wfn.org | Title: Henri Tincq interviews Konrad Raiser

["WCC Media" <Media@wcc-coe.org>]

World Council of Churches 7 Feature 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 20/11/2003 - feat-03-14 

Henri Tincq interviews Konrad Raiser 

Following an invitation from the public information team of the
World 
Council of Churches (WCC), Henri Tincq, who has been in charge of

religious news at the prestigious French daily "Le Monde" since
1985, 
interviewed Rev. Dr Konrad Raiser. The interview took place in
Geneva, on 
Wednesday, 29 October 2003, as Raiser approached the end of his
term as 
general secretary of WCC. This interview can be freely
reproduced. A 
high-resolution photograph is also available free of charge (see
below). 

H.T. - Reverend Konrad Raiser, what is the best memory that you
have from 
your eleven years as general secretary of the World Council of
Churches? 

K.R. - I have been privileged to meet many remarkable women and
men, 
religious and spiritual figures and many senior political
leaders. Among 
all these, my most moving memory is certainly that of Nelson
Mandela. I 
can still picture him at the WCC Assembly in Harare, Zimbabwe, in
1998, 
arriving in the plenary hall, preceded by a superb choir, and
dancing to 
the music as he made his way to the podium. He spoke in words of
profound 
simplicity about his experience as a young African leader and
about the 
way he was influenced both by the Christian faith and the
commitment of 
the churches in the struggle against apartheid. It is an event I
shall 
never forget. 

And your worst memory? 

Without doubt my visit in February 1998 to the Moscow theological
academy 
and the unfriendly reception I received from a few young Orthodox
monks 
and students. I have never experienced such a violent verbal
attack, 
without, I would add, the dignitaries who were present making any
move to 
intervene. I interpreted this as the expression of tension
between this 
group of theological students and their own hierarchy, and
particularly as 
the expression of their rejection as "heretical" of any kind of
interest 
in ecumenism. I returned to Moscow in July this year and I must
say that I 
found the situation much improved. 

Would you say that the ecumenical movement has made progress in
the past 
eleven years? 

I sincerely believe that it has, but I say this with a certain
degree of 
modesty. Firstly because people other than myself would be more 
sceptical. Also because the signs of progress that I see are not
all due 
to the work of the World Council of Churches. Let's take the
example of 
the agreement signed in Augsburg in 1999 between the Lutheran
World 
Federation and the Roman Catholic Church. It was the first time
official 
representatives of the Vatican had agreed to sign a doctrinal
agreement 
with another communion of churches, and it was the result of a
long 
process of dialogue. Lutherans and Catholics had the courage to
say 
together that that which had separated them for four centuries
should no 
longer divide them. It was a considerable step forward. There has
also 
been progress in other inter-church bilateral dialogues, and
other 
agreements have been signed. We are witnessing a real
reorganisation of 
relations between all churches, including the churches of the
Reformation 
and Anglicans, up to and including Roman Catholics. 

I'm reminded of the statement of Vatican II that communion does
truly 
exist, even if it is as yet imperfect. Unity remains a gift to be

received, to be recognised, to be celebrated. But if our efforts
already 
allow us to make unity more visible and to translate it through
our 
actions then, yes, I am right to speak of progress. Put another
way, and 
here I am repeating what Pope John Paul II has often stated, our
journey 
towards unity is irreversible. It is unthinkable that we could
return to 
the situation as it was in the past. I would go still further and
claim 
that during these eleven years, the very quality of relationships
between 
the churches has changed and improved. Ive experienced this on
numerous 
occasions on my travels, and again recently in Angola where a
simple 
courtesy visit to the Archbishop of Luanda became an invitation
to meet 
the full bishops conference. 

There has, however, been no lack of tension with the Roman
Catholic 
Church. The reaffirmation of doctrine, particularly the statement
on 
Dominus Iesus in 2000, could seem to be a step backwards
ecumenically. Has 
this not led to an impairment of the quality of relations with
Roman 
Catholics? 

I would first like to pay tribute to the faithfulness and clarity
of our 
Catholic partners. They are brothers and sisters who seek, as we
do, and 
who want, as we do, to respond to the ecumenical call and are not
put off 
by opposition. They can be found at the Vatican and amongst
bishops at the 
national level, amongst priests and lay people. As we continue
our search 
for unity, we already feel that the links between us are so
strong that 
the obstacles that arise do not call into question the progress
already 
made. 

At the same time, it is impossible to overlook increasing fears
among 
Roman Catholics, but also among Anglicans and Lutherans,
Methodists and 
Orthodox, linked to the identity or integrity of each tradition.
There are 
trends developing or gaining momentum which see the ecumenical
movement as 
threatening or disturbing. Following the 2003 Ecumenical
Kirchentag 
(ecumenical inter-church gathering) in Berlin, Cardinal Joachim
Meisner 
criticised the event for having sown confusion amongst the
faithful. Such 
fears are linked to the breakdown and fragmentation of religious
identity, 
to secularisation, and to the relativism which continues to gain
ground at 
the heart of our society. We can only overcome these things, in
my view, 
by transcending our various traditions in a common rediscovery of
the 
spirit and life of Christ. 

To answer your question more directly, I would add that such
fears do in 
part determine the direction of the Roman Catholic Church, and
that this 
creates problems for us. We cannot hide that. I do not for a
moment doubt 
that John Paul II is personally committed to ecumenism and that
for him, 
this is much more than just a question of strategy. Neither do I
doubt his 
desire to re-open dialogue with the Orthodox. But I do not think
the 
approach adopted is the best way to achieve that goal. John Paul
II was 
extremely courageous in proposing to his ecumenical 
partners that there should be discussion of the way primacy is
exercised 
by the Bishop of Rome. However, by adding that there could be no
question 
of discussing the concept of primacy itself, he demonstrated that
in 
each of our traditions the stumbling block has to do with they
way we 
understand our faith in the Church. 

Orthodoxy has not been an easy partner either. An increased
intransigence 
has become apparent since the fall of Communism. What lessons can
be 
learned from this discontent and from your initiative to create a
Special 
Commission to overcome the crisis? 

I have been impressed by the religious renewal in ex-Communist
countries. 
I think of my visits to Russia, but also to countries such as
Albania 
which has witnessed an unbelievable resurrection of its church.
But 
given the strength both of the Marxist past and the equally
secularising 
post-Communist economic liberalism, I am also very sceptical
about the 
reawakening of the soul of Orthodoxy. Excluded for seventy years
by the 
Communist state from the cultural, economic and political
spheres, it had 
no opportunity to adapt to the context of modern society. It was 
liberated, but without being at all prepared for the new
situation. For 
people living through enormous upheaval, it even became an
alternative 
ideology. As always in similar circumstances, new converts have
sought 
certainties in Orthodoxy that they could no longer find
elsewhere. They 
passed from one system to another, but their terms of reference,
which 
involved to some extent making a distinction between enemies and 
friends, remained the same. The Orthodox students who verbally
attacked 
me in 1998 in Moscow were probably former komsomols, young
communists* 

This situation has changed a great deal, in part due to the
Special 
Commission on Orthodox participation in the WCC. In this context,
for the 
first time, the Orthodox churches felt they were being listened
to and 
understood a little better. I see the reaction of one Greek
Metropolitan 
as evidence of this. Previously his relationship with us had been

difficult, but at the end of the final session of the Commission,
he 
publicly expressed his delight that he had at long last been able
to speak 
and be understood. Things are moving. Many of our Orthodox
partners are 
beginning to get involved in ecumenical endeavours. There is
mutual 
understanding, helped by the realisation that Orthodoxy is also
part of 
the geography of Europe and has to get closer to us. Today our
partners in 
Russia I think particularly of Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk
and 
Kaliningrad (Head of the Department of External Church Relations
of the 
Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church) recognise
that they 
are part of Europes heritage with us and that this sharing is not

necessarily a threat to Orthodoxy. They know that they need an
ecumenical 
framework, and that this can provide a good basis for mutual
understanding 
and for a new way of living together in Europe. 

I think the threat of the withdrawal of the Russian Orthodox
Church from 
the ecumenical movement, which would have called into question
the whole 
edifice of ecumenism in the Orthodox family, has receded. The
Special 
Commission has put into place an agenda which is comprehensive
enough to 
deal even with our own understandings of the nature of the
church. I 
should add that this change would not have been possible without
the 
recognition that the predominant Protestant tradition still has
too much 
influence over what gets onto our agenda, our way of working, the
way we 
make decisions or celebrate worship. Perhaps we needed this
crisis in 
order to understand that the Orthodox do not feel at home in the 
ecumenical movement as we do. Thus this painful crisis will have
been 
beneficial by allowing a deepening of the understanding of the
WCC as a 
fellowship of churches. 

You have often spoken of the need for a new configuration of the 
ecumenical movement. How is it possible to make space for the
diversity of 
contemporary ecumenical experience and keep a strong sense of
direction in 
an organisation like the WCC? 

I have spoken of the progress and difficulties in dialogue
between the 
major historic churches. But one should not forget that they now
represent 
only a part of Christianity, which today has very diverse and new

expressions. Today, there is an indigenous, black or Asian
Christianity in 
the South, a profusion of charismatic, Pentecostal and prophetic 
communities, and a spiritual energy which makes me think of
Christianity 
during its initial growth. This is something I have often been
able to 
experience, particularly during my visits to the Southern
hemisphere. 

These new expressions of Christianity convey in different ways
the need 
for recognition and solidarity through the ecumenical movement.
With the 
passing of time, their identity has become more defined and today
they are 
more open. That is the feeling I get from the replies we received
to our 
invitation to explore ways to create a Global Christian Forum.
This is 
where we are. We can no longer stick to the outdated and
simplistic 
distinctions between ecumenical and liberal on the one hand, and 
evangelical and conservative on the other. In terms of theology
and 
spirituality, for example, the majority of our member churches
from the 
South are evangelical. 

This is the background against which the question of a new form
of 
governance of the ecumenical movement is being posed. If there is
no 
structure of reference, no transparency in the way
responsibilities are 
exercised, nor any discipline about participation, we risk
encouraging therise of a militant, populist and fundamentalist
Christianity. The World 
Council of Churches can be, in its own way, such a fundamental
framework 
or backbone. Its future also lies in the way it allows for the
expression 
of the widest possible diversity of opinion, in the way it
provides a 
protected space for encounter, in the resistance it offers to
normative, 
exclusive and trenchant ways of thinking. The challenge for
tomorrows WCC 
lies precisely in accompanying changes in mentalities, in
generations and 
in forms of Christianity and in facing up to the spiritual
challenges that 
result. 

But what is your vision of the future of Christianity which, from
a purely 
European perspective, is in decline? 

If one looks at the situation of Christianity in Europe, it is
true that 
one tends to be pessimistic. But we should not forget that
Christianity, 
throughout its long history, has never been pinned down to one 
particular geographic or cultural zone. It has always been able
to renew 
itself. In the same way, we should not forget that the
sociologists and 
philosophers of the 1960s were wrong about secularisation, blind
as they 
were to the fact that secularisation does not exclude new forms
of 
religiosity which, today, are emerging with great energy. 

It is true that we are at the end of a cycle, of the sort which 
Christianity has continually faced, such as at the end of
antiquity or of 
the Middle Ages. A new period in the history of Christianity is
beginning, 
what could be called the post-modern era, grounded in the forms
of revival 
that I see in the activity of communities such as SantEgidio, the

Focolari, Arche, Taizi, or Grandchamp. The growth of Christianity
in the 
South, added to new forms of church life in old Europe which
offer more 
sense of community, make me optimistic about the future. 

You often say that the ecumenism is above all a gospel
imperative. What 
has this meant for you during these eleven years as general
secretary of 
the WCC? 

- When I first encountered the ecumenical movement, a long time
ago, it 
saw itself as being involved in struggle: spiritual struggle,
social 
struggle, not only for Christian unity but also for the renewal
of our 
churches, of our faith, for the transformation of the world.
Today, I am 
convinced that rather than a struggle, ecumenism is a call and a
journey 
directed by the Spirit of God. I am also convinced that the
future lies in 
what Chiara Lubich (founder of the Focolari movement) calls
ecumenism of 
the people, as opposed to the ecumenism of the past which was
perhaps too 
focused on church leaders. 

The Ecumenical Kirchentag in Berlin earlier this year made a real

impression on me and confirmed for me that this is the vision for
the 
future. It was the people of God in all their diversity who
asserted 
themselves, in the name of that gospel imperative mentioned
earlier, 
through the meetings, discussions and worship. 

For me the renewal of the church is a continuous process. The
ecumenical 
movement is moving out of a time of structural and organizational
concerns 
towards a phase of journeying, of pilgrimage of the whole people
of God. 
Tomorrow, when I have finished my term of office I shall, as far
as I am 
able, take up my place in that pilgrimage just as I did in the
past. 

Henri Tincq has been in charge of religious news at the
prestigious French 
daily "Le Monde" since 1985. He was awarded the John Templeton
"European 
Religion Writer of the Year" prize in 2002. He is the author of
numerous 
books, including Une France sans Dieu (France without God, 2003),
Les 
ginies du christianisme (Great Christian Thinkers, 1999), Les
midias et 
l'Eglise (Media and the Church, 1997). 

A free photo can be found on: 
http://www.wcc-coe.org/wcc/press_corner/tincq-pic.html 

For more information contact: 
Media Relations Office 
tel: (+41 22) 791 64 21 / (+41 22) 791 61 53 
e-mail:media@wcc-coe.org 
http://www.wcc-coe.org 

The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches, now
342, in 
more than 120 countries in all continents from virtually all
Christian 
traditions. The Roman Catholic Church is not a member church but
works 
cooperatively with the WCC. The highest governing body is the
assembly, 
which meets approximately every seven years. The WCC was formally

inaugurated in 1948 in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Its staff is
headed by 
general secretary Konrad Raiser from the Evangelical Church in
Germany.