CONFESSING ONE GOD AMIDST MUSLIMS AND JEWS: AN ECUMENICAL-THEOLOGICAL CONVERSATION (II)

Abstract

PIM VALKENBERG [*] In previous article, Dr Mulder has given an outline of some ecumenical theological conversations between theologians from Middle East and theologians from Netherlands, about context of their theology. Although it is somewhat strange to contribute to a series of articles on situation of Christianity in Middle East as a Dutch theologian who is not even specialized in this subject, it might be interesting to give an impression of recent bilateral theological conference between Middle East Council of Churches and Council of Churches in Netherlands, which took place in Amman, Jordan, 2-5 September 1999. In fact, I should have written this article together with Dr George Sabra from Beirut, since task of drawing up conclusions of this conference was entrusted to two of us, but since Dr Sabra had already accepted invitation to write another contribution to this volume of IRM, context of theology in Middle East, as it was described at this meeting, will be sketched through filters of my eyes. During conference we noticed that perspective of an outsider, distorting as it may often be, can sometimes induce us to see our own context in a new way. I will begin my observations by following process of conference as summarized in conclusions by participants; consequently, I would like to summarize my thoughts about confessing one God in a plurality of contexts in some concluding remarks. [1] 1. The contexts of our theologies After previous conferences on the Church and Jewish People (Limassol 1993) and on Continuity and Discontinuity (Oegstgeest 1995), theme of third conference was influence of context on our theologizing, and question as to whether it is possible to transcend these contexts in our theology. It was a matter of course that influence of context was main theme on first day. For members of Dutch delegation, this was an opportunity to tell about their experiences in two short exposure visits to Lebanon and Gaza strip. But conference started with a reflection on context of theology in Israel/Palestine by Rev. Dr Naim Ateek, in which it was stated that every Christian theology should take its context seriously. In context of Middle East, justice and peace are important principles: against humiliation and injustice in situation of Palestinians, justice and liberation should be urged. However, it is important that we have courage to ch ange opinions if context changes as well. We should not get stuck with fossilized theologies, because we did not see how context has changed. Next, Prof. Dr Leo Koffeman gave a survey of context in Netherlands, from which it appeared that heritage of Enlightenment very much influences modern and post-modern forms of theology in Western Europe. This leads to four characteristics that are accepted by theologians to a large extent: modernization, individualization, globalization and pluralization. In discussion at end of day, we concluded that our contexts are different but not totally unrelated, because of worldwide influence of modernity, globalization, politics and economics. In both situations, context influences theology, and theologians are aware of that. Because of this contextuality, our theology cannot directly grasp ultimate truth, but it has to speak about God in human language that has to be interpreted and actualized. 2. The Jewishness of Jesus The valuation of impact of Judaism on Christian theology has been most important matter in dispute between both delegations in Limassol and Oegstgeest. On second day, this theme was discussed in relation to context of theology: why is it so important for Dutch theologians that Jesus was a Jew? And what does Jewishness of Jesus mean for theologians in Middle East? …