The Papacy for an Ecumenical Age : A Response to Avery Dulles.

EVER SINCE THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, the Roman Catholic Church has committed itself irrevocably to the task of restoring the unity of the church of Christ. Then, as it entered into dialogue with sister churches and ecclesial communities, they, one after the other, voiced their common concern: there is a need to find new ways of exercising the papal ministry. Since all baptized persons are incorporated into Christ and they, too, have the Holy Spirit, their virtually unanimous demand should give us pause.

It has given pause to Pope John Paul II. The result is his extraordinary encyclical Ut Unum Sint ("That They Be One," 1995). In it he charts new ways. He accepts that the Roman Catholic Church is in need of perpetual conversion, metanoia (No. 15). Then he pointedly recalls "how the Master concerned himself with Peter's conversion" (No. 91) and adds that his own ministry is "open to a new situation" (No. 95). He goes on to conclude, "I insistently pray the Holy Spirit to shine his light upon us, enlightening all the Pastors as theologians of our churches, that we may seek--together, of course--the forms in which this ministry may accomplish a service of love recognized by all concerned."

The pope, the teacher, wants to be a learner. To make sure that his point is not missed, he insists, "This is an immense task, which we cannot refuse and which I cannot carry out by myself"(No. 96).

Theologians and leaders of churches were taken by surprise and were at first slow in responding to the pope's request. Then they began to understand the invitation and take up the challenge. Some scholars and members of the hierarchy held symposia (two in Rome, one in Innsbruck); others published articles and books; and now, a healthy "disputation" is spreading and expanding among Catholic and non-Catholic Christians--that is, within the entire church of Christ.

Avery Dulles, S.J., a professor at Fordham University, made a contribution to this exchange through an article in America ("The Papacy for a Global Church," 7/15). His approach is clear but puzzling. The information he provides is partial. He reports the activities of the center faithfully, but he does not speak of the weaknesses in the provinces. Then, on the basis of incomplete data, he reaches the conclusion that no significant change is needed. As for the ecumenical outcome, here is his position: "It will be for members of the other churches to judge whether a strong and energetic papacy is ecumenically acceptable." In other words, the contemporary way of exercising the papacy is not open to a new situation.

A puzzling response, indeed, to the pope's demand. Surely, John Paul II meant what he wrote: he wants to preserve the substance of his office intact but does not want to cling to unnecessary historical accretions that can impede the union of the churches. To achieve that goal, he asks for fresh ideas and creative insights. Among theologians, an honest "disputation" is in progress. Learned, wise and responsible scholars from the world over are joining it. (One of the first meetings was sponsored by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith!)

All Is Not Well