anglicans had, of course, been ordaining women for a long time, so they disagreed with the pope and the CDF on this issue. But the CDF's statement alarmed even those churches, like the Orthodox, who in fact don't ordain women but don't want the pope and his curia deciding such issues either.

An overly centralized papacy with too much authority: Vatican II had tried to change this picture through its discussion of the collegiality of bishops and the infallibility of the whole people of God. But to ecumenical partners, authority in the Roman Catholic Church still appeared too centralized. As John Garvey has observed, "Collegiality was a principle but not really a practice." Episcopal conferences were under fire, the synod of bishops remained merely advisory to the pope, and now infallibility seemed to be expanding.

And what was this new category, "definitively to be held," anyway? As Roman Catholics wrangled among themselves about its meaning, ecumenists from other church communities watched uneasily. They puzzled over the explanation given by Ratzinger and Tarcisio Bertone in comments on Ad tuendam fidem in 1998, in which the condemnation of Anglican orders and the exclusion of women from ordination were considered positions "definitively to be held" and were then linked to infallibility.

But more than theories were involved. Some Roman Catholics were required to add the "definitive" category to an oath they took to show their faithfulness, or to ask their bishops for a mandate to teach theology. Such glimpses of papal teaching authority could hardly be expected to reassure ecumenical partners.

Some of the CDF's theological positions also alienated other churches. In Some Aspects of the Church Understood as Communion of 1992, churches lacking full communion with the pope were described as "wounded." A series of exchanges between Ratzinger (CDF) and Cardinal Walter Kasper (PCPCU) highlighted the tension between two interpretations of Vatican II present in the curia. While articles by Ratzinger emphasized the priority and importance of the universal church, Kasper's articles underlined the diversity of the local churches and the mutuality of the church at the local and universal levels. Then Dominus Iesus taught that the church of Christ "continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church." After decades of ecumenical dialogue, partners felt that some ecclesial elements they shared with the Roman Catholic Church had not even been acknowledged.

Because the Reformation was a movement of dissent within the church, Protestants and Anglicans at times identify with dissenters and tend to keep an eye on the treatment of dissent. Even if they were envious of the CDF's juridical authority, they wondered why relatively moderate moral positions like those of Charles Curran were censured and Curran removed from his teaching post. Concerned about episcopal authority, Orthodox and Anglicans were alarmed by restrictions the Vatican placed on Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen's pastoral outreach to the gay community in his own diocese of Seattle, and on his care for divorced and remarried Roman Catholics. The recent censure of Thomas Reese at America is experienced by many inside and outside the Roman Catholic Church as a scandal. As a General Theological Seminary statement put it in 1986 when Curran was censured, "The question ... is whether or not the Anglican Communion should envision closer ecumenical relations with a church that seems officially determined to suppress public discussion, debate, dialogue, or even disagreement."

Now Benedict XVI has another chance to respond to this question. He is more familiar with ecumenical dialogue than most of his predecessors. His countercultural stand may impel him to make common cause with all who call on Christ's name. And he has a treasure trove of significant agreements with many churches that his office approved. If these agreements were now to be officially implemented, ecumenical dialogue would take giant steps in the next few years.

Still, painful memories last a long time. Dispelling such memories with bold initiatives will be an important obligation for Benedict XVI as he carries out the irreversible commitment of the Roman Catholic Church to ecumenical dialogue.

Margaret O'Gara is a Roman Catholic professor of theology at the Faculty of Theology in the University of St. Michael's College, Toronto. She has been involved in ecumenical dialogue since 1976.