Dear sir and brother in Christ,

It is with great interest and gratitude that I read in the May, 1974 issue of THE OUTLOOK your editorial, “I Too Have a Dream,” and in the September, 1974 issue your editorial, “A Dream, A Dream, A Response, A Request.”

I am writing these lines in order to share with you my own dream which in a certain fashion amplifies and corrects yours.

My dream is of a renewal of the very old dream which was that of John Calvin.

In a letter dated March 13, 1549, addressed to Bullinger (Opera Calvini, XIII, p. 217), the French Reformer wrote:

“We have believed it to be our duty to attest you . . . what we feel as one mind, and what we say with one mouth for since it is the same Christ whom we preach, the same Gospel which we profess, the same body of the Church of which we are members, in a single ministry, the diversity of political jurisdictions to which we are submitted must not divide the unity of our faith, or prevent the flowering of the rights of so holy a union, consecrated under the auspices of Christ.”

Later, on March 20, 1552, Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, wrote to Calvin:

“Nothing contributes more efficaciously to unite the churches of God than the pure doctrine of the Gospel, and doctrinal harmony. That is why I have often desired and I still desire that wise and pious men, distinguished by their erudition and their judgment, meet and compare their various opinions, examine the principal points of ecclesiastical doctrine, and transmit to posterity a work treating not only matters in themselves, but the forms in which they are expressed.”

Calvin answered:

“Your feelings, most distinguished sir, are just and wise; indeed, in the present disordered state of the church no remedy can be more recommended than to hold a general assembly of pious and prudent men, men who have rightly been formed in the school of God, and who are one in the matter of the doctrine of holiness.

“It would be necessary to find a means of reuniting men belonging to the various churches eminent in their knowledge, so that after carefully discussing each of the various points of doctrine, they can, united in their judgment, transmit to posterity the true doctrine of the Scriptures.

“Moreover it must be recognized that one of the greatest evils of our time is the division among the churches, and the fact that human solidarity is so lightly regarded among us. Christian brotherhood is prized even less; only a small number sincerely put it into practice.

“Thus with the members of the church separated from each other, the body is there, but it is bleeding! As far as I am concerned, nothing would restrain me from being of service; if necessary, I would cross ten seas!”

Calvin’s dream of a Reformed Catholic or ecumenical church, which would not be divided because of the various political jurisdictions, was taken up again by National Synod of the Reformed churches of France held in Poitiers in 1561, expressing the wish of the earlier convocations of universal synods. Unfortunately, there was only one ecumenical Reformed synod of this kind: the Synod of Dordrecht in the Netherlands in 1618–1619. Although the representatives of the Reformed churches in France were prevented by King Louis XIII from attending, the National Synod of Ales in 1620 solemnly radified the “canons” defined at Dordrecht.

Along the lines of the wish of Calvin and of the wish of the Synod of Poitiers, my dream, in 1975, amplifying and correcting yours, is that there be convened as soon as possible a Reformed ecumenical congress with pious and wise men, ONE in “the faith once for all delivered unto the saints,” ONE in the recognition of the great ecumenical creeds of the first centuries and of the confessions of the Reformed faith, including the Canons of Dordrecht, and desiring cordially to search for “the path of unity,” toward the unity not only of the American truly “Reformed” churches, but of the Reformed churches of the entire world.

It is a historical evil placed under the judgment of God that the Reform ended in “national” churches and not in the reformation of a “universal” church (“catholic” or “ecumencial”).

Our Reformed vision of the churches of God (or the church of God) ought to be “de–nationalized,” “de–particularized.” It is normal that there be local churches, expressions of the holy universal church, and that there be regional and national synods. But would it not be normal that there be regularly universal “catholic,” “ecumenical” synods?

You state very well: “The danger is that we together might exhaust our time and energy and efforts in a futile effort to resolve a controversy that is of fifty years‘ standing”—the controversy between PRC and CRC.

But an ecumenical congress would oblige us all to surmount all secondary and quite relative historical problems in order to seize again (to use the words of Cranmer) the principal points of die ecclesiastical doctrine find to search for “the path of unity of all the confessing reforms throughout the world.” Our too-narrow points of view, too much drowned in local controversies would be enlarged. Thanks to God, we would go to His Word and to His Spirit:

1. Toward the establishment of an ecumenical Reformed confession of faith;
2. Toward the establishment of a common ecclesiastical discipline crowned by the regular institution of a Reformed ecumenical synod;
3. Toward the extension of a Reformed evangelization in the entire world.

“Like Calvin we must be willing to cross ten seas (he says ten) to unite the church.”

“To cherish the vision or goal of having all those who are scripturally conservative and genuinely Reformed in a Catholic Reformed Church hardly calls for an indictment or an apology. As prophets, priests and kings, arc we not all entitled and also obligated to cherish and also to pursue such an ideal, even though we do it unofficially?”

Such is my dream. Such is my appeal, Such is my prayer.

Expressing to you my gratitude and devotion in Christ, I am sincerely yours,

PIERRE COURTHIAL Academic Director of the Faculty of Reformed Theology at Aix-en-Provence, France

P.S. I am writing in French. Excuse me. Perhaps with the help of a good translator you can publish this editorial in THE OUTLOOK?

Note: THE OUTLOOK is indebted to Dr. Arthur J. Otten, teacher of French fit Calvin College for the above translation.