Thoughts on Reunion Proposals Pt. 3: Size Matters

In the nineteenth century, Germany was a collection of various states. Several Germans sought unification, and two ideas of which states would be included competed with each other. Advocates of the Kleindeutschland idea sought a unified Germany that included the Rhineland, Bavaria, the Saxon lands, and Prussia (among other states). The competing Grossdeutschland idea sought to also include the German speaking parts of Austria. (Of course, the Kleindeutschland idea ultimately prevailed. However, there are several important details behind this victory, which need not detain us here.)

Advocates of the Kleindeutschland idea did not believe that the German speaking Austrians were not really German. Rather they advocated Austria's omission because of political considerations (which again are beyond the scope of this blog). Might it not be possible, for various practical reasons (for example, a better chance of actual reunion), to temporarily abandon the search for a Grossoekumenismus in favor of a more achievable Kleinoekumenismus? That is, might a smaller group of churches, which already have greater agreement, unite where a larger group would fail to reach consensus?

In particular, instead of aiming for a broad "East-West" union of Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, Mainline Protestant, and Evangelical Protestant churches, would not unions within East and West be easier? A Eastern Orthodox-Oriental Orthodox union, for example, would not need to face the issue of the filioque, for example. Other examples may come readily to mind. Why should a disagreement between Catholics and Eastern Orthodox mean that Catholics and Anglicans must stay separate? Furthermore, a union within one side need not be held up because of squabbles within the other side. It makes no sense for the disagreements between Eastern and Oriental Orthodox over the formulae of Chalcedon to mean that Presbyterians and Disciples of Christ must be in separate organizations.

Such a small ecumenism need not be the end. When the easier unions have happened, and only a few churches (plus the various outliers, discussed in a previous post) remain, then the push to full union could resume. Discussion on the various sticky points between the various aspects of traditional Christianity could continue through the previous unions. Meanwhile, a kind of ecumenical momentum would build up, and the idea that previously divided Christians can unite and live together within the same church structure, yet continuing to practice their own gifts and ministries, would become readily accepted.