Report on possible Roman Catholic membership in the National Council of Churches


Cx>uA<u\ Ciavy\rdlv«.s of C^v'xS
lA VOvsv 'V*2-^cA o'l' f\ c<r\ '^T ^ y^^vTC-O.. ,

AbE^775
'

19 VU%

REPORT

ON POSSIBLE

ROMAN CATHOLIC MEMBERSHIP

I

IN THE

MATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

by

The Study Committee on the Relationship

of the

National Council of Churches

and the

Roman Catholic Church

in the

United States of America





REPORT

ON POSSIBLE

ROMAN CATHOLIC MEMBERSHIP

IN THE

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

by

The Study Committee on the Relationship

of the

National Council of Churches

and the

Roman Catholic Church

in the

United States of America

1972

UNITED STATES CATHDLIC CONFERENCE
1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 2DDD5





FOREWORD

It has been our pleasure for the past two years to serve as co-

chairmen of the Joint Study Committee on Roman Catholic Mem-
bership in the National Council of the Churches of Christ. This

committee succeeded the Joint Working Group which sought to

facilitate cooperation between the Council and the Roman
Catholic Church from 1966 until 1969.

The following report investigates both in depth and consid-

erable detail the matters which must be taken into consideration

prior to further decisions concerning the future of Roman Cath-
olic-Conciliar relationships. Since developments on the national

scene parallel those on the world level as well as in dioceses and

congregations, we offer this document as a help to consideration
of ecumenical life at all levels of the Church.

In completing this report the study committee has been as-

sisted by a distinguished body of members with extensive ecu-
menical experience.* We are grateful to them for the attentive
and dedicated service they have given to the task set before us

by the Bishops' Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Af-

fairs of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and by the

National Council of Churches.

Our assignment was one of study and research, not of deci-
sion making. The report we have submitted does in no way
commit the Council or the Churches to any particular course of
action, but seeks to provide information that is indispensable for

the Roman Catholic Church in the U.S. and for the Council in
order to chart the future of their relationships.

For this reason we are happy to submit this report to wide-
spread study and scrutiny. We welcome the serious review of this
study by those who test its findings. We are convinced that the
people and leadership of all our churches are sensitive to the need

in our time to find ways to more and more effective ecumenical
witnessing and collaboration. We hope that this report may be
of use in extending the ecumenical life of all the churches.

In all of these endeavors, of course, our ultimate hope is to
serve the fuller unity of the People of God.

^ Charles H. Helmsing
December 1, 1971

John Coventry Smith
Names in appendix A.



Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2016

https://archive.org/details/reportonpossibleOOnati



REPORT ON POSSIBLE ROMAN CATHOLIC MEMBERSHIP

IN THE

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

By

The Study Committee on the Relationship

of the

National Council of Churches

and the

Roman Catholic Church

in the

United States of America

1. The Historical Context

The National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United

States of America (NCC) came into being in 1950, continuing,
combining and extending the Interests and functions of fourteen

general agencies and cooperative services of the churches. It is

now made up of thirty-three member communions which have
agreed to the Preamble to the Council's Constitution:

Under the Providence of God communions which con-
fess Jesus Christ as Divine Lord and Savior, in order more
fully to manifest oneness in Him, do now create an in-
clusive cooperative agency of Christian churches of the

United States of America to show forth their unity and
mission in specific ways and to bring the churches into

living contact with one another for fellowship, study and

cooperative action.

Only a national communion can join the Council. Neither a
local or regional body nor a national body which does not repre-

sent the whole communion (such as a Roman Catholic diocese.

1



religious order, or a unit of the United States Catholic Confer-

ence) can be a member of the Council as a whole. However, such
bodies under certain conditions can be members of or related to
various units of the NCC, such as departments, divisions, com-
missions or offices. In addition to constituent membership, non-

member organizations such as state and metropolitan councils,
boards, agencies and related movements which have distinctly
Christian purposes can be given recognition and participate in the

Council's work in accordance with the Constitution and By-laws.

Though the NCC is presently going through a period of self-
examination looking towards possible reorganization, it currently

functions in the following way: Its basic governing body is the

triennial General Assembly, which has approximately 850 mem-
bers, representative of the member churches on a proportional
formula. The General Board, consisting of approximately 250

members and meeting three times a year, is the governing body
of the NCC between meetings of the General Assembly. These
determine the basic policies and priorities of the NCC. In addi-
tion to these two bodies, each of the four divisions of the NCC
has a Program Board. Although each board is subject to the

policies of the NCC as a whole, each has a large degree of
autonomy in planning and conducting programs. For a fuller de-
scription of present NCC units, see Appendix A.

The main work of the NCC is the carrying out of regular
services to member communions in their basic tasks of evan-
gelism, education, mission and social welfare. The NCC provides
interdenominational conferences on such themes as the Church

and the family, Christian colleges, lay ministries, urban church

problems and economic issues. It plans, produces and publishes

along interdenominational lines materials to serve the com-

munions—especially study courses for missionary education, and
various periodicals. It furnishes a center for study and research

in major areas of Christian concern. It serves as an instrument of

joint administration in projects that call for combined resources

and unified direction, as in Bible translation, emergency relief,

refugee resettlement, and the initiation of radio and television

programs. It is a stimulus to experimentation and pioneering in

new types of interdenominational religious work, as in urban

centers which have been built c/e novo. The NCC further serves
member communions as a voice in matters of public concern;

2



statements by the General Assembly and the General Board are

offered to the churches for their study and use. The NCC keeps
in touch with religious bodies not in its membership, and with

secular agencies concerned about human welfare.^

Only the churches themselves initiate steps toward union by

entering into negotiations with one another. The NCC does give
some assistance to the churches. It provides them with informa-

tion concerning steps being taken by various churches toward

closer unity with one another. It offers occasions for consultation

among those whose churches are engaged in union negotiations.
It conducts studies of related questions. Moreover, all the work
undertaken jointly by churches through the NCC has surely
helped to prepare the climate for their discussions about unions.

The member communions of the NCC are now all of Prot-
estant, Anglican or Orthodox background, but there has been

increasing cooperation of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) with
the NCC. In a statement dated January 27, 1970, the General
Secretary of the NCC, Dr. R. H. Edwin Espy, enumerated many
areas of increasing Roman Catholic-National Council cooperation.
Among the items listed were these:

Official observers and fraternal delegates at NCC events

Interrepresentation at one another's public occasions

Catholic priests and religious on the NCC staff (presently
five)

Increasing consultation between the presidents of the
National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) and

the NCC

Establishment of the Interreligious Committee of the
NCCB, the NCC and the Synagogue Council of
America

Action of the General Board of the NCC announcing its
recognition of the RCC in the U.S.A. as being in accord
with the Preamble to the Constitution of the NCC
(1966)

An NCC delegation of six churchmen . . . conferred for
four days in March, 1969, with the Vatican Secretariat

for Promoting Christian Unity

3



Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert, former General Secretary of the
NCC, has reviewed the growing cooperation between Roman
Catholics and the NCC, stressing especially the contacts through
the Council's Faith and Order work, the publication of Living

Room Dialogues, and the membership of the Medical Mission
Sisters in the Council's Division of Overseas Ministries.^

An important background factor in the discussion of possible
Catholic membership in the NCC is the fact that similar consid-
erations are going on at the world level between the World Coun-

cil of Churches (WCC) and the RCC. In 1965 a Joint Working

Group (jWG) was established; Dr. Espy, General Secretary of the
NCC, Bishop Joseph L. Bernardin, General Secretary of the USCC
and the NCCB, are members. The task given to the JWG was "to
work out the principles which should be observed in further

collaboration and the methods which should be used." Not com-

petent itself to make decisions for the churches, it has prepared

the way for such decisions by drafting recommendations. It has
dealt with theological problems arising in connection with the

ecumenical movement as a whole and encouraged practical co-
operation in social and international affairs. Originally made up
of 14 members, three years later the number In the JWG was
increased to 24. Cooperation between the RCC and the WCC
has grown measurably.^

Among the many specific achievements on the world level
are these: the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity is jointly pre-
pared and celebrated; nine Roman Catholic theologians have

become members of the WCC Commission on Faith and
Order; a joint committee on Society, Development, and Peace

(SODEPAX) carries on an extensive program; there is joint work

in emergency relief and development aid; and, finally, the ques-

tion of Roman Catholic membership in the WCC has been clari-
fied and advanced.

In an address delivered at the Fourth Assembly of the WCC
at Uppsala In 1968, Father Roberto Tucci, S.J., spoke directly to

the possibility of closer structural relationships between the WCC
and the RCC. The Council in response adopted at Uppsala a

Statement Concerning Relations with the RCC, which states, in

part:

4



The Assembly encourages the Joint Working Group to

continue to give attention to the question of the mem-
bership of the Roman Catholic Church in the World
Council of Churches. Membership depends on the

initiative of individual churches willing to accept the

basis and the agreement of the member churches ac-
cording to the constitution. The World Council of

Churches reaffirms its eagerness to extend its member-

ship to include all those Christian churches at present

outside its fellowship.^

Dr. Lukas Vischer, Director of the WCC Commission on Faith
and Order, commenting on this response, remarks:

The Assembly . . . made it absolutely clear that from the
side of the World Council of Churches there was, in

principle, no obstacle to the membership of the Roman
Catholic Church in the Council. The Assembly also, for

the first time, expressed the desire that a complete

manifestation of the one ecumenical movement might
actually be realized. The realization of this desire may
still take a long time, but at least the task has now been
made explicit.^

In an allocution at the WCC Headquarters in Geneva on
June 10, 1969, Pope Paul spoke favorably of the cooperation that

had developed, but noted that the question of Roman Catholic
membership in the WCC ''contains serious theological and pas-
toral implications" and requires profound study and commitment
to a way that could be long and difficult. Yet conversations are
progressing, and it seems possible that the RCC will develop a
more formal relationship to the WCC by its next General As-
sembly. Affirmative action on the international level will depend,

in part, on the degree of interest shown on the national and local
levels.

On the national level, the RCC has been forging positive
relationships with councils of churches in many parts of the
world. The RCC is already a full member of the National Council
of Churches in Belize (British Honduras), Fiji, Finland, Guyana,

Jamaica, the Netherlands, New Hebrides, Sudan, Trinidad-Tobago,
and Uganda. It has observer status in the United States and in

many other countries, including Great Britain, Australia, New
Zealand and South Africa.® In many countries, such as Canada

5



and Great Britain, membership in their national councils is being
actively considered. In Great Britain a British Council of

Churches-RC Joint Working Group has been established "to facili-
tate Roman Catholic entry into the BCG and to act in the interval
as an official meeting ground of the two bodies, where matters
of interest to either can be tackled."

On the regional and local level in the United States, many
Roman Catholic parishes and dioceses have become members of
interchurch agencies. Roman Catholic judicatories (dioceses and
archdioceses) have joined state councils (or conferences) of

churches in eleven states (Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Nevada,

New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas,
Vermont) and in the Delmarva Peninsula (Wilmington). Roman
Catholic dioceses have also joined councils in three metropolitan

areas (Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Ohio). In addition to

this judicatory membership there is parish membership in some
70 to 100 local councils throughout the country. In many other
ecumenical agencies Roman Catholics are in active cooperation,
especially in Faith and Order.

On the national level In the United States, Roman Catholic
relationships with the NCC and related bodies have made great
progress in the past few years. In harmony with the traditional
Roman Catholic interest in the work of Faith and Order, and with
the Roman Catholic membership in the World Council of
Churches Commission on Faith and Order, the NCCB in its No-
vember, 1970, meeting voted to approve Roman Catholic mem-
bership in the NCC's Commission on Faith and Order. At the

time of writing five Roman Catholics have become members of
the Commission.

In January, 1966, an historic conference in Baltimore brought

together leaders of the NCC member communions with members
of the Bishops' Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious
Affairs (as it is now named; abbreviation BCEIA). Out of this
meeting came a Joint Working Group which met for several years
to promote closer cooperation. The question of possible RCC
membership in the NCC came to the fore, so that in the fall of
1968 it was decided to dissolve the Working Group. In its place

the NCC and the BCEIA set up a Joint Study Committee on the
Relationship of the NCC and the RCC in the U.S.A. (For a list of
participants, see Appendix B.) The Study Committee met on April

6



8, 1969, on January 27, May 18 and September 29, 1970, and on
May 19, 1971. To facilitate its work the Study Committee in the
fall of 1970 set up the following five task forces: Rationale for

Membership, Policy Determination and Policy Statements, Fi-

nance, Representation and Staff Operations. The terms of ref-

erence of the study were explained to the task forces as follows:

There are two matters which the Study Committee

wishes to keep distinct in a discussion of possible mem-
bership in the National Council. The first is the question

of whether or not the Roman Catholic Church should
apply for membership. The question belongs more

properly to the Roman Catholic Church and is not a
matter to be resolved by the Study Committee. The

second matter is the working through of the practical,

pastoral and theological problems which are envisioned

in the event of Roman Catholic application for member-
ship. The second consideration properly belongs to the

Study Committee and is its concern.

Accordingly, the Study Committee is to address itself

specifically to the question of membership, working

under the hypothesis of a Roman Catholic application
for membership in the present National Council. To a
certain degree our study will be conducted in the midst

of variables. From the Roman Catholic side such a de-
cision to apply has not yet been made. From the Na-
tional Council side, the present structure of the Council

is undergoing study and discussion. Nevertheless, the

discipline of taking the present National Council and

the hypothetical Roman Catholic application for mem-
bership as a point of departure will aid both the Roman
Catholic Church in its decision and the National Council
in its reappraisal.*

* Various options for the restructuring of the NCC have been considered
in recent years. A model which provided for a greatly decentralized ecu-
menical structure failed acceptance by the General Board in January, 1971. A
Committee on Future Ecumenical Structure was then appointed to develop a
proposal providing for a strong representative body with an advocacy function,
centralized development of priorities with concomitant budget accountability,
empowerment of minorities at every level, and a flexible and facilitative style
of staff leadership. This proposal, copies of which are available from the NCC,
was submitted by the General Board in September, 1971, to the member
churches for their official approval. It is foreseen that the NCC structure
would be further affected and new responsibilities would open up if the RCC
should become a member.

7



The present Report combines the results of reports prepared by
the five task forces and subsequent discussion in the Study
Committee.

2. The State of the Question

The possibility of Roman Catholic membership in the NCC
commands consideration at a time when the RCC increasingly
recognizes itself as a part of what Is often now called '"the one
ecumenical movement."® In the Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis
redin tegratio, Vatican II acknowledged that the ecumenical move-
ment is "fostered by the grace of the Holy Spirit" {UR 1, p. 342) ®

and went on to exhort "all the Catholic faithful to recognize the
signs of the times and participate skillfully in the work of ecu-
menism" {UR 4, p. 347). The question before us, therefore. Is
not whether the RCC should participate in the ecumenical move-
ment—this we take for granted—but rather what kind of rela-
tionship to the NCC would be an appropriate implementation of
Its commitment to the ecumenical movement.

In theory, the RCC could take any of four positions:

a) It could continue the collaborative relationships it now
has, adding some and subtracting others as the situation
seems to demand, without formal membership;

b) It could apply for membership in the NCC without de-
manding prior changes in the Council as preconditions

for such application;

c) It could apply for membership on condition that certain

specified changes were made in the NCC;
d) It could recommend that the NCC be dissolved and

replaced by a new fellowship of churches with a differ-
ent status.

Correspondingly, it is evident that the NCC might adopt
similar positions with regard to Roman Catholic membership.

In accordance with the questions put to the present commit-

tee, this Report concerns itself primarily with the second and third

of these possibilities. If an affirmative answer Is reached regarding

either of these possibilities, the first and fourth possibilities would

therefore be automatically excluded. If the answers to these pos-

sibilities are negative, the other two would have to be considered.

8



As a first indication in favor of an affirmative response to the

second and third possibilities, one may mention the fact that the
NCC has for the past twenty years played a unique role in the
ecumenical movement in the United States. It is, on the national
scene, the closest equivalent and partner to the WCC on the
world scene. As consideration Is being given to RCC membership
in the WCC, it seems natural that the same question should arise
with respect to the NCC in the U.S.A., especially since the RCC has
joined eleven other national councils of churches.

The aims and objectives of the NCC closely resemble the
goals of the ecumenical movement, as described, for example, in

the documents of Vatican II. The purposes of the NCC, as set
forth in Article II of its Constitution are as follows:

1. To manifest more fully the oneness of the Church of Christ
according to the Scriptures and to further the efforts of the

member churches in proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ
to the end that ail men may believe in Him.

2. To continue, combine, and extend the interests and func-

tions of the following general agencies and cooperative serv-

ices of the churches (here various service, missionary, stu-

dent, laity, educational and communications commissions

are listed).

3. To encourage the study and use of the Bible.

4. To carry on programs for and with the churches by which
the life of the Church may be renewed and the mission of
the Church may be fulfilled.

5. To foster and encourage cooperation, fellowship, and
mutual counsel among the churches for the purposes set
forth in this Constitution.

6. To assist the churches in self-examination of their life and
witness in accordance with their understanding of the will of

God and of the Lordship of Jesus Christ as Divine Head of
the Church.

7. To further works of Christian love and service throughout
the nation and the world.

9



8. To study and speak and act on conditions and issues in
the nation and the world which involve moral, ethical, and
spiritual principles inherent In the Christian Gospel.

9. To encourage cooperation among local churches and to
further the development of councils and other organizations
in agreement with the Preamble of this Constitution, and to
maintain cooperative relationships with such bodies.

10. To establish and maintain consultative and cooperative
relationships with the World Council of Churches; other
International, regional, and national ecumenical organiza-

tions; and with agencies related to the churches in the

United States.

11. To establish specific objectives and to carry forward
programs and activities for achieving the purposes herein

stated.

If the affirmative stance toward the ecumenical movement
expressed in the documents of Vatican II may be taken as a true
indication of the present attitude of the RCC, it seems evident that

the RCC could not fail to approve, in substance, the objectives
of the NCC. From the NCC side It has been made clear in
numerous ways that it regards Roman Catholic membership as
both feasible and desirable. The majority of the goals of the

NCC, as just quoted, could be matched by specific quotations
from Vatican II. The close parallelism of purposes suggests the

likelihood that the RCC in the United States might appropriately
seek to become a member of the NCC, and that it would be
welcomed in this capacity. But certain questions and difficulties
arise, especially in view of the special traditions, history and doc-

trinal tenets of Roman Catholicism. It is with these difficulties
that the remainder of this report will be primarily concerned.

3. Overcoming Christian Divisions

One of the better reasons for joining the NCC might be the
contribution that this step would make to the cause of Christian

unity. In a working paper prepared In 1963, a Faith and Order

Study Commission declared:

Councils of churches provide readily available channels

for the churches to fulfill the clear imperatives to seek

10



unity. They are important means for bearing witness to

the unity we have and enlarging our concepts about the
unity we seek. They are structures by which congrega-
tions and denominations join together in the quest for

Christian unity.^®

These objectives are highly congenial to contemporary

Catholicism, at least as expressed by Vatican 11. But the question

must be asked whether councils such as the NCC are in fact over-
coming divisions among their member churches. As the Faith and
Order working paper remarks, councils in the U.S. "grew up

during a period when less attention than is now deemed neces-
sary was paid to certain questions about the true nature of the

Church; in many quarters it was often assumed that questions of
faith and order could be safely ignored, detoured, or post-

poned." There is therefore a danger that councils of churches

may at times evade the hard questions with regard to genuine
unity. "Institutionalized cooperation may become fixated and
thus be a hindrance to more advanced steps of church unity."

There is a real risk, in our opinion, that by working within the

structures of the NCC the churches might lose their interest in
questions that challenge the continued dividedness of the

churches in teaching, polity and worship. As Lukas Vischer has

written, "The fact that a union could disturb the balance of a

Christian Council can lead, consciously or otherwise, to re-

sistance."

But this danger can be, and perhaps is being, partly obviated.

We note with satisfaction that the position of Faith and Order in
the NCC has been one of increasing importance. A recent re-
organization, which shifts Faith and Order from being a depart-

ment within the former Division of Christian Unity to the status

of a Commission reporting directly to the NCC General Board,
with its Director reporting to the General Secretary, is a welcome

improvement. There is hope that the various divisions of the NCC
and Faith and Order will be able to communicate effectively, to

the mutual benefit of Faith and Order and the divisions. Thus

Faith and Order would be kept in sufficient contact with the

program and administrative work of the Council and would not be

lost in abstract considerations that fail to advance beyond debates

no longer actual.

11



With the increased dignity given to Faith and Order within

the NCC there is reason to hope that the NCC may give greater
attention not only to theological and doctrinal questions but also

to the "spiritual ecumenism" which Vatican II singled out as the
"soul of the whole ecumenical movement" {UR 8, p. 352). In
speaking to the General Board of the NCC in January of 1971,
Bishop Bernardin stressed the centrality of prayer and renewal of

heart to the whole ecumenical effort. The upgrading of the Faith

and Order component in the NCC may be expected to focus
greater attention on prayer, worship and spiritual renewal.

Even though the NCC has no authority to negotiate church
unions, it undoubtedly makes a contribution by building up a

common fund of experience, a common vocabulary, a sense of
solidarity in mission, and a fruitful interchange of ideas and atti-

tudes. All these developments may pave the way for an ultimate
reconciliation in God's good time.

The entire task of promoting Christian unity obviously can-

not be thrust upon the NCC alone. Even after the RCC joins the
NCC, if it should decide to do so, the various member churches
will need to maintain certain kinds of bilateral or multilateral

conversations among themselves and with outside groups, in
order to foster increasing mutual recognition of creeds, ministries

and sacraments, and possibly to unite in larger federations and

unions.

4. The Critique of Institutionalism

Many observers in recent years have noted a decline in sup-
port for institutionalized ecumenism. It is often objected that

centralized structures inevitably become bureaucratic, that they
are not responsive to the dynamics of the true Christian com-
munity, that they get out of touch with "grass roots" level needs,

and that they tend to impede free and spontaneous initiatives on

the local level.

While this objection contains some merit, we do not feel that
It demands the dissolution of the NCC or prohibits the RCC from
entering the NCC. Ecumenism may be expected to go forward on
several different levels, some more centralized than others. In our
time, when rapid communications are improving and the world

12



is contracting, the churches cannot effectively discharge their full

mission unless they maintain agencies enabling them to tap their

best talent and resources and to bring these promptly to bear on

new needs wherever these arise. In order to accomplish anything

significant in our complex industrialized society, it is imperative

to have some visible institutional base or, as some have put it, to

occupy some "'sociological space." And so the ecumenical move-

ment must be implemented, not only locally but also on the

national and world levels, by appropriate offices and structures.

There is really no conflict between an institutionalized

framework and a healthy measure of free initiative. The NCC
need not be, and in our judgment has not been, an impediment

to pluralism and flexibility. Applying the principle of subsidiarity,

it has effectively promoted local ecumenism. Illustrations are

CROP (name of the Community Hunger Appeal of Church World
Service), Living Room Dialogues (LRD), the Week of Prayer for
Christian Unity (WPCU), field work of the Division of Christian

Life and Mission (DCLM), and distribution of the Revised Standard

Version (RSV) of the Bible. The recently established Commission

on Regional and Local Ecumenism (CORLE) has the task of

collecting and disseminating information concerning local de-

velopments in such a way that the best results achieved in one
locality may be an example and encouragement for other local
communities.

The theological explorations of the Faith and Order Com-
mission can be of great assistance to local ecumenical initiatives.

For example, the recent NCC ecumenical study on the eucharist
may pave the way for appropriate common worship, at least
among certain communities which are able to recognize one an-
other's ministries. Theological studies concerning the nature of

the Church often serve to focus attention on the local ekkiesia.

By its recommendations and reports, the NCC promotes restruc-
turing of churches in accordance with God's will for them at the

present time. The critique of institutionalism itself owes much
to the collaborative studies on institutionalism conducted within

the framework of the WCC. Thus organized ecumenical activity,
far from subjecting the churches to inherited structures, often

suggests ways in which these structures can be changed so as to

become more functional.

13



5. Recognition of Other Churches

As stated in the preamble to its Constitution, quoted above,

the NCC understands itself as a "'cooperative agency of Christian
churches"; its constituent members are churches (or "com-
munions") rather than private individuals or boards, councils,

etc. This fact raises for the RCC the question whether it can,
consistently with its own ecclesiology, enter a body in which it
would find itself on an equal footing with other bodies which also
claim to be churches. Would this be, in effect, a repudiation of
the traditional claim of the RCC to uniqueness? If so, can and
should such a repudiation be made?

Questions of this character have been discussed in the WCC
almost since its inception. The classic answer remains to this day

the statement of the Central Committee of the WCC issued at
Toronto in 1950. Crucial are the fourth and fifth "assumptions"

that, according to the Toronto declaration, underlie the WCC:

4. The member churches of the World Council consider
the relationship of other Churches to the Holy Catholic

Church which the Creeds profess as a subject for mutual

consideration. Nevertheless, membership does not im-

ply that each Church must regard the other member
Churches as Churches in the true and full sense of the

word.

5. The member Churches of the World Council recog-
nize In other Churches elements of the true Church.

They consider that this mutual recognition obliges them

to enter a serious conversation with each other in the

hope that these elements of truth will lead to a recogni-

tion of the full truth and to unity based on the full truth.

The Toronto statement, while it refers directly to the WCC,
appears to be fully applicable to other similar organizations such

as the NCC.

From the point of view of Roman Catholic theology, there is
no difficulty in recognizing that elements of the true Church exist

in the various member churches of the NCC. The Decree on
Ecumenism, the most official recent expression of the Roman
Catholic view on this matter, declared that "some, even very

14



many, of the most significant elements or endowments which

together go to build up and give life to the Church herself can

exist outside the boundaries of the Catholic Church" {UR 3,

p. 345). The same Decree went on to say that the separated

brethren also perform sacred actions of the Christian religions

and "in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church

or Community, these actions can be rightly described as capable

of providing access to the community of salvation" {UR 4, p. 346).

Even if the RCC could say nothing more positive than this about
the other member Churches, these declarations would seem to be

sufficient recognition to satisfy the conditions laid down by the

Toronto statement.

Whether the RCC can go further and recognize other com-
munions as churches "in the true and full sense of the word" Is a

more subtle and difficult question and one which, in our opinion,

does not need to be settled in the present report. It may, how-

ever, be relevant to say a few words on the subject. Vatican II

stated quite clearly that some of the communities separated from

the Roman See are "Churches" as distinct from "ecclesial com-

munities. In Article 19 of Unitatis redintegratio it spoke of some

of the communities arising in the West since the Middle Ages as

being "Churches" in this sense. Many Roman Catholic theo-
logians would restrict the term "Church" to bodies having a min-

istry recognized by Roman Catholicism as being In the apostolic
succession—and thus would prefer not to call Protestant com-
munions "Churches." But even if the RCC were to hold that
none of the present members of the NCC is a church In the
theological sense (and we know of no Roman Catholic theologian
who would be so restrictive), this would not be a bar to joining,
since the conditions of the Toronto statement could nevertheless

be satisfied.

It may be pertinent to note in this connection that the Ortho-

dox, who have much the same problem as the RCC does in rec-
ognizing the authenticity of other "Churches," have found It

possible to be members of the WCC and the NCC. From the
point of view of the WCC and the NCC, the ecclesiology of the
Orthodox has not proved a bar to fruitful collaboration.

15



6. Ecclesiological Status and "Basis" of the NCC

Another reason for hesitation on the part of the RCC might
be the ecclesiological implications of the NCC as a council of
churches. To what extent does the Council itself purport to pos-
sess the properties of a church? Is there a danger that the councils

of churches will absorb the functions of the Church, and thus

reduce the member churches to a subsidiary position? The RCC
would understandably be reluctant to merge its identity into a
larger unit that is, in effect, a superchurch.

The Toronto statement of 1950, and several other major state-
ments issued by WCC authorities, explicitly deny that the WCC
regards itself as a superchurch or as the Una Sancta. The Faith
and Order study on The Ecclesiological Significance of Councils
of Churches declares: "Though the reality of the Church is ex-
pressed in certain ways in councils of churches, the councils of

churches are not themselves churches. Councils of churches do
not normally have creeds or determine theological issues, and do
not administer the sacraments or ordain."

It is by no means easy to state accurately what is involved in

the "expression" of the "reality of the Church" which is here

ascribed to councils of churches. One might say, perhaps, that
such councils participate in certain ways in three central functions

of the Church—those of witness, worship and service—and to
that extent participate also in the reality of the Church herself.

Thus the NCC, although it does not formulate doctrine, does bear
witness to Christ by its corporate life and pronouncements.

Though it is not itself a liturgical assembly or eucharistic com-

munity, it does sponsor gatherings at which there is common
worship. Though it does not issue orders or commands to its
member churches, it recommends policies and jointly administers
projects requiring common resources. In these ways it extends
the service rendered to mankind by member churches in the
name of Christ. Each of these three functions of witness, worship
and service may now be examined in somewhat more detail.

(a) The idea that there should be a measure of common
witness to the Christian faith by the separated churches and com-

munities is, in our age, widely accepted. Vatican II, in its Decree

on the Missions, called for "common profession of faith in God

16



and in Jesus Christ" (AC 15, p. 602). The Decree on Ecumenism

contains the exhortation, "Before the whole world, let all Chris-

tians profess their faith in God, one and three, and in the incar-

nate Son of God, our Redeemer and Lord {UR 1, p. 342).

The two last quotations are implicit references to the Basis of

the WCC as it has stood since the New Delhi Assembly of 1961.
The WCC here defines itself as "a fellowship of Churches which
confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior according to the
Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfill together their common
calling to the glory of one God, Father, Son and FJoly Spirit." As

is well known, this richer, trinitarian formula was introduced into

the WCC in 1961, replacing a merely Christological formula, to
satisfy the desires of several churches first entering the WCC at
that time.

The NCC, according to its present constitution, is an agency
of churches which "confess Jesus Christ as Divine Lord and

Savior." Beyond this, the Constitution lays down no theological
requirement for membership. From the standpoint of Catholic

theology this formula offers no positive difficulty, but it falls short

of bearing witness to the common trinitarian faith of the member
churches. Since those who accept the divinity of Christ com-
monly admit also the divinity of the FJoly Spirit, it would pre-

sumably be possible for the NCC, like the WCC, to shift to a
wording that makes its trinitarian basis and scriptural foundation

more explicit. We think that the new Basis should even seek to
go beyond New Delhi by adding express mention of the true
humanity as well as the divinity of Jesus Christ, according to the

model of the Chalcedonian definition. Such a revision of the

Basis would be welcomed by many of the present member
churches and the RCC. The amendment of the Basis, however,
does not seem to be a matter of such importance that on this
ground alone the RCC should hesitate to apply for membership
in the NCC. Without violence to its convictions, the RCC could
accept the Basis of the NCC as it presently stands.

(b) The worship functions of the NCC are presently very re-
stricted, and offer no apparent theological difficulty. The problem

to what extent Roman Catholics might be able to take part in
common worship at NCC meetings could be worked out, as par-
ticular questions arise, in accordance with the general guidelines

17



for ecumenism, as found in the Decree on Ecumenism and the
Ecumenical Directory.

(c) The service to the world rendered in the name of Christ
by the NCC as an ecumenical organization would seem to be fully
in accord with Roman Catholic principles of ecumenism. In a
paragraph which deserves to be studied in its entirety, the Decree

on Ecumenism declares that "cooperation among all Christians
vividly expresses the bond which already unites them, and it sets
in clearer relief the features of Christ the Servant" {UR 12, p. 354).

The Decree on Missions calls upon Roman Catholics to col-
laborate with the separated brethren "in social and technical

projects as well as in cultural and religious ones. Let them work

together especially for the sake of Christ, their common Lord.
Let his name be the one that unites them! This cooperation
should be undertaken not only among private persons, but also,
according to the judgment of the local Ordinary, among Churches
or ecclesial Communities and their enterprises" (AC 15, pp.
602-603).

In conclusion therefore, we may say that the kind of cor-
porate ecclesial existence implied by entrance into the NCC
would appear to be in harmony with the ecclesiological and ecu-

menical principles of the RCC as expressed by its most authorita-
tive documents. Membership in bodies such as the NCC would
help to carry out the common witness, worship and service
appropriate to the actual ecclesial situation as understood both

by the RCC and by the present member churches of the NCC.
Roman Catholic membership would also make it possible for the
NCC more adequately to carry out its objectives.

7. Common Policies and Programs

Entrance into the NCC by the RCC would presumably in-
volve participation in both the central policy-making bodies and

in the program units of the NCC. From the standpoint of the

RCC, participation in an ecumenical body such as the NCC offers
both liabilities and assets, which must be measured against one

another. On the liability side one may list:

(a) The possibility that the Council or its units might adopt

some policies and programs which are not welcome to the RCC.
(The divergence might possibly be found with regard to such

18



complex issues as abortion, population control, divorce, public

aid to church-related schools.) Even though it could formally

dissociate itself from such actions, the RCC might be embarrassed
by Its membership in a body which advocated such unacceptable

measures.

(b) In some cases there could be delays in the adoption of
joint policies or programs which if done separately, would require

less time and consultation. For launching a project such as the

present Campaign for Human Development through an agency
such as the NCC, long negotiations and delays would presumably
be involved.

(c) There Is a risk that some common statements and deci-
sions would be too bland. Prophetic vigor is difficult enough to

achieve in official statements of the RCC alone; and the difficulty
might often be increased if it were necessary to obtain the sup-

port of the NCC as a whole, since it is made up of very hetero-
geneous bodies. (The same objection could be raised from the

standpoint of the NCC: its statements might be weakened by the
need for obtaining RCC support.)

On the asset side, one can see clear adv^yitages in having
common policies and programs that are not the sole responsibility
of the RCC:

(a) Interdenominational studies and staff work could prob-
ably be conducted with greater expertise, with wider sharing of
the relevant information, and with less duplication of effort by
parallel agencies. While the RCC presently has some of the ad-
vantages of common studies through its informal relationships
with the NCC, membership in the NCC would regularize this type
of cooperation and would not add to the actual cost of such
studies. It would give the RCC an appropriate share in the
burdens and in responsible leadership.

(b) There would be a wider basis of support and under-
standing In the American community for positions taken not by
the RCC alone, but by the NCC with the RCC as a member. This
would make for more effective presentation of such policies and
programs to the general public and to governmental and other
agencies. Parallels can often be found between policy statements
issued In the past by the NCC and those Issued by the Roman
Catholic bishops in the United States.^®

19



(c) In recent times the RCC has repeatedly expressed its
commitment to dialogue. The discipline of making Roman
Catholic positions plausible to other Christian groups often leads

to greater precision of theological understanding by Roman
Catholics themselves. It often gives other Christians a greater

understanding of the rationale behind the traditional Roman
Catholic views regarding controversial subjects such as Christian

education, abortion and divorce. We believe It would be a dis-
tinct advantage to all concerned if the divisive issues could be

discussed ecumenically.

Various proposals are under discussion in the NCC to im-
prove the methods it uses to advocate positions. Some examples
are that the NCC should express itself less frequently, with greater
competence, at different levels and not simply through the Gen-

eral Board, and In more varied ways than mere statements. This

Study Committee suggests that on issues where there are signifi-

cant minority positions among member churches, these positions
should normally be incorporated in NCC statements.

Meanwhile it is essential to be in possession of an accurate
understanding of the present system of policy determination and

policy statements in the NCC. Much of the information is avail-
able In considerable detail in the official documents, especially

the Constitution and the Standing Rules of the NCC (available on
request). A prominent part of the work of the NCC has been the
production of policy statements intended to speak to the Chris-

tian conscience or to governmental or other bodies on Issues in

society and in the Church. A policy statement is a position or
an affirmation of conviction formally approved by the General

Board or General Assembly. It expresses a substantial preponder-

ance of opinion that there is a strong weight of ethical, moral or

religious principles in support of the view expressed. A policy
statement is presented to member communions for their con-
sideration and use. Through these statements the representatives

of the member communions speak together as the Council to
their churches and to the general public and guide Council pro-

gram operations.

The process by which policy statements are formulated can

be summarized as follows. A member communion, a division
or committee, or an Individual representative (who must obtain

20



10 signatures) may offer a proposed policy statement. Accom-
panied by a data sheet and supporting documents, the text must

be sent to members six weeks in advance of the General Assembly
(or to a first reading of the General Board) and Is then referred

to a committee of reference. The committee has several options,

and if the policy statement Is presented for action (as written or

amended), it must be approved by at least a two-thirds vote of

members present and voting, and must receive the affirmative
vote of at least one-fourth of the total votes of the members.

When issued, a policy statement must be accompanied by an
analysis of the voting of the General Assembly or the General

Board, including the number of approvals, disapprovals and
abstentions. (There is an extraordinary procedure by which the

General Assembly or General Board may waive any or all require-
ments with the consent of nine-tenths of the members present
and voting, so that immediate action may be taken.)

Resolutions are formulated in a similar procedure and must

be based upon policy statements. Messages must be consistent
with policies of the NCC and be within the field of work of the
body issuing them. Study documents, consultation reports, and
study conference reports are clearly identified as such and are not

to be construed as expressions of the NCC. It is not clear to what
extent statements issued by the Executive Committee or the
President may constitute problems for the RCC.

Priorities are established and the balance between study and
program is determined in the NCC by overall policy and by the
eleven purposes stated in the Constitution, but Implementation
is determined by the availability of funds.

The Council has no authority or administrative control over
member communions. The sole authority of a policy statement
Is its intrinsic value, which In turn may influence the statements
of the member communions, be used in preaching and teaching,
stimulate leaders in the churches and assist them to make state-
ments, and may also be used in testimony before government
agencies.

In the event that the RCC as a member were to disagree with
a proposed policy statement, it might have enough votes to stop
passage. Even if this were not the case, as with other com-
munions, It could either abstain or make a minority report.

21



In a period of tension, transition and pluralism, policy state-

ments are often controversial and open to legitimate criticism.

Some criticism is irresponsible and not based on facts (e.g.,
accusation of Communist influence or of disregard of the Gospel),
but much criticism represents difference of responsible Christian
opinion. Where genuine differences exist, they appear in all com-
munions and therefore reflect tensions within all member
churches. This situation also exists within the RCC and therefore
should cause no hindrance to membership.

NCC statements are significant influences on ecumenical
thinking. Each member communion contributes from its own
wisdom to the policy statements. Sometimes a breakthrough in
one communion in turn is passed on to the NCC, giving others
the benefit of new formulations and implications of the faith.
Some Roman Catholic bishops may be concerned lest their
unique teaching position and its acceptance by Catholics be ob-

scured by this broader process, but no communion accepts the
NCC as an authoritative teacher or confuses the NCC statements
with its own teaching. We see no insurmountable difficulty in
clarifying this within the member communions and to the general
public. As the process of mutual exploration continues, any

psychological barriers to membership should be eliminated.

The process by which policy statements are produced does

not seem to provide any barriers to participation by the RCC. We
suggest for consideration only modification of the process, a

change in the majority required for passage from 2/3 to 3/4. This

would allow the RCC to exercise a restraining influence if it is
united In its opposition.

Concluding this section of our report we may say that the
RCC, if it joins the NCC, must be on guard against allowing its
own prophetic voice to be muted. It will have to maintain its own
agencies to express the distinctive stands of Roman Catholicism.
The RCC would have ways of disengaging itself from NCC policies
to which it takes exception. This, however. Is a problem for all

member churches of the NCC, it would also be an argument
against the existence of the NCC. If this problem were a valid

reason for the RCC to keep aloof from the NCC, It would also be
an argument against the existence of the NCC. It is precisely

because Christians have clear differences that they bear a re-

22



sponsibility to face these issues together. The fact that the RCC,

like other churches in the NCC, has to perform certain tasks on

its own does not preclude its membership. In accordance with

the Lund principle that the churches should "'act together in all

matters except those in which deep differences of conviction

compel them to act separately," the RCC could appropriately
participate In the policy bodies and program units of an ecu-

menical body such as the NCC.

8. Relations with Other Constituencies

Before it could responsibly join an agency such as the NCC,

the RCC would have to consider what effect this action might
have on the relationships of both the RCC and the NCC with
other bodies. Special attention would have to be given to the

reactions of other religious groups, such as the Jews and Moslems,

and to Christian churches that are not now members. The same
is true of ethnic groups such as Blacks and Hispanic-Americans,

and also secular groups anxious to preserve the principle of sepa-

ration of Church and State.

The possibility must be recognized that groups now outside
the NCC might feel that Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox
were establishing a gigantic power bloc that might be used against

them. On the other hand, they might feel that it would be to their
advantage to be able to deal with a single agency that would put

them in touch with such a broad spectrum of American Christi-

anity. Responsibilities would have to be assigned within the NCC
for liaison with other groups, both religious and secular, so that

lively interchange could be cultivated. In view of the special ties

between the Christian and Jewish communities, consideration

might be given to establishing a distinct desk in the NCC charged
with the responsibility of liaison with the Jewish communities.

The Churches coming together through the enlarged NCC must
not do so as a Christian party with the intention of pressuring
other groups in American society.

Some Protestant bodies presently outside the NCC, facing
theological issues rather similar to those to which this report
addresses itself, might be assisted in overcoming some of their
objections to joining the NCC if the RCC were to reach a judg-
ment in favor of joining.

23



The effect of Roman Catholic entrance upon the present
member churches of the NCC would also have to be taken into
account. Some might feel that the NCC was being weakened in
its capacity as a spokesman for a predominantly Protestant con-
ciliar tradition at present making progress in dialogue between its
Black and its White constituents. At the same time, many of the
present member churches might find their ecumenical commit-
ment deepened by the broader role of the NCC that would result
from the accession of the RCC.

9. The Roman Catholic Church in the United States

The By-laws of the NCC specify that a member church ''shall
have identity as an autonomous and stable church body with
corporate existence within the United States" (1, 1, b). As applied

to the RCC, this provision raises several possible difficulties.

In the first place. It may be asked whether the RCC in this
country is sufficiently autonomous. The international commit-
ments of the RCC are of course in some ways unique, but many
member churches of the NCC are strongly conscious of their unity
with and responsibility to their fellow Christians in other nations.

For example. The Protestant Episcopal Church in the U.S.A., which

defines itself as "a constituent member of the Anglican Com-
munion," is a member. Furthermore, when the Exarchate of the
Russian Orthodox Church In North and South America applied

for membership, its dependency upon the Moscow Patriarchate
did not constitute a bar to its acceptance by the NCC. Though
these churches do not understand themselves simply as national

churches, they have established a national identity sufficient to

enable them to participate as members of the NCC (See Ap-
pendix C).

Since the NCC does not seek to control the Internal lines of
authority in its member churches, the unity of American Roman
Catholicism with the Pope and the worldwide college of bishops

does not appear to impede it from fulfilling the commitments of

a member church of the NCC. In some ways the relationship of
American Catholicism to the worldwide structures of the RCC
may equip it to add a dimension of universal concern that could
be of benefit to the NCC, particularly as regards the NCC's com-

mitments to overseas ministries and to international peace and

24



justice. Representatives of the NCC have themselves expressed
this view.

In the second place, it may be asked whether the RCC in
this country is sufficiently a national entity organizationally to

enable it to become, in a meaningful sense, a member of the
NCC. In this connection, the question may be raised as to what,
if any, body on the national level has power to commit the RCC
to membership In the NCC.

For the sake of clarity, it will be well to keep these two

questions distinct. Whoever makes the decision and commits the
RCC to join, it should be clear that it Is the RCC in this country
(rather than any organ of the church) that would become a mem-
ber of the NCC. The body joining, therefore, would be the com-

munion of local Roman Catholic churches throughout the United
States. The reality of this communion Is manifested by many
Roman Catholic organizations on the national level.

In the nineteenth century the communion of the local
churches was made evident in provincial and later in plenary
councils at the national level. In the twentieth century it was

manifested by the annual meetings, initially of the metropolitans,

and later of all the bishops. Today It is manifested by the NCCB,
which is defined as '"a kind of council in which the bishops of a

given territory jointly exercise their pastoral office by way of
promoting that greater good which the Church offers mankind"

(CD, no. 38).

Another manifestation of the RCC at the national level is the
civilly incorporated agency known as the U.S. Catholic Confer-
ence (USCC). Its role is "assisting the Bishops in their service of

the Church in this country by uniting the people of God where
voluntary collective action on a broad Interdiocesan level is

needed. The USCC provides an organization, structure, and the
resources needed to ensure coordination, cooperation, and assist-

ance in the public, educational, and social concerns of the Church

at the national or interdiocesan level."

In addition to these episcopal organizations, there are

numerous national Roman Catholic organizations of priests,
religious and laity.

25



We believe it is clear in Roman Catholic polity that the
Catholic church comes into being in and from the individual
churches, that is, the local churches united with the bishops who
are their pastors and representatives {LG no. 23 and CD nos.
36-38). Thus it is somewhat questionable whether one may tech-
nically designate Roman Catholicism in the U.S.A. as a "national
church." But this reservation, we believe, would not be an im-
pediment to membership in the NCC. Many Protestant churches
that are already members of the NCC are likewise unions of local
churches. For example, the American Baptist Convention, as de-

scribed in the Year Book for 1969-70, allows full freedom for Its
member churches to order their own life "in accordance with the
Scriptures under the guidance of the Holy Spirit" in worship, wit-

ness, and ministry.

The appropriate authority for making a decision to join quite

properly Is the highest duly constituted ecclesiastical body in the

country. It is clear, we believe, that the American bishops of the
RCC have this authority. In the United States, the NCCB is the
duly constituted episcopal conference with the powers specified

by Vatican II (CD, 38) and in the Apostolic Letter, Ecclesiae

sanctae, issued by Paul VI In 1966.

The fact that the NCCB, at its November, 1970, meeting, took
the step of approving Roman Catholic membership in the NCC
Commission on Faith and Order indicates that the NCCB regards
such measures as falling within its competence. In several other

countries the RCC has joined national councils of churches
through the episcopal conferences.

As a matter of pastoral prudence, and in view of the signifi-

cance of membership in the NCC to the total membership of the
RCC (including priests, religious, and laity) in all the dioceses,
others In addition to NCCB members should be involved In the
decision. Concurrence of the appropriate organs of the USCC
should presumably be sought and there should be considerable

preparation on the "grass roots" level in the individual dioceses.

This is largely a matter to be determined by the bishops themselves

with appropriate consultation within the RCC. Probably they

might wish to refer the matter for consideration to the Advisory

Council of the USCC or. If a National Pastoral Council should
come into existence sufficiently soon, to that body also. From the

26



NCC side, it has indicated its full understanding of the diversity of
organization within the RCC in the United States and its desire for
a basis of eventual membership in the NCC that will reflect the
richness of the many facets of Roman Catholic life in this country.

10. Images of the NCC

In many quarters the NCC is popularly Identified with a type
of liberal social-action-oriented Protestantism. In some sectors,
however, there is a feeling that the NCC with its slow, bureau-
cratic structures and with its white Anglo-Saxon predominance is

hopelessly conservative. Such Identifications might make many
of the Roman Catholic clergy and laity reluctant to see the RCC
join the NCC. The problem is real, but, we feel, not insoluble.
In the first place, the NCC Is quite conscious of this problem,
which complicates its relationships to many of its present con-
stituent communions, and Is therefore considering ways of re-

structuring Its agencies so as to clarify accountability for social

and political statements. Secondly, many Catholics, as well as
many Protestants, feel that the leaders of the NCC deserve credit
for their courageous leadership in social action, much of which is
in full accord with papal encyclicals from Rerum Novarum to
Populorum Progressio. Roman Catholics who are familiar with
these encyclicals are often favorably inclined toward many of the
social and political stands which the NCC has taken. Thirdly, by
joining the NCC, the RCC in this country could have a voice in the
formation of NCC policy, and therefore make this even more
consonant with Roman Catholic principles. Thus the present
criticisms directed against the NCC do not seem to be a decisive
reason for the RCC to decide against joining.

11. Staff, Representation and Finance

The professional staff of the NCC are elected by the General
Board and subject to its personnel policies. Roman Catholics
already serve on the staff but their number would undoubtedly
increase substantially in the event of Roman Catholic membership.

It is impossible to determine the amount of time that a given
staff member of the USCC, NCCB or any other Catholic organiza-
tion might devote to the work of the NCC if the RCC were a
member. This would depend upon the degree of Involvement,

27



for instance, of a USCC unit in the work and programs of the
appropriate NCC unit. USCC staff could be elected to NCC com-
mittees, could work on NCC projects either at the NCC or in the
USCC. USCC staff could even be secunded part-time from present
assignment at the USCC to a specific project in the NCC in which
they have special competence. All of this activity would, of course,

be subject to appropriate approvals within the USCC, the limita-

tions of USCC personnel and budget and mutual agreement with
the NCC.

Thus Roman Catholic membership in the NCC does not im-
ply that units of the USCC or the NCCB would be eliminated or
merged into their counterpart at the NCC. Units of the USCC or
the NCCB would continue to function and carry on their activities.
However, in some areas, it might be that a USCC or NCCB unit
might discharge some of its responsibility for programming in a
certain area, not by producing its own program, but by cooperat-
ing with other Churches through the appropriate unit of the NCC.
Wasteful overlapping of agencies of the NCC with Roman Cath-
olic agencies would need to be avoided. This is a problem felt by
all the member churches of the NCC and would not be unique
for the RCC. Further research is needed on the relations to the

NCC of Catholic organizations other than the USCC and the
NCCB. It is the conclusion of the Study Committee that on the
level of staff operations there are no obstacles to membership in

the NCC.

Proportionate representation of the member churches In the
General Assembly, the General Board and major units of the NCC
is determined by agreed formulae. In the event of Roman Cath-
olic membership, the present formula would need to be replaced,

simply because the resulting bodies would be too large to func-

tion adequately (see Appendix D). Development of a new for-
mula for each of those bodies would require a determination of

their nature and purposes, with attention to the balance required

between the gifts and perspectives which can be brought by

young people, minority groups, women and persons of specialized
competence, on the one hand, and decision makers with greater

authority and financial resources in the member churches, on the
other hand. While this is a subject for future consultation, in light

of the membership strength of the RCC, the Study Committee

proposes as a working principle that the RCC have not more than

28



a third of the representatives and not less than a fifth in the top

policy-making bodies of the NCC.

Financial support for ''general operations" of the NCC is ex-
pected from member churches based on a set of criteria mutually
arrived at, a formula determined by financial capacity rather than

membership. The percentages are determined by a three-year

average of total contributions for local, regional, national and

world programs of the national church body. Included in the

general operations budget at the present time are the General

Secretary and his immediate assistants, expenses of the General

Board and General Assembly and their committees, a Washington

office, an office for administration, an office for communications,

an office for planning and program coordination, and liaison with

regional and local ecumenical bodies.

In addition, member churches are expected to provide sup-
port for major program units and their sub-units as they partici-

pate in them, generally from related program agencies in the

member church. This is known as "cognate funding." Repre-
sentatives of such cognate agencies participate in making the

program decisions and in providing the financing for such pro-

grams. The major portion of the NCC budget is made up of such
program funds.

The Study Committee is of the opinion that the maximum
expected from a single member church for the general operations
budget should be 25%. This suggestion is related to our sug-
gested norms for representation and the judgment that any one
church should not be overburdened with financial responsibility.

Askings for the program units would be set as participation is
planned. Some of these askings are based on the general formula
but others are based on a series of factors and still others on
membership. (For further details on the general operations and
program budgets see Appendix E.)

Conclusion

In the judgment of this Study Committee, the question
whether the RCC should join the NCC can be broken down Into
two sub-questions: whether the NCC (or some near-equivalent)

29



should continue to exist and, secondly, whether, if so, the RCC
should be a part of it.

To the first of these questions we answer in the affirmative.
While we recognize that the ecumenical movement is much
wider than the NCC, that there are many things that the NCC
cannot accomplish, and that the NCC does not have a perfect,
record in the spheres in which it is competent, we nevertheless
believe that the NCC has made, and can continue to make, a
major contribution as an organ of the ecumenical movement and
as a service organization of the member churches. The common
ecumenical experience of the member churches over the past
twenty years through the NCC and even earlier through previous
cooperative church organizations is a precious heritage from

which American Christianity should continue to draw profit. If

the NCC were to be dismantled without an effective successor,
great harm would be done to the cause of ecumenical Christianity

in the United States.

To the second question we would reply, in substance, that
nearly every argument in favor of the continuance of the NCC
(or a comparable successor) is also an argument for Roman Cath-
olic membership. We believe that If the documents of Vatican II
are a valid expression of what the RCC is and intends to be

—

as can scarcely be denied—Roman Catholic ecclesiological prin-
ciples are in substantial accord with the aims and methods of the

NCC. This being so, it would seem that the arguments for Roman
Catholic membership In the NCC are as strong as the arguments
for membership in the case of many of the other member
churches. But the ultimate decision as to whether these argu-

ments are sufficiently weighty to bring about an application for

membership in the NCC must of course be made by the responsi-
ble leaders of the RCC after due consultation with their own
constituencies on various levels.

In order to pave the way more smoothly for a favorable
decision, we recommend the following three changes on the part
of the NCC:

First, we believe that the Commission on Faith and Order
should continue to be upgraded to the point that it is able to

penetrate all the activities of the NCC with a theologically based
concern for the unity of Christ's Church in faith, polity and

mission.

30



Secondly, we believe that the present study provides an

auspicious occasion for the NCC to reexamine its Basis, and to
remove from the formulation anything that savors of an exag-

gerated ''Christomonism" or tends to obscure the true humanity

of Jesus Christ.

Thirdly, we believe that in the future, statements should be

drawn up in such a way as to manifest the diversity as well as the

unity found within the Council.

Further, we believe that as steps are taken that might lead to
membership of the RCC, special attention should be given to the

following points:

1. It is of very great importance that the future expanded

NCC should neither be nor seem to be a giant lobbying force that
would use its influence in a way that could legitimately be feared

or resented by other religious, ethnic or civic groups. To this end

it will be important to assure adequate minority representation

in the NCC and to maintain effective liaison with non-members
of the reorganized NCC. Particular care will have to be taken to

be receptive to the sensitivities of groups strongly committed to

the principle of separation of Church and State.

2. Within the RCC, it would seem to be of the greatest im-

portance that the decision to join should not be taken without

previous broad appreciation of the NCC and its purposes, so that
the decision will enjoy a high degree of grass-roots understanding

and support. We therefore recommend that the materials in this
Report, or materials of a similar nature, be made available for
public dissemination.

3. As progress Is made toward a decision on application by
the RCC for membership in the NCC, further and more detailed
studies will have to be made regarding the financial responsibili-
ties, the number and mode of selection of representatives, etc.
The detailed solutions to these questions will have to be made in
the light of changes now occurring in both the RCC and the NCC.

Properly prepared for, the entrance of the RCC Into the NCC,
in our judgment, might rekindle the ecumenical enthusiasm of

many Roman Catholics, which has somewhat subsided since the
days of Vatican II, and at the same time strengthen the commit-
ment of the present member churches of the NCC to the aims

31



and purposes of the ecumenical movement. The reception of the
RCC into the NCC would also have important repercussions for
conciliar ecumenism on the local level in the United States, on
the national level in other countries and on the world level.

It is perhaps pertinent to add one final observation. While

we recognize that careful study and committee work are neces-
sary to shape the structures used by Christian churches, we share
the impatience of many Christians who feel that it is desirable,
as soon as possible, to get beyond this kind of discussion and to

work for more substantive goals. The entrance of the RCC Into
the NCC, while important, will not in and of Itself be a major
ecumenical achievement. It becomes so as it rapidly leads to a
more concerted action on the part of all the churches Involved,
thus bringing the healing power of the gospel to God's pilgrim

people and a distraught and divided world.

32



NOTES

1 For more details, see Samuel McCrea Cavert, The American Churches

in the Ecumenical Movement: 1900-1968 (New York: Association Press, 1968),

pp. 245-48.

2 Samuel McCrea Cavert, Church Cooperation and Unity in America: A
Historical Review: 1900-1970 (New York: Association Press, 1970), pp. 280-300,

gives a helpful survey of the developing relationships between U.S. Roman
Catholics and the NCC.

3 See Lukas Vischer, "The Activities of the Joint Working Group Between

the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches, 1965-69," The

Ecumenical Review, vol. 22, no. 1 (Jan. 1970), pp. 36-69.

4 Text in Norman Goodall (ed.). The Uppsala Report 1968 (Geneva: WCC,
1968), pp. 177-180.

5 Lukas Vischer, "The Ecumenical Movement and the Roman Catholic
Church," in Harold E. Fey (ed.), A History of the Ecumenical Movement, vol. 2,
1948-68 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970), pp. 311-52, quotation from p. 352.

6 Peter Hocken, "Bilateral or Multilateral?", One in Christ, vol. 6, no. 4
(1970), pp. 496-524, esp. p. 499. (For up-to-date information on these matters

one may consult Victor E. W. Hayward, Associate General Secretary for Rela-
tionships with Christian Councils, at the WCC offices in Geneva, Switzerland.)

From Heythrop Ecumenical Conference Report, July 1969, chap. 1. See

also Bishop Kenneth Sansbury, "Growing Relations Between the British Council
of Churches and the Roman Catholic Church," One in Christ, vol. 6, no. 4
(1970), pp. 490-95.

® See the Second Report of the Joint Working Group of the WCC and the
RCC.

^ In references to documents of Vatican II, the following abbreviations of

the Latin titles will be used:

UR—Unitatis redintegratio (Decree on Ecumenism)
AC

—

Ad gentes (Decree on the Church's Missionary Activity)
LG—Lumen gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church)
CD

—

Christus Dominus (Decree on the Bishops' Pastoral Office)
Page references are to W. M. Abbott (ed.). The Documents of Vatican II

(New York: Guild Press, 1966).

10 The Ecclesiological Significance of Councils of Churches (New York:
National Council of Churches, 1963), p. 21.

11 Ibid., p. 14.

12 Ibid., p. 23, quoting the WCC Commission on Institutionalism and Unity.
13 Lukas Vischer, "Christian Councils—Their Future as Instruments of the

Ecumenical Movement," Study Encounter, vol. 4, no. 2 (1968), pp. 97-107, quo-
tation from page 106.

i"! For a lucid statement of this position see Yves Congar, "Note on the

Words 'Confession,' 'Church,' and 'Communion,' " in Dialogue Between Chris-

33



tions (Westminster, Md.: Newman, 1966), pp. 184-213. On page 206 Congar
writes: "On any hypothesis, one thing is certain: a community which lacks the
apostolic succession, which does not admit of degrees of its possession, cannot

qualify even as a local Church in the strict theological sense of the word. If

this name is accorded to it, it can only be in a descriptive or sociological sense
for which some employ the word confession, but for which, as we shall see, it
is preferable to employ 'communion.'" In opposition to this view, other

Catholic ecumenists, such as Gregory Baum and Walter Kasper, would extend
the term "Church," at least in an analogous sense, to Protestant communities.

See James O. McGovern, The Church in the Churches (Washington, D.C.:

Corpus, 1968), pp. 98-109.

Op. cit. (note 10 above), p. 19.

Dean M. Kelly, "The National Council of Churches and the Social Outlook

of the Nation," (available from the NCC on request).

See Standing Rules, pp. 12-14.

Oliver S. Tomkins (ed.). The Third World Conference on Faith and Order

(London: S.C.M. Press, 1953), p. 16; reprinted in Lukas Vischer, A Documentary
History of the Faith and Order Movement, 1927-63 (St. Louis: Bethany Press,

1963), p. 86.

Quoted from the description in The Official Catholic Directory (New
York: P. J. Kenedy, 1970), p. 13.

34



APPENDIX A

Counterpart Staff

NCC RCC

Office of the General Secretary General Secretariat NCCB-USCC

Washington Office of the NCC Office of Government Liaison
Office of General Counsel

Division of Christian Life & Mission Department of Social Development

Church and Culture Department Bishops' Committee on Liturgy

Department of International Affairs Department of International Affairs

Division of World justice and Peace

Department of Social Justice

Delta Ministry

Religious and Civil Liberties

Hispanic-American Ministries

Domestic Hunger

Division for Urban Life

Division for Rural Life

Division for the Spanish Speaking

(National Conference of Catholic

Charities)

National Catholic Community Services

Division of Christian Education Department of Education

(National Catholic Educational Assn.)

Department of Educational Development Division for Religious Education (CCD)

Division for Elementary and Secondary

Education

Division for Campus Ministry

Division for Youth Activities

Division for Adult Education

Division for Family Life

Department of Education for Mission Division for Religious Education (CCD)

(U.S. Catholic Mission Council)

Department of Ministry Bishops' Committee on Priestly

Formation

Bishops' Committee on the Permanent

Diaconate

Division for Urban Life

(Conference of Major Religious

Superiors)

35



APPENDIX A (Cont.)

Counterpart Staff

NCC RCC

Division of Overseas Ministries

Africa Department

E. Asia Department

So. Asia Department

Mideast Department

Latin America Department

Catholic Relief Services

Division for World Justice and Peace

Division for Latin America

Department of Church World Service Catholic Relief Services

Division for Migration & Refugee
Service

Department of Specialized Ministries Department of Health Services

Division for Chaplains' Services

Commission on Regional and Local

Ecumenism

Commission on Faith and Order

Bishops' Committee for Ecumenical

and Interreligious Affairs

Bishops' Committee on Liturgy

Central Division of Communications

Broadcasting and Film Commission

Department of Communications

Division for Radio and Television

Division for Motion Pictures

Department of Information Division of Information

NC News Service

Office of Planning and Program Office of Research, Plans and Programs

Office of Administration Office of Finance and Administration

36



APPENDIX B

Study Committee on the Relationship of the National Council of Churches

and the Roman Catholic Church in the United States of America:

The Most Reverend Charles H. Helmsing, co-chairman, Bishop of Kansas City

—

St. Joseph, Kansas City, Missouri

The Reverend John Coventry C. Smith, co-chairman. General Secretary, Commis-

sion on Ecumenical Mission and Relations, The United Presbyterian Church

in the U.S.A., New York, New York

The Very Reverend Maximos Aghiorgoussis, School of Theology, Hellenic

College, Brookline, Massachusetts

The Most Reverend William W. Baum, Bishop of Springfield—Cape Girardeau,
Springfield, Missouri

The Most Reverend Joseph L. Bernardin, General Secretary, United States Cath-

olic Conference and National Conference of Catholic Bishops, Washington,

D.C

Mr. James A. Christison, Executive Secretary, The American Baptist Home
Mission Society, American Baptist Convention, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

The Reverend Avery Dulles, S.J., Professor of Theology, Woodstock College,

New York, New York

Dr. R. H. Edwin Espy, General Secretary, National Council of Churches, New
York, New York

The Reverend Tracey K. Jones, Jr., General Secretary, Board of Missions, The

United Methodist Church, New York, New York

The Reverend Robert J. Marshall, President, The Lutheran Church in America,

New York, New York

The Reverend Richard McCormick, S.J., Professor of Moral Theology, Bellarmine

School of Theology, Chicago, Illinois

The Reverend Frederick McManus, Executive Secretary, Bishops' Committee on
Liturgy, United States Catholic Conference, Washington, D.C.

The Reverend Randolph Crump Miller, Divinity School, Yale University, New
Haven, Connecticut

The Reverend Robert Moss, President, United Church of Christ, New York,
New York

The Reverend Edwin B. Neill, former Associate General Secretary, National Con-
ference of Catholic Bishops, Washington, D.C.

The Reverend Krister Stendahl, Dean, The Divinity School, Harvard University,
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Mrs. Theodore O. Wedel, President, National Council of Churches, Center for
Voluntarism, Washington, D.C.

37



Observers

The Reverend T. E. Honey, General Secretary, The Canadian Council of

Churches, Toronto, Canada

The Reverend John Keating, National Office for Ecumenism, Canadian Catholic

Conference, Toronto, Canada

The Reverend Frederick W. Meuser, Executive Secretary, Division of Theological
Studies, Lutheran Council in the U.S.A., New York, New York

The Reverend Herbert A. Meuller, Secretary, The Lutheran Church-Missouri

Synod, St. Louis, Missouri

The Reverend Frederick Schiotz, President (to 1970), The American Lutheran

Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota

The Reverend Eugene L. Smith, Executive Secretary, World Council of

Churches, New York, New York

The Reverend Kent Knutson, President (from 1971), The American Lutheran

Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Staff

The Reverend David Bowman, S.J., Special Assistant for Ecumenical Services,
National Council of Churches, New York, New York

The Reverend John F. Hotchkin, Director (from April, 1971), Bishops' Committee

for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, National Conference of Catholic

Bishops, Washington, D.C.

The Reverend Monsignor Bernard F. Law, Director (to April, 1971), Bishops'

Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs, National Conference

of Catholic Bishops, Washington, D.C.; Vicar General, Diocese of Natchez-

Jackson.

The Reverend William A. Norgren, Executive Director, Commission on Faith and

Order, National Council of Churches, New York, New York

Adjunct Staff

The Reverend Gerald E. Knoff, Associate General Secretary, Division of Christian

Education, National Council of Churches, New York, New York

The Reverend James Rausch, Associate General Secretary, United States Catholic

Conference, Washington, D.C.

The Most Reverend Francis T. Hurley, Bishop of Juneau, Alaska, former Asso-

ciate General Secretary, United States Catholic Conference, Washington,

D.C.

38



APPENDIX C—Samples of Statements from Member Churches'
Constitutions or Similar Documents

1. American Baptist Convention

The American Baptist Convention, as a manifestation of the church uni-

versal, bears witness to God's intention to bring redemption and wholeness to

all creation. American Baptists believe that God's intention can be sought and

followed in local congregations and other gatherings of Christians and in asso-

ciational, regional, national and world bodies as they receive from one another

mutual counsel and correction. Since Jesus Christ is the head of the church,

each body of Christians, seeking to order its life in accordance with the Scrip-

tures under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, has a proper responsibility under

God for maintaining its life of worship, witness and ministry.

In every area of their common life American Baptists, acknowledging the
importance of creative diversity, seek such a balance of freedom and order

as will keep all parts of the Convention open to the guidance of the Holy

Spirit and at the same time enable them to work responsibly to carry out the

common task of mission and ministry in our time.

The American Baptist Convention acknowledges that it shares a common
faith in Christ with churches which may be quite different from it in history,
polity and practice. Consequently, it seeks to share with them a common
ministry and to express it faithfully.

The American Baptist Convention further acknowledges that God's will is

also manifested in movements outside the formal structures of Christ's church,
and that, therefore, it must respond faithfully to such disclosures.

In the light of this affirmation, the following, in the form of a statement

of purpose of the American Baptist Convention, is intended to implement and
not to alter the objects of the corporation as stated in the Act of Incorporation:

—to bear witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the world and to lead
persons to Christ;

—to seek the mind of Christ in moral, spiritual, political, economic, social,
denominational and ecumenical matters, and to express to the rest of

society on behalf of American Baptists, their convictions as to the mind
of Christ in these matters;

—to guide, unify, and assist American Baptists in their witness in the
world, in preparing members for the work of ministry, and in serving
both those within and outside the fellowship of Christ;

—and to promote closer relations among American Baptist churches and
groups, within the whole Body of Christ and to promote understanding
with other religious bodies.

—Standing Resolution 1.80 (pp. 542-43)
Yearbook for 1969-70

39



2. The Episcopal Church

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, otherwise
known as The Episcopal Church (which name is hereby recognized as also
designating the Church) is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion,
a Fellowship within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, of those

duly constituted Dioceses, Provinces and regional Churches in communion with
the See of Canterbury, upholding and propagating the historic Faith and Order

as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer. This Constitution, adopted in
General Convention in Philadelphia in October, 1789, as amended in subsequent
General Conventions, sets forth the basic Articles for the government of this

Church, and of its overseas missionary jurisdictions.

From the Constitution of the Episcopal Church.

3. The United Church of Christ

The United Church of Christ, formed June 25, 1967, by union of the

Evangelical and Reformed Church and The General Council of the Congrega-

tional Christian Churches of the United States in order to express more fully

the oneness in Christ of the churches composing it, to make more effective
their common witness in Him, and to serve His kingdom in the world, hereby
adopts this Constitution.

The United Church of Christ acknowledges as its sole Head, Jesus Christ,

the son of God and the Saviour of men. It acknowledges as brethren in Christ
all who share in this confession. It looks to the Word of God in the Scriptures,
and to the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, to prosper its creative and

redemptive work in the world. It claims as its own the faith of the historic
Church expressed in the ancient creeds and reclaimed in the basic insights of

the Protestant Reformers. It affirms the responsibility of the Church in each

generation to make this faith its own in reality of worship, in honesty of thought
and expression, and in purity of heart before God. In accordance with the

teachings of our Lord and the practice prevailing among evangelical Christians,
it recognizes two sacraments: Baptism and the Lord's Supper or Holy

Communion.

From the Preamble of the Constitution of the United Church of Christ.

4.

The United Methodist Church

The Church is a community of all true believers under the Lordship of

Christ. It is the redeemed and redeeming fellowship in which the Word of

God is preached by men divinely called, and the Sacraments are duly adminis-

tered according to Christ's own appointment. Under the discipline of the Holy

Spirit the Church seeks to provide for the maintenance of worship, the edifi-

cation of believers, and the redemption of the world.

The Church of Jesus Christ exists in and for the world, and its very divided-

ness is a hindrance to its mission in that world.

The prayers and intentions of The Methodist Church and The Evangelical

United Brethren Church have been and are for obedience to the will of our

40



Lord that His people be one, in humility for the present brokenness of the

Church and in gratitude that opportunities for reunion have been given. In

harmony with these prayers and intentions these churches do now propose to
unite, in the confident assurance that this act is an expression of the oneness

of Christ's people.

From the Preamble of the United Methodist Constitution.

5. Orthodox Churches in America

Dr. Paul Anderson, consultant to the NCC on Orthodox affairs, suggests
that "autonomy" for the Orthodox communions means the ability and re-

sponsibility to conduct their own internal affairs. "Autocephaly" includes this,
and adds the ability and responsibility for choosing the supreme head of a

particular church.

Two of the Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States are of special inter-
est to Roman Catholics for the way in which they define their autonomy. The
Antiochian Orthodox Catholic Archdiocese of Toledo, Ohio, and Dependencies

quotes a Patriarchal Manifesto dated July 25, 1962, which indicates the separate

and independent jurisdiction of the two Syrian Archdioceses in America, in

order to prevent conflicting jurisdictions. Under Article 6. Authority: (B)

Spiritual, we read:

The Archdiocese derives and upholds its Spiritual Authority to func-

tion from the Patriarch and Holy Synod of the Apostolic See of Antioch

and all the East: the Hierarch of which is a member of the said Holy
Synod duly appointed and consecrated. Archbishop under the canoni-

cal Praxis issued by His Beatitude, the Patriarch of Antioch and all

the East.

In the case of an application for membership from The Exarchate of the

Russian Orthodox Church in North and South America, the concern was to

ascertain that this church recognized the autonomy of other member churches
of the NCC and claimed no authority over them. The occasion was the pres-
ence of another Russian Orthodox body in NCC membership.

6. The Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America

The Orthodox churches do not have single head with authority similar to
that of the Pope. Yet in each of the 16 Orthodox churches there is strict
canonical structure, with a Patriarch (e.g., Moscow) or Archbishop (e.g., Cyprus)
or a Metropolitan (e.g., Poland) as its head. Many of these "mother" churches
have a diocese(s) outside of the mother country. As regards America, many of
these dioceses or archdioceses are considered autonomous, i.e., have a right to
manage all domestic affairs, including election and consecration of bishops,
but the head of the American body must be confirmed, and in some cases
appointed, by the head of the mother church. Thus Archbishop Michael Shaheen
and Archbishop Philip, each having a body of Antiochian parishes, have
autonomy for their flocks in America, while they still attend the Synod of
Bishops of the Mother Church at Damascus.

41



Documents available at the NCC are: (1) Report of the General Constituent
Membership Committee on the Application for Membership of Four Com-
munions on December 5, 1966, (2) Information concerning the Antiochian

Orthodox Catholic Archdiocese of Toledo, Ohio and Dependencies with the

application for membership and supporting data, (3) Information about the

Exarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church in North and South America with

their application for membership and supporting data, (4) An Analysis of
National Council procedure in considering application for membership, used in

1966, and still in force. Please write if you wish a copy of one or the other

of them.

42



APPENDIX D—Representation in the National Council of Churches

1. Following is a list of member communions and their representatives on the
General Assembly and General Board in the current (1969-1972) triennium. The

detailed formula for selection of communion representatives for the General
Assembly is stated in the Constitution, Article VI, Section 2 and 3; and for the

General Board, Article VIII, Section 2.

Repre- EACH
sentatives Potential Pro-

General General gram
Assembly Board Board

Q 9
5 uU QJ _U gj

DENOMINATION ^ 5CQ Ln
^ S
CQ 0-)

UO Q
QQ U

African Methodist Episcopal Church 29 4 8 1 5 3

African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church 19 2 6 1 4 2

American Baptist Convention

The Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of

Toledo, Ohio and Dependencies in North

30 4 9 1 5 3

America

The Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdio-

8 1 3 1 3 1

cese of New York and All North America
Armenian Church of America, Diocese of the

10 1 4 1 3 2

(including Diocese of California) 10 1 4 1 3 2

Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) 31 4 9 1 6 3

Christian Methodist Episcopal Church 14 2 5 1 4 2

Church of the Brethren 11 1 4 1 3 2

The Episcopal Church

The Exarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church

40 5 11 1 7 3

in North and South America 9 1 3 1 3 2

Friends United Meeting

General Convention The Swedenborgian

9 1 3 1 3 2

Church

Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and

8 1 3 1 3 1

South America 34 4 10 1 6 3

Hungarian Reformed Church in America 8 1 3 1 3 1
Lutheran Church in America 35 4 10 1 6 3
The Moravian Church in America 9 1 3 1 3 2
National Baptist Convention of America 46 6 13 2 7 4
National Baptist Convention U.S.A., Inc.

Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious

87 11 23 3 12 6

Society of Friends 8 1 3 1 3 1

43



DENOMINATION

Repre- EACH
sentatives Potential Pro-

General General gram
Assembly Board Board

Q 9
.y QJ .y OJ U
fZ
CQ

5
CO

TO

<7)

u O
Q Q

Q
U

Polish National Catholic Church of America 12

The Presbyterian Church in the United States 22

Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc. 15

The Reformed Church in America 11

The Romanian Orthodox Episcopate of America 9

The Orthodox Church in America 9

Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for the U.S.

of America and Canada 9

Seventh Day Baptist General Conference 8

Syrian (Orthodox) Church of Antioch 8

Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America 9

United Church of Christ 37

The United Methodist Church 166

The United Presbyterian Church in the

United States of America 55

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

5

21

7

4 1

7 1

5 1

4 1

3 1

3 1

3 1

3 1

3 1

3 1

10 1

43 5

15 2

3 2

5 2

4 2

3 2

3 2

3 2

3 2

3 1

3 1

3 2

6 3

21 10

8 4

Totals: 825 103 243 41 160X4 83
928 284 =640

1) Representatives of state and local Councils of Churches are shown as
"State." These representatives are chosen from a nomination list provided by

State Councils of Churches.

2) Each Program Board is allowed an "additional thirty-five" in addition to

basic representatives nominated by denominations. Each of the "additional

thirty-five" must be certified by his denomination, but this does not count

against their basic representatives.

3) Central Division of Communication is allowed an "additional seventeen"

representatives.

Following is a projection, using the present formula, of Roman Catholic

representation in the NCC compared with a large member denomination, such as
the United Methodist Church, and the combined membership of denominations

participating in the Consultation on Church Union. The projection reveals that

the present formula could not be used because of the size of the General

Assembly and the General Board would not be viable.

44



Communi- General General Each

cants Communion Assembly Board Division

8 + 1 per Va of GA basic 2 + 1/10 of
70,000 = basic -f 1 + V4 of GA + 35 ad-
-f- 1/8 of that state and area ditional

total represent- council repre-

ing state and

area councils

of churches

sentatives

40,000,000 Roman Catholic 578 + 72 = 650 146 + 18 = 164 674-35=102
25,000,000 Churches in

c.o.c.u. 357 + 46 = 403 90 -f 13 = 103 42 4-35= 77
10,000,000 United Metho-

dist 166 -f 21 =187 43 + 5 = 48 214-35= 56

2. The present distribution of the representation of member churches is
illustrated in the following table from four examples:

American

Baptist Episcopal

United

Church

United

Meth.

GA GB GA GB GA GB GA GB

Youth 4 1 2 1 2 0 5 3

Laywomen 6 1 9 4 5 1 13 4
Laymen 5 2 10 4 9 2 38 10

Minority Groups 5 1 9 3 7 2 13 6

Clergy—Ordained 19 6 21 7
—Rectors 9 3 6 2 28 12
—judicatory heads 9 2 3 1 27 7
National officials 8 4 9 5 11 4 42 9

& Staff
Total Number of
Representatives

(Including Basic 34 10 45 12 42 11 187 48

& State)

Note: There is some overlapping in categories in the count.

These four churches select representatives to the NCC in the following
ways.

American Baptist Convention—Representatives for the General Assembly
and General Board are nominated by the General Council and approved by the
American Baptist Convention in annual session. The Division Program Boards
are nominated by the American Baptist National Program Boards and General
Council and approved by the American Baptist Convention.

The Episcopal Church—Representatives to the General Assembly and Gen-
eral Board of the National Council of Churches are selected by the Joint Com-
mission on Ecumenical Relations, a continuing Commission of the General

45



Convention, and elected by the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church.
The chief responsibility for preparing the recommendation to these positions
is undertaken by a committee of the Joint Commission called by the Committee
on Councils of Churches. The positions on the Division Program Boards are
filled by the Ecumenical Officer in consultation with appropriate Executive

Council staff members and the individuals concerned.

United Church of Christ—
a) General Assembly—The national agencies are asked to suggest

names for appointment by the Executive Council.

b) General Board—Chosen from the General Assembly delegation
according to the formula of the National Council of Churches.

c) Division Program Boards—The cognate national agencies suggest
names to the Program Boards, and they in turn are approved by the
office of the President.

United Methodist Church—Assembly members and General Board members
are chosen by the General Conference on nomination of the Council of

Bishops. If the Assembly comes at such a time that our quadrennial General
Conference is not in session the Council of Bishops is authorized to act.

In choosing the Assembly members the Council of Bishops asks for nomi-
nations from the related boards and agencies in the church and these are

usually staff members or board members. These nominations represent one-half
the Assembly total. The other half is nominated by the bishops from the church

at large.

The Council of Bishops selects the program board members but this is

largely perfunctory as we ask for nominations from the cognate agencies of the
church and at least in the last fifteen years none of these nominations have

been changed.

3. Members of the Study Committee's task force on representation were

generally agreed on the opinion that present representatives of NCC member
churches are tied in with denominational decision-making and financial

authority.

Para-ecclesiastical and minority groups are present or represented in a

variety of other ways. There are six Organizations in Fraternal Relationship who
are related to the total Council. In addition, there are 38 Organizations in

Fraternal Relationship which are related to major units. The NCC Bylaws offer
guidelines for careful consideration to be given to minority groups, women
and youth as members of the General Assembly, General Board, Executive
Committee and Program Boards.

All persons who serve on committees of the NCC are required to be
“persons in good standing" in member and non-member communions. A list
is maintained of non-member communions recognized by the General Board

to be in agreement with the Preamble to the Constitution of the NCC.

Members of the task force on representation recognized the problem faced

by the NCC and the denominations in appointing representatives who will
bring greater diversity but who may not be decision-makers or possess financial
authority. It was agreed that the gifts and the perspectives which youth,

minority representatives, and others can bring are essential to the work of

46



the Council, but it was recognized that denominational "responsibles" must

also participate in the deliberations of the NCC if support is to be secured from
the denominations. It was also recognized that many denominations are limited
in the appointments of representatives by financial considerations. A church
official who has a travel budget is more likely to be appointed than a lay
person or a pastor who would have to be supported in his travel out of the
church's central budget.

APPENDIX E—FINANCE

The NCC budget has been reduced in recent years. The member churches
must decide how much of a structure will be needed in the future. Accord-
ingly, any projection of a fair share asking from the RCC if it were to become
a member is hazardous. Some guidance can be gained, however, from the 1972
projected budget. Of the total budget of $17,572,770, $11,485,340 is expected

from contributed sources. Of this latter amount $6,787,890 will come from
member communions. Of this total from the member communions, $531,000 is
for general operations and $6,256,890 for programs in which the communions
elect to participate.

This $6,256,890 for programs and projects will be spent in the following

way:

Division of Christian Life and Mission $ 930,590

Division of Christian Education 337,630

Division of Overseas Ministries 4,658,670

Commission on Faith and Order and 92,540

Commission on Regional and Local Ecum.

Central Division of Communications 173,710

Planning and Program 41,000

Washington office 22,750

The NCC is at present undergoing restructure, but the current estimate for
the general operations budget in 1973 is $834,000* as compared to $811,520 in

1972. It is this budget to which the RCC, as a member, would be expected to

pay its fair share. In the event of membership it is evident that further con-

sultation will be required regarding both the amount of the fair share and the

sources from which it would come. It should not be assumed that all Roman
Catholic contributions to the NCC would come from the general fund of the
bishops; on the contrary, other Roman Catholic organizations might be expected
to share responsibility. In addition, the RCC through its many agencies will
determine the extent of its participation in and support of the various programs

of the NCC indicated above.

* The figure $834,000 assumes the present membership of 33 churches in

NCC.

47



A

^ r iQhHW^t
-;•. C> !..> • «:< '• . . .

- -

E 'fv-lT »/r -|t.^t f» b^**kjvi«5fv nhitti
Hb‘>, r^.-A

H'_ JL.a'Vft^ »j. i/»j; k \ ^a<>. ^ ^ ^‘ttn If «^; ' » • I \ t I V44>#fc ftu -jil s Ys»> iiiv. #if*: K>
.
.^uix

4««^V.t;T0 a^ f f\
'

- ' ^v .v» ;.‘
1'^' ;! •, J^W4Mliril^l>Qft#P| r, ' * }vj

.sir/ ' •,i>'*ft#r(?'

^

* C‘W!,vr
_

>. I ' *• • ,‘m iijf^ - »3isL' nrc/’O .
‘‘‘-

'

H >'. « r '. .i.

tM^»m. - :h o^tt’ '
'• 4 0U* -'• r .. .
l % V. V

il
=•*' V* »*••* '”'.5 '* t. . VJI .t

(iV- r.^f|f(fji»i.Va'

'
ft

=•*-
S'*

»*'•* ''•‘.5 '4 i, ,- .t • • -ii»i^.-»naii*p

briwnc’ .n JuBi '••’«(ii':' i*-.m,iirft
,\t fcU.}^.—

. f. ^ * 4H . ^ rJilr

M»a>

Ojjt

..i,'

(jt fcf.v r>u*U «.*' ,i‘-Kvi . ;d —v.*.\ witrilii
M-c. ' . iJa.'n,, • • '. -.•

i,
¥‘-'‘ ^'1

4,-
^

-> —:rV
'iiS' ' 'i.l

/ '.‘’Hi >s
V -

. > fyf.St>i‘';.v tjt;
^'V

01

sr j > ' M-.k *»i Vtiio ‘ M jiri!

ffc

' * ’’

^ ihK^

-
(«*4f',

<•
‘

-^H^a

/. . 1
*^'

'
-'• -

;•/ ''>r" AiMi ‘-^ '''

KiPi 13' '‘''I

’.'4h.>1-?rv'!.>t?rV J

• t-.iU'iO '
'’

^
*'•

/;• w . ., , N * 4^'““

w.*