Hermeneutics of History 2017

red54;;;Opening New Frontiers Evangelical Catholic Dialogues One of the unexpected developments in Catholic ecumenism following the second Vatican Council was the development of a variety of dialogue with Holiness,‭ ‬Evangelical and Pentecostal Christians.‭ ‬At the Council there were no formal representatives of evangelical churches,‭ ‬though there were unofficial Pentecostal and Baptist guests who facilitated their communities‭’‬ dialogue with the Catholic Church a few years later.‭ In this paper we will look at two texts,‭ ‬Evangelical Roman Catholic Dialogue on Mission‭ (‬1983‭ – ‬hereafter ERCDOM‭) ‬and‭ ‬Church,‭ ‬Evangelization,‭ ‬and Koinonia‭ ‬between the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and‭ ‬the World Evangelical Alliance‭ (‬previously Fellowship‭) ‬(2002‭ – ‬hereafter WEA‭)‬,‭ ‬with very different histories and provenance,‭ ‬but both‭ ‬make important contributions to the theological ecumenical literature‭;‬ which‭ ‬are‭ ‬historic in their own ways and rich resources for Catholic and Evangelical formation and local dialogue. ‭ ‬Before focusing on the two texts,‭ ‬a few background observations are necessary:‭ First,‭ ‬Catholic Evangelical relations were very delicate in the beginning and continue to be so,‭ ‬more from the Evangelical side than the Catholic side,‭ ‬because of historic tensions where there have been experiences of‭ ‬alienation or‭ ‬persecution.‭ ‬There are also hesitations in some Catholic communities where differentiation is difficult between anti-Catholic proselytizers,‭ ‬non-Christian groups,‭ ‬and the more open historic churches and some ecumenical Pentecostal and evangelical groups. ‭ ‬Second,‭ ‬the majority Christians from the Evangelical global subculture within Christianity are in Pentecostal,‭ ‬Baptist and historic Protestant communities with which the Catholic Church has‭ ‬other‭ ‬dialogues than those documented in these two texts. ‭ ‬Definitions of‭ “‬evangelical,‭” ‬in the sense used in these two reports are notoriously imprecise,‭ ‬as noted in the ERCDOM text:‭ “‬Yet all Evangelicals share a cluster of theological convictions which were recovered and reaffirmed by the‭ ‬16th century Reformers.‭ ‬These include‭ (‬in addition to the great affirmations of the Nicene Creed‭) ‬the inspiration and authority of the Bible,‭ ‬the sufficiency of its teaching for salvation,‭ ‬and its supremacy over the traditions of the Church‭; ‬the justification of sinners‭ (‬i.e.‭ ‬their acceptance by God as righteous in his sight‭) ‬on the sole ground of the sin bearing often called‭ "‬substitutionary‭" ‬--‭ ‬death of Jesus Christ,‭ ‬by God's free grace alone,‭ ‬apprehended by faith alone,‭ ‬without the addition of any human works‭; ‬the inward work of the Holy Spirit to bring about the new birth and to transform the regenerate into the likeness of Christ‭; ‬the necessity of personal repentance and faith in Christ‭ ("‬conversion‭"); ‬the Church as the Body of Christ,‭ ‬which incorporates all true believers,‭ ‬and all of whose members are called to ministry,‭ ‬some being‭ "‬evangelists,‭ ‬pastors and teachers‭"; ‬the‭ "‬priesthood of all believers,‭" ‬who‭ (‬without any priestly mediation except Christ's‭) ‬all enjoy equal access to God and all offer him their sacrifice of praise and worship‭; ‬the urgency of the great commission to spread the gospel throughout the world,‭ ‬both verbally in proclamation and visually in good works of love‭; ‬and the expectation of the personal,‭ ‬visible and glorious return of Jesus Christ to save,‭ ‬to reign and to judge.‭” ( ‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬Introduction,‭ ‬1‭])‬ Therefore,‭ ‬Pentecostals and ecumenically oriented Baptists are more likely to give attention to these specific dialogues,‭ ‬and use them for formation and theological renewal in their own traditions. ‭ ‬See for example,‭ ‬Wolfgang Vondey,‭ ‬Pentecostalism and Christian Unity:‭ ‬Ecumenical Documents and Critical Assessments,‭ ‬Pickwick Publications:‭ ‬Eugene,‭ ‬2010.‭ ‬The Protestant and Anglican churches,‭ ‬whose evangelical members may be in these dialogues,‭ ‬are more likely to look to the specific dialogues with their churches than to these evangelical texts.‭ Likewise,‭ ‬evangelicals from the ecumenical churches who are in these dialogues,‭ ‬like Anglican John Stott and United Methodist Thomas Oden,‭ ‬may have other theological priorities than their‭ ‬own‭ ‬churches bring to their Catholic relations,‭ ‬and other experiences of Catholicism than their evangelical colleagues.‭ ‬For example,‭ ‬when Dr.‭ ‬Oden articulated that there should be no problem with Marian piety,‭ ‬and sited some of Charles Wesley’s hymns,‭ ‬Latin American members of the‭ ‬evangelical‭ ‬dialogue voiced a very different point of view.‭ ‬Sometimes personalities in the evangelical movement bear a tenuous relationship with their own specific church tradition.‭ ‬For example,‭ ‬prominent Southern Baptists,‭ ‬like Billy Graham,‭ ‬Timothy George,‭ ‬Chuck Colson,‭ ‬or the late Carl F.H.C.‭ ‬Henry and R.G.‭ ‬Lee,‭ ‬have major evangelical influence but their Convention belongs to neither the National Association of Evangelicals nor the Baptist World Alliance.‭ ‬Richard Mouw,‭ ‬president of the Fuller,‭ ‬the flagship evangelical seminary and successor to David Hubbard active in ERCDOM,‭ ‬is Reformed cochair of the US Reformed Catholic dialogue and has a remarkable ecumenical history. ‭ ‬Thirdly,‭ ‬some evangelicals belong to churches with a clear ecclesiology and a commitment to the goal of the ecumenical movement as full communion in faith,‭ ‬sacramental life and witness,‭ ‬including bonds of communion.‭ ‬Nevertheless,‭ ‬for the evangelical movement as a whole,‭ ‬identity is formed by‭ ‬mission and particular emphases within the Christian faith,‭ ‬and not ecclesiology.‭ ‬It is even more remarkable,‭ ‬as one long time participant notes about the second of these two texts,‭ ‬that it:‭ “‬goes beyond‭ [‬ERCDOM‭] ‬as participants of the dialogue began to speak at some depth about the nature of the Church.‭ ‬In light of our respective histories it is almost more than one might have hoped for.‭” Basil Meeking,‭ “‬Comment on the Report:‭ ‬Church,‭ ‬Evangelization,‭ ‬and Koinonia,‭”‬ Information Service,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬113:II‭ – ‬III,‭ ‬103. ‭ ‬Therefore,‭ ‬the‭ ‬goal‭ ‬of these two texts is‭ “‬an exchange of theological views in order to increase mutual understanding and to discover what theological ground they hold in common‭” (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬Introduction,‭ ‬3‭])‬,‭ ‬laying the ground work for witness together.‭ ‬They are pioneering:‭ ‬ERCDOM because‭ ‬1‭) ‬of its foundation in two important texts‭ ‬The Lausanne Covenant‭ (‬1974‭)‬ (LC‭)‬ and Pope Paul VI’s‭ ‬Evangelii nuntiandi‭ (‬1975‭)‬ (EN‭)‬,‭ ‬2‭) ‬the methodology of the dialogue,‭ ‬and‭ ‬3‭) ‬the quality of its text‭; ‬and WEA because of‭ ‬1‭) ‬earlier tensions,‭ ‬2‭)‬ the formal sponsorship of the conversation that produced the report and‭ ‬3‭) ‬its convergence on the theology of the Church. The Two Texts Early Evangelical contacts,‭ ‬in the late‭ ‬1960s,‭ ‬first occurred through the bible societies in translation work together. ‭ ‬John Radano,‭ “‬International Dialogue Between Catholics and Evangelicals Since the Second Vatican Council,‭” ‬in‭ ‬M.‭ ‬Goheen‭ & ‬M.‭ ‬O’Gara,‭ ‬eds.,‭ ‬That the World May Believe,‭ ‬Lanham:‭ ‬University of America Press,‭ ‬2006,‭ ‬173‭ – ‬175.‭ ‬Difficulties in these early encounters enabled the Secretariat‭ (‬now Pontifical Council‭)‬ for Promoting Christian Unity at the Holy See to develop sensibilities and an understanding of what common ground needed to be created.‭ As the Catholic Church moved into the‭ ‬1970s and beyond,‭ ‬it became possible to initiate conversations with these Christians,‭ ‬to begin the healing of memories,‭ ‬and to recognize the importance of speaking about religious freedom and‭ ‬proselytizism,‭ ‬as a foundation for common witness.‭ ‬In addition to texts from these dialogues,‭ ‬interchange of representatives at evangelical assemblies and at events sponsored by the Holy See has been stepping stones in enhancing this relationship.‭ ‬The Global Christian Forum has become another context for Catholic evangelical contacts. ‭ ‬http://www.globalchristianforum.org/‭ ERCDOM ‭ ‬The Pontifical Council‭ (‬then Secretariat‭)‬ for Promoting Christian Unity sponsored a conversation with an informal group of conservative evangelical Christians‭ ‬which‭ ‬produced‭ ‬Evangelical,‭ ‬Roman Catholic Dialogue on Mission. ‭ ‬http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/e-rc/doc/i_e-rc_ev-cath.html see Basil Meeking,‭ “‬Introductory Note,‭” ‬in William G.‭ ‬Rusch,‭ ‬Jeffrey Gros,‭ ‬eds.,‭ ‬Deepening Communion,‭ ‬Washington:‭ ‬US Catholic Conference,‭ ‬1998,‭ ‬425‭ – ‬6.‭ ‬ The text has an‭ ‬unofficial and ad hoc character,‭ ‬and is the result of three sessions begun at Venice in‭ ‬1977.‭ ‬It is offered as a record of‭ ‬a conversation and not an agreed statement. ‭ ‬Since this body of Christians has an important international presence,‭ ‬especially in mission and evangelism,‭ ‬these talks were a significant‭ ‬early part of a long process.‭ ‬It is in these groups,‭ ‬for example,‭ ‬that much of the historic anti-Catholicism has still to be overcome. ‭ ‬See William M.‭ ‬Shea,‭ ‬The Lion and the Lamb:‭ ‬Evangelicals and Catholics in America,‭ ‬New York:‭ ‬Oxford University Press,‭ ‬2004.‭ ‬Stephen Bevans,‭ “‬What Catholics Learn from Evangelical Mission Theology,‭ ‬Missiology,‭ ‬XXIII:‭ ‬2,‭ ‬April,‭ ‬1995,‭ ‬155‭ – ‬164.‭ ‬ Likewise,‭ ‬it is here that the more aggressive evangelism,‭ ‬sometimes proselytism,‭ ‬is likely to take place relative to Catholics.‭ ‬So,‭ ‬even without formal representation,‭ ‬the process was significant,‭ ‬as the introduction notes: For the evangelical movement has a broad spectrum,‭ ‬which includes evangelical denominations‭ (‬both within and outside the World Council of Churches‭)‬,‭ ‬evangelical fellowships‭ (‬within mainline,‭ ‬comprehensive denominations‭)‬,‭ ‬and evangelical parachurch agencies‭ (‬specializing in tasks like Bible translation,‭ ‬evangelism,‭ ‬cross-cultural mission,‭ ‬and Third World relief and development‭)‬,‭ ‬which accept different degrees of responsibility to the Church.‭ (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬Introduction,‭ ‬1‭]) Participants on both sides were drawn from missiologists and theologians who could give an account of their own tradition,‭ ‬evangelical and Catholic,‭ ‬with accuracy to the heritage,‭ ‬but without polemic.‭ The text recognizes early on the agreement cited in the‭ ‬Lausanne‭ ‬Covenant and‭ ‬Catholic‭ ‬Post-synodal Exhortation,‭ ‬noting: ‭…‬a measure of convergence in our understanding of the nature of evangelism,‭ ‬as the following quotations show:‭ "‬To evangelize is to spread the good news that Jesus Christ died for our sins and was raised from the dead according to the Scriptures...‭ ‬Evangelism itself is the proclamation of the historical biblical Christ as Savior and Lord....‭"‬ (LC‭) ‬Again,‭ ‬witness must be‭ "‬made explicit by a clear and unequivocal proclamation of the lord Jesus...‭ ‬There is no true evangelization if the name,‭ ‬the teaching,‭ ‬the life,‭ ‬the promises,‭ ‬the Kingdom and the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth,‭ ‬the Son of God,‭ ‬are not proclaimed.‭"‬ (EN‭)‬ (ERCDOM,‭ ‬Introduction,‭ ‬2‭]) The text that was produced has no standing with any of the participants or with the Catholic Church,‭ ‬and its diffusion is purely individual,‭ ‬though it has become an important resource,‭ ‬particularly in dealing with areas of tension.‭ ‬However,‭ ‬it pioneered an important theological‭ ‬innovation in bilateral conversations sponsored by the Holy See.‭ ‬It takes as its starting point the‭ ‬theme of mission,‭ ‬and how the different theological emphases‭ ‬serve mission,‭ ‬rather than concentrating on the historic differences over Scripture,‭ ‬tradition,‭ ‬initiation and salvation.‭ ‬These themes are treated in how they serve the mission of the Church,‭ ‬and how differences over them impede common witness to the Gospel.‭ ‬This provided an incentive for evangelicals for whom institutional unity,‭ ‬theological agreement and even the word‭ “‬ecumenism‭” ‬is often alienating.‭ ‬ Therefore,‭ ‬as Archbishop Kevin McNamara notes,‭ ‬it shows‭ “‬evidence of a new confidence on the part of Christians in discovering more clearly and affirming more knowledgably where they differ and what remains to be accomplished before fully common witness to the Lord Jesus can be achieved.‭” Kevin McNamara,‭ “‬A Review/Appreciation of the Document:‭ ‬Evangelical Roman Catholic Dialogue on Mission,‭” ‬Information Service,‭ ‬1986,‭ ‬60:‭ ‬I‭ – ‬II,‭ ‬98.‭ Much of the text lays out in an irenic fashion differences that are still divisive,‭ ‬differences that are emphases within a common approach to the Gospel truth,‭ ‬distortions of one another that can be clarified and put aside as a result of this dialogue,‭ ‬and‭ ‬the overcoming of which can‭ ‬make common witness possible.‭ ‬The text covers the themes of revelation and authority,‭ ‬salvation and justification,‭ ‬the nature of mission including its social and interreligious aspects,‭ ‬response in the Holy Spirit,‭ ‬the church and the Gospel,‭ ‬Gospel and culture‭;‬ all in the service of common witness. I The discussion of‭ ‬authority and scripture leads off the document because of its centrality in Gospel witness and its importance in the faith of both evangelicals and Catholics on which mission is based.‭ ‬Dialogue participants agree that they‭ “‬will not come to closer understanding or agreement on‭ ‬any topic if they cannot do so on‭ ‬this topic:‭” We agree on the objectivity of the truth which God has revealed.‭ ‬Yet it has to be subjectively received,‭ ‬indeed‭ "‬apprehended,‭" ‬if through it God is to do his reforming work.‭ ‬How then should our response to revelation be described‭?‬ (ERCDOM,‭ ‬1,‭ ‬1‭; ‬1,‭ ‬4,‭ ‬b‭]) The text caries an extended treatment of biblical interpretation,‭ ‬tradition and the role of the church,‭ ‬as well as of the individual and community,‭ ‬and the idea of reform,‭ ‬all areas where there have been misinterpretations of one another in the past.‭ ‬Continuing differences are formulated clearly where they are not resolved. ‭ ‬It demonstrates‭ ‬a sense of penitential reverence in response to the urgency of God’s call to common witness in a variety of cultural contexts: We all acknowledge the difficulties we experience in receiving God's Word.‭ ‬For as it comes to us,‭ ‬it finds each of us in our own social context and culture.‭ ‬True,‭ ‬it creates a new community,‭ ‬but this community also has its cultural characteristics derived both from the wider society in which it lives and from its own history which has shaped its understanding of God's revelation.‭ ‬So we have to be on the alert,‭ ‬lest our response to the Word of God is distorted by our cultural conditioning.‭ ‬(ERCDOM,‭ ‬1,‭ ‬4,‭ ‬b‭] ) II In outlining the nature of mission differences on the‭ ‬theological‭ ‬relationship between the evangelizing and social mission of the church and the role of‭ ‬cultural sensitivity have been‭ ‬particularly acute between these communities,‭ ‬therefore the recorded convergence is indeed dramatic: We are agreed that‭ "‬mission‭" ‬relates to every area of human need,‭ ‬both spiritual and social.‭ ‬Social responsibility is an integral part of evangelization‭; ‬and the struggle for justice can be a manifestation of the Kingdom of God.‭ ‬Jesus both preached and healed,‭ ‬and sent his disciples out to do likewise.‭ ‬His predilection for those without power and without voice continues God's concern in the Old Testament for the widow,‭ ‬the orphan,‭ ‬the poor and the defenseless alien. In particular we agree: a‭) ‬that serving the spiritual,‭ ‬social and material needs of our fellow human beings together constitutes love of neighbor and therefore‭ "‬mission‭"; b‭) ‬that an authentic proclamation of the good news must lead to a call for repentance,‭ ‬and that authentic repentance is a turning away from social as well as individual sins‭; c‭) ‬that since each Christian community is involved in the reality of the world,‭ ‬it should lovingly identify with the struggle for justice as a suffering community‭; d‭) ‬that in this struggle against evil in society,‭ ‬the Christian must be careful to use means which reflect the spirit of the gospel.‭ And:‭ We all agree that the aim of‭ "‬indigenization‭" ‬or‭ "‬inculturation‭" ‬is to make local Christians congenial members of the body of Christ.‭ ‬They must not imagine that to become Christian is to become western and so to repudiate their own cultural and national inheritance.‭ ‬The same principle applies in the west,‭ ‬where too often to become Christian has also meant to become middle class. There are a number of spheres in which each Church should be allowed to develop its own identity.‭ ‬The first is the question of certain forms of organization,‭ ‬especially as they relate to Church leadership.‭ ‬Although Roman Catholics and Evangelicals take a different approach to authority and its exercise,‭ ‬we are agreed that in every Christian community‭ (‬especially a new one‭) ‬authority must be exercised in a spirit of service.‭ "‬I am among you as one who serves,‭" ‬Jesus said‭ (‬Luke‭ ‬22:27‭)‬.‭ ‬Yet the expression given to leadership can vary according to different cultures.‭ (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬2,‭ ‬3‭]) III The authors are also able to face the contentious‭ ‬soteriological‭ ‬issue that was at the core of the Reformation division,‭ ‬justification and salvation,‭ ‬even beginning a discussion of the role of Mary and contemporary Latin American liberation theologies as they approach mission together: We agree that what is offered us through the death and resurrection of Christ is essentially‭ "‬deliverance,‭" ‬viewed both negatively and positively.‭ ‬Negatively,‭ ‬it is a rescue from the power of Satan,‭ ‬sin and death,‭ ‬from guilt,‭ ‬alienation‭ (‬estrangement from God‭)‬,‭ ‬moral corruption,‭ ‬self-centeredness,‭ ‬existential despair and fear of the future,‭ ‬including death.‭ ‬Positively,‭ ‬it is a deliverance into the freedom of Christ.‭ ‬This freedom brings human‭ ‬fulfillment.‭ ‬It is essentially becoming‭ "‬sons in the Son‭" ‬and therefore brothers to each other.‭ ‬The unity of the disciples of Jesus is a sign both that the Father sent the Son and that the Kingdom has arrived.‭ ‬Further,‭ ‬the new community expresses itself in eucharistic worship,‭ ‬in serving the needy‭ (‬especially the poor and disenfranchised‭)‬,‭ ‬in open fellowship with people of every age,‭ ‬race and culture,‭ ‬and in conscious continuity with the historic Christ through fidelity to the teaching of his apostles.‭ Roman Catholics draw attention to the three dimensions of evangelization which Evangelii nuntiandi links.‭ ‬They are the‭ ‬anthropological,‭ ‬in which humanity is seen always within a concrete situation‭; ‬the‭ ‬theological,‭ ‬in which the unified plan of God is seen within both creation and redemption‭; ‬and the‭ ‬evangelical,‭ ‬in which the exercise of charity‭ (‬refusing to ignore human misery‭) ‬is seen in the light of the story of the Good Samaritan. We all agree that the essential meaning of Christ's salvation is the restoration of the broken relationship between sinful humanity and a saving God‭; ‬it cannot therefore be seen as a temporal or material project,‭ ‬making evangelism unnecessary.‭ (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬3,‭ ‬5‭]) IV The role of the Holy Spirit,‭ ‬baptism and the nature of‭ ‬conversion are issues where the differences are carefully outlined,‭ ‬and the level of mutual understanding and agreement spelled out.‭ ‬The nature,‭ ‬role and mission of the church are one of the most divisive issues.‭ ‬Important areas of agreement support common witness,‭ ‬even without agreement on ecclesiology: Both Evangelicals and Roman Catholics are conscious of past failure in their understanding of the Church.‭ ‬Roman Catholics used to concentrate on the Church as a hierarchical institution,‭ ‬but now‭ (‬since Vatican II‭) ‬see it in new perspective by stressing the important biblical images such as that of the People of God.‭ ‬Evangelicals have sometimes preached an excessively individualistic gospel,‭ "‬Christ died for me.‭" ‬This is true‭ (‬Gal‭ ‬2:20‭)‬,‭ ‬but it is far from the whole truth,‭ ‬which is that Christ gave himself for us‭ "‬to purify for himself a people...‭" (‬Tit‭ ‬2:14‭)‬. Thus both Roman Catholics and Evangelicals agree that the Church as the Body of Christ is part of the gospel.‭ ‬That is to say,‭ ‬the good news includes God's purpose to create for himself through Christ a new,‭ ‬redeemed,‭ ‬united and international people of his own. ‭ ‬McNamara notes this ecclesiological emphasis as one of the most important breakthroughs in this text,‭ ‬ibid.,‭ ‬99.‭ (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬5,‭ ‬1‭]) V The culmination of the report is the‭ ‬theological‭ ‬conviction that‭ ‬common witness is not only possible,‭ ‬but‭ ‬demanded by the common faith that is shared and the mission to which we are called as Christians: We who have participated in ERCDOM III‭ [‬this text only represents those present at the last of the three meetings‭] ‬are agreed that every possible opportunity for common witness should be taken,‭ ‬except where conscience forbids.‭ ‬We cannot make decisions for one another,‭ ‬however,‭ ‬because we recognize that the situation varies in different groups and places.‭ ‬In any case,‭ ‬the sad fact of our divisions on important questions of faith always puts a limit on the common witness which is possible.‭ ‬At one end of the spectrum are those who can contemplate no cooperation of any kind.‭ ‬At the other are those who desire a very full cooperation.‭ ‬In between are many who still find some forms of common witness conscientiously impossible,‭ ‬while they find others to be the natural,‭ ‬positive expression of common concern and conviction.‭ (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬Conclusion‭) WEA This second‭ ‬dialogue‭;‬ the‭ ‬2002‭ ‬text,‭ “‬Church,‭ ‬Evangelization,‭ ‬and‭ ‬Koinonia,‭” ‬is truly historic because‭ “‬for the first time these meetings were sponsored by international bodies on both sides:‭ ‬the‭ ‬World Evangelical Alliance and‭ ‬the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity‭” (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬Preamble‭)‬.‭ ‬It was not at all clear when this particular set of conversations began in‭ ‬1990‭ ‬that a text would emerge. ‭ ‬http://www.prounione.urbe.it/dia-int/e-rc/doc/e_e-rc_report2002.html‭ ‬ The conversations were begun because the World Evangelical Fellowship‭ (‬now Alliance‭) ‬issued a‭ ‬1987‭ “‬A Contemporary Evangelical Perspective on Roman Catholicism‭” World Evangelical Fellowship.‭ "‬A Contemporary Evangelical Perspective on Roman Catholicism‭"‬,‭ ‬The Evangelical Review of Theology,‭ ‬10:4,‭ ‬11:1,‭ ‬1986.‭ ‬in response to protests from some southern European evangelical associations who objected to the presence of Roman Catholics,‭ ‬especially a member of the staff of the Secretariat‭ (‬now Pontifical Council‭) ‬for Promoting Christian Unity from the Vatican,‭ ‬at their‭ ‬1980‭ ‬international Assembly in England.‭ ‬Catholics found this text‭ ‬theologically‭ ‬inaccurate,‭ ‬and therefore a set of meetings was begun,‭ ‬where clarifications and points of view were exchanged,‭ ‬with no original plan for a statement. ‭ “‬Justification,‭ ‬Scripture and Tradition:‭ ‬World Evangelical Fellowship‭ ‬-‭ ‬Roman Catholic Dialogue,‭” ‬Evangelical Review of Theology,‭ ‬21:2,‭ ‬April,‭ ‬1997.‭ ‬At the‭ ‬1999‭ ‬meeting the group felt that there was sufficient theological convergence after almost a decade of meetings that drafting could be attempted.‭ ‬The next three meetings made it possible to produce this text. ‭ ‬The size,‭ ‬cultural and historical differences are noted,‭ ‬and the gradual rapprochement is recorded.‭ ‬The first part of the text focuses on ecclesiology,‭ ‬through the lens of‭ ‬koinonia,‭ ‬a biblical term which has proved to be fruitful in the ecumenical movement.‭ ‬In the context set by common reflection on this ecclesial perspective,‭ ‬differences on‭ ‬proselytizing,‭ ‬religious freedom,‭ ‬and common witness are taken up in the second part. ‭ ‬The purpose of the dialogue is duly circumscribed:‭ The purpose of these consultations has been to overcome misunderstandings,‭ ‬to seek better mutual understanding of each other’s Christian life and heritage,‭ ‬and to promote better relations between Evangelicals and Catholics‭… ‬It is a study document produced by participants in this Consultation.‭ ‬The authorities who appointed the participants have allowed the Report to be published so that it may be widely discussed.‭ ‬It is not an authoritative declaration of either the Catholic Church or of the World Evangelical Alliance,‭ ‬who will both also evaluate the document.‭ (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬Preamble‭) Care is taken to be clear that differences are articulated with no compromise.‭ ‬In fact,‭ ‬due to Evangelical caution,‭ ‬over a year passed between the finalization of the text in‭ ‬2002‭ ‬and its publication.‭ I Common‭ ‬biblical understandings of‭ ‬fellowship provide a‭ ‬theological‭ ‬consensus within which Catholic and Evangelical emphases and differences can be articulated.‭ ‬The text’s focus on the Trinitarian character of ecclesial communion is a particularly important‭ ‬theological‭ ‬development beyond the ERCDOM text,‭ ‬following the theology of wider ecumenical conversations: ‭(‬5‭) ‬For both Evangelicals and Roman Catholics communion with Christ involves a transformative union whereby believers are‭ “‬koinonia of the divine nature and escape the corruption that is in the world by lust‭” (‬2‭ ‬Pt‭ ‬1:4‭)‬.‭ ‬Catholics tend to interpret‭ ‬koinonia in this passage to mean a participation in the divine life and‭ “‬nature,‭” ‬while Evangelicals tend to interpret‭ ‬koinonia as covenant companionship,‭ ‬as it entails escaping moral corruption and the way of the world‭… (6‭) ‬Catholics believe that sacraments are Christ’s instruments to effect the transformative union with the divine nature‭ (‬1‭ ‬Co‭ ‬12:12-13,‭ ‬where they see water-baptism,‭ ‬and‭ ‬10:16-17,‭ ‬Eucharist‭)‬.‭ ‬In passages such as these they hear other‭ (‬Catholics would say deeper‭)‬,‭ ‬more sacramental and participatory connotations in the word‭ “‬koinonoi‭” ‬than are expressed by the word‭ “‬fellowship.‭” ‬Many‭ ‬Evangelicals consider the sacraments to be dominical means of grace or‭ ‬“ordinances‭” ‬which are‭ “‬visible words‭” ‬that proclaim‭ (‬kataggellete,‭ ‬1‭ ‬Co‭ ‬11:26‭) ‬or are signs and seals of the grace of union with Christ—grace to be received and enjoyed on the sole condition of personal faith.‭ (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003‭) See Meeking,‭ “‬Comment,‭” ‬105.‭ In the light of these beliefs,‭ ‬the report explains differences in understanding the communion of saints‭; ‬the relationship of sacraments,‭ ‬sanctification,‭ ‬and justification‭; ‬and the eschatological character of‭ ‬koinonia. ‭ ‬The eschatological issue was raised by evangelical theologian,‭ ‬and cochair of the WEA dialogue,‭ ‬in his earlier evaluation of the Catholic response to BEM.‭ ‬He proposed that Catholic ecclesiology identified the fullness of‭ ‬koinonia‭ ‬too easily with its own present reality,‭ ‬without sufficient attention to the eschatological fullness,‭ ‬which holds all of our pilgrim communities under judgment.‭ (‬George Vandervelde,‭ “‬Vatican Ecumenism at the Crossroads‭? ‬The Vatican Approach to Differences with BEM,‭” ‬Gregorianum,‭ ‬69:4,‭ ‬1988,‭ ‬689-711‭)‬.‭ ‬The introduction of the eschatological perspectives helps them understand how they can collaborate on the way to the Kingdom:‭ “‬Catholics and Evangelicals should look to a deeper communion in this world,‭ ‬even if they disagree…on the means by which this might be achieved,‭ ‬and on the extent to which it can be realized prior to the return of Christ,‭” (‬9‭) The text goes on to elaborate processes in history whereby the two communities have moved to a more positive evaluation of other Christians and,‭ ‬consequently,‭ ‬of one another.‭ ‬However,‭ ‬the text continues to articulate caution here for Evangelicals: Evangelical attitudes to the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches differ widely.‭ ‬Some Evangelicals are praying,‭ ‬talking,‭ ‬studying Scripture and working with these churches.‭ ‬Others are strongly opposed to any form of dialogue or cooperation with them.‭ ‬All are aware that serious theological differences between us remain.‭ ‬Where appropriate,‭ ‬and so long as biblical truth is not compromised,‭ ‬cooperation may be possible in such areas as Bible translation,‭ ‬the study of contemporary theological and ethical issues,‭ ‬social work and political action.‭ ‬We wish to make it clear,‭ ‬however,‭ ‬that common evangelism demands a common commitment to the biblical Gospel‭ (‬Manila Affirmation‭ ‬9‭)‬.‭ (‬Lausanne,‭ ‬1989,‭ ‬292‭) (‬cited in WEA,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬19‭) The Scripture,‭ ‬the Apostolic Faith as articulated in the classical creeds,‭ ‬the Gospel call to conversion and the disciplined life,‭ ‬and responsibility to witness and service in the world all characterize the uniting bonds of communion that bind Catholics and Evangelicals in Christ.‭ ‬The modern pilgrimage toward greater toleration,‭ ‬mutual understanding,‭ ‬and consequent ecclesial recognition is recounted.‭ Catholics and Evangelicals‭ ‬have theological‭ ‬differences on the visibility of the church‭ ‬which lead to different emphases on the personal and the institutional dimensions of‭ ‬koinonia and the disciplines which flow there from.‭ ‬This discussion of differences has led to a surprising‭ ‬theological‭ ‬convergence: ‭(‬41‭) ‬Catholics and Evangelicals experience a convergence in the understanding of the way that order and discipline serve the‭ ‬koinonia of the church.‭ ‬Catholics have begun to reemphasize the importance of the personal in understanding the church.‭ ‬Evangelicals show an increasing appreciation of visible expressions of unity in the life of the church beyond the bounds of their own denomination.‭ ‬Such a convergence in our understanding of biblical‭ ‬koinonia‭ ‬offers promise for a‭ ‬continuation of the dialogue.‭ (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003‭) The first part of the text devoted to a theology of the church,‭ ‬ends with an exhortation to go beyond the history of alienation,‭ ‬to a new future: ‭(‬43‭)… ‬It is not possible to reverse history,‭ ‬but it is possible to prepare for a different future. ‭(‬44‭) ‬We realize the need for a spirit of repentance before God because we have not made sufficient efforts to heal the divisions that are a scandal to the Gospel.‭ ‬We pray that God grant us a spirit of‭ ‬metanoia.‭ ‬We need to continue to study and face issues which have separated us.‭ ‬We need to examine also the practices that uncritically continue the biases of the past. ‭(‬45‭) ‬Could we not ask ourselves whether we sufficiently understand the levels of unity that we already share‭? (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003‭) II The‭ ‬second section of the text outlines views on‭ ‬evangelization/evangelism,‭ ‬resolving old tensions,‭ ‬repentance/conversion,‭ ‬religious freedom,‭ ‬and common witness,‭ ‬all in the light of the‭ ‬koinonia discussion‭ ‬that was‭ ‬elaborated in part one.‭ ‬This is a particularly important section,‭ ‬since,‭ ‬historically,‭ ‬tensions between Catholics and Evangelicals have emerged from different‭ ‬theological‭ ‬approaches to mission,‭ ‬charges of proselytism,‭ ‬and the lack of religious freedom in some Catholic countries.‭ ‬On religious freedom,‭ ‬WEA is more articulate than ERCDOM,‭ ‬building on intervening dialogues and situating mission and freedom in the context of ecclesiology. ‭ ‬While Catholics and Evangelicals differ on their emphases within the Gospel mission,‭ ‬they affirm together that‭ “‬every Christian has the right and obligation to share and spread the faith,‭” (‬WEA,‭ ‬2002,‭ ‬48‭)‬.‭ ‬Both also affirm that,‭ “‬the real‭ ‬koinonia we already share gives rise to our mutual concern to view conjointly the issues of religious freedom and proselytism that have divided us.‭ ‬We believe that the two issues of religious liberty and proselytism must not be treated as totally separable areas but must be firmly linked and considered jointly as related concerns,‭ ‬seen in the context of the meaning of evangelization and the possibility of common witness.‭” ‬From an extended discussion of this common basis the text goes on to identify‭ “‬repentance,‭ ‬conversion and commitment,‭ ‬in which we commit ourselves to the convergence that has already begun in our life together‭” ‬as issues for substantive reflection‭ (‬World Evangelical,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬56‭)‬. ‭ ‬In this section themes of repentance,‭ ‬conversion and commitment are key,‭ ‬laying the groundwork for a spirituality of dialogue and common witness.‭ (‬57‭ – ‬81‭) On the basis of this shared faith,‭ ‬the authors of this text challenge their own communities to face the sensitive issues of mission and religious freedom in new ways: ‭(‬69‭)‬ We repent of unworthy forms of evangelization which aim at pressuring people to change their church affiliation in ways that dishonor the Gospel,‭ ‬and by methods which compromise rather than enhance the freedom of the believer and the truth of the Gospel. ‭(‬71‭) …‬The bonds of‭ ‬koinonia imply that Christians in established churches protect the civil rights of the other Christians to free speech,‭ ‬press and assembly.‭ ‬At the same time,‭ ‬the bonds of‭ ‬koinonia imply that the other Christians respect the rights,‭ ‬integrity and history of Christians in established churches.‭ ‬Tensions can be reduced if Christians engaged in mission communicate with one another and seek to witness together as far as possible,‭ ‬rather than compete with one another. ‭(‬72‭)…‬Since Evangelicals believe their church to be catholic,‭ ‬and Catholics believe their church to be evangelical,‭ ‬it would seem that our future task is to recognize better the aspects that each of us emphasizes in the others‭’ ‬view as well.‭ (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003‭) In the discussion of religious liberty,‭ ‬the Evangelicals and the Catholics involved in this dialogue reiterate their commitment to common theological principles and modes of evangelism,‭ ‬drawing on earlier dialogues.‭ ‬They reaffirm together their commitment to the rights of all,‭ ‬not just Christians.‭ ‬They assert‭ “‬that human rights should be interpreted and exercised within the framework of Scripture teaching and of rigorous moral reasoning.‭ ‬Due regard must be had for the needs of others,‭ ‬for duties towards other parties,‭ ‬and for the common good.‭ ‬Human rights language,‭ ‬also,‭ ‬must guard against being turned into narcissism,‭ ‬self-assertiveness and ideology‭” (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬78‭)‬. The text ends with a firm conviction and biblical call: ‭(‬80‭)… ‬to the extent conscience and the clear recognition of agreement and disagreement allows,‭ ‬we commit ourselves to common witness. ‭(‬81‭) ‬We conclude this report by joining together in a spirit of humility,‭ ‬putting our work,‭ ‬with whatever strengths and limitations it may have,‭ ‬in the hands of God.‭ ‬Our hope is that these efforts will be for the praise and glory of Jesus Christ.‭ (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003‭) Conclusions Pope John Paul in his‭ ‬1995‭ ‬encyclical encouraged Catholics to make the results of these dialogues a‭ “‬common heritage.‭”‬ These two texts are particularly important in‭ ‬1‭) ‬teaching missiology‭;‬ 2‭) ‬preparing pastoral agents for dealing with fellow Christians in their communities especially in Latin America and the US Hispanic community‭;‬ and‭ ‬3‭) ‬providing the basis for local dialogues especially marriage preparation. ‭ ‬See Thomas Rausch,‭ ‬ed.,‭ ‬Catholics and Evangelicals:‭ ‬Do They Share a Common Future‭?‬,‭ ‬Downers Grove:‭ ‬InterVarsity Press,‭ ‬2000.‭ ‬Stephen‭ ‬Bevans,‭ “‬What Catholics Learn from Evangelical Mission Theology.‭”‬ Missiology‭ ‬1995,‭ ‬XXIII‭ (‬2‭) ‬:‭ ‬155‭ – ‬164.‭ ‬They have also generated a renewed interest in ecclesiology among evangelical scholars. I‭ ‬Missiology ERCDOM is particularly useful in teaching missiology in both‭ ‬Catholic and Evangelical contexts since it can be used as an ecumenical commentary on the‭ ‬Lausanne Covenant and‭ ‬Evangelical Nuntiandi.‭ ‬Furthermore,‭ ‬in a Catholic context it can illustrate how‭ ‬Ad Gentes of the second Vatican Council is beginning to be received in both the ecumenical and Catholic development.‭ ‬It also demonstrates a different methodology from the confessional bilateral or from unreflective approaches to collaboration. ‭ ‬See Steven Bevans,‭ ‬SVD,‭ ‬Jeffrey Gros,‭ ‬FSC,‭ ‬Evangelization and Religious Freedom:‭ ‬Ad Gentes,‭ ‬Dignitatis Humanae,‭ ‬New York:‭ ‬Paulist Press,‭ ‬2008. ‭ ‬WEA is useful,‭ ‬for Catholics,‭ ‬in helping to demonstrate how important is the Vatican II affirmations of‭ ‬Dignitatis Humane on Religious Freedom to the renewed understanding of the Church as‭ ‬koinonia,‭ ‬and‭ ‬in‭ ‬its ecumenical relations and approach to evangelization.‭ ‬For evangelicals,‭ ‬it can help to correct misunderstandings and often unfortunate experiences of the Catholic Church.‭ ‬I think this dialogue and other ecumenical contacts are among the stimuli that have increased the interest in ecclesiology among Evangelicals. ‭ ‬See,‭ ‬for example,‭ ‬George Vandervelde,‭ “‬The Challenge of Evangelical Ecclesiology,‭” ‬Evangelical Review of Theology,‭ ‬27:1,‭ ‬January‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬pp.‭ ‬4-26.‭ ‬Amos Yong,‭ “‬The Marks of the Church:‭ ‬A Pentecostal Re-Reading,‭” ‬Evangelical Review of Theology,‭ ‬1:26,‭ ‬January‭ ‬2002,‭ ‬45-67.‭ ‬Miroslav Volf,‭ “‬The Nature of the Church,‭” ‬Evangelical Review of Theology,‭ ‬1:26,‭ ‬January‭ ‬2002,‭ ‬68-75.‭ ‬Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen,‭ ‬An Introduction To Ecclesiology:‭ ‬Ecumenical,‭ ‬Historical‭ & ‬Global Perspectives,‭ ‬Downers Grove,‭ ‬IL:‭ ‬InterVarsity Press,‭ ‬2002.‭ ‬John H.‭ ‬Armstrong,‭ ‬Your Church is too Small:‭ ‬Why Unity in Christ’s Mission is Vital to the Future of the Church,‭ ‬Grand Rapids:‭ ‬Zondervan,‭ ‬2010. ‭ ‬I have found these two texts particularly useful in teaching ecclesiology in both Catholic and ecumenical contexts giving a sense of relevance to the issues under consideration and bridges to how various issues of church,‭ ‬mission and culture are seen differently,‭ ‬but have the potential for‭ ‬creating the basis for common witness.‭ II‭ ‬Catechesis The results of these dialogues are important contributions to Catholic catechesis,‭ ‬especially in countries where Catholics predominate.‭ ‬In places like Spain and Colombia,‭ ‬a first evaluation of the Council by the local bishops was that it would not influence their situation in society and relationship to Christian minorities.‭ ‬On the other hand,‭ ‬council fathers from Catholic countries,‭ ‬like Cardinals Rossi of Brazil and Silva of Chile were clear on the catechetical revolution that would be necessary to hand on the Catholic faith in a context that now affirmed the liberty of all persons in matters of belief.‭ ‬Even these visionary leaders did not realize how necessary this catechesis of freedom,‭ ‬life in a pluralist society,‭ ‬and ecumenical commitment would become,‭ ‬as evangelical Protestantism began to mushroom in the‭ ‬1970s to the present.‭ Within the Latin American Catholic Church there is still no consensus on ecumenical priorities,‭ ‬the approach to an inevitable religious pluralism,‭ ‬or the advocacy of the religious rights of all citizens,‭ ‬for example in matters of education or marriage.‭ ‬With popular religion as the primary bearer of Catholic identity for many in Latin America,‭ ‬including US Hispanic Catholics,‭ ‬catechesis becomes an important challenge for Catholic ecumenical progress. ‭ ‬See Thomas Rausch,‭ “‬Ecumenism and America’s Hispanic Christians,‭” ‬Origins,‭ ‬June‭ ‬1,‭ ‬2006,‭ ‬36:3,‭ ‬41-45.‭ ‬Ricardo Ramírez,‭ "‬Bringing Ecumenism to Hispanic Christians,‭" ‬Origins,‭ ‬22:3,‭ ‬May‭ ‬28,‭ ‬1992,‭ ‬40-44‭; “‬The Crisis in Ecumenism Among Hispanic Catholics,‭” ‬Origins,‭ ‬24:40,‭ ‬March‭ ‬23,‭ ‬1995,‭ ‬660-666.‭ ‬These texts are particularly important for training catechists in communities of new immigrants from majority Catholic countries in Eastern Europe and Latin America. ‭ ‬To this catechetical task,‭ ‬these evangelical dialogues are an irreplaceable contribution to Catholic ecumenical formation‭; ‬and education for pluralism and religious freedom.‭ ‬These relationships were not predicted in the Council,‭ ‬are very fragile,‭ ‬and least known where they are most needed:‭ ‬in the evangelical Protestant community‭;‬ and in Catholic contexts where Catholics are a majority,‭ ‬and have a memory of hegemonic times where religious freedom was not at the center of the Catholic agenda.‭ III‭ ‬Local Dialogues Local relations like Fuller Seminary in Pasadena,‭ ‬California or Catholic universities where evangelicals have had their training,‭ ‬like Leuven in Belgium,created the condition of possibility for some of these dialogues.‭ ‬The dialogue of truth builds on the dialogue of love‭ – ‬sharing of faith,‭ ‬of hopes for common witness,‭ ‬can only develop where personal,‭ ‬spiritual relationships are nurtured. ‭ ‬Similarly,‭ ‬the reception of the results of these dialogues will not be seen in actions of the churches,‭ ‬but in the resources they provide for healing of memories,‭ ‬mutual understanding and common witness.‭ ‬In places like Los Angeles,‭ ‬Chicago,‭ ‬St.‭ ‬Paul,‭ ‬Boston,‭ ‬Springfield,‭ ‬Philadelphia and other communities around the world,‭ ‬a rich Catholic Evangelical bonding has occurred in situations where dialogue,‭ ‬common prayer,‭ ‬and common witness are possible.‭ ‬A number of formal and informal,‭ ‬but unofficial exchanges have made an immeasurable contribution to the reception of these initiatives. ‭ ‬See for example:‭ ‬Charles Colson,‭ ‬Richard John Neuhaus,‭ ‬eds.,‭ ‬Evangelicals and Catholics Together:‭ ‬Toward A Common Mission,‭ ‬Dallas:‭ ‬Word Publishing,‭ ‬1995.‭ ‬Your Word is Truth,‭ ‬Grand Rapids:‭ ‬Eerdmans,‭ ‬2002.‭ ‬http://www.firstthings.com/simpleSearch.php?offset‭=‬0‭&‬mySqlSearchCriteria‭=‬%22A+Statement+of+Evangelicals+and+Catholics+Together%22‭ ‬ As Evangelicals and Catholics continue to marry one another,‭ ‬these texts are resources for couples and their pastors as they prepare for a life of dialogue,‭ ‬mutual understanding and witness in an interchurch family.‭ ‬For young Catholics who come to faith in an evangelical,‭ ‬Pentecostal or charismatic experience,‭ ‬these reports will help them clarify and differentiate their faith,‭ ‬strengthen their Catholic convictions,‭ ‬and deepen their ecumenical appreciation of fellow Christians.‭ We can join with the members of WEA dialogue in praying: ‭“‬Now to Him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine,‭ ‬according to his power that is at work within us,‭ ‬to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus‭ ‬throughout all generations,‭ ‬forever and ever‭! ‬Amen.‭” (‬Eph‭ ‬3:20-21‭)‬.‭ (‬WEA,‭ ‬2003,‭ ‬81‭) And hope that the vision of ERCDOM continues to expand: At the same time we hope that dialogue on mission between Roman Catholics and Evangelicals will continue,‭ ‬preferably on a regional or local basis,‭ ‬in order that further progress may be made towards a common understanding,‭ ‬sharing and proclaiming of‭ "‬the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints‭" (‬Jude‭ ‬3‭)‬.‭ ‬We commit these past and future endeavors to God,‭ ‬and pray that by‭ "‬speaking the truth in love,‭ ‬we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head,‭ ‬into Christ‭" (‬Eph‭ ‬4:15‭)‬.‭ (‬ERCDOM,‭ ‬Conclusion‭) EVANGELICAL ROMAN CATHOLIC DIALOGUE ON MISSION ‭ ‬1.‭ ‬Revelation and Authority ‭ ‬1‭) ‬Revelation,‭ ‬the Bible and the Formulation of Truth. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬Principles of Biblical Interpretation. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬The Church's Teaching Authority. ‭ ‬4‭) ‬Can the Church be Reformed‭? 2.‭ ‬The Nature of Mission.‭ 1‭) ‬The Basis of Mission. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬Authority and Initiative in Mission. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬Evangelization and Socio‭_ ‬political Responsibility. ‭ ‬4‭) ‬God's Work Outside the Christian Community. ‭ ‬3.‭ ‬The Gospel of Salvation ‭ ‬1‭) ‬Human Need. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬The Person of Jesus Christ. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬The Work of Jesus Christ. ‭ ‬4‭) ‬The Uniqueness and Universality of Jesus Christ. ‭ ‬5‭) ‬The Meaning of Salvation. ‭ ‬Appendix:‭ ‬The Role of Mary in salvation. ‭ ‬4.‭ ‬Our Response in the Holy Spirit to the Gospel ‭ ‬1‭) ‬The Work of the Holy Spirit. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬Conversion and Baptism. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬Church Membership. ‭ ‬4‭) ‬Assurance of Salvation. ‭ ‬5.‭ ‬The Church and the Gospel ‭ ‬1‭) ‬The Church is a Part of the Gospel. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬The Church is a Fruit of the Gospel. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬The Church is an Embodiment of the Gospel. ‭ ‬4‭) ‬The Church is an Agent of the Gospel. ‭ ‬6.‭ ‬The Gospel and Culture ‭ ‬1‭) ‬Culture and the Bible. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬Culture and Evangelization. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬Culture and Conversion. ‭ ‬4‭) ‬Culture and Church Formation. ‭ ‬7.‭ ‬The possibility of Common Witness ‭ ‬1‭) ‬Our Unity and Disunity. ‭ ‬2‭) ‬Common Witness. ‭ ‬3‭) ‬Unworthy Witness. ‭ ‬Conclusion ‭ Notes 17