Ecumenical converation - Day 2 (October 31)

There are 21 ecumenical conversations offered at this WCC Assembly, each taking place over four days. The topic I have chosen is Compelled to serve: the diaconal church in a rapidly changing world. The ecumenical conversation was well organized and tightly structured. I had been asked to be a leader of one of the small groups and the running sheet was carefully detailed. 

The abstract for this particular ecumenical conversation on diakonia is: 

The global context in which churches and specialized ministries ('agencies') work for solidarity and sustainable development is rapidly changing and significantly affects how we engage in sustainable development through diakonia (Christian service). These changes include new demographics (youth); communication technologies; geo-political-financial power shifts; private sector and military as new actors; changed global development architecture; shrinking political space for civil society; interreligious opportunities and challenges; neo-liberal economics and climate change. Responses of the ecumenical movement in the past that have effectively provided solidarity, accompaniment and resources now require new thinking, new approaches and new patterns of cooperation. This conversation invites deep analysis of this changing development paradigm, in which the ecumenical movement is compelled to engage and to witness for and serve God. The sessions will provide a space for theological, ecclesiological and practical reflection on how these change factors affect churches and specialized agencies. Focus will be on the risks, opportunities and new patterns of co-operation. The expected outcome is that we leave the conversation with a deepened understanding that being a diaconal church is not something added but something at the heart of being church together. We will identify together six points of affirmations and/or challenges on how we can better integrate the working relationship between churches and the specialized ministries so that they are mutually beneficial, collaborative and constructive.

On Day 1, there were two speakers who addressed the changing global contexts which impact and inform new paradigms of diakonia and of development. These presentations were aimed to help participants better understand the key elements of a complex environment which most affect and challenge the work we are called to do. They also were asked to give their own definitions of diakonia, development, and changing paradigms of development.

The first was Dr Julia Duchrow, head of Human Rights and Peace desk of the organisation Bread for the World, based in Berlin, Germany. She spoke about some of the existing and emerging trends – the growth in emerging economies (in ‘developing’ countries), the ongoing and enormous disparities in ‘developing’ countries with first world countries. The negative impact of climate change which will guarantee that poverty will continue to rise in the future. She said her organisation was guided by the imperative of holding up human dignity, and promoting sustainability. She noted a concern that there were a significant number of private companies involved in activities in developing countries, with evidence of a greater number of human rights violations and a problem in accountability mechanisms. There was a significantly greater risk that human rights would be violated as a result of the activities of these private companies.

The second speaker was Dr Shushant Agrawal from India, whose work is with CASA, Church’s Auxiliary for Social Action. His was a free-ranging conversation, spoken with conviction and passion. He made the point that diakonia is not a business but a fundamental mission of the church. In the language of many organisations in Europe I have noticed that ‘diakonia’ has been used to describe the work of agencies providing social aid of many kinds, so in some ways describes the activities of these agencies but is disconnected from an understanding of diakonia as core to the church’s self-understanding. Many of the church agencies undertaking work that relates to aid and development are theoretically church based, but largely act independently and do not have a theological framework for their diakonia work.

Following the two speakers, small groups were asked to identify any gaps or other influences from the changing context which they felt had not been addressed but needed to be named, to identify 2 specific impacdts that these changes have for development and diaconal work in our particular contexts, and to identify 2 implications for cooperation in our service to the rapidly changing world for churches, specialised ministries (agencies) and the WCC. All in 18 minutes! It felt like ‘speed dating’, with strangers in the group quickly trying to address the issues when we knew nothing of each other or our contexts (we only had the briefest of time to introduce ourselves and where we were based). Of course, each group began the process, but it felt like skipping on the surface. My problem with this approach is that it seems that the final result may be summarised into a paper that has come from the group’s efforts, but does not truly reflect the depth of understanding that could be possible. At best, the questions service as a catalyst for ongoing thinking but ineffective to get the most out of the participants. Each group wrote a quick summary of discussion, but not all groups were able to feedback, so the rapporteur will be limited in what they can gather from the group’s discussion. I’ll be interested to see what she comes up with at the end! Her task is to prepare a short narrative report (3-4 pages) and key recommendations to the churches, ecumenical partners and the WCC.

Two new insights I’d like to explore further.

The first speaker spoke about ‘shrinking political space of civil society action’, which was in the ACT Alliance report (ACT Alliance is a global membership based alliance of churches and specialized ministries for Humanitarian Aid, Transformational Development and Advocacy). The ‘shrinking political space of civil society action’ recognizes the significantly smaller opportunities for churches and agencies to be involved in and comment in the political arena. This is concerning (and the opposite to the hopeful framing by Dr Chris Baker at a recent conference on the post-secular city in which he said there were now greater opportunities for engagement in the public and political arena, and that churches may be seen as one of the partners in civil society. More thinking and exploring to be done in this area.

The other insight was provided by James in my small group who works with a Lutheran Aid organisation in the UK. He said there is a bill before Parliament which, if passed, will make it illegal for churches and charity groups and agencies to participate in the political debates in the public arena. This is most disturbing and I will talk with James further about this. I wondered if politicians in other places including Australia are aware of this proposed legislation, and how effectively the church as the ‘irritant’ in the public arena could be shut down from participating in public debate and contributing to thinking in the political arena. Disturbing.

The Early exit today. Skipping the regional meetings. Nice to have a chance to write up reflections and process the day rather than go to bed exhausted.