Ecumenism - a Pipe Dream, a noble idea we know we should say ‘yes’ to when we really mean ‘no’.

Are we ready yet to consider the possibility that we either have a future together, or no future at all?

This could well be an inflexion point for the future of an ecumenical project that was birthed in the 1940s, flowered in the 1960s, had its hopes dashed in the 1970s, and has rocked and rolled since then with a steady decline over the past two decades. This decline isn’t peculiar to Co-operating Ventures (CVs) – it simply reflects the fortunes of the partner churches.

The energy for CVs has waned. But, not within the CVs themselves.  With the Anglican, Methodist, and Presbyterian partner denominations each facing significant challenges, there is an inclination to withdraw to silos that represent a stronger denominational emphasis. Christian Churches, formerly ‘Churches of Christ’ have long since withdrawn from any effective participation.

Yet there remain opportunities for much more constructive working together. Part of the problem is that the default position for all of us is to think denominationally. This, irrespective of the reality that we are all invested in CVs whether we like it or not (Methodist – heavily invested, Presbyterian – moderately so, Anglican – more minimally). It sometimes feels to us in the CV movement as if we are the illegitimate children of parents who would rather that we weren’t there – that we are the reminder of the mistakes of a previous naïve and ridiculous generation of church leaders who had hoped and planned for an organic unity that never happened (although it almost did!).

I’m inviting us to consider how we see. For example, in facing the dissolution of one of our struggling denominational parishes it seems that it is rare that the thought of even opening a conversation with one (or a number of) the surrounding churches about a possible future together occurs to anyone. The same goes for exploring opportunities in new suburbs. The default thinking is almost always exclusively denominational. And monocultural.

In the past, in smaller, regional centres, the church - and its witness to the Gospel - has survived by church leaders being willing to talk to one another across denominations and form strategic alliances. Today, the default is to ‘close-up’ and ‘cash-up’. The present reality is that this cash is often what keeps regional church structures going. There is a powerful financial incentive for not having these cross-denominational conversations.

And where CVs have thrived in regional centres, there is now opportunity for these alliances in our larger cities, as churches that were planted and growing congregations in the 1970s are now being closed, and their properties being sold off. Yet talking to other churches in these neighbourhoods about possible futures together doesn’t seem to be on the radar. At least not very often.

The reality is that the ‘mainline’ partner churches are all in  trouble. We are all in decline. We are all seeking ways to reverse the inexorable trend toward oblivion. CVs offer a number of positives in how we might respond to the challenges we all face. They offer a greater flexibility in how these challenges may be met. And while forming a CV may be seen as a stop-gap measure in the face of the inevitable, they provide breathing space for time, prayer, and strategic thinking to consider how to be the church in rapidly changing times. They can be more than simply two or more small tribes of penguins deciding to stand together to keep warm. Even this analogy should not be too quickly dismissed, as while we stand together to weather the winter, summer eventually follows, and because we’ve stood together through the winter, we’re still there to enjoy and potentially thrive in the seasons that follow.

The hopes of past generations for a future together were lofty and noble – grounded in a deep commitment to God and the unifying power of the Gospel. In 1984, the 1967 Act of Commitment was reaffirmed by the partner churches, its final sentence reading:

With the obedience we offer, we acknowledge our obligation to receive new insights and now to do together many of the things, which in the past, we have done separately.

Today, these words seem to be faint echoes of a long-forgotten dream. Yet there is cause to hope. By way of analogy - even though currently under assault, Te Tiriti  o Waitangiis finding new traction in the standing that appropriately belongs to it – it will continue to shape our nation in more just and life-enhancing ways in the decades to come. Perhaps the solemn commitments to church unity made by previous generations will once again flower to be the engine room for a new Jesus centred, Spirit empowered, Love motivated energy for life-giving mission in our nation. Are we open to it?