Council of WCRC Europe3rd to 5th March, 2016

Zürich

Kloster KappelKappelerhof 5

CH-8926 Kappel am Albis

Draft Minutes

Thursday 3rd March

Present

MembersRev Alison McDonald, Church of ScotlandRev John Proctor, United Reformed ChurchRev. Thomas Hennefeld, Reformed Church of AustriaVice President Olle Alkholm, Uniting Church SwedenModerator Dietmar Arends, Church of LippeRev Balázs Ódor, Reformed Church in HungaryPastor Israel Flores, Spanish Evangelical ChurchRev Dimitrios Boukis, Evangelical Church of GreeceReverend Marek Izdebski, The Evangelical-Reformed Church in PolandMr. Pavel Pokorny, Evangelical Church of Czech BrethrenPresident Christian Krieger, Reformed Church of Alsace and LorraineReverend Anette Brandt, Uniting Church in SwedenRev. Branimir Bučanović, Reformed Church in CroatiaPastora Sandra Reis, Presbyterian Church of PortugalReverend Tamás Bódis, Reformed Christian Church in SloveniaRev Trevor Gribben, Presbyterian Church in IrelandRev. Lense Lijzen, Remonstrantse BroederschapPasteur titulaire Karl Marhoffer, Eglise protestante réformée du LuxembourgRev. Sabine Dressler, Reformed Alliance in GermanyPastor Thomas Fender, Evangelical-reformed Church GermanyRev. Attila Palcsó, Reformed Christian Church in SlovakiaDr. Arie-Jan Plaisier, Protestant Church in the NetherlandsModerator Martin Engels, Reformierter Bund DeutschlandRev Sabine Hofmeister, Reformed Church in DenmarkRev. Catherine McMillan, Reformed Church of Zürich and SEK/FEPSRev. Rimas Mikalauskas, Reformed Church of Lithuania

Steering CommitteeRev. Jan-Gerd Heetderks, Protestant Church in the Netherlands

Mrs. Martina Wasserloos, Reformierter BundRev. Balázs Ódor, Reformed Church in HungaryRev. Alexander Horsburgh, Church of ScotlandMrs. Kerstin Koch, Church of Lippe

WCRC Executive CommitteeRev. Dr Bas Plaisier, Protestantse Kerk NederlandRev Cheryl Meban, Presbyterian Church in IrelandD.Dr.h.c. Peter Bukowski, Evg. Kirche im Rheinland

WCRC StaffRev. Chris Ferguson, General SecretaryDr. Douwe Visser, Secretary for TheologyDr. Johann Weusmann, TreasurerRev. Dr. Hanns Lessing, General Council Co-ordinator

GuestsProfessor Matthias Zeindler, Reformierte Kirchen Bern-Jura-SolothurnMrs. Henny Plaisier-Wendt, Protestant Church in the Netherlands

Opening of the meeting

Jan-Gerd Heetderks welcomed everyone to the meeting. He led the opening worship, reading from Romans 3 and leading the Council in prayer.

John Proctor paid tribute to the late Alan Sell, who had served as Theological Secretary to WARC.

Marcus Sali, Theological and Cultural Director of Kloster Kappel, gave a welcome to and on behalf of Kloster Kappel. He spoke of the history of the house, which dates back to the 12th Century.

Those who were attending for the first time introduced themselves.

Minutes of the Meeting of the Council of WCRC Europe, Belfast, 2015

The minutes were approved without amendment.

President’s report

Jan-Gerd Heetderks presented his report (Appendix 1). He highlighted the solidarity visit to Croatia, where the Steering Committee had met people from Croatia and Slovenia. He affirmed the value of such visits. He indicated that it is hoped to continue such visits this year. He also spoke of the conference on Human Trafficking. It had been a very good meeting. He invited Sabine Dressler speak on behalf of the Reformierter Bund who had co-organised the meeting. She spoke of the co-operation between WCRC and the Reformierter Bund. About twenty-five people had gathered in Hanover. A wide variety of experts from different places had contributed. There had been a proposal to build links and co-operation between sending and receiving countries and also some liturgical material, in German, had been published by WCRC.

He highlighted the letter written by the Steering Committee to the Presidents of the European Parliament and the European Commission expressing concern about the treatment of refugees.

Jan-Gerd also spoke of the Erasmus project which will exchange best practice and support volunteers working with refugees. This project would be financed by the European Union and co-ordinated by the Reformierter Kirche in Germany, in co-operation with the Steering Committee and the Reformed Church of Hungary.

The highly successful Emden Conference, run by WCRC Europe and the Reformierter Bund, on the current migrant and refugee crisis was also highlighted. This focussed particularly on the theological perspective. 75 people from eight European countries, and one South African had attended. Several members of the Council had attended too. There had been high quality lectures on a variety of topics. It is intended to publish the text of the lectures.

He said that the Steering Committee had had a busy year, but had worked with joy.

The Council received the report.

Treasurer’s report

Kerstin Koch introduced her report (Appendix 2), both the financial report and the balance sheet. She corrected one matter relating to a request for financial support, which had not, in fact, been forthcoming. The closing balance of €183,000 was down about €7000. She indicated that this was not a serious deficit. There were no major items of expenditure planned.

The Council received the report and thanked the Treasurer warmly for her work.

Report from the WCRC Executive Committee

Bas Plaisier introduced his report (Appendix 3). The meeting in the Lebanon in May 2015 had been very fruitful. He highlighted decisions regarding the Wittenberg Declaration relating to the developing relationships between Reformed and Lutherans. It is hoped that this declaration will be made in 2017 and will indicate that Reformed and Lutherans are growing ever closer. It will be presented to the General Council in Leipzig and will build on the excellent results of the Reformed-Lutheran dialogue and be a living out on a global level of the Lund Principle between Global Communions.

He also spoke of the work done on the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ). The greetings of the General Secretary of the LWF, Martin Junger, had been most helpful in leading the Executive Committee to move forward with the proposal to associate with the JDDJ. The Executive Committee had decided forthwith to begin the process of consulting with member churches with a view to association with the JDDJ. It saw regional involvement as necessary. The 2016 Executive Committee meeting in Havana would debate and formulate a final proposal.

Bas was thanked for his report.

Member churches would be asked to give their opinion on the proposal to associate with the Joint Declaration before the General Council met in 2017.

Jan-Gerd Heetderks gave some background leading to the discussion on the JDDJ being held at this meeting. He indicated that the Theological Sub-Committee of WCRC Europe had been asked by the Steering Committee to discuss the proposal to affiliate to JDDJ in order that this Council meeting might be well resourced to discuss the issue, that member churches may be resourced themselves in the consideration of the proposal to associate.

He introduced Douwe Visser and Matthias Zeindler and outlined the process to be followed in discussion.

Introduction to the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and a brief overview of the discussion leading to the proposal to associate with the JDDJ (Douwe Visser)

The text of the JDDJ had been distributed prior to the meeting. Douwe Visser distributed and introduced a document known as the Signing Statement (Appendix 4). It outlined the points in which it was felt that Reformed Churches were in agreement with the Joint Declaration and added a section on the links between justification and justice.

The Theological Sub-Committee of WCRC Europe had been involved in examining the proposal to associate. It had met in Wuppertal.

He explained that the JDDJ had come out of years of painstaking work by the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) and the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity (PCPCU). The Reformed had been interested from the beginning.

Douwe outlined what is expected as discussions on possible associating with the JDDJ proceed. He indicated that the process would be in line with the normal democratic decision making processes of WCRC. He affirmed that neither the Office nor the Executive Committee could decide themselves whether or not the WCRC should associate. The proposal was that WCRC would associate, but to do so, it would need the approval of member churches. Member churches themselves would not be associating individually.

Douwe reported that the consultation with member churches was about to get underway. During it, he indicated that the signing statement could be further developed in light of what member churches said. The purpose of the statement was twofold:

1) to say, theologically, why WCRC could associate with the JDDJ. This would involve a description of a Reformed understanding of Justification, and an examination of the differences between that and the understandings held by the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran Churches. He offered the opinion that the Reformed actually differ more with the Lutherans than we do with the Catholics.

2) To point out what was perceived to be a deficit in the original Declaration, namely the omission of a statement that justice is closely bound up with justification.

Douwe affirmed that the PCPCU and the LWF would have to approve the Reformed Signing Statement. Also, there would be consultation with the World Methodist Conference, which had previously associated.

In terms of process, he indicated that if 60% of responses received from member churches were positive about associating, the Executive Committee would recommend that WCRC should go

ahead and associate. He made it very clear that this did not mean 60% of member churches, but only of those responding, no matter how few that might be. He reminded the meeting that only 15 member churches had responded on the question about moving from Geneva. He admitted that there had been serious (if unexplained) delays in the consultation process, such that it was now not possible for it to be complete before the Executive Committee meeting in May 2016. Member churches would be given time, until the end of the year, to respond.

Questions about process were raised, particularly over the short timescale vis-à-vis processes within member churches to consider and approve, or not; about the threshold for approval; whether member churches could associate as well as the WCRC; and about whether or not the PCPCU or LWF have an effective veto of the Reformed process.

Keynote address

Prof Matthias Zeindler gave the keynote address, entitled: A theological exploration of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. (Appendix 5) He led the Council through a detailed examination of the JDDJ and spoke strongly in favour of WCRC associating with this document.

There was brief opportunity for questions. John Proctor asked if other area councils were also discussing this issue. They were not. He further asked why the Leuenberg agreement is not mentioned? And why does it only say that ‘some’ churches have pulpit and table fellowship, not recognising the breadth of such fellowship across the world.

The business of the day was closed with prayer by from Bas.

Friday 4th March

Discussion on JDDJ

A decision having been made to remain in plenary discussion, the Council explored the JDDJ further. Particular reference was made to the implications of affiliation for WCRC and for member churches in Europe. It was noted that there was already strong links between the reformed and Lutherans in Europe through mutual membership of CPCE.

Jan-Gerd introduced the discussion. He asked for members to list the issues they wanted to discuss. The following were listed:

Procedure for agreeing whether or not to associateSupplement to the statementHow to motivate churches to engage in the issueWhat difference can it make to local churches to connect to old agreement?Para 31 – tighten link between justification and justice21-22 – need sensitivity to relationship between Israel and Church, Old Testament and

New

The following points were discussed:

Motivation for churches – it was recognised that the text would probably not excite the general membership of churches and that we have to accept that fact. It was recognized that this is not a matter of direct concern, but is a matter of ecumenical

co-operation. It was felt that agreements at this kind of level can make contact between churches at an institutional level more straightforward.

What is the specific contribution of the to this discussion Reformed? Could we be a bridge builder between Catholic and Lutheran?

Justice – the opinion was offered that adding justice, our particular concern, does not seem to make sense in this document. The point of the document is not justice, but justification. It makes it look like an afterthought.

Wholesome relationships: God’s work of creating wholesome relationships between him and humanity carries within it an imperative for humanity to create wholesome relationships between itself. Justification is relational and not exclusively legal.

Several people expressed the view that WCRC can’t sign something created by others without us. They stated that there needs to be something new and suggested that this could be about the relation of doctrine and ethics. However, some countered that justification is relational and that the document represents a big move to see justification in relational terms

Some felt that there was too much on justice in the Reformed Signing Statement and that it was, in consequence, unbalanced.

Arjan Plaisier asked what is the JDDJ about and what it its purpose. In his opinion, it was a document which tackled a doctrinal problem between Lutherans and Roman Catholics and did not address issues specific to the Reformed. He therefore felt that association would not really say anything new.

John Proctor offered the criticism of Paragraphs 21-22, stating that the Reformed are very aware of the Old Testament, perhaps more so than in Lutheran or Roman Catholic theology. He noted that the use of the term “Law” was rather loose and this gave him cause for hesitation about adopting the JDDJ.

Balázs Ódor addressed the issue of process: this was the first time most of us have been able to engage with the JDDJ and the draft signing statement. He asked if more could be included in the document. Could comments be submitted? He asked what would happen to them. He stated the view that this matter is important and therefore needs more time to be done properly.

Peter Bukowski asked: is there a Plan B in relation to the decision whether or not to associate? He thought that many churches may not respond at all, either through lack of time or lack of interest.

Chris Fergusson answered that the Executive Committee wants to hear the advice of the member churches, but their responses will not be binding on the Executive Committee.

Trevor Gribben asked how the 60% quota would work and what would it say about communion if WCRC moved forward with not that many churches engaged or approving.

Chris encouraged all member churches to give a reaction, as has been requested. He re-emphasized that the process was consultative rather than deliberative.

Voices were raised to say that this matter should be decided on at the General Council rather than before, by the Executive Committee.

In conclusion, it was agreed that, as an area, we could not give definitive guidance. Rather, the discussion had resourced further conversation and engagement.

The Steering Committee presented proposed guidelines for the discussion in the churches, as follows:

WCRC Europe is dedicated to the Reformed-Lutheran dialogue. In our bylaws there is a strong relation to the CPCE and the Leuenberg Agreement.

Some of our member churches are united churches. They were also results of the Reformed-Lutheran dialogue.

In ecumenical contacts, an affiliation or association [with the JDDJ] would be helpful. We urge our member churches to react on the letter (Appendix 1) and Reformed Signing

Statement (Appendix 2). We ask them to react on the process and on the content of the statement. We ask our member churches to give advice to the Executive Committee and to the General Secretary about handling this item.

We had a broad discussion in the Council; we ask the member churches to involve the delegates [to the 2017 General Council] in the deliberations in the churches.

We commend the lecture of Professor Zeindler (Appendix 3) to our member churches. We ask the General Secretary to give more clarification about the process for our member

churches.

Welcome by Michel Müller, President of the Church Council of the Cantonal Church of Zürich

Martin Breitenfeld, introduced the Zurich Cantonal Church Council who were present.

Michel Müller gave a welcome to Kloster Kappel and to Zurich. He gave the greetings of SEK/FEPS. He explained that Gottfried Locher, the President of SEK/FEPS was visiting the Pope and therefore unable to be with us. He spoke of the work of Kloster Kappel as a place where people attended conferences. Recently, there had been several on the Reformation Jubilee, which had inspired more than 1000 members of congregations. The Kloster had also played a significant role in ecumenical relations between the Reformed and the Roman Catholics. He noted that Zwingli had died fighting for the Reformed faith within metres of where we were sitting. The war was about religious freedom. The result was that, for 500 years, the church was kept out of politics. Bullinger, Zwingli’s successor, worked out a relationship between church and state in which neither was dependent on the other.

Today, pastors are now much more engaged politically. There is an annual meeting of faith leaders and politicians. There is also more informal activism. The Church is active in witnessing for human rights and justice.

Some refugees are claiming sanctuary in Churches in Basel and Lausanne. This has posed a problem in that churches have traditionally upheld the law, but also want to be critical if the laws are seen as unjust.

The Church is experiencing rapid decline and the rate of about 1% per annum.

There was some discussion within the Cantonal church on different approaches to Church Sanctuary and experiences of it in different countries.

Following this the Council moved outside to participate in the Ceremonial planting of a tree by the Reformed Church of Zürich, as part of the Reformation Commemorations.

After midday prayers in Kloster Kappel chapel, the Council enjoyed lunch together with the Church Council of the Reformed Church in the Canton of Zürich

WCRC Financial Report

Johann Weussman gave his report on the finances of WCRC.

He reported that there had been many changes since he last met with the Council during its meeting in Vienna in 2012. The move from Geneva to Hanover had taken place. The move had had many implications, some of which had been anticipated. A new General Secretary had been appointed and the General Council would be held in Leipzig. The move cost a lot of money which meant that there was no immediate benefit. However, benefits have started to be felt. Operational costs are now €300,000 per annum cheaper than in Geneva. There is no longer a paid finance co-ordinator, that role being filled by a volunteer.

There is no longer a financial crisis. There are reserves of £1,000,000 which were given by the Council for World Mission which are invested and may, in future, yield dividends. The capital cannot be touched. The aim is to have €1.2m (one year’s budget) in reserve. Last year there was a surplus of €100,000.

The current financial plan is to have a balanced budget for 2016. 2017 may not achieve this. The challenges are with the core budget, not with the General Council budget. Churches in Asia are contributing more than they did, especially from Taiwan. There are positive signs that more funds will come from Korea. It is important that all who can do contribute.

SEK FEPS has decided to cut its contribution by 50% and devote that money to CPCE. A discussion is taking place with them about this decision. The cut, unfortunately, came without notice which created problems.

There is a question over value for money. WCRC could do better in some areas. There was a negative impact from the move which adversely impacted productivity. This is a common problem in organisations which move. Johann raised questions over whether the current pattern of a General Council ever seven years with Executive Committee meeting annually is the right way to work. There were environmental considerations too with all these meetings.

He reported that the budget for the General Council was €3.6m. It would be the most expensive ever Council. There would be one day in Wittenberg and one in Berlin, the rest of the time in

Leipzig. Accommodation would be in hotels. It is unlikely that there will be more call for additional funds. German churches and the German Federal Government have offered generous support. Planning has been difficult as there was no institutional memory retained in the organisation as to how to plan a General Council. The planning process this time will be much better documented, so that lessons learned this time will not be forgotten.

Turning to general contributions to WCRC funds, Johann reported that some churches continue to pay above the grid. Others are still to meet the demands of the grid.

Warm appreciation for the treasurer’s report and the way the finances are being managed was expressed.

WCRC Europe and recent work with refugees and migrants

Martina Wasserloos reported on recent work. The Steering Committee had held conferences on theological, political and practical matters regarding migration. These had been described in the President’s report.

Dimitri Boukis spoke of the situation in Greece. He reminded the Council that representatives of the EU would be meeting with Turkey on 7th March. He described how there were currently 12,500 refugees on border with Macedonia. The Evangelical Church of Greece is providing thousands of meals a day to refugees but cannot meet the full need. Help from the Greek Government is minimal, so most of the burden is falling on Churches and NGOs. He invited support for the Evangelical Church of Greece and especially invited churches to come and see what they are doing. He spoke powerfully of how this was not a crisis for one church or for one country but for the whole continent. He said there is a need to think in the medium and long term, not just to focus on the immediate plight of refugees, though that is critical. He informed the Council that there were approximately 75,000 refugees in Greece at moment. Many do not have the legal right to immigrate into Europe, but they are in Greece now. Moroccans and some Afghans are not entitled to move on. What can we do with these people, he asked. Work is being done on their basic needs, namely housing and food but there is an urgent need to think what to do to help families and children. Concentration camps are not acceptable in civilised Europe, he said, to universal agreement.

He said that there is a need to prepare churches in countries further up the migration route, as they would experience increasing demands for their care and resources. He reminded the Council that most immigrants already have connections in Europe. He suggested that churches work with existing immigrant communities in order to prepare for the eventual arrival of others.

Dimitri promised to share written information through the secretary.

John Proctor suggested that WCRC Europe attempt to coordinate a visiting team to Greece. Catherine suggested that students might be involved.

ACTION: STEERING COMMITTEE

Balázs spoke appreciatively of the support for the church in Hungary from partners and from WCRC in developing a Christian witness and response.

Olle Alkholm spoke of the Swedish situation. People there have open hearts and open hands and

government policy towards refugees has reflected that. More than 100,000 new people have come to Sweden in the last year; 36000 are children, many unaccompanied, mostly boys from Afghanistan. Many local churches are helping people to learn Swedish and are also giving food and clothes. Extra money has come from the Government to support churches’ work with immigrants. They remember how, 20 years ago, 100,000 people came from Yugoslavia, fleeing the war there. Now they are a net economic benefit to Sweden, paying taxes and contributing many ways, both economically and socially.

Rimas Mikalauskas offered a different perspective, describing how, over 10 years, about 1m people had left Lithuania as emigrants. He said that the Roman Catholic church had declared that Lithuania should accept refugees.

There was discussion on the challenges of baptism and conversion.

The proposal from the Reformierter Bund that a working group be set us by WCRC Europe on refugee and migration issues, was tabled, with the support of the Steering Committee. (Appendices 6 and 8) Arjan argued that rather than set up a new task group, engagement with CCME should be deepened. He asked what value the proposed task group would add. Balázs argued that a task group would partner with CCME. Dimitri added that its main work was on policy in Brussels. Dietmar Arends argued that a group could facilitate contact with partner churches on refugee and migration issues. Alison McDonald argued that the first two points of the proposal seemed to duplicate work which is being done by CCME. Sabine Dressler argued that what was envisaged for the proposed group was a more internal, theological task.

Jan-Gerd indicated that the Steering Committee would, if told to do so, develop a remit for the proposed task group, ensuring there was no duplication of work.

Christian Krieger argued that there was no distinctive Reformed viewpoint. It was an issue which transcends confession and even religion.

Lense Lijzen stressed that the real need was for practical work. It was easy to set up meetings and have discussions.

On a vote being taken, the proposal fell.

Those who found themselves in the minority continued the discussion. The Steering Committee was mandated to take forward the matter in the light of the discussion, recognising that this was a top priority for the Communion. On a second vote being taken, this proposal was approved.

WCRC General Secretary’s Report

Chris Ferguson reported on current work. He reiterated that consolidation had taken place following the move to Hanover. He indicated that there had been progress towards the ownership of the programmatic work by member churches. There had been an increase in churches reaching out to WCRC seeking help and accompaniment in difficult situations. This had meant that some areas of work had received less attention.

Much effort is being made in run up to General Council. There are many churches dividing over questions of human sexualities. This is a serious challenge to the concept of communion. A

consultation is planned on the issue of human sexualities as a communion issue.

A Strategic plan is being developed to encourage work on theology, mission, communion and justice on a regional basis. There are structural issues to be addressed to such as how the Executive Committee relates to regions. A consultation is planned.

Christ spoke of deep challenges around ecumenical relations. He said that the Reformed community needs to deepen these relationships – both at WCRC level and member church level.

Peter asked about the Wittenberg declaration which would say that nothing actually divides Reformed and Lutheran churches any more. He wanted to know what progress had been made. Chris answered that there had been much progress. He indicated that there may not be a full declaration of communion but that a meeting of theologians to map out agreement has been scheduled. Johann emphasised that nothing in this would be seen as taking a position against the Roman Catholic Church. Chris emphasised that this was being prepared jointly with the Lutherans.

Hanns Lessing, General Council co-ordinator, introduced the logo of the General Council. He outlined the concept of the Council. He emphasised the global, rather than just the European nature and impact of the Reformation. And spoke too of the living legacy of it. He indicated that the flowering of democracy in Leipzig in 1989 would be celebrated. A visit to Berlin would involve engagement with German politicians.

He also spoke of the major exhibition being planned and appealed for churches to help fund it. It is supposed to be ready by the General Council. A question was raised about how expensive the exhibition would be. Past experience had shown that these kind of things had been very successful and very much appreciated. Dietmar proposed that churches be asked to fund it, not for themselves, but for others. An international network is drawing together content.

There is an idea to start a week before the formal opening of the Council, focussed especially on youth. This is not yet budgeted for, but it is hoped that a network of churches with active youth programmes may be able to subsidise youth from less well off churches.

Sandy suggested that, rather than being the 26th General Council, it was in fact the 2nd of WCRC, but Chris informed the Council that, for complicated reasons, it had been decided to choose to number this Council in continuity with the longest standing predecessor organisation.

Brief updates from member churches

Thomas Fender offered a reflection on meetings he had participated in with church leaders from Lebanon and Syria (Appendix 7).

Pavel Pokorny told the Council that the Evangelical Church of Czech Brethren would be celebrating its centenary in 2018.

Jan-Gerd introduced a proposal to organise a conference on the fears and emotions raised by migration and refugee crisis. This was under discussion with the Reformierter Bund and more information would be shared when it was available.

Any other competent business

Jan-Gerd proposed a draft text regarding the discussion on the JDDJ. It was agreed that this should form the basis of a letter to the member churches. (Appendix 9)

Date of the next meeting

Jan-Gerd proposed that the 2017 meeting be not a normal meeting but a one day meeting simply to prepare for the General Council, especially to consider which candidates might be proposed to serve on the next Executive Committee and any other matters to which Europe might like to make a particular contribution. He proposed that it be held on 24th March, 2017 at a venue to be confirmed. This was agreed.

Close of meeting

The meeting was closed formally with a Communion Service in Kloster Kappel chapel

Saturday 5th March – Optional Programme

Those members of the Council who were able to stay on enjoyed a fascinating, if somewhat wet, walking tour of Zürich to visit Reformation sites associated particularly with Ulrich Zwingli. A visit was also made to the Zürich Cantonal Church Migrants’ Church Centre.

Sunday 6th March – Optional Programme

Those members of the Council who were able participated in worship in a selection of local congregations. This was well received, and served to strengthen links between WCRC Europe and the local church.

Appendices

Appendix 1

President’s Report 2016

We are happy to present this report to the meeting of the Council of WCRC Europe in Kloster Kappel. We are grateful to the Zürich Cantonal Church for hosting us here and also for arranging the programme of visits to projects and congregations on Saturday and Sunday. In this report I will give an impression of the work the Steering Committee did last year. We do our work with joy and inspiration and I’m grateful to my colleagues in the Steering Committee.

In November 2015 our Secretary, Rev. Sandy Horsburgh, distributed an extensive newsletter. So it is not necessary to repeat all the items which were named in the newsletter. I will just highlight a few things and elaborate some items which could not make part of the newsletter yet. The newsletter is among the preparatory papers for this meeting and should be read as part of the report.

Solidarity visitsIn recent years, the Steering Committee has had a policy of making solidarity visits as part of its work. These have taken place alongside regular business meeting of the Committee. We are extreme grateful that the churches visited have received us with open arms. We think that it is a valuable sign to the smaller churches of our communion that our communion looks after them and shares their joys and sorrows. The hospitality is always touching and we are blessed to share time in prayer with the churches.

As mentioned in the newsletter, we visited the Reformed Christian Church in Croatia and met representatives of the Reformed Christian Church in Slovenia. The Steering Committee would like to continue the practice of these visits.

Consultation on Human TraffickingTogether with the Reformierter Bund, the Steering Committee organized a consultation on Human Trafficking. You can read about the content in the Newsletter and, in the meeting of the Council, we will give an impression of this consultation. Like at the consultation on asylum, we shared stories in this consultation on human trafficking. Many of our member churches are involved in the work against human trafficking. Human trafficking is the third largest sector of organized crime; huge economic interests are at stake. The work of the churches is not always welcome. One of the delegates told about how he and his family had been threatened. The victims need, among others, the work of our churches. The conference was organized by the President, Vice-President Martina Wasserloos-Strunk and Rev. Sabine Dressler who were all present.

Refugees and asylum1. In 2014, the Steering Committee, together with the Reformierter Bund, organized a consultation about asylum. Many of our member churches were and are involved in the work with refugees. Last year, hundreds of thousands of refugees came to Europe. We saw that many of our member churches were again involved in work for the refugees in lobbying and practical help. At the other side, it seemed that the governments and institutions were powerless at some stage. And we saw that solutions were boycotted.

As the Steering Committee, we wrote letters in the autumn of 2015 to Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament, and to Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission. We asked them to bring their influence to bear to ensure that the refugees who have come to us are treated with humanity, compassion and dignity, and that, in this time of crisis, political ideology and national self-interest be put aside. We asked them to urge all European Union member states to work together, both to meet the needs of those who have recently arrived, and to formulate a common, humane policy on welcoming refugees and asylum seekers. You will find the answers from Presidents Schulz and Junker included in the preparatory papers.

2. The Steering Committee agreed that support for our member churches is needed. It decided to take responsibility for an Erasmus Project financed by the European Union. This Project will be co-ordinated by the Reformierte Kirche (Leer) in Germany in cooperation with the Steering Committee. Project Partners are the Reformierte Kirche (Leer), the Reformed Church of Hungary and at least one more member church of WCRC Europe. The objectives of the project are the exchange of best practices between the partners and the development of an international concept to support volunteers and institutions in their work with refugees.

3. As decided by the Council of WCRC Europe in Belfast, the Steering Committee organized, together with the Reformierte Bund, a further conference about migration. The conference was planned because of the importance of the topic of asylum and migration for people in Europe and because of the need for a common vision of our life and community in Europe. This conference was held in Emden from 17 to 20 February of this year. 75 people from eight European countries and South Africa participated in the conference, which was entitled, ‘Tolerating Strangeness – Migration and Aggression in Europe’. This conference sought to think together about the question of how we can live with the stranger in the midst of our societies on the way to communion. It provided opportunity to learn more about a reformed “Theology of migration” and to recognize and rebuild our engagement in Europe. The topic was discussed from political, sociological, historical and theological perspective. There were lectures from Dr. Achim Detmers, Professor Susanne Lachenicht, Professor Robert Vosloo, Dr. Klaas Dieter Voss, Dr. Andreas Mertin, Professor Gusztàv Bölcskei, Professor Herman Selderhuis, Vice-President Martina Strunk and Professor Klaas Huizing. There was also a panel discussion on this item. In my opinion, it was a very good and fruitful conference. Looking both at the biblical witness and at our own history and theology ( especially the Huguenots and Calvin) brought a lot of inspiration for the way we can look at asylum and migration in our times. The President, Vice-President Martina Wasserloos-Strunk and Vice-President Balázs Ódor attended the conference. Attached to this report is an interview with Dr. Achim Detmers and the President about the results of this conference (in German).

Rev. Jan-Gerd Heetderks, President of WCRC EuropeFebruary, 2016

Appendix 2

Financial Report to the Council of WCRC Europe, Zurich, March 2016

General

In accordance with paragraph 14 of the WCRC Europe by-laws, I would like to present this short report of the financial situation of the European Area of the World Communion of Reformed Churches.

In spite of all financial problems within Europe, either in state governments or within the communities and even within our member churches, the European member churches of WCRC are still among the strongest financial supporters of the communion.

IncomeIn 2015 the allocation of 5% of the membership fees coming from our European member churches came up to EUR 23,650 which is just as much as in 2014. We are very grateful to our members that they were able to make such an effort in these times.

ExpenditureThe president´s report gives an overview of several activities carried out on behalf of WCRC Europe last year. In Belfast in 2015, the Council decided to help the Reformed Church in Transcarpathia (Ukraine) in their diaconal work with an gift of EUR 10,000, like WCRC Europe supported the Greek Evangelical Church the year before. These payments were exceptional one-off payments. It has to be noted that the EUR 10,000 per annum special grant for the justice department came to an end in 2015 after four years of support. The Steering Committee was asked to prolong this support by the office in Hanover. This request will be brought to the Council.

Just quickly I would like to highlight another two items of expenditure: Our Belfast meeting cost EUR 8,000. In October the conference on Human Trafficking took place in Hanover as you read in the President’s report. This conference was a profound exchange on this topic with a financial involvement of EUR 3,800.

The 2015 closing balance for WCRC Europe was EUR 183,800, EUR 7,000 less than at thebeginning of the year. For this year we already got a special support of CHF 5,000 (EUR 4,500) from the SEK/FEPS for the European Area. This sign of commitment is very much appreciated.

WCRC globalWe will have the General Treasurer of the World Communion of Reformed Churches Johann Weusmann with us in Zurich so we will get the latest news of the financial developments within the WCRC.

Kerstin Koch, WCRC Europe Treasurer,March 2016

Appendix 3

WCRC Executive Committee Meeting, 9-15 May 2015, Dhour Choueir, Lebanon,

The meeting of Executive Committee 2015 was held in a very historic and politically sensitive part of the world: Lebanon. We were gathered at the cradle of Christianity which is now divided and devastated by war and terrorism. All over Lebanon, we saw refugees and, at the same time, waves of them were looking to Europe. The theme of the meeting was a word of hope and prayer: “God of Life, Lead us on your Path of Justice, Peace and Reconciliation”.

The members of the Executive Committee experienced the serious and dangerous situation in Lebanon through the encounters with congregations, context sessions about the actual situation, and the many stories they heard from the people which they met on several occasions. At the end of the meeting, the Executive Committee agreed a message about the situation in the Middle East and the role of the WCRC on the path of justice, peace and reconciliation. This message is at the end of this document.At the end of the meeting it was decided that the 2016 Executive Committee will be held in Havana, Cuba, if the infrastructural wishes are fulfilled.

Presidency, General Secretariat and the core groupsThe Executive Committee is the governing body of the WCRC. It meets annually to evaluate the work done by the Officers, the General Secretary and the Executive Secretaries and their core groups. Executive Committee also discusses the new programmes, policies and challenges for the WCRC in the fields of finance, managerial work, the

constitution and the Reformed Partnership Fund. In this global body of the WCRC, the work of the regional WCRC organisations is shared. An important part is also the preparatory work for the next General Council in 2017.

It was the first time that the new General Secretary, Chris Ferguson, could deliver his reports – especially concerning his work during the second half year 2014. He reported about the state of the Communion and the activities in the Hanover Office, his efforts to fulfil the decisions of the Executive Committee concerning the strategic plan and the financial situation. He reported about his visits to churches, organisations and leading ecumenical persons in a lot of countries. He told the Executive Committee about his efforts to overcome the (ecumenical) problems to come to a better advocacy around the financial architecture. It was proposed to begin a process with LWF to focus on the Reformation and Economic Jubilee in the 21st century as a contribution to NIFEA and the 2017 Reformation Jubilee.

FinancesThe situation of the finances of WCRC which was critical in 2011-12 currently is in a better situation, although the low membership fees are a continuous problem. Due to the situation that the budget for the work of the Executive Secretary for Justice and Partnership for 2016 was not yet clear, as a result of the end of the four years funding from the Netherlands, new funding has to be found for it.

A funds development committee will be set up to approve the efforts to do fund development as was stated in the agreement with the Council of World Mission. Besides that, the President and the General Secretary will focus their efforts to collect overdue membership fees from those member churches that have the largest underpayment.

Core Group: Theology, Mission and Communion (TMC)Based on the report and the dialogue with the Executive Secretary, Douwe Visser, the core group reported on a variety of work and proposed several plans for next year(s). The dialogues with the Anglicans and the Pentecostals were evaluated and we are waiting for the final report of the dialogue group with the Roman Catholics about Justification and Justice. A working group will prepare a renewed method for publishing Reformed World. The second edition of the conference about ‘Mission in the Frontlines’ was seen as very relevant in these times and has to be organised as soon as possible. The 2017 Global Institute of Theology will be in Germany in conjunction with the General Council; a part of the programme will be held in Wuppertal in addition to Leipzig. Special theological work will be done concerning the meaning and practice of Communion.

Core Group: Justice and Partnership (JP)The celebrations around the 10th anniversary of the Accra confession were evaluated with Executive Secretary Dora Arce-Valentin. Special attention was given to the region's event, which were connected to the Strategic Plan for WCRC and the launched Lenten Campaign against Human Trafficking for use by churches. An important issue was the discussion in a couple of churches about the ordination of women and the 50% gender balance at the next General Council. Executive Committee encourages member churches to bring delegates who are reflective of the full expression of their communities in order to have active participation, while also reaching the needed quotas. Besides that, seminaries and universities in the global south will be contacted to promote the availability of scholarships for women.

The creation of a working advisory group to strategize how to move forward on the issue of women’s ordination toward the 2017 General Council was reported. This group will develop, with the regional councils, a mapping of member churches where issues related to women’s ordination and gender justice require further attention.

Core Group: Communications The discussions in this core group with Philip Tanis were centred around the ‘renewed way of working / methodologies in the Strategic Plan: networking, communication in and between churches (the website and the social media; the addition of four non-European languages and telling stories; it was agreed that Reformed Communiqué should be published three times per year); leadership development and sharing resources. The current database has to be cleaned up and modernized.

Partnership FundThe Partnership Fund (Werner Joecker and Douwe Visser) reported on several projects in different parts of the world. The structure of the PF has to be modernized. It was decided that some ‘name-changes’ were necessary. The name of the Partnership Fund was changed in ‘Reformed Partnership Fund’. Besides that, the so-called ‘Fund E’ was transformed in the ‘Emergency Fund’. There was a lot of appreciation for the work of this Fund.

The 26th General Council - will be held in Leipzig, Germany from 27 June to 7 July

with the theme 'Living God, Renew and Transform us'. The moderator of planning group, Lisa Vander Wal, reported about progress, but emphasized that a lot of work still had to be done. We are grateful that Rev Dr Hanns Lessing will start, in summer, with his work as General Council Co-ordinator. It was decided that the general secretariat should start to raise funds for the General Council. The General Secretary will send a request to member churches to make a special contribution.

Membership and constitutionExecutive Committee decided that there will be follow up conversations with several churches that applied for membership. In Europe this will be done by Jan-Gerd Heetderks with the congregation in the Ukraine.

Because of concerns about the reliability of the WCRC database concerning the payment of the membership fees and other practical problems, was decided that in this year no church will be declared inactive at this point.

‘Wittenberg Declaration’ in 2017Executive Committee welcomed, with the core group TMC, the need to take actions (as was decided in the Executive Committee 2014) for a draft proposal of a statement (“Wittenberg Declaration”) by with the General Council. This would describe its understanding of the current meaning of Reformation as well as laying out guidelines for the future of WCRC resulting from this. This work would be a logical consequence for the previous report of the Reformed and Lutheran dialogue (2006-2012)

Executive Committee received the report of the Officers in which was proposed ‘to build on the excellent results of the Reformed-Lutheran dialogue to move from dialogue to implementation as an expression of visible unity and a living out of the Lund principle on the global level between communions. This means working together to formulate a joint commitment to this end.’ The LWF General Secretary Martin Junge, who was present during a part of the meeting, expressed his interest and affirmation.

Joint-Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ)In the core group TMC, the affiliation of the WCRC with the JDDJ was discussed.

In his greetings from the Lutheran World Federation, the General Secretary Martin Junge stated: ‘I understand that this is an internal discussion process at this point of time, which the LWF both welcomes and respects. When you find yourself ready for it, the LWF will be ready and willing to offer accompaniment on your reflections on this important decision. Let me express from the LWF’s perspective how I see the importance of your process towards a possible joining of the JDDJ. It relates precisely to the aspect that I highlighted earlier: your particular commitment to justice. You would bring this very gift into the JDDJ! Because indeed, if the WCRC was to join, it would bring much more to the table than the pencil to sign the document. It would bring the identity of the WCRC and its own particular profile into it. It would hence bring, among others, precisely the special vocation for justice, which in fact is currently explored between the WCRC and the Roman Catholics in your bilateral dialogue. A JDDJ joined by the WCRC wouldn’t be anymore the JDDJ that was signed 1999. And this is good so.

Without knowing the outcome of your internal process, let me therefore express already at this stage how much we would welcome such contribution and how nicely it would actually speak of the journey towards unity that Lutherans and Reformed have been able to walk together during the last decades, as recently affirmed again by the bilateral document Communion: On being the Church.

Ahead of us, as you know, is the 500th Reformation anniversary of the Reformation which had its origins in the revolutionary thinking of Martin Luther. A reformation movement that had preceding events, and that had other reformation moments and movements afterwards. The Reformation, this we have been stressing as we journey towards the anniversary, does not belong exclusively to Lutherans. It is a movement that took place and continues to take place within the body of Christ and in this world. It has been taken up, it has meandered into other expressions and denominations, and it has been transformed further and read anew.

And as such, it calls us indeed to reflect how we, Reformed and Lutherans, intend to give expression to our shared sense of ownership of reformation, while expressing at the same time the distinctiveness of our theological and spiritual profiles.’

Executive Committee decided to start immediately the process of consultation with member churches for affiliation with JDDJ. Regional involvement is seen as necessary. The 2016 Executive Committee meeting debate a proposal in preparation for the next General Council in Leipzig.

StaffingExecutive Committee members were impressed by the quality and attitude of the administrative staff team in Hannover, who gave many additional hours in order to facilitate an efficient meeting. In addition, several volunteers have greatly added to the smooth-running of the Executive Committee and office administration, as well as transport, housing and excursions/worship services.

Bas Plaisier

STATEMENT ON THE MIDDLE EASTWe the Executive Committee of the World Communion of Reformed Churches have gathered here at the Dhour Choueir Evangelical Conference Centre in Lebanon under the theme: God of Life, Lead us on your Path of Justice, Peace and Reconciliation.

Inspired by the words of the prophet Isaiah, we strive to be “called the repairer of the breach, the restorer of streets to dwell in” (Isaiah 58:12) and can thus find no place more appropriate to be than here, in the Middle East.

As we have heard from our sisters and brothers who dwell in these streets, the cradle of Christianity is in crisis, and many of their streets are shattered, both figuratively and literally:

• A brother from Iraq told us that he must keep the records of his church packed in his car, not knowing when he may have to flee from radical Islamic forces.

• A sister from Lebanon told of Palestinians living as refugees for nearly seven decades and commented on the irony as she watched walls erected in Israel/Palestine even as they were coming down in Berlin.

• Despite churches being burned, a brother from Egypt related a heartening story of Christians and Muslims standing side by side seeking change—a symbol of hope even in the midst of ongoing struggle.

• A youth worker in the region raised concerns for young people, for their current safety and of whether there is even any future here for them.

• The work of a brother from Syria has moved from writing sermons to supplying water to his flock and many others.

Yet these stories of struggle only hint at the complex picture of this region. Christians here are the first disciples of the church of Antioch and have endured much during their two thousand years of faithfulness.

Historically Christians and Muslims have often lived peacefully as neighbours, enjoying a dialogue of life and sharing common values for the good of their community. We lament the deterioration of relationships that has sprung from radical religious movements and express deep regret concerning the way religion is used for political agendas.

Even today and despite their increasingly smaller numbers Christians in the Middle East remain the salt and light in their communities. We have seen evidence that their roles and impact in their communities goes far beyond their numbers. For instance, the peacemakers in the region are often the graduates of Christian schools, regardless of their present religious practice.

We are heartened by Middle East Christians’ demonstration of grace, courage and resolve to stay in their communities. The region would be seriously impoverished without their presence as a vital means to a peaceful, just and reconciled Middle East.

We have heard these stories from our sisters and brothers and realize that the Middle East is complex, and each country has its own specific context. The situation in one country may be dramatically different than in another.

Our coming here has given us a renewed opportunity to express our solidarity with our members in this region. We do not want to see this as a single act but the beginning of a renewed commitment. How then can we as a World Communion of Reformed Churches respond to our sisters and brothers in the Middle East?

We call for global recognition of the suffering of all people in the Middle East.

We call for violence to cease in Syria immediately and pray for peace to spread like ripples from there throughout the entire region.

We urge our officers and secretariat to strengthen the bonds among our member churches in this region to consolidate their communion.

We commit ourselves to tell the stories of our Middle East sisters and brothers to the wider world.

We encourage our member churches:

• To join us in a fresh sense of solidarity with Christians in the Middle East and a lasting commitment to the wellbeing of all people of this region.

• To hear anew the stories of our sisters and brothers, as opposed to simply accepting the rhetoric of the media. Middle East

• To welcome the refugees as neighbours rather than treat them as “others.” • To not ignore or allow our governments to ignore the places of massive suffering or their contribution to it. • To speak up for the wellbeing of Christians and all people in this region, decrying the violence that creates

such destruction and dehumanizes people.• To draw inspiration from our sisters and brothers in the Middle East who show the love of Christ in the face

of incredible challenges and frequent calls to suffer.

• To live and to pray in the spirit of Isaiah 58:6-12, which says:

Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of injustice, to undo the thongs of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke?

Is it not to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover them, and not to hide yourself from your own kin?

Then your light shall break forth like the dawn, and your healing shall spring up quickly; your vindicator shall go before you, the glory of the Lord shall be your rear-guard. Then you shall call, and the Lord will answer; you shall cry for help, and he will say, Here I am.

If you remove the yoke from among you, the pointing of the finger, the speaking of evil, if you offer your food to the hungry and satisfy the needs of the afflicted, then your light shall rise in the darkness and your gloom be like the noonday. The Lord will guide you continually, and satisfy your needs in parched places, and make your bones strong; and you shall be like a watered garden, like a spring of water, whose waters never fail.

Your ancient ruins shall be rebuilt; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations; you shall be called the repairer of the breach, the restorer of streets to live in.

Appendix 4

Proposal of a Reformed Signing Statement to the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

1. By a new ecumenical consensus, the doctrine of justification by faith represents the heart of the gospel. Agreement about what the doctrine means is therefore of the highest importance. In recent years a welcome degree of convergence has been worked out by the Roman Catholics, the Lutherans and the Methodists. In 1999, after many years of painstaking dialogue, the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification was signed by the Catholics and the Lutherans. It was then ratified by the Methodists in 2006. What was once the flashpoint of the Reformation has settled into relative concord. The mutual anathemas of the 16th century, while still accepted as salutary warnings, have been laid aside as not applying to the present.

2. Although it should be said that the Joint Declaration speaks about justification in a way that differs from the Reformed way of formulating this doctrine, we, the World Communion of Reformed Churches, are ready to join in this ecumenical concord. We express our joy and gratitude for the great gains that have been made. At the same time, we wish to point to areas in need of further clarification and dialogue. We hope to affirm, enrich and extend the existing degree of consensus.

3. We acknowledge that the common understanding of justification as it is outlined in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ §§14-18) corresponds to Reformed doctrine. We are especially grateful for the approach by which God’s work of salvation is explained in a Trinitarian and Christocentric way.

4. We affirm the importance of listening. In ecumenical dialogues, we earn the right to speak only as we have listened first to Scripture and listened much more than we speak. (§14)

5. We agree with the common affirmation that justification is the work of the triune God. The good news of the gospel is that God has reconciled the world to himself through the Son and in the Spirit. Justification presupposes and is grounded in the incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ. Justification means that Christ himself is our righteousness (1 Cor. 1:30). Entering into union with him through the Holy Spirit by means of word and sacrament, we receive a share in his saving righteousness. By grace alone, through faith in Christ's saving work -- and not because of any merit on our part -- we are accepted by God. In Christ, the Spirit renews our hearts, sanctified to do the good works that God has prepared for us to walk in. (§15)

6. We also agree that God calls all people to salvation in Christ. When we receive this salvation by grace through faith, we are justified by Christ alone. Faith is God’s gift through the Holy Spirit. By word and sacrament in the community of faith, the Spirit leads believers into that renewal of life which God will bring to completion in eternal life. (§16)

7. We further concur that the message of justification directs us in a special way to the heart of the New Testament witness. Based on God’s saving action in Christ, justification tells us that as sinners we depend entirely on grace. Our new life in Christ is due solely to God's forgiving and renewing mercy. This mercy is imparted to us as a gift, which we receive through faith and never can merit in any way. (§17)

8. With the Lutherans, we agree that justification is an indispensable criterion of the gospel, but with the Catholics we affirm that other criteria are equally important as well. (§18)

9. We accept what Lutherans and Roman Catholics say together about some of the crucial issues in the doctrine of justification that since the 16th century had long divided them (cf. JDDJ §§19, 22, 25, 28, 31, 34, 37). Moreover, we accept the explanations, which Lutherans and Catholics offer in paragraphs §§20-21, 23-24, 26-27, 29-30, 32-33, 35-36 and 38-39 concerning their respective positions on these issues. We do not consider these differing viewpoints as sufficient cause for division between either one of these parties and the Reformed.

10. The Reformed tradition has always understood itself as deeply indebted to the biblical teaching about justification as it was set forth by Luther, Calvin and the other reformers. At the same time, it has also embraced elements of the doctrine of justification, which belong to the Catholic tradition of the early church both East and West. This gave the Reformed doctrine of justification a distinctive profile. Relative to “the remaining differences of language, theological elaboration, and emphasis” which are seen as not impairing the “consensus in basic truths of the doctrine of justification” between Lutherans and Catholics (JDDJ §40), the Reformed teaching may be described as follows:

11. According to the Reformed tradition, the doctrine of original sin is an essential Christian doctrine. The corruption of human nature cannot be undone by ourselves. The destructive effects of the Fall are overcome by the saving initiative of the Father through the Son and in the Spirit. We depend completely on God for our salvation and justification occurs solely by God's grace. What Christ has accomplished by his saving obedience (extra nos) is made known and applied to us (in nobis) by the Spirit especially through God's word and the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper. No one can respond to God’s call apart from God’s prior work of grace. (§19)

12. Insofar as consent to God's justifying action is understood as a gift of grace, we would agree with the Catholics. This consent is an aspect of faith. (§20) We would also agree strongly with the Lutherans that no one can possibly contribute to his or her own justification. (§21)

13. Because sin is both a guilt and a power, God's grace brings both forgiveness and liberation. God's forgiveness absolves us of our guilt (justification) and God's liberation frees us from bondage to sin so that our faith might be active in love (sanctification). Union with Christ, according to Reformed teaching, is the source of these two saving benefits. (§22)

14. According to Reformed understanding, it is through our participation in Christ by faith that we receive a saving share in his righteousness before God (justification) and enter into life-long repentance (sanctification). We therefore

agree with the Lutherans that "the righteousness of Christ is our righteousness" (§23) and with the Catholics that “God's forgiving grace always brings with it a gift of new life.” (§24)

15. It is Reformed teaching that sinners are justified by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8). Grace is the source and ground of justification while faith is the instrument of its reception. The whole of the Christian life is a life of trust in the promises of God. Faith cannot truly exist without love and hope and faith without works is dead. Love for God and the neighbour is therefore indispensable to faith. Works of love, however, are not the basis of justification. Justification is a free gift that cannot be merited in any way. (§25)

16. According to Reformed understanding, justification and sanctification both flow from union with Christ. We therefore agree with the Lutherans when they state that “justification and renewal are joined in Christ, who is present to faith.” We also agree with them that sinners are justified by faith alone (sola fide) and that God brings forth faith through the proclamation of God's Word. (§26)

17. The Reformed teach that our adoption as God's children takes place as we are joined to Christ through faith. We are made righteous before God in Christ by free grace while still being only imperfectly righteous in ourselves. At the same time we agree with the Catholics when they emphasize that justifying grace brings renewal of life and that this renewal "contributes nothing to justification." (§27)

18. According to Reformed understanding, we remain dependent on God's grace, through word and sacrament, throughout our lives. Grace is never something we merely possess. As we call upon the name of the Lord, it is something we receive decisively once and for all as well as perpetually again and again. In our struggle against "the old Adam," we must pray for forgiveness every day. God's grace is new every morning. (§28)

19. We agree with the Lutherans that believers are "righteous and sinners at the same time" (simul iustus et peccator). Because there is a sense in which righteousness and sin are categorical before they can be matters of degree, we also agree with them that as believers we are "completely righteous" in Christ while still being "completely sinners" in ourselves (totus/totus) before God. Nevertheless, because the enslaving power of sin has been broken, sin no longer has dominion over us. By grace we are continually made free to lead new lives of justice and love. (§29)

20. According to Reformed understanding, all sin, whether large or small, and whether original or actual, is worthy of divine condemnation. We agree with the Catholics that concupiscence must be distinguished from deliberate consent and that concupiscence is not the same as natural desire, but we also hold that disordered and unwholesome desires are an expression of human sinfulness as condemned by God. (§30)

21. We agree that "Christ has fulfilled the law by his death and resurrection" and that he has overcome the law "as a way of salvation." We are therefore justified by faith "apart from works of the law" (Rom. 3:28). The teaching and example of Christ establish a standard for our conduct. The commandments of God also remain valid for our lives as believers. (§31)

22. According to Reformed understanding, the law remains a norm for the conduct of the Christian life (as agreed in the previous section). We affirm with the Lutherans that the law also serves to disclose and accuse us of our sin. The law is rightly used when it drives us to God's mercy in Christ. (§32)

23. We receive with gladness the Catholic statement that "through Jesus Christ God has mercifully promised to his children the grace of eternal life." We affirm that what God intends will be fulfilled and that the good work God has begun in us will be brought to completion. (§33)

24. We believe that because the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable (Rom. 11:29), the gift of faith includes the assurance of salvation. Faith without assurance would be deficient or confused. Assurance is based primarily not on anything in ourselves -- whether faith, works, or evidences of the Holy Spirit -- but on Christ and the promises of God. (§34)

25. The Reformed believe that assurance is linked to the doctrine of election. Divine election underscores that our salvation is grounded solely in the grace of Christ, because we were chosen in him before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). The Reformed therefore agree with the Lutherans that when falling into the grip of anxiety about our salvation, we should "look solely to Christ and trust only in him." (§35)

26. According to Reformed understanding, in Christ God faithfully promises our salvation. We therefore welcome the Catholic affirmations that faith is grounded in "the objective reality of God's promise" and that the divine promise cannot be considered untrustworthy. (§36)

27. We agree that good works are the fruit of faith. We also agree that good works can only be done in dependence on God's grace. (§37)

28. We agree with the beautiful statement by Therese of Lisieux as quoted in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (#2011): "After earth's exile, I hope to go and enjoy you in the fatherland, but I do not want to lay up merits for heaven. I want to work for your love alone. ... In the evening of this life, I shall appear before you with empty hands, for I do not ask you, Lord, to count my works. All our justice is blemished in your eyes. I wish, then, to be clothed in your own justice and to receive from your love the eternal possession of yourself." Justification and eternal life are both unmerited gifts. (§38)

29. We strongly agree with the Lutherans that our participation in Christ's righteousness is not partial but always complete. On the basis of Christ's righteousness as received by grace through faith, eternal life is an unmerited reward in which God's promise to the believer is fulfilled. (§39)

30. One specific area not treated in the Joint Declaration is of special concern to the Reformed. It deserves to be mentioned as a topic for further clarification and dialogue:

31. The Reformed are concerned that the Joint Declaration is to our understanding not explicit enough about the relationship between justification and justice. A recent and important confession of faith coming out of the Reformed tradition is the Belhar Confession. This confession states that there is a very strong relationship between justification and justice because “God has revealed himself as the one who wishes to bring about justice and true peace among people.”1 It has to be clear that “we reject any ideology which would legitimate forms of injustice and any doctrine which is unwilling to resist such an ideology in the name of the gospel.”2 An even more recent confession is the Accra Confession. This statement of faith is outspoken in pointing towards the injustice of the global economic situation and makes clear that “global economic justice is essential to the integrity of our faith in God and our discipleship as Christians.”3 It is also outspoken in its desire that all may have life in abundance: “… therefore we reject any church practice or teaching which excludes the poor and care for creation, in its mission; giving comfort to those who come to ‘steal, kill and destroy’ (John 10.10) rather than following the ‘Good Shepherd’ who has come for life for all (John 10.11).”4 And thus according to Reformed understanding, justification and justice cannot be separated, because doctrine is inseparable from ethics. Therefore, we would urge the following:

32. Justification implicates the removal of injustice, the prevailing of mercy, the restitution of the sinner. It leads to the imperative to seek justice for the oppressed. It implicates that all our disorders are rectified and that the world is reconciled to God. It means that in the time between the times, the church, in love and witness to Christ, is called to stand against all social disorders, and for justice, freedom and peace in the world.

33. Most especially, it implicates solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice. Justification implicates the inclusion of the excluded, the acceptance of the rejected, and the embracing of the humiliated and the marginalized. We cannot be conformed to Christ, whose heart was moved to look upon our sin as our misery, without seeking to alleviate the misery of those most in need at the bottom of society.

34. To establish justice on earth for the poor, the excluded and the oppressed, God stands on this side, against the exalted and for the lowly, always for those whose rights have been robbed and taken away.

35. As Reformed Christians we are grateful that on the basis of such an agreement as this, Lutheran and Reformed Churches in some countries have recognized one another as belonging to the one Church of Jesus Christ and have declared full communion of pulpit and table. It is our deep hope that in the near future we shall also be able to enter into closer relationship with Lutherans in other places and with the Roman Catholic Church, as well as with the Methodists, in accordance with this declaration of our common understanding of the doctrine of justification.

1 Belhar Confession § 4.2 Belhar Confession § 4.3 Accra Confession, § 15.4 Accra Confession, § 28.

OFFICIAL COMMON AFFIRMATIONIn this statement, the World Communion of Reformed Churches affirms its fundamental doctrinal agreement with the teaching expressed in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification signed at Augsburg on 31 October 1999 on behalf of the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church and as ratified by the Methodists on 23 July 2006.

The signing partners of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification join together in welcoming the above statement of the World Communion of Reformed Churches, which declares and demonstrates Reformed agreement with the consensus in basic truths of the doctrine of justification as expressed in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.

Building on their shared affirmation of basic truths of the doctrine of justification, the four parties commit themselves to strive together for the deepening of their common understanding of justification in theological study, teaching and preaching.

The present achievement and commitment are viewed by Catholics, Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed as part of their pursuit of the full communion and common witness to the world which is the will of Christ for all Christians.

Appendix 5

Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification – should the World Communion of Reformed Churches join?

Matthias Zeindler

On October 31st 1999, the President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the President of the Lutheran World Federation signed a document in Augsburg (Germany) entitled “The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification” (JDDJ). The celebration marked the end of more than three decades of theological work and ecumenical diplomacy. Both within the Catholic Church and in the Lutheran World Federation, considerable obstacles had to be overcome before this remarkable consensus could be reached. For one of the major branches of the Reformation tradition, the Reformed, a theological step forward, such as the one being talked about, has to be considered as highly relevant. Douwe Visser has sketched the process that now sets before us the question whether the World Communion of Reformed Churches should associate with the Declaration. It is my task in this brief paper to present to you some theological deliberations on that question. My comments are the result of a meeting of the Theological Sub-Committee of WCRC Europe in Wuppertal, January 28th-30th. The group was convened by Dr. Douwe Visser and consisted of Viktoria Kóczián (Hungary), Prof. Michael Weinrich (Germany), Dr. John McCulloch (Scotland) and myself.

1. The Joint Declaration

Let me start with a few remarks on the content and the nature of JDDJ. The Preamble starts out with the statement that the doctrine of justification “was of central importance for the Lutheran Reformation in the sixteenth century” (1). You all know that, after the Reformation, the doctrine was called the articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae, the article on which the church stands and falls. Both sides in the disputes of the Reformation time held different understandings of faith, works and justification and, as a consequence, put forward doctrinal condemnations of the respective other. The Preamble says: “These condemnations are still valid and thus have church-dividing effect” (1) This was the situation JDDJ intended to overcome.

The document goes on to draw attention to a number of reports of bilateral dialogues of the past years, reports that had showed “a high degree of agreement” on the current interpretation of the doctrine of justification. And that therefore the time had come “to summarize the results of the dialogues on justification so that our churches may be informed about the overall results” so that they might “be enabled to make binding decisions” (4). The intention of the Joint Declaration was then formulated as “to show that on the basis of their dialogue the subscribing Lutheran Churches and the Roman Catholic Church are now able to articulate a common understanding of our justification by God’s grace through faith in Christ. […] It does encompass a consensus on basic truths of the doctrine of justification and shows that the remaining differences in its explication are no longer the occasion for doctrinal condemnations” (5). The “consensus on basic truths” has indeed created a new situation, in which “the corresponding doctrinal condemnations of the sixteenth century do not apply to today’s partner” (13). Lutherans and Catholics are no longer divided on the basis of their differing understandings of God’s work of the justification of the sinner.

After a brief exposition of the biblical teaching on justification, JDDJ then goes further, noticing that “insights of recent biblical studies” as well as “modern investigations of the history of theology and dogma” have made the consensus possible (13). Central for the consensus is “the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God” (15), by the work of Christ, the Son of God sent by the Father, mediated to us by the Holy Spirit. The partners can therefore confess: “By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works” (15). In other words, both faith and good works are effects of divine agency, and not conditions to be fulfilled by humans before they can be saved.

Making clear the foundational role of God’s grace in the constitution and the maintenance of the relationship between God and humanity, the doctrine of justification is more than one doctrine alongside others. “It stands”, in the words of JDDJ, “in an essential relation to all truths of faith, which are seen as internally related to each other. It is an indispensable criterion which constantly serves to orient all the teaching and practice of our churches to Christ” (18). There have been considerable controversies on the criteriological status of the doctrine of justification, between the signing parties on the one hand, but much more within the Lutheran churches on the other. I don’t have to expand on the latter. I only mention the fact that the controversy on the question of whether the doctrine of justification was the indispensable criterion or just one of the indispensable criteria (as it now stands in the text) was probably the main reason why 250 (!) theologians, mostly from Germany, signed a declaration against the JDDJ.

The way the remaining differences between Lutherans and Catholics where expressed within the JD deserve our attention because the formulations are typical for the document’s methodology. We are speaking of the so called method of differentiated consensus which, in the JDDJ, was accepted for the first time by the Roman Catholic side. The paragraph on the criteriological status of the doctrine of justification reads as follows: “When Lutherans emphasize the unique significance of this criterion, they do not deny the interrelation and significance of all truths of faith. When Catholics see themselves as bound by several criteria, they do not deny the special function of the message of justification.” After the differences are mentioned – which apparently are differences in emphases and not in substance, the underlying consensus is once more stated: “Lutherans and Catholics share the goal of confessing Christ in all things, who alone is to be trusted above all things” (18). As you can see, the method of differentiated consensus allows the expression of both differences and consensus by placing the remaining differences within a still more far-reaching shared conviction. As Reformed protestants, we can state that, with this method, the type of relationship constituted between the two parties of the JDDJ comes close to a type favoured by Protestants, namely communion – think of the Leuenberg communion, think of WCRC.

We don’t have to go into all the details of the JDDJ, especially because we will highlight some of the important points from a Reformed point of view when we come to the Signing Statement. Suffice to say that the document proceeds in the same way as so far, following the method of differentiated consensus. The method helps to explain the specific theological interests of the parties in controversial questions, and therefore prevents them giving the differences a dividing status. This applies to questions such as the understanding of human cooperation in the process of salvation, where both sides affirm that the sola gratia should not and is not denied, while also the personal character of faith is given its proper place. The same is true when it comes to the question of external justification and internal renewal, where both sides hold that salvation exclusively rests on God’s work, but also both sides affirm that one important dimension of God’s grace is the gift of a new life. And therefore – to mention one last important point of traditional controversies – there is no justification without the fruits of good works, namely “a Christian life lived in faith, hope and love” (36). Catholics can assure their partners that, when they speak of the “meritorious” character of good works, there is no intention to install some kind of work-righteousness. On the other hand, Lutherans can acknowledge that the concept of growth in grace is not foreign to their theology at all.

The JDDJ ends with a final affirmation of the “Significance and Scope of the Consensus reached”. The two parties have reached a “consensus in basic truths”, in light of which “the remaining differences of language, theological elaboration, and emphasis in the understanding of justification […] are acceptable.” They do not “destroy the consensus regarding the basic truths” (40). The signatory churches finally state that the consensus now reached “must come to influence the life and teachings of our churches”. The topics that need further clarification include “the relationship between the Word of God and church doctrine, as well as ecclesiology, ecclesial authority, church unity” etc. We find also mentioned “the relation between justification and social ethics” (43). Catholics and Lutherans “are convinced that the consensus we have reached offers a solid basis for this clarification” (43).

2. Reformed Reactions to JDDJ

The JDDJ was an agreement between Catholics and Lutherans. The Reformed did not participate. Nevertheless, they were deeply involved in discussions after the signatory act about the question of whether they could also join the declaration. In a quadrilateral consultation 2001 in Columbus, Ohio (Lutheran, Methodist, Reformed, Catholic), reformed theologians stated their positions – which were not unanimous, but still clear, in a number of respects; the presentations were published in the first issue of “Reformed World” in 2002. After Columbus, the Theological Subcommittee of the European Area Committee of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches took up the topic and, in 2009 came out with a truly fine volume “What is Justification About? Reformed Contributions to an Ecumenical Theme”. In addition to that, a considerable number of reformed theologians have addressed questions concerning the JDDJ in different places, so that we can say without hesitation that a serious opinion making has taken place among the Reformed.

Now, again, with the Reformation jubilee at hand, we face the question of whether we should join the JDDJ. The question can be asked, and answered, in different ways. First of all, it can be approached either as a theological question or as a question of church politics; more specifically of ecumenics. Ecumenical questions generally are both and should be both, but still there remain different emphases. On a theological level, one can either ask whether a text adequately represents the theological sensibilities of one’s confessional tradition, or one can ask what theological reasons prevent me/us from agreeing with the suggested propositions. In the first case you may speak of a maximum position; in the second case of a minimum position. It is quite clear that, in ecumenical dialogues, you usually have to deal with texts of the latter type. Especially when a text works with the method of differentiated consensus, the choice of method already implies remaining differences which exclude the possibility of a document expressing a confessional maximum, both in terms of content and in terms of language. Thus the adequate question to be asked, in our case, is whether the expression of the doctrine of justification in JDDJ articulates reformed sensibilities clearly enough that it can be joined. And if not, whether an added statement of missing points would make it possible nevertheless to approve the JDDJ. The latter scenario is the one suggested to you today. JDDJ, to a very large extent, states concerns that belong to the very core of Reformed theology. On the other hand, there remain concerns that are of special importance for Reformed churches and which cannot be found in JDDJ in desirable clarity – and, for that reason, a special Signing Statement should be added. We will come to the content of such a statement in a moment.

3. Reasons to join JDDJ

Before that, a few ecumenical considerations: it has been more than 16 years since the signing act in Augsburg. The expectations have been high, especially on the Lutheran side. Since the doctrine of justification in Lutheran theology holds a unique place and ideally organizes the whole of the theological system, one could expect that the signature under JDDJ should open the door for a whole chain of agreements on matters that are connected with the doctrine of justification, especially in ecclesiology. This was not the case. For the year 2000, Pope John Paul II announced a Great Jubilee with a Jubilee indulgence. In the same year the declaration “Dominus Iesus” was published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, affirming once again the teaching that the Roman Catholic Church is the sole true Church of Christ. To Protestant Churches, the term “Church” was denied; they were called “ecclesial communities” and “not Churches in the proper sense”. This was ecclesiological teaching strictly along the lines of Catholic church tradition, and those who had hoped that JDDJ would bring a change – more precisely, would have to bring a change – were disappointed. This was not necessarily a sign that, in the Vatican, JDDJ was never really accepted (this may be the case), but first of all that, in Catholic theology, justification never held the central place it holds in Lutheran theology. This difference remained with JDDJ, and it minimizes the ecumenical significance of the document considerably.

It would be wrong, though, to conclude that JDDJ was theologically and ecumenically insignificant. The document is anything but irrelevant. First of all, other than in the Vatican, ecumenical theologians in the Catholic Church make strong use of the declaration. In their hands, JDDJ can be useful as a lever that constantly helps to remind the Catholic side of the far-reaching commitments into which they had entered. Further studies in the interpretation of justification might indeed bring to light new ecumenical imperatives implied in JDDJ. So any support given to JDDJ gives support to ecumenically minded theology within the Catholic church.

Let me add another aspect. To join JDDJ not only affects the relationship of the Reformed to Catholics, but also to Lutherans. And with the Lutheran Churches the Reformed are in a close relationship, not only historically, but also and much more in modern times. In Europe, it was mainly Lutheran and Reformed churches that came together in the Community of Protestant Churches on the basis of the Leuenberg Agreement of 1973. Therefore, when it comes to the relationship with Lutherans, the burden of proof is clearly on the side of the Reformed. After the Leuenberg Agreement has been signed and a common understanding of the Gospel has been affirmed, there would have to be very good theological reasons not to associate with JDDJ. And I wish to underline: theological reasons.

When the Leuenberg Agreement sets out to detail the common understanding of the Gospel, it starts with the “message of justification as the message of the free grace of God”. The message of justification through grace alone by faith builds the core of the shared interpretation of the Bible’s teaching of the churches of the CPCE. One may feel that the Leuenberg Agreement on the whole leans very strongly towards the Lutheran side within the spectrum of Protestant theologies, but that’s a question to be discussed. What counts most for our question of joining JDDJ is the fact that, since Leuenberg 1973, Lutherans and Reformed explicitly agree in their interpretations of the doctrine of justification. The common basis was reaffirmed in the Report of the Lutheran – Reformed Commission “Communion: On Being the Church” (2012).5 Our decision has to be taken in the light of that shared conviction. The theology network wishes to stress the point that the Reformed, from the beginning, shared that conviction; Calvin speaks of justification as the “main pillar” on which our faith rests. You may therefore say that to agree with the importance of JDDJ adds nothing new to Reformed theology but is simply a matter faithfulness to our own theological tradition.

One last point concerning our relationship to the Lutherans: with Leuenberg, a strong bridge has been built between two confessional traditions which, at times, were severely opposed to each other. Remember that, in Luther’s perspective, the Swiss Reformers were farther away from some of his positions that the Catholics. The Agreement of 1973 had church-historical dimensions and made things possible that seemed unimaginable for centuries. In the process since 1973, the bridge has become even stronger and mutual ecumenical reliability has been deepened considerably; and all this on the basis of a shared understanding of the doctrine of justification. We have to take into account this common history in our deliberation about JDDJ. Can we afford not to join? Would our ecumenical reliability, vis-à-vis our Lutheran brothers and sisters, not seriously suffer? And would the Lutheran side not, with good reason, ask whether the common basis stated in the Leuenberg Agreement, and repeated in later documents, is valid any longer?

4. The Reformed Signing Statement: a Proposal

There are strong reasons to decide that WCRC should join the JDDJ. But as said before, this can and should not happen without comment. When we join, our partners have a right to transparency concerning the Reformed position. And as both Lutherans and Catholics have reached a consensus but still differ on certain points, the Reformed also agree on the central statements, but wish to add one or the other nuance from their particular confessional perspective. So also the process of joining follows the method of differentiated consensus.

You all have read the Proposal of a Signing Statement to the JDDJ. It was discussed and welcomed at the Wuppertal meeting. Let me briefly comment on the document.

The proposal consists of three parts. The first parts runs from paragraph 1 to 9, and gives a short reading of JDDJ from a Reformed perspective. In the second part (10-29) , a Reformed understanding of the doctrine of justification is presented, highlighting the specific insights of our tradition. Both parts are not an exhaustive presentation of all the pros and cons but a Reformed self-positioning within these important controversies. It may be interesting to note that the Reformed are not closer in every case to the Lutheran position. In the third part (30-35), one area is introduced which, in the opinion of WCRC, is of special concern to the Reformed, but is not treated explicitly enough in JDDJ, namely the relationship between justification and justice.

Let us go back to part 1. Right at the beginning, the central statement is stated, namely that “we acknowledge that the common understanding of justification, as it is outlined in the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, corresponds to Reformed doctrine” (3). Therefore, in spite of eventual differences, the doctrinal foundation is laid for an agreement. It is also said that the Reformed are specifically grateful to find God’s salvific work “explained in Trinitarian and Christocentric” terms (3). In the question of the criteriological status of the DJ, equal right is given to both sides when, on the one hand, justification counts as an “indispensable criterion of the gospel”, while, with the Catholics, the Statement affirms “that other criteria are equally important as well” (8). The statement then holds that the Reformed do not consider the remaining “differing viewpoints as sufficient cause for division between either one of these parties” and themselves (9).

The following presentation of Reformed accents in the doctrine of justification in part 2 first underlines the strong doctrine of sin and the complete dependence on God for human salvation (11) – the first of the five points of Calvinism, you may say, “total depravity”. The effects of God’s grace are described as both forgiveness and liberation, as absolution from guilt and getting freed from bondage to sin (13). We find here Calvin’s teaching of God’s twofold

5 https://www.lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/DTPW%20Reformed-Lutherans%202014_0.pdf.

grace as justification and sanctification.6 The Statement underlines the deep interconnectedness of justification and sanctification that “both flow from union with Christ” (16). Having given such a prominent place to salvation, it is no wonder that paragraph 21 affirms the so-called third use of the law: “The commandments of God also remain valid for our lives as believers”, along with the teaching and example of Christ (cf. 22). In paragraph 25, the doctrine of election is introduced, not as a source of anxiety, but in the context of the question of the assurance of salvation.

Part 3 finally mentions the relationship between justification and justice as “a topic for further clarification and dialogue” (30). One can say that, with the question of justice, a difference between Lutheran and Reformed comes to the fore that goes back to Reformation times. While Lutheran soteriology primarily focused on the individual, Reformed soteriology was always oriented to the communal aspect of human well-being as well. In a recourse to the confessions of Belhar and Accra, the Statement makes clear that “according to Reformed understanding, justification and justice cannot be separated” (31). Justification therefore has to be understood as implying “the removal of injustice, the prevailing of mercy, the restitution of the sinner” (32), and, most of all, “solidarity with the victims of social disorder and opposition to systems of social and economic injustice” (33). The theology network recommends to you that WCRC join the JDDJ, adding the Reformed Signing Statement here proposed. With both aspects of the act, the Reformed churches stay true to their Reformation heritage. They reaffirm the centre of Reformation theology, the strict priority of God’s grace in his covenant with creation, and they affirm the distinctive accents of their confessional tradition, and so make them bear fruit for the sake of other churches.

5. Personal Position

Let me finish with a few personal comments. Since I am part of the theology network, much of what I have to say has been mentioned already. Allow me to add only two points to the question of the value of the WCRC’s joining JDDJ. What could be the added value of such an act?

First, WCRC joining JDDJ would be an important step on an ecumenical level. It is certainly not a revolutionary step, but you all know that this is not the time for revolutionary ecumenical steps. Any step has to be welcomed in a – let’s say – rather sober ecumenical climate. It is a small step, but also a logical one. If it is still true that the message of God’s justification of the sinner builds the cornerstone of the Reformation, and if we are convinced that the message of justification is still relevant, the Reformed have to have great interest in an ecumenical agreement that deals with the centrality of the doctrine of justification. Anything else would be difficult to argue for.

My second point is a more material one. If WCRC joins JDDJ, it reminds itself of the centrality of the message of God’s justification. It is good to advocate the importance of justice vis-à-vis the other ecumenical partners. But the interrelation between justification and justice remains dialectical, justification being the source of any human work, the work for justice an implication of justification. So while the Reformed remind Lutherans and Catholics of the importance of justice, JDDJ reminds us of the lasting importance of justification. The Gospel can only be proclaimed faithfully within the framework of the dialectic of justification and justice. Even our best teaching of justice and taking action for justice has to be controlled by and based on God’s justification, otherwise the project easily turns into ideology. Justice cannot be the only centre of the church’s proclamation.

The doctrine of justification had and always has a strong ideology-critical dimension, keeping awake the awareness that any human thought and action is in danger of becoming sinful, of cutting itself off from its divine source, and becoming an instrument of human self-interest. God stands on the side of the lowly, but God also justifies the sinner by his grace alone. No one is without sin, but all are desperately in need of justification. This is the healthy and promising dialectic of the message of justification. In order to keep this dialectic alive, we as WCRC should join JDDJ.

Kappel, 3.3.2016

Appendix 6

Petition to the Council of WCRC-Europe 2016

The Reformed Alliance in Germany in cooperation with WCRC-Europe focused on migration and asylum in and to Europe at two conferences: at first by listening and sharing the experiences of churches engaged in refugee work mainly in European border countries (Hanover, Oct. 2014). This was succeeded by a bigger conference examining the

6 Inst. III,1,1.

theological and historical background of Reformed Churches and their role as migrant-churches and it's implementation for todays challenges (Emden, Feb 2016)Both conferences were regarded as highly important for future cooperation and networking on various levels.(In line with this the Steering Committee wrote a letter to the president of the EU-Parliament, Martin Schulz.)We realize that the disastrous situation of refugees as well as the current political situation within the European Union asks for an ongoing process that involves not only the social and diaconal work of our Churches but also our theological refection und political engagement.

We therefore call for the installation of a permanent task group/working group which - in cooperation with partner churches and organizations like CPCE, CCME and others –

1. monitors the developments, 2. investigates root causes for flight and migration3. and equip our communion of churches to work on European level as well as on national level as churches

who don't remain silent but seek together for humanitarian solutions.

29.2.2016, Reformierter Bund, Sabine Dressler

Appendix 7

Lebanon Travel 2016

At the beginning of this year I had the opportunity to travel to Lebanon. I visited Lebanon, because I wanted to meet some of our partners from Syria there.

Since last year the Reformed Church in Germany supports a school in Syria, in Aleppo. I also wanted to talk with representatives of the Christian churches in the Middle East. Especially with members of the Supreme Council of Evangelical Churches in Syria and Lebanon which have directed in 2014 the urgent appeal to the Protestant churches in the world to draw attention to the difficult situation in the Middle East. I think you all have received this letter.

The churches in the Middle East belong to the oldest congregations of Christianity. Still at the end of the 20th century the religious and cultural diversity was characteristic for the region of the Middle East. But since the so-called „Arabian spring“ from 2011 a dramatic change has taken place there. How the future of the Christians will be in the region, we can not say today.

There are still the states like Jordan or Lebanon in which Christians feel save. But there is the danger that these countries are dragged into the conflicts of the neighbouring countries. If there is no solution of the conflicts, even more Christians will leave the region.

Since the end of 2011 the civil war prevails in Syria. Before 2011 about 1,8 million Christians lived in Syria. They represented about 10 % of the population. Currently the number is approximately even between 600.000 and 900.000. Most of them belong to the Syrian-orthodox and the Greek-orthodox church. A small minority in the Christian minority are the Protestants.

Under Assad regime the Christian minority could live well. Till today many Christians look at the Assad regime in a positive way.

The civil war has changed the local life during the last years very strongly. Many people are on the run. From Aleppo about 30.000 Christians fled, from Homs about 10.000.

The infrastructure is completely destroyed at many places. In the areas affected by the war only very few people live in their own houses.

Also a lot of church buildings have been destroyed or damaged. The congregations do their best under these circumstances to continue the ecclesiastical life and the Christian tradition. There are still areas where Christian congregations function furthermore where on Sunday services take place and a more or less regulated congregation life is possible.

The situation of the protestant congregation in Aleppo is still very difficult. From formerly 250 families which belonged to the congregation only 70 are still there. Daily people leave the town. By the civil war the infrastructure

has broken down. There is not enough food, water and also electricity, gas and petrol. The protestant church tries to help where it is possible and they help not only their own church members, they help all which are in need.

The church building of the protestant congregation has been destroyed during the last years twice. The second destruction was so strong that a new building had to be built. During the construction time the congregation has met in a flat. There the service and the other local events take place. At the last Christmas the new Church was initiated with a service. The construction of the church should be a sign of hope which makes the people to remain there. Also the school supported by our church has been damaged during the war. In the meantime from formerly 1.400 children only approximately 700 are there. These are predominantly children of Muslim faith. With their school the protestant church in Syria shows face. They are convinced that education is the only meaningful measure against inhuman ideologies and fanaticism.

During my visit I spoke with a lot of representatives from the Middle East churches. Many of them were disappointed that their difficult situation is not perceived by their brothers and sisters in the world. They asked for our solidarity.

Thomas Fender

Appendix 8

WCRC-Europe 2016 – Task Group “Migration and Asylum”

The Steering Committee realizes that the disastrous situation of refugees as well as the current political situation within the European Union asks for an ongoing process that involves not only the social and diaconal work of our Churches but also our theological refection and political engagement. We see church communities who are trying to help refugees but which are being criticized by their politicians and often by their own neighbours and relatives for what they are doing for people. In other cases, people need to be reminded of their own reformed tradition of migration and urged to take responsibility for these issues.

The Steering Committee of WCRC Europe decided to give support to the parishes and requested them last October to give short reports about their engagement and projects focused on the issue of migration and asylum. In cooperation with the Reformed Alliance in Germany, we held two conferences: the first was about listening and sharing the experiences of churches engaged in refugee work mainly in European border countries (Hanover, Oct. 2014). This was succeeded by a bigger conference examining the theological and historical background of Reformed Churches and their role as migrant-churches and its implications for today’s challenges (Emden, Feb 2016).

As the Steering Committee, we wrote a letter to Martin Schulz and Jean Claude Juncker to urge them to seek practical solutions to the issue.

All these were regarded as highly important for future cooperation and networking on various levels. WCRC Europe needs a structure to take this work forward.

We therefore, according to the mandate of the European Area Council and based on the bylaws, appoint a Task Group/Standing Committee, which - in cooperation with partner churches and organizations like CPCE, CEC, CCME and others, will –

1. monitor developments in the member churches and their respective countries, 2. encourage theological reflection and exchange of best practices among the member churches,3. contribute to Churches’ and organisations’ investigation of root causes for flight and migration,4. and equip our communion of churches to work on the European level as well as on the national level as

churches who don't remain silent but seek together for humanitarian solutions.

Our engagement in that issue will be based on our good relationship to other organisations like CCME. We have created a strong and solid partnership and cooperation with them in recent years. It is not intended to duplicate the work of other organisations like CCME or create a double structure.

We are aware that member churches’ representatives sometimes need sensitivity and safe spaces to hear from each other and engage in discussion with each other in an open manner. So we would like to use our structures and sense as a “Reformed family” to encourage and provide that. Members in the task group will cover the regions of the European Area. The members of the group will be appointed by the Steering Committee on the nomination of Balázs

and Martina. We will have our first meeting in Budapest to discuss and agree on our further procedures in line with the aims mentioned above.

There will be an evaluation of the work of the group after one year and a decision of the Steering Committee to continue or to end the work of this group.

06.03.2016, Odor Balázs/Martina Wasserloos

Appendix 9

WCRC Europe is dedicated to the Reformed-Lutheran dialogue. In our bylaws there is a strong relation to the CPCE and the Leuenberg Agreement.

Some of our member churches are united churches. They were also results of the Reformed-Lutheran dialogue.

In ecumenical contacts, an affiliation or association [with the JDDJ] would be helpful. We urge our member churches to react on the letter and Reformed Signing Statement. We ask them to react

on the process and on the content of the statement. We ask our member churches to give advice to the Executive Committee and to the General Secretary about handling this item.

We had a broad discussion in the Council; we ask the member churches to involve the delegates [to the 2017 General Council] in the deliberations in the churches .

We commend the lecture of Professor Zeindler to our member churches. We ask the General Secretary to give more clarification about the process for our member churches.