Dear Professor Rahner, dear guests, dear laudator, dear Bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Bavaria, dear Heinrich, dear brothers and sisters, dear friends of ecumenism!
A final word?! - That's not even possible after such a concentrated load of theology, where each of you also thought: "I'll have to read that again first." That's a good thing! Because theology should also stimulate thinking, and anyone who has understood everything straight away has not yet listened properly, at least I don't think so.
But one final word is a double point, an invitation to reflect further on these incredibly enriching lectures by the laudator and the controversial Professor Rahner. I don't want to go into individual points, that's not my place. I would simply like to start by saying thank you: to the Academy and, of course, to the founders beyond their deaths, that there is such a thing as this Ecumenical Prize.
Over the course of my life, I have developed a stronger passion for ecumenism from year to year. I wasn't born into it, but from my first chaplaincy, and then also from many other events that I don't want to go into here, I developed strong connections. And when we celebrated the Year of Christ in 2017 - some wanted to make it the year of the Reformation, but we made it the year of Christ - it became very clear to me once again, as we then also formulated it: "visible unity in reconciled diversity"
This has not been fully received; there will be a text that is still in the pipelines of the committees, which will deal with the idea of a "process-orientated ecumenism". We are trying to make real progress and turn 2017 not just into a nice memory, but into something that continues and develops productively.
I would also like to thank the Academy management for choosing the prizewinner. A controversial woman, I can take that - that's a good thing! The first three points of the speech - I don't want to say they could have been mine - but almost. The laudator spoke of the twilight of the church and Mrs Rahner also spoke of the challenge that lies ahead of us. It's not just about ecumenical texts, but about the future of Christianity: It is about the future of Christianity. And we can only think about the future of Christianity, not in opposition to modernity, but in a constructive dialogue with modernity. And that is why, and I don't want to go into this in depth here, it is absolutely essential that we work ecumenically on real perspectives and seek dialogue.
I keep thinking about Cardinal Cajetan's meeting with Luther in Augsburg. Two educated people meet; Heinz Schilling described it in his wonderful book 1517 - Weltgeschichte eines Jahres, in which he published various essays about what else happened in 1517. And let's not allow ourselves to be persuaded that the Reformation had to happen, that Trent was inevitable, that the schism was inevitable. No! They are always free decisions.
And the question for us today is what momentum is there now, whether we are missing something again for the next step towards unity or reconciled diversity, at least towards recognising that we are Christians together, as you have said, going into the future together - even with differences - but not with the attitude that you are "second class" Christians and we are "first class" Christians.
That's just not right! And that's why I sometimes think to myself when I think of Luther and Cajetan: These were educated people, Cajetan was perhaps even the more educated, he knew Greek better and had studied more philosophy than Martin Luther - why wasn't it possible for two intelligent people to find ways to bring Christianity to the fore in their time? It failed, for many reasons. But that doesn't necessarily have to be the case in the future. And that is our endeavour: people like Wolfgang Huber and Johanna Rahner help to ensure that we remain in conversation - in a contentious conversation.
But I would like to add one more thing that is important to me. We are naturally tempted to do theology with texts, texts, texts ... that is our Western culture. But Christianity is not just made up of texts; the three pillars are of equal importance, the three pillars of truth: one is the confession; we have to agree on that, but you will never find sentences that some people find just as right as others. That is completely impossible. All I can say here is the keyword analogy with the great Karl Rahner. The second is practice, the practice of faith. This was more important for Paul. A faith that can move mountains - without love it is of no use at all. You can memorise the catechism, it won't help you at all. And the third thing we have emphasised time and again is that we should worship together. Shouldn't we be transformed when we celebrate together ecumenically? Not yet in Eucharistic communion, but perhaps with an openness to the fact that the other denomination could also be right. The individual decides in conscience, but worship is a transformative force.
These three pillars are of equal importance. For me. Not just texts over and over again, and someone always finds that something is not yet formulated correctly. No, sometimes I get tired of that. There is a point at which it has to be good and we have to look further. In ecumenical theology, we call this differentiated consensus. But it is even more important that we pray together and that we work together to serve society, the sick and the poor.
I would like to thank you very much and I hope that this evening, with the help of our two speakers, will once again give us all an impetus not to let up on ecumenism. I recognise the danger, the tiredness, we have so many problems of our own, the profiling, that has been mentioned. But we need each other. We are in open dialogue, and in a good sense, we can argue. We have always done that. But we are together, we are Christians together, and this society needs the witness of the Gospel, and we no longer want to do this alone, but only together.
Thank you for the ecumenical testimony! And congratulations on the prize!
