Confessing The Apostolic Faith From The Perspective Of The Pentecostal Churches

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

| PentecostalTheology.com

5

Confessing

the

Apostolic

Faith from the Perspective

of the Pentecostal Churches

Brother

Jeffrey Gros,

FSC*

The Faith and Order Commission of the National Council of Churches of Christ is indebted to Dr. Cecil M.

Robeck, Jr., Assistant Dean, School of Theology, Fuller

Theological Seminary and to Dr. Russell P.

Spittler,

Director of the David J. du Plessis Center for Christian

Spirituality,

for

hosting

a consultation on the role of the Pentecostal Churches in the ecumenical movement. The consultation took

place

October

22-24, 1986, and was co-chaired by Dr. Robeck

(Assemblies

of

God)

and Dr.

George

Vandervelde (Christian

Reformed

Church)

from the Institute for Christian Studies in Toronto. The

papers

contained in this volume,

together with the two

reports

of the consultation are offered as a contribution to the

reconciling

work of Jesus Christ

among

those who confess faith in Him.

The consultation itself is

part

of a

larger project

of the Commission,

“Toward the Common

Expression

of the

Apostolic Faith

Today.”

The discussions are much more wide

ranging,

as the reader will note, than the

specific theological

focus of this

project. However,

the consultation is meant to serve the

larger reconciling intent of

setting

an

agenda

of

dialogue among

the churches participating

in the Faith and Order

discussions, allowing

for a wider

acquaintance

with the Pentecostal Churches on the one

hand, and the US conciliar movement on the other. In this brief introduction, background

will be

given

on the

Apostolic

Faith study,

and the

papers

and

responses

will be reviewed.

The classical Pentecostal Churches have a rich

history

of relationships

in the ecumenical movement. The

Society

for Pente- costal Studies includes members from a wide

spectrum

of Christian churches and has

provided

a serious context for

theological dialogue

on an extensive

range

of issues. The Kansas

City gathering (1977),

as well as the one

planned

for New Orleans

(1987) provide, on the level of prayer, celebration, and

experience,

a rich ecumenical coming together

in the

Spirit.

Fifteen

years

of

dialogue

with the Roman Catholic Church has raised

up

a witness to the

quality

of theological interchange possible

in these

dialogues.

The work of Dr. David J. du Plessis, to whose

memory

this volume is dedicated and whose

presence

enriched the

dialogue,

is a monument to the ecumenical dimension of the Pentecostal

heritage.

Since

1954,

he was a conspicuous visitor in World Council Assemblies. In 1960, his

presence

with the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council

opened

new

paths

of contact in that arena.’ .

1

6

The 1961 World Council

of Christ

at New Delhi saw the

of

in the Faith

Assembly

entrance of the first Pentecostal Church into that

fellowship Christian churches. The

special relationships

of the United Church

to a Pentecostal Church in Chile, and of the

Disciples

of Christ to a Church in Venezuela

point

to significant

experience

that can inform US church life. Since 1984, several members of the Society

for Pentecostal Studies have been

participants

Commission of the National Council. The International

Churches,

member of the World Council of Churches,

in the Faith and

and Order

Communion of Charismatic

membership NCCCUSA.

regional

the

only

US Pentecostal

also holds full Order Commission of the

a

survey

of local and

participation communities. published

will be

helpful Christian

leadership

In

preparation

for this

consultation,

ecumenical

agencies

disclosed that

many city, community, and state

groupings

of churches and

community

ministries have full

or

relationships

with Pentecostal churches in their

The results of this

survey

will be

subsequently

in Ecumenical Trends. It is hoped that that

volume, too,

both to Pentecostal churches and other local

in

assisting

We

into the discussions efforts.

their

reconciling

efforts and

Holiness) Chair,

North American

District of the a level of Pentecostal

leadership

of these

whose the

particular gratitude

understandings.

are

particularly grateful

for the

presence

in the consultation of Dr. Vinson

Synan, (Pentecostal

Renewal Service Committee and the Reverend Dr. Jesse Miranda, Superintendent

of the Pacific-Latin American

Assemblies of God, for

ringing

that was most

helpful

and

supportive

It is sometimes more

challenging

for Pentecostal scholars and

clergy

to

give

themselves to these conversations than for those

churches

belong

to the ecumenical

of relationships. For this

reason, particular

is in order for the Pentecostal

leadership.

history

reason, worship United

Holy Preaching, session-after

institutions,

because of

was

theological,

“The

For this

with

equally

intense

Meaning

of Ecumenism

While the theme of the consultation

Apostolic Faith,”

its purpose was more

widely reconciling.

was

prominent,

with Dr. James

Forbes, (Original

Church

International),

Joe R.

Engle

Professor of

Union

Theological Seminary preaching,

and the final

much intense

discussion-ending

prayer. Papers

were delivered on the

theology

of the

Holy Spirit,

on the Pentecostal

theology

were also

given

on the Latin American

and

ment.

However,

papers

supporting

ecumenical

engage-

2

7

were

given

within the

experience,

of the Councils of Churches and the

and contributions of Pentecostalism from a historical

All of these

major presentations

of

believing

Christians.

the

discussions,

it became obvious that clarification

the

experience varieties

perspective.

theological perspective

Early

in

the nature of “ecumenism”

papers,

original

Graeco-Roman

.

denoting

speaks context,

mission the divided

cautions

against

as Christians

recognize and

_

Christians need

of and the use of the word would be

and

political

in the

it often

desig-

era,

of “ecumenical”that

develops

essential for

understanding.

A very

helpful response

to one of the

outlined four uses of “ecumenical” in common

parlance, and

suggested

a direction in which the

contemporary

Christian conversations should

proceed.

Thomas

Hoyt, (Christian Methodist

Episcopal),

from Hartford

Seminary,

outlined the

secular

meaning

of oikoumene, in the times of the Roman Empire, signifying

the whole inhabited earth. Its biblical and classical

usages

were often

geographical

world. In

contemporary contexts,

nates the world wide call to Christian mission. A second,

specifically Christian

usage developed

as the

adjective replaced

the

noun,

the

universally accepted orthodoxy

of the creeds and councils of the

early

church. This

meaning

survives in technical theological usage

in some Christian traditions.

The third

use, emerging

from the modern

post-Reformation

to transconfessional

gatherings

and

organizations.

In this

and

unity arejoined

as evangelical imperatives for

Christian churches.2 In his

response, Hoyt suggested that Robeck “… is right to suggest that Pentecostals can contribute a sense of the

power

of the

Spirit

to the ecumenical movement but

those who would stress the

Spirit’s

movement without concern for the mission of the Church to the World.”

Finally,

he noted an understanding

the

emerging reality

of the Third

World,

the

diversity

of

peoples

in our

own

midst. Non-Pentecostal

“to

keep

the door

open

for the sake of all humankind and the life of the world” to the kind of ecumenical inclusiveness

represented by the Pentecostal

to the word “ecumenical”

to be entailed

by engaging

and four of this

development.

of the

discussion,

it became clear that there was still some

apprehension

the Pentecostal

that the

goal

of the ecumenical movement was some sort

or

“superchurch.”

While

deepened

fellow- ship

and

evangelical

are

surely

elements of an ecumenical spirituality,

as Claire Randall’s

paper

in this series makes

explicit, there is no

prejudgment

on how we are to understand one another

churches.

Many

would

argue

that ecumenical

meanings no compromise understandings

In the course

three

among

dialogue of bureaucratic

merger

unity

as

Churches. These four clarify quite clearly

that there is

with other Christians in

participants

in the

fellowship

is an

3

8

occasion for

Gospel

witness and does not

require

us to

recognize one another as authentic

Christians,

much less as valid churches in the biblical sense. There are others who would

say

that three- quarters

of a century of dialogue and

prayer, brings

members of the Conciliar movement into a

deeper fellowship

and mutual

recog- nition as Christian

churches,

within the World and National Councils,

than was

possible

in 1950.3 However that

particular discussion

might

be resolved, there is no understanding of “church” necessarily

entailed

by

a willingness to talk with other Christians in theological dialogue.

Furthermore,

those

understandings

of “church” to emerge from the research of the ecumenical movement and

proposed

to the various communions for their consideration do not

carry

with them the

stereotypes

of bureaucracies as

they

were

developed

in the medieval West or in

corporate

America. The World and National Council Faith and Order studies have

proposed

a vision of fellowship (koinõnia)

as a Conciliar

Fellowship:

The one Church is to be envisioned as a conciliar fellow-

ship of local churches which are themselves truly united. In

this conciliar

fellowship,

each local church

possesses,

in

common

with

others,

the fullness

of catholicity,

witnesses

to the same

apostolic faith,

and therefore

recognizes

the

others as

belonging

to the same Church of Christ and

guided by

the same

Spirit.4

The witness of the Pentecostal churches is important to test the biblical and

theological description

of Christ’s church and to see what elements

they

would

expect

to be present if such a fellowship were to become

possible.

The

Apostolic

Faith

Among

the elements discerned

by

scholars to be

necessary,

if such a Conciliar

Fellowship among

Christians were to be possible, is a common basis in the faith handed on from the

Apostles.

This solid core of biblical affirmations entails not

only

careful biblical study

to determine what is

necessary

if we are to affirm a shared faith,

but also a careful

dialogue

to determine how communities of Christians from whom we have been estranged, confess their faith.

Traditionally,

Pentecostals have not been reluctant to bear witness to what the

Spirit

is doing in their

lives,

and what

they

see Christ

demanding

of the faithful Christian.

However, they

have been less enthusiastic about finding common creedal formulations of the

faith,

either from the tradition of the Church, or in the worship

life of Christian confessions.

Theology,

in its written

form, has been less

important

than the evidence of the

Spirit

in

life, worship,

and the

gifts.

For this

reason,

the World Council of Churches’

study

of the Christian

faith,

which focuses on the

.

4

9

Niceno-Constantinopolitan

Creed

(AD 381)

has seemed a bit remote from the ecumenical priorities of Pentecostals. The affirmation of the

Trinity

and of the

Incarnation,

in very orthodox

fashion,

is not absent from the life of these churches, but avenues need to be found

by which this witness can become part

of the

understanding of non-Pentecostal churches. This consultation was

designed

to begin

this

process

of

understanding.

Pentecostal

presence

in the Faith and Order Commission of the National Council since 1984, has

already

made the documentary affirmations of these Christians available to other Christians in new

ways.

The

Apostolic

Faith

study

of the National and World Councils is seeking

to explore what doctrinal

convergence

is necessary for true Christian

fellowship.

The World Council

study

includes three components: 1)

A common

explication

of the core of the Christian faith; 2)

A common

recognition

of this

faith; and 3)

a common

confession

of this faith

together

in the modern world.5 The World Council has

begun

to work on a common

explication, using

the Nicene Creed as the framework in which to

engage

in

dialogue concerning

the biblical faith.6 Since the Pentecostal

churches,

from their

beginning,

have

given

attention to the

affirmation “Apostolic Faith,” though

often with different

perspectives

and

emphases

than those of “creedal” churches, their witness is seen to be

very important

in the

explication process.

In the World

Council, questions

of

recognition

and common confession

require

further discussion and

exploration.7

The

presence

of Pentecostal and other churches which are not

explicitly creedal,

but who affirm a strong biblical

orthodoxy,

are

important participants

in this common research

project.

In the National Council of

Churches,

these same studies have been

important

elements in bringing divided Christians

together

to explore

what we can

profess together

in Jesus Christ. Studies on a world wide level have

provided

resources for common

study

on the role of Christ in uniting the churches.8 In the United

States,

studies of the

Christological

divisions of the fifth

century

have allowed for an

engagement

of non-creedal Protestants in a way not realized in Europe.9

The role of the

Holy Spirit

has been

an’important

element in the

reconciling

discussions

throughout

the word. 10 The National Council

dialogue

on this

topic

has been

very

careful not

only

to include a wide

spectrum

of non-creedal

churches,

but also a Pentecostal

paper. ‘ ‘

In

fact,

that consultation on the

Holy Spirit can be seen as a companion study to this

prior study

which was designed

from a

basically

Orthodox

understanding

of the ecu- menical movement.

In addition to its

attempt

to

bring

the worldwide discussions of Christ and the

Holy Spirit

into the US ecumenical

dialogue,

the

5

10

National Council has also

sought

to

give clarity

to

positions

of particular importance

in the US.

Among

these have been the questions

of

gender and’language

in the

creed,12

issues raised

by churches that

baptize only adult, 1

definitions of “apostolic” in US churches

along

with criteria used in

reaching

faith

judgments,

and the context in which we are called to “confess”

today

as US Christians. A

study guide

is in

preparation

which will

help

US Christians come

together

in

dialogue

on the faith confessed in the creed. In

preparation

for these

studies,

several

years

of

dialogue were needed for Christians in the

Commission-Catholic,

Pente- costals, Orthodox,

and Protestants of a

variety

of traditions-to come to an understanding of how creeds and doctrines were used in the

variety

of churches who

participate

in these US discussions.

The US Commission has also

attempted

to

provide

consultations which would

stage particular

voices within the ecumenical

movement, such as this one for the Pentecostal churches. A successful

dialogue with the Black Churches in the US

provided

a common statement that could be shared with the World Council Commission. 14

Again, this discussion

focused, among

other

things,

on the Black Pentecostal experience,

and it was in that

way,

a preparation for the conver- sations in this volume. Leonard Lovett,

(Church

of God in Christ), a

representative

in the

present consultation, presented

a

major paper

for the Church of God in Christ in the earlier consultation. Partners in Ecumenism, a unit of the National Council which deals with Black Church ecumenism, has been

quite

active in

assisting Black Pentecostal churches to find their

place

in the ecumenical movement.

In the

ongoing

work of the

study

“Toward the Common Expression

of the

Apostolic

Faith

Today”

in the

US,

the Pente- costal churches will continue to

play

an

important

role. As a result of this

role,

the witness of the Christian Faith confessed

by Pentecostal Christians will become better known and

appreciated among

all the churches.

The

Consultation Discussions

‘

The

presenters

were selected and the

program designed

to

give the central focus to the

theological questions

of the

Apostolic Faith. At the same time,

they

allowed for the discussion to range to wide areas of potential

engagement

of Pentecostals in ecumenical interchange.

The first

paper

was that of the chair of the Faith and Order Commission, William Rusch (Ecumenical Officer, Lutheran Church in

America).

It treated the

history

of the doctrine of the Spirit

in Christian

theology,

and elaborated on the

consequent implications

for Pentecostal

relationships.

Kilian McDonnell,

(Roman Catholic)

from St. John’s

6

11

University, expanded

on the

presentation by highlighting

the theological

shift within Pentecostal

theology

from a

preliterary phase

before World War II to an emerging literature. He went on to raise a

theological

issue about the

tendency

toward an under- developed

trinitarian

theology,

and the subordination of the

Spirit to Christ, in Pentecostal

thought.

He paralleled Protestant

orthodoxy’s neglect

of

pneumatology,

mentioned

by Rusch,

with the rise of Jewish

legalism during

the

period

of Ezra to Daniel

(450-165 BC). He raised

up

for discussion, the contribution of classical Pente- costalism to the

theology

of the

Spirit

in twentieth

century Christianity,

but without the

neglect

of trinitarian

theology

which has characterized most Protestant

emphases

since Schleiermacher. The constitutive role of the

Holy Spirit

in

ecclesiology

was also noted for further

study

and elaboration

5 Finally,

he opened up the discussion on the

unique

Pentecostal contributions to the

theology of

experience

in the classical

churches,

while

pointing

out the dangers

in pursuit of experience for its own sake.

Russell

Spittler’s (Assemblies

of

God)

observations on Rusch’s paper paralleled

McDonnell’s

nicely. He, too, emphasized

the preliterary

character of much Pentecostal

thought,

and he elucidated the

advantage

that this

gives

to the New Testament scholar for understanding

the

prescriptural developments

of the

Apostolic Faith. He clarified the historical roots of Pentecostal individualism in the

pneumatological experience,

and the consequent late

develop- ment of historical consciousness, inattention to social sin, and

social

inequalities.

Spittler’s

cautions about

“mergers” opened up

the

very helpful and

clarifying

discussion about the vision of

unity

before the ecumenical

movement, allowing

the

“superchurch”

caricature of the ecumenical movement to be confronted in a substantial

way. Likewise,

he clarified for the

participants,

the difficulties of evoking participation

from ecclesiastical

leadership

in the Pente- costal

churches,

even though they have had an increasing

appreciation for the work of Pentecostal ecumenists such as du Plessis. His confession of the

stage

of development at which Pentecostals find themselves in the ecumenical movement foreshadowed several of the concerns later to be surfaced

by Protestants apprehensive

about Pentecostals.

After the intense

worship

and charismatic

preaching

of James Forbes,

Claire Randall’s

(Presbyterian) paper

was discussed. In a very positive response by

Assemblies of God District

Superin- tendent,

Jesse

Miranda,

the

principle

of diversity within

unity

was outlined. This

diversity

exists within the Pentecostal movement as well as between Pentecostal and non-Pentecostal Christians. While ecumenical

dialogue

has tended to move

along

doctrinal and

7

12

ecclesial

lines,

Pentecostals are drawn to an ecumenism on the spiritual

and

experimental level,

what Miranda called a “rediscovery of the

Spirit.”16 Miranda,

the

highest ranking

ecclesiastical leader represented

in the

consultation,

drew on his

identity

as a classical Pentecostal,

and a

Hispanic,

to talk about the intersection and interaction of cultures: “I am a Christian who sees the

church,

now and in

eternity,

as a multi-racial,

multi-cultural,

multi-doctrinal community-a

beautiful

tapestry,

a colorful mosaic.”

A

second, quite lengthy, response

to the

paper presented by Claire Randall was that of Efstathios

Mylonas (Greek Orthodox). He

developed

the

importance

of

pneumatology,

not

only

in Orthodox

spirituality,

but also as a constitutive element of ecclesiology,

celebrated

regularly

in the Divine

Liturgy.

He emphasized the

relationship

of Christ and the

Spirit

in the

understanding

of the trinity

and of the church. Of particular importance in his

response was the charismatic character of the church,

against any pyramidal understanding of

its nature. 17 He emphasized the

importance

of the dialogue

in truth and of seeing the conversation as just a beginning in a long

journey together.

Carmelo Alvarez’

(Disciples

of Christ)

paper

introduced a topic much too vast to be treated in depth in this brief consultation. The relations of Pentecostal and non-Pentecostal churches in Latin America raise

sociological, historical, theological

and ethical issues that have

implications

for the entire Western

hemisphere.

Both respondents,

Donald

Dayton (Wesleyan Church),

of Northern Baptist Seminary,

and Everett Wilson

(Assemblies

of God),

Dean, Bethany

Bible

College,

were

very

affirmative of the

picture painted by

Alvarez. In this context, Wilson observed three

important characteristics to watch in Latin American Pentecostal

develop- ment.

First,

while

they

are often caricatured as otherworldly, their very existence

is part of the social

revolution,

often better understood by anthropologists

than

by

their

evangelical

fellow Christians. “The Pentecostals don’t have a social

policy, they

are a social policy!”

he noted. Second, their lack of political involvement and messianism

may

come from their

marginal status, rejection

of short term

solutions,

and social

cynicism. Finally,

the

democratic, pragmatic

and

youthful

character of Pentecostal communities in Latin America make them

prospective

laboratories for democra- cies,

over

against

the more traditional institutional forms.

Dayton emphasized

the elements

of indigenization

of Christianity in Latin America

through

the Pentecostal

experience,

the

diversity of Pentecostal

experiences

of

church,

the ambivalence of “sec- tarian”

analysis,

and the

importance

of the

global perspective

in the process

of ecumenical

dialogue.

As different as the Latin American Pentecostal

experience may

be the Asian and African

experiences

8

13

present

even further

variety.

The

particular

tensions

produced by the dominance of Pentecostals

among Protestantism,

and of Roman Catholicism

among Christianity

in Latin America was lifted

up

as a

topic

for further

exploration

and discussion in the future. With the

hope

of expanding the Latin American discussion and of providing the

readership

with

bibliographical

data for use in the discussion, Everett Wilson has

graciously

written a brief introductory

article to be read in tandem to the one

by

Alvarez.

Vinson

Synan’s paper

focused on the

history, witness,

and present reality

of the Pentecostal Churches. His

approach emphasized

the

strongly

gifts

of Pentecostalism to the Christian

community. The two

responses may

be characterized as the most

challenging ones made at the consultation. That of Leonard

Lovett, though brief, picked up

on the

paper

he had done

previously

for the Black Churches consultation on the

Apostolic Faith,

mentioned in Claire Randall’s

paper.

With

Synan,

he

emphasized

the

diversity

within the Pentecostal movement in both

theology

and culture. He was more

hopeful

about the “new breed” of Pentecostal scholars who are

providing

“more viable and

adequate” theological

statements. There seem to have been

significant

differences of

viewpoint between

Synan

and

Lovett, however,

on what would best serve the movement at

this juncture

of its

development.

The

response

of Barbara Brown Zikmund

(United

Church of Christ), Dean,

Pacific School of

Religion,

seemed to evoke more public

attention than

any

other. While

mirroring

most of the issues raised in

Spittler’s

comments about the

challenges

before the Pentecostal

community,

Zikmund deliniated Pentecostal-Protes- tant

apprehensions

in a most

forthright way.

She affirmed the

gifts of Pentecostalism to

expressive worship

and revitalized small communities. She also

singled

6ut and

spoke

to four difficulties which she believes Pentecostals

present

to the ecumenical move- ment. These were

1 ) anti-intellectualism, 2)

an

emphasis

on personal

charismata at the

expense

of social

witness, 3) the promise of freedom and

equality

for women and blacks in the

early

vision of Pentecostalism which has yet to be realized, and

4) the insensitivity to

indigenous

cultures evident in some Pentecostal

approaches

to evangelism.

The last

point,

in

particular,

remained a central item for discussion

throughout

the consultation. The

relationship

of Christianity

to the

great

world

religions,

of evangelism to dialogue, of

prosyletism

and authentic

witness,

of sacramentalization to evangelization

are all areas about which more

dialogue

is welcomed. In the discussions it became evident that on some

elements,

division did not follow

clearly

defined Pentecostal and non-Pentecostal lines.

Certainly,

those churches which have

traditionally

related to the ecumenical

movement,

are not of one mind on

questions

of

‘

9

14

missiology

and

dialogue.

There is also considerable

diversity among

Pentecostals on the

appropriate

cross-cultural

strategies

of mission and their

relationship

to

prosyletism.

After the consultation had

worshipped together

and discussed the ecumenical movement, the Pentecostal churches and the Latin American

situation,

discussion returned to the

Apostolic

Faith with Robeck’s

paper.

The focus of the

paper

was the

theological basis in the Pentecostal churches for constructive ecumenical engagement.

As

already noted,

it evoked a response which

helped the whole consultation define more

specifically

the

meaning

of “ecumenism” and the

expectations

of one another in the

dialogues. A second

response

was

given by

Bernice Ledbetter

(International Church of the

Foursquare Gospel),

a Master of Divinity student at Fuller

Theological Seminary.

She

emphasized

the basis of unity in the

Spirit

as transcending the

unity

“cultivated

by human efforts.” While

reinforcing

the comments of

Robeck,

she called for more exploration

of the

diversity among

the Pentecostals themselves so that neither Pentecostals, nor their

partners

in

dialogue,

would stereotype

too

quickly,

the

variety

of groups, for

example,

who are members of the Pentecostal

Fellowship

of North America.

Secondly, she sounded a realistic note to balance Robeck’s more idealistic optimism.

And

finally,

she

emphasized

the

importance

of self- knowledge

and

honesty among Pentecostals, quoting

the obser- vation

recently

made

by

Dr. Arie

Brouwer,

General

Secretary

of the National Council, that “… the most essential

discovery

of dialogue is

self-discovery

…” The ecumenical encounter should cause a strengthening

of Pentecostal witness and

identity,

not its dilution.

The five papers, ten

responses,

and sermon became the resources from which

many

hours of

discussion,

formal and

informal, occurred-dispelling stereotypes, unearthing problems

and differ- ences, honestly facing

the

challenge

of mutual

understanding-and the

hope

in Jesus Christ for a greater realization of the

Holy Spirit’s gift

of reconcilation. The discussion did not

attempt

to close off or conclude the

dialogue,

but

rather,

to surface an

agenda

for a

long Christian

pilgrimage together,

towards

greater fellowship.

The ideas,

mood and vision of the discussion were

gathered up by

the two

reports

of

Jerry Sandidge

and Thaddeus

Horgan, reports which were

approved

for

publication by

the assembled

group.

A firm recommendation was

put

forward to

plan future,

more focused, dialogues

in the context of the

program

of the Commission on Faith and Order of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. While there

appears

to be a full

program

now in place through 1988, the proposal

will be given

very

serious

consideration.

10

15

on Faith in the USA.

*Brother

Jeffrey Gros, FSC,

serves as Director of the Commission

and Order of the National Council of Churches of Christ

‘kith R. Bridston, “Faith and Order:

1960″,

Lutheran

World, 7:3,

(December 1960). 2See W.A. Visser’t

Hooft,

(London:

SC Press,

1953). This 28 page Visser’t Hooft’s “The World `Ecumenical’-Its

Catholic/ World Review,

5Hans-Georg Link, ed., Apostolic

8PauIos

Gregorios,

(Geneva:

Churches, 1981)

Nersoyan, Christology 1986),

9Nersoyan 10 Vis(-her,

The

Meaning of’ Ecumenical,

booklet is somewhat condensed in

History

and Use” in Ruth

Ecumenical Movement,

Rouse and

Stephen

Neill, eds., A Hisotry of the

1517-1948 (London: SPCK, 1954), 735-40.

;Thomas F.

Stransky, CSP,

“A Basis

Beyond

the Basis: Roman

Council of Churches Collaboration,” The Ecumenical

37:2 (April,

1985), 213-222.

4David M. Paton, ed.,

Breaking Barriers,

Nairobi 1975 (London: SPCK and Grand

Rapids:

Wm. B. Eerdmans,

1976), 60 ; “Ecumenical Chronicle,” The

Ecumenical

Review 26:2 (1974), 291-298; “Conciliar

Fellowship,” Midstream 2.1:2 ( 1982), 243-268.

Faith

Today, (Geneva:

World Council of Churches,

1985).

6Thomas F. Best, ed., Faith and Renevi,al: Reports and Do-cuments of the Commission on Faith and Order,

Stavanger 1985, Norway (Faith

and Order

Paper

No.

131 ), (Geneva:

World Council of Churches,

1986), 127.

7Best, Faith and Renewal, 157.

William Lazareth and Nikos

Nissiotis, eds., Does Chalcedon Divide or Unite? Towards Cvnvergence in Orthodox

Christology

World Council of Churches,

1981); Lukas Vischer, ed., Spirit of God, .Spirit of Christ, (London: SPCK and Geneva: World Council of

Faith and Order

Paper

No. 103; Hans-Georg

Link, ed., The Roots

of Our Common Faith:

Faith in the Scriptures and in the Early Church

(Geneva:

World Council of Churches,

1984); Paul Fries and Tiran

in East and West (Macon: Mercer

University Press,

Theodore

Stylianopolos

and Mark

Heim, eds., The Spirit of Truth: Ecumenical

Perspectives

on the

Holy Spirit (Brookline: Holy

Cross Orthodox Press,

1986).

and Fries, eds.,

Christology

in East and West.

ed., Spirit of God, Spirit of Christ; also Credo in Spiritum Sanctum: Atti del Congresso

Teological Internazionale

di Pneumatologia, Volumes I and II, (Vatican

City:

Libreria Editrice Vaticana,

1983).

“Herald T.

Sheppard,

“The Nicene

Creed, Filioque, and

Pentecostal Movements in the United States,” in Stylianopoulos and Heim,

Spirit of

171-186.

12″Gender and

Language

in the Creeds” Union

Seminary Quarterly Review 40:3 ( 1985).

I3Merle D. Strege, ed., Baptism and Church: A Believers’Church Vision, (Grand Rapids: Sagamore Books, 1986).

14″Toward a Common

Expression

of Faith: A Black North American

Midstream 24 ( 1985).

Truth,

Perspective,”

11

16

.

IsKilian

McDonnell,

“A Trinitarian Doctrine of the

Holy Spirit, Theological Studies,

46 (1985), 191-227.

16James D.G. Dunn is interviewed in “A

Meeting

of Minds:

Dunn,

du Plessis and Hubbard Discuss Charismata,”

Theology,

News and Notes 30: (March,

1983), 3.

«Efstathios V. Mylonas, An Evaluation

of Hans Kung’s

Contribution to the Debate on Papallnfallibility

(Ann Arbor,

MI: University Microfilms International, 1985), 1 ;

John

Zizioulas, Being as Communion: Studies in Personhood and the Church, (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s

Seminary Press, 1985),

131-2.

18Walter J. Hollenweger, The Pentecostals: The Charismatic Movement in the Churches

(Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1972).

12