Interview: Bishop Melvin Talbert, on the CCT
The ecumenical movement in the United States has unquestionably grown in the past few years through the development of a new umbrella organization called Christian Churches Together in the U.S.A. (CCT). Earlier this month, the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church agreed to take part in the CCT, marking the first time in history that evangelicals, Pentecostals, Catholics and mainline Christians would sit on a common table under a common banner.
Retired Bishop Melvin Talbert of the United Methodist Church (UMC) was a member of the steering committee for the CCT on behalf of the 8-million member denomination – the largest mainline protestant group to join the CCT. Talbert, who retired after 20 years as bishop to the UMC in 2000, served on the steering committee during his position as the church’s ecumenical officer.
The following is the full text of a Nov. 29, interview with Bishop Talbert on the future plans and role of the CCT:
Get Our Latest News for FREE
You were one of the steering committee members for the CCT. What was the primary responsibility for the steering committee?
The steering committee has been primarily responsible for the agenda for the next coming together. I have only been there long enough to attend one meeting – the one in Chicago last March. The primary agenda during that meeting was looking at the bylaw and projecting when we might the launching date. Those were the major decisions we made. We decided that the launch will either be in May or June of 2004, but that is still being talked about.
Some have celebrated the CCT as a historic landmark in American Christianity. Do you agree with the observation?
It is historic that these diverse groups have agreed to at least be in a group to talk together. Some of the groups have been so antagonistic in the past because of theological difference. In some cases, the groups’ leaders refused to even be in the same room with one another because of these differences. So the mere fact that there are Roman Catholics, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, and Mainline churches that are coming together is indeed historic. I am prepared to celebrate that and take it for what it is. However, I don’t want to say as thought the confirmation of heaven on earth has come. We still have a lot of things to walk through.
For example, the Roman Catholic Church has not given up on its stance that it is the true church, and the rest of us have not agreed that the Catholic Church is the true church. But I believe we are recognizing each other for who we are. We are expecting a lot, but the important step is to begin to talk, and at least we have a significant number of groups willing to talk.
But seeing if we have accomplished a great deal depends on how each of the groups respond to one another. We are hoping others can join, and that one day, we can see that the images of faith in the Church have come together.
What role will the Christian Churches Together (CCT) play in American Society once it launches next year?
At this point, I am not sure what kind of role it will be playing. However, if you look at the organizational structure, there is a significant period of time where the primary agenda for the CCT will be conversation among the member bodies. We will not begin to take action on issues until later on the road. Even then, it is structure that even one communion can decide not to do something. This just shows how limited we are in making any decision and addressing social issues. So you could see that this would be a difficult challenge for the organization right now to take social stances because it takes 100 percent agreement -- That will be very difficult to come by.
The National Council of Churches (NCC) played a large role in starting the talks for the formation of the CCT. What will the role of the NCC be once the CCT is launched?
The NCC will continue to have a significant role in its own right, but not in any way related to CCT. [The NCC] represents a historic group that has been together for decades, and if you want to know which organization will take social stances, it is the NCC. The CCT will not replace the NCC for at least the next several decades.
Is it possible for inter-denominational groups such as the NCC and the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) to join the CCT?
Yes, in fact there is room in the CCT not only for churches but various organizations. As long as they subscribe to the basic principles of the CCT charter, they can join.
Why has the NCC chosen not to join?
The NCC understands that its historic place has been read by others as very antagonistic. The NCC, which represents [the UMC among other groups], has said that for the sake of the future of the CCT, it will not attempt to claim a part of it. The reason is that some of the historic stances that the NCC has taken in the past have made it impossible for some of the other churches to agree; some of the groups that have agreed to take part in the CCT may withdraw their membership if the NCC decides to join.
At this point, that might even include the Roman Catholic Church. They have not yet decided to be a part of the NCC but it joined the CCT.
Did the NCC invite the Roman Catholic Church to be a part of it?
Yes. The NCC has historically invited all groups to take part, so no groups are excluded. However, groups have excluded themselves.
Evangelical denominations that have not yet decided to join the CCT have said they do not wish to lose their identity by joining such a group. Do you believe this is a valid concern?
I would say that from their perspective that might be right. But if there is an identity that may be lost from associating with other churches, I think they should check to see what kind of identity that is. What I mean is, I don’t think there are any of us that are so important to ourselves that we cannot become a part of a larger community of faith and a larger church of Jesus Christ. It is not our church, but it is God’s church. And if we have an identity that makes it possible to bring together all of God’s faithful people, we must look to see why we are standing aside.
Are you familiar of the event four years ago when the NCC, the Roman Catholic Church, the highly conservative Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), and several other denominations came together to sign a resolution on marriage, but the NCC withdrew its signature several days afterwards. Is this one of the “historic stances” you mentioned earlier that has made it harder for some of the churches to join the NCC?
Yes, I believe this is one instance. But this is not the only case. If you want to get the rationale for why Bob Edgar of the NCC decided to repeal his signature, you would have to speak to him directly. However, I supported his decision to change his mind because I saw how his signature was going to be used.
What we tend to do is to make claims about the institution of marriage that is not biblically or theologically correct. For instance, some people say the institution of marriage, which says one man and one woman only, is ordained by God. But I don’t think you can say that, biblically. It may be true culturally, because it has been a part of our situation. But to lay the claim that that has been ordained of God is stretching it. My conclusion is that Bob Edgar was right in seeing the direction of where it was going.
Conservatives often point to the passage in Genesis about the creation of Adam and Eve in saying there is a reason for one man and one woman to be in union. Isn’t that a scriptural claim?
We [the UMC] do not believe the scripture is infallible and is the literal word of God. We believe that the bible is the inspired word of God, not literal. When I live my life, people could say I am living a life that is inspired by the word of God, but that does not mean that I make no mistakes. We see that to be the same way in the past. We try to look at what God attempted to say through those who called themselves spiritual persons… all we do is to do our best to try to understand who God is and what he is trying to say.
Going back to the topic of CCT, what do you believe would be the main role of CCT once it is launched?
I would say the main role ought to be making a common witness of faith in the midst of the times in which we are living. It ought to be a table where we can come together and agree that this is what we understand to be the message of faith for these times. That is a very optimistic view because as I’ve said earlier, I’m not sure if we are anywhere near that. This might happen some 10 years down the road, and there will be some issues we will not be able to agree on.
For example, in questioning who is able to participate in the Lord’s Table, some say there are a certain group that is allowed, and this is what they believe. In fact, this is the bedrock of what they believe. However, in the UMC, we are a church that will invite anyone to the table because we see two main covenants: Love God and love your neighbor. If you are committed to doing this, then we are sharing at the Lord’s Table. And when you love God, you obviously believe in God. You have a right to join the table.
What is the criteria for joining at the table for the CCT?
There are certain stipulations that have been set as criteria for membership for certain basic beliefs and certain number of churches. These criteria are very general.
In the future, would it be possible for certain groups to be vetoed out of the CCT? More specifically, how would the CCT monitor what groups enter, if the criteria is so general?
If you aren’t a part of the chartering group and then every group that decides to come in later will need to receive the vote of those who are part of the chartering group. Right now, there is a window of opportunity that has gone out to all denominations and they will send in their name indicating that they subscribe to the basic tenets of the CCT and that they will desire to become a part of the larger group. But the steering committee right now, if there would be a question of the church there will raise a question.
During this period of time then, is there any way to stop well-known cult groups from joining, such as the Unification Church or the Church of Latter-Day Saints?
My sense is that if the two groups decided to become a part of the larger group, this could trigger others who have decided to be a part of it to not be a part of it. We are talking about a long, tedious process here and if someone wanted to stop it from happening, this would be one way to accomplish that goal.
