True Ecumenism in an Age of Sectarianism

The Plague of False Ecumenism

The word "ecumenism" often carries negative connotations, evoking images of what we might call “hippy universalism” that prioritizes superficial unity over truth. Many are drawn to traditional Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy precisely because these traditions draw clear lines in the sand, making it evident who is in and who is out. In an age where buzzwords like "inclusion" and "tolerance" dominate Western discourse, people long for institutions committed to truth—institutions that declare heresy as boldly as they do orthodoxy and that are unafraid to exclude in order to preserve the faith once for all delivered to the saints. In this culture of compromise, the impulse toward the objective and true is commendable. However, left unchecked, the extremes of this impulse can lead to a sectarian worldview that actually forsakes the truly catholic position on ecumenism and can be just as deadly for the health of the Church as an unqualified universalism.

This essay seeks to outline a vision of true ecumenism—one that neither validates all who claim the name of Christ nor embraces a sectarian exclusivism that dismisses billions of Christians from the body of Christ. Instead, this is an ecumenism that takes seriously the call to Christian unity while steadfastly defending catholic dogma.

True Ecumenism: Balancing Unity and Truth

As a devout Anglo-Catholic, I hold as my highest duty the responsibility to honor the dogmatic teaching of the Church across all ages. This teaching is rooted chiefly in the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testaments, the Nicene Creed, and the definitions of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. Standing with both Rome and the East, I affirm that those who fall outside the boundaries of these dogmatic standards are outside the Church on a doctrinal level. However, I intentionally use the phrase "at a doctrinal level" because the Church also operates at a sacramental level, which ultimately involves the mysterious workings of God.

The error of the sectarians is that they fall prey to the belief that if one is doctrinally outside of the Church they are necessarily excluded from the grace of the Church entirely. This extreme thinking misses the reality that sacraments are holy mysteries. Like the Holy Spirit that brings them to bear, we cannot fully understand them or contain them. They are, simply put, beyond our comprehension. I believe this is conceded by even the most exclusive communions like Rome and the East in their acceptance of schismatic and heretical baptisms (according to their own standards). The implication of this reception is that in some real sense, those who are outside of the Church are still the recipients of God’s grace in baptism and share in the benefits of Christ, even while deficient in both orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium is helpful here when it states”

“The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety…For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical communities. Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist and cultivate devotion toward the Virgin Mother of God. They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits. Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power”¹

Here, Rome acknowledges that baptism, as an act of God, is efficacious even outside the formal boundaries of the Church. This acknowledgment allows for the conclusion that non-Roman Catholics who are baptized are properly called Christians, united with Christ, and joined in some sense with the Church through the Holy Spirit. This humility is a model for all Christians, as it upholds the Church’s objective reality as a visible institution while recognizing that baptism conveys what it promises, even outside institutional boundaries. Thus, to say that those baptized in the Triune name, who confess the Triune God, are somehow not Christian is an offense to the efficacy of the sacrament, reducing it to a kind of receptionism that goes beyond even that of John Calvin.

Avoiding the Errors of Sectarianism

God cannot be contained, yet the sectarian assumes they can contain Him. I have heard some Eastern Orthodox Christians claim that the good works observed in Roman Catholic and Protestant churches are nothing but demonic illusions of holiness. Such declarations presume to know exactly where God is at work and where He isn’t, limiting God and binding Him to human structures. While divine revelation provides an objective orthodoxy to which we are bound, God is not similarly bound. His ways are higher than our ways, which is why we must take a more humble approach to the question of his workings outside of the structures that we can identify as the Church. Making this distinction helps us see those outside the doctrinal and ecclesial boundaries of the Church in their proper light.

Before moving on, for the sake of clarity: the validity of baptism outside the Church does not mean that doctrine is irrelevant. Doctrine absolutely matters. However, doctrinal perfection cannot be the sole criterion for determining who is or isn’t a Christian. If God judged us on that basis, none of us would be saved. That said, there are essential doctrinal standards that must be met for one to be considered a Christian. Baptism isn’t valid simply because water is used and the words "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" are spoken. The minister must also intend to do what the Church does. This intent, combined with proper form and matter, ensures the validity of baptism across Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant churches. All intend to baptize in the Triune name as defined by the Nicene Creed. And all use the proper matter and form. Thus, all have valid baptisms and are united to Christ. This is a fairly straightforward syllogism that I believe is logically sound and conceded in practice by both Rome and the East.

Therefore, with this in mind, we now have a real category for those who are doctrinally outside of the Church, but sacramentally united to her. They are true Christians, united to Christ, and sustained by the Holy Spirit. This automatically means that we are not to treat them in the way we treat the unconverted. To do so would be the way of the sectarian. However, in recognizing them as Christians, we should also not fall into a kind of passive engagement that refuses to challenge them and call them into the deeper mystery of the catholic Church. To fail in this capacity would a disservice to them. We must strike a balance between the two extremes, and I believe that if we successfully do this, we will have achieved true ecumenism.

A Path Toward True Unity

When I sit down with a Baptist, Presbyterian, or Lutheran, true ecumenism compels me to confess that I am sitting down with brethren by virtue of their baptism. However, true ecumenism also compels me to call them to forsake innovation, heterodoxy, and at times, heresy, for the truth of the apostolic faith once for all delivered. This is categorically different than calling them to repent and believe in the Gospel as I would the heathen. This is an invitation into fullness of life, not life itself. Whereas Rome and the East will often refer to those who come to them from other Christian communions as “converts,” I would never use such language. To do so confuses the categories we just discussed. If a Baptist becomes an Anglican, I would simply call that a movement towards visible union with the Church. It is a movement from the mystery of a purely sacramental union to visible union under a bishop. Nothing has happened in way of conversion. The Christian status has not changed. The only thing that has changed is movement into the fullness of what baptism opened up and what Christ intends for his people.

Conclusion

In conclusion: all we as Christians can ever do is try our very best to conform our lives to that which Christ desires, trusting in the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I often wonder—and it has given me great grief at times—why there are so many competing voices in the Christian world. How easy it would be to join a communion that claims to be the “one true Church” and simply cut everyone else off from being representative of anything resembling true Christianity. It would be so easy to do. There would be so much peace in that stability. However, I fear it would be a false stability for I believe that reason alone compels us to not take that position. Looking at Rome, Protestantism, and the Eastern churches, I see the fruit of true Christians. I see orthodox confessions on the doctrine of God, Christ, and even the Church and her sacraments. I see valid baptisms (by catholic standards) that only a fool would deny as being a means of God’s grace uniting people to his Son and cleansing them of all sin. I cannot see this and also conclude that God’s grace is bound to a particular instantiation of the Church to the exclusion of all others.

However, I cannot also naively assume that all communions speak truth with one unified voice. And so, prayerfully, with great effort, I search the Scriptures; I read the Fathers; I submit myself to the Creeds and Ecumenical Councils; and finally, I make a judgement. Yes, a personal judgment as to where I believe the fullness of the Church is. If I am wrong, Lord have mercy on me! However, the gravity of my possible error seems to be far less grave than the possible error of giving into the ease of sectarian ecclesiology, cutting off billions of professing Christians from the body of Christ.

So at last, I take my place in this distinctly Anglican via media, acknowledging that many Christians, though doctrinally separated from the Church, remain united to her through the mystery of the sacraments. The profound mystery of the Holy Trinity compels me to trust in the objective efficacy of these sacraments and to embrace baptized Christians as my brothers and sisters, even when they fall outside the Church's formal doctrinal bounds. True ecumenism, then, rests upon a genuinely catholic understanding of the Church—one that neither diminishes the Church’s boundaries nor presumes to limit God’s sacramental grace beyond what we can see. In striking this balance, I reject sectarianism while faithfully inviting my estranged brethren to embrace the fullness of the apostolic faith and to deepen their encounter with the grace bestowed upon them in baptism. This, I believe, is the true posture of humility, truth, and unity, which is what ecumenism is all about.

1. Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, paragraph 15.