Perspectief 2016-34

2016-34 Learning ecumenically from each other 39 Com ment would be moving in ways which would both deepen their authentic respective identities and draw them into more intimate relationships with one another. 13 Brief comparison As for the comparison between these two methodologies of ecumenical interaction, the following two aspects needs to be emphasized. The main difference between ‘open sobornicity’ and ‘receptive ecumenism’ lies in the question that represents the starting point of each approaches. ‘Open sobornicity’, even though it stresses repeatedly the need of the Orthodox Church to learn from the non-Orthodox, gives a certain priority to the question “what have we the Orthodox to teach the non-Orthodox?” According to Stăniloae, the main task of the Orthodox Church’s involvement in the ecumenical movement remains that of bearing witness to the truth it possesses. Receptive ecumenism, on the other hand, goes in the opposite direction and places at the heart of its approach the question “what do we (either Orthodox, Catholics, or Protestants) have to learn from those coming from other traditions?”; the main similarity between ‘open sobornicity’ and receptive ecumenism is the fact that – with varying degrees of emphasis - both concepts find the act of learning and receiving in the ecumenical encounters between different Christian traditions and Churches extremely important. The inter-Christian dialogue and the receptivity in relation to our fellow Christians are not optional and marginal but necessary and essential. However, I am of the opinion that teaching and learning or receiving in ecumenical relationships are mutually interdependent and that a balance between them should be somehow maintained. One cannot only receive or learn from the others; giving and teaching are essential components of the ecumenical interaction. Examples from the past There are several examples from the past that could show the benefits of an ecumenical interaction in which each side is willing to give and receive from one another. I will briefly 13 Paul Murray, “Receptive Ecumenism and Ecclesial Learning”, 32-33.