Edinburgh 2010: The ecumenical movement observes its 100th anniversary

And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?
For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?
So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. I Corinthians 14:7-9

A conference to mark the centenary of the World Missionary Conference was held in Edinburgh from June 2-6, 2010. The conference organizers acknowledge that

the 1910 Edinburgh Conference is considered the starting point of the contemporary ecumenical movement, due to its insistence on the importance of unity and cooperation in worldwide mission.

The participants in 1910 were Protestant churches and missionary organizations, but the 2010 conference includes Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, Orthodox churches, and even Seventh-Day Adventists, which may lead one to wonder what gospel will be proclaimed. Pope Benedict XVI sent a formal greeting:

‘I send my greetings to those gathered during these days in Scotland for the centennial of the first Edinburgh Missionary Conference, which is now acknowledged to have given birth to the modern ecumenical movement. May we all renew our commitment to work humbly and patiently, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to live again together our common apostolic heritage.’

Those interested in the liberal slant of Edinburgh 2010 should go to the conference’s website and click on the various links. I’ll quote a few paragraphs from their Common Call, issued on June 6:

1. Trusting in the triune God and with a renewed sense of urgency, we are called to incarnate and proclaim the good news of salvation, of forgiveness of sin, of life in abundance, and of liberation for all poor and oppressed. We are challenged to witness and evangelism in such a way that we are a living demonstration of the love, righteousness and justice that God intends for the whole world.

2. Remembering Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross and his resurrection for the world’s salvation, and empowered by the Holy Spirit, we are called to authentic dialogue, respectful engagement and humble witness among people of other faiths--and no faith--to the uniqueness of Christ. Our approach is marked with bold confidence in the gospel message; it builds friendship, seeks reconciliation and practises hospitality.

3. Knowing the Holy Spirit who blows over the world at will, reconnecting creation and bringing authentic life, we are called to become communities of compassion and healing, where young people are actively participating in mission, and women and men share power and responsibilities fairly, where there is a zeal for justice, peace and the protection of the environment, and renewed liturgy reflecting the beauties of the Creator and creation.

4. Disturbed by the asymmetries and imbalances of power that divide and trouble us in church and world, we are called to repentance, to critical reflection on systems of power, and to accountable use of power structures. We are called to find practical ways to live as members of One Body in full awareness that God resists the proud, Christ welcomes and empowers the poor and afflicted, and the power of the Holy Spirit is manifested in our vulnerability.
...
6. Recognising the need to shape a new generation of leaders with authenticity for mission in a world of diversities in the twenty-first century, we are called to work together in new forms of theological education. Because we are all made in the image of God, these will draw on one another’s unique charisms, challenge each other to grow in faith and understanding, share resources equitably worldwide, involve the entire human being and the whole family of God, and respect the wisdom of our elders while also fostering the participation of children.

My reaction to most of the statements in the Common Call was "whatever that means." The paragraphs seem to be worded in such a way that those who are more conservative in their beliefs than others will be hoodwinked into going along with a liberal agenda while thinking that they’re following a biblical agenda. Whatever obfuscation is present in the Common Call, the social gospel slant is there. Liberation theologians, for instance, can invoke "liberation for all poor and oppressed" in support of their views.

In paragraph 2 we read, "we are called to authentic dialogue, respectful engagement and humble witness among people of other faiths--and no faith..." This is where I use the old Mad magazine method of analysis: "What they say--and what they really mean." "Authentic dialogue" and "humble witness" = "refusing to proclaim that the gospel of salvation through trusting only in the work of Jesus Christ on the cross is true, and other ways are false." "Respectful engagement" = "appeasement" or "capitulation."

In paragraph 3 we read, "women and men share power and responsibilities fairly..." Does this mean women in positions of leadership in the church? None of the terms are defined, but a liberal could certainly read it that way. Then we have "a zeal for justice, peace and the protection of the environment, and renewed liturgy reflecting the beauties of the Creator and creation." "Justice" and "peace" aren’t defined, and I don’t think "protection of the environment" was a priority for those attending the conference in 1910. As for the "renewed liturgy," I suspect that this opens the door for more worship of nature, I.e., paganism.

Paragraph 4 begins with "Disturbed by the asymmetries and imbalances of power that divide and trouble us in church and world, we are called to repentance, to critical reflection on systems of power, and to accountable use of power structures." Whatever that means--although I suspect that liberation theologians and feminists would probably interpret this in a way favourable to their views. In paragraph 6 we have the phrase "share resources equitably worldwide"--I have no doubt that the typical liberal at that conference would read that as support for socialism.

Bob DeWaay’s 2009 book The Emergent Church is subtitled Undefining Christianity. Pastor DeWaay does an excellent job of pointing out (citing, among other works, Francis Schaeffer’s book Escape From Reason (1968)) that those of Emergent views deliberately leave terms undefined. As Mr. Schaeffer pointed out in his book, the New Theology (1960s existentialist-style) used what he called connotation words, such as "resurrection, "crucifixion," "Christ," "Jesus"--words with a connotation in popular memory. However, the New Theologians, like the Emergents today, have removed all meaning from these words. As far as I can tell, the same is true for Edinburgh 2010--terms are thrown around but are undefined, as if the terms are used in a Gnostic sense, being properly understood only by a select elite. For all of Edinburgh 2010’s emphasis on "mission" (and my "spidey senses" always detect liberalism when I see the word "mission" used instead of "missions"), I don’t see a clear definition of the gospel of Christ. As the ecumenical movement has become increasingly liberal and unbiblical in the 100 years since the first World Missionary Conference, so you can expect the movement to continue in that direction.