The document summarizes a lecture given by Rev. Dr. Carlos Emilio Ham on Christian identity in relation to others. Some key points: 1. Ham analyzes a biblical passage where Jesus asks his disciples who others say he is and who they say he is. Peter responds that Jesus is the Messiah of God. 2. Ham discusses how identity is defined in relation to others, and how a distorted view leads to indifference and violence against others. A proper view sees finding identity through others in a relationship of responsibility and love. 3. Christian identity today is defined by belief in one God, Jesus as divine, and the Bible as authoritative, while acknowledging diversity in how different cultures experience their Christian

1. What is the relationship between
Christian identity, spirituality,
religious plurality and Christian self
understanding?
WCC/ALC
Rome, Thursday, February 2, 2012 (ALC) - Rev. Dr. Carlos Emilio Ham, Cuban Presbyterian-
Reformed pastor and the World Council of Churches’ (WCC) programme executive for Diakonia
and Latin America and the Caribbean.
UISG Rome Constellation 2012
“Who do you say that I am?” (Lk. 9:20):
Our identity in relation to the other.
Lecture offered by Carlos Emilio Ham*
at the annual gathering of the International Union
of Superiors General (UISG), Rome, January 12, 2012.
(*The Rev. Dr. Carlos Emilio Ham is a Cuban Presbyterian-Reformed pastor and the World
Council of Churches’ (WCC) programme executive for Diakonia and Latin America and the
Caribbean.)
Dear sisters in our common Lord Jesus Christ. “May grace and peace be yours in abundance in the
knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord” (2 Peter 1:2).
First of all, I am indeed very grateful to God for this great blessing to share with you some
thoughts in this special occasion when you are gathering in your annual meeting. As I expressed to
your executive secretary, Josune Arregui, when she graciously extended the invitation for me to
come, this opportunity to be with you is a great honor, both for me and for the World Council of
Churches in general.
Introduction
When I was reflecting on the topic suggested by our sister Josune, namely to look at the important
theme of “identity in relation to the other”, the Biblical text of “Peter’s Confession about Jesus”

2. (Lk. 9:18-20), came to my mind. I will read this passage for you: “Once when Jesus was praying
alone, with only the disciples near him, he asked them, ‘Who do the crowds say that I am?’ They
answered, ‘John the Baptist; but others, Elijah; and still others, that one of the ancient prophets
has arisen.’ He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Peter answered, ‘The Messiah of
God’”.
In my presentation, after reflecting on the exegesis of this biblical text, I would like to highlight the
following sub-themes: Our identity in relation to the other; How do we define our Christian
Identity today; Christian Identity through Confession and Discipleship; Christian Identity and
Spirituality; and finally, Religious plurality and Christian Self-Understanding. I will then finish
proposing some Conclusions.
1. Exegesis of the Biblical text
According to R. Alan Culpepper, who wrote in The New Interpreter’s Bible, the Commentary of
“The Gospel of Luke”, this section consists of a conversation between Jesus and the disciples. This
first part contains two questions regarding Jesus' identity (vv. 18-20). The first question elicits
three answers regarding who the crowds say Jesus is. The second question leads to Peter's
confession that Jesus is "the Messiah of God" … After an extended section in Luke that developed
the theme of "who then is this" and offered indirect answers by developing Jesus' fulfillment of
the prophetic traditions on drawn primarily Isaiahic themes, the Elijah-Elisha cycles, and exodus
motifs, the disciples offer the first confession of Jesus as the Messiah (Culpepper 1995:198).
Here, as in other parts, Luke depends on Mark, although he has moved directly from the feeding of
the five thousand, which in Mark occurs in 6:30-44, to the context of Peter's confession (Mark
8:27-30) (Culpepper 1995:199).
Luke omits some sections of Mark. The effect of this omission is to bring the feeding of the five
thousand and Peter's confession into direct relation to each other—a fact that may prove
significant for defining the meaning of the confession "the Messiah of God" (Culpepper 1995:199).
Three other Lucan modifications of the confession scene give to it a distinctive meaning in this
context: (1) Luke has omitted Mark's designation of thegeographical location (Caesarea of Philippi)
and substitutes instead a designation of the spiritual context of the confession; (2) Luke changes
Mark's allusion to "people" in Mark 8:27 to "the crowds." The crowds have been a recurring
fixture of Luke's account of Jesus' ministry and are also mentioned three times in the feeding of
the five thousand (9:11,12,16), so under Luke's editing of the material Jesus' question "Who do the
crowds say that I am?" must be understood in direct relation to the previous scene, and (3) the
third Lukan modification that serves an important function in the narrative is the change of "one
of the prophets" (Mark 8:28) to "one of the ancient prophets has arisen" (Luke 9:19). The
difference between the two phrases is not great, but in Luke the phrase is a verbatim repetition of
Luke's earlier summary of Herod's words (9:8). By means of this repetition, the confession scene is
tied directly to Herod's question. Peter will give the answer that Herod never finds (Culpepper
1995:199).

3. The answers that the disciples give to Jesus' question about the level of the crowd's understanding
underscore Jesus' identification with the prophetic tradition: John the Baptist, Elijah, one of the
ancient prophets. The crowds have understood that Jesus' mighty works are of the same cloth as
those performed and predicted by the prophets: announcing good news for the poor, challenging
the rich, giving sight to the blind, healing lepers, and raising the dead. Luke 7 and 8 especially have
defined Jesus as one greater than the prophets and greater than John the Baptist. The time has
now come to articulate the nature of that "greater than." By means of the succession of two
questions regarding Jesus' identity and the emphatic opening ofthe second question, literally, "But
you, who do you say that I am?", Luke telegraphs the fact that the answers the crowds have
proposed are inadequate. The disciples, through Peter, now show that they have moved to a
higher level of understanding (Culpepper 1995:199).
Peter's confession, "the Messiah (christos) of God," has been interpreted in various ways, as has
the issue of whether it accurately reproduces a pre-Easter confession. The issue of whether the
title is to be understood in a prophetic context or a royal, Davidic context is relevant to both of
these questions. The reader already knows that Jesus is the Christ from references in Luke 2:11,
26; 3:15; 4:41. Luke has cited the connection between the title "Christ," or the anointed one, and
the prophetic tradition by placing Jesus' recitation of Is. 61:1 at the beginning of his ministry, in
Nazareth (4:18). It is clear from Luke's repeated description of Jesus as one greater than the
prophets that this title cannot signal merely that Jesus was a prophet. He was the eschatological
prophet who fulfilled Is. 61:1. The feeding of the five thousand, with its allusions to the exodus,
the Moses traditions, and Elisha prepares us to understand this title in context as an indication
that Jesus is the fulfillment of these traditions, including the expectation of the coming prophet
like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18). Peter's confession also resonates with the predictions of Jesus'
fulfillment of the Davidic tradition (Luke 1:32-33) (Culpepper 1995:199-200).
The angelic prediction at Jesus' birth foreshadows for the reader God's intention for Jesus. He will
fulfill God's promises for David and his descendants (2 Sam 7:9-14). The Lukan narrative,
therefore, will not allow an easy choice between prophetic and royal contexts for understanding
the little "the Messiah of God." Luke has prepared the reader to understand the importance of
both traditions. The two are joined and fulfilled in Jesus(Culpepper 1995:200).
2. Our identity in relation to the other
The term identity comes from the Latin identitas, also coming from idem and means “sameness”.
It conceptualizes all affinities and affiliations, all forms of belonging, all experiences of
commonality, connectedness, and cohesion, all self-understandings and self-identifications. It
involves the perennial philosophical problems of permanence amidst manifest change over time,
and of unity amidst diversity.
At the same time, a very important notion related to the whole question of identity is the one of
“otherness”, namely, the quality or condition of being other; the quality of being different, not
alike or distinct in appearance or character. An interesting way to illustrate this is in reference to

4. our Spanish language where the pronoun “we” (first person plural) is “nosotros”, which is a
compound word, namely, “nos-otros”, “nosotros y los otros”, i.e. “we and the others”.
C. Díaz in his article “Alteridad”, from the Dictionary of Contemporary Thought, refers on the one
hand, to a twisted or distorted understanding of the Othernessconcept. He says that Otherness can
be understood as alteration or disturbance, when the other is seen as alienation, this, he says,
produces xenophobia. It is the affirmation of myself, negating the other (Díaz 1997:61).
This point of view reminds me the quote of Eugene Gogol, dealing with the concept of the other in
the Latin American liberation process. He said: “From the time of Columbus and the conquest,
what became known as Latin America, has been seen as the other, first by Europe and then by the
United States - the other to be subjugated, exploited, and dominated. But it became an other of
resistance and rebellion so permanent and enduring as the conquest was” (Gogol 2004:17).
The other distorted understanding mentioned by C. Díaz is to live our difference in relation to
the other as indifference. Summarizing, he says, the result of bothdistorted mechanisms is that
they cause a “violent indifferentiation”. This can cause an arbitrary perpetuation of violence,
just to mention a very recent example, like the killing of the two Senegalese men by the right-wing
extremist Gianluca Casseri in Florence, last December 13. This distorted understanding
of the other leads to a foundational crime, which produces an endless spiral of violence,
concludes C. Díaz (Díaz 1997:62).
On the other hand, C. Díaz, after acknowledging in his article the difficulties and tensions produced
by the relational reality, by the relationship or the dialogue with the other, he highlights that the
other pole discovers his or hers own identity in relation to a pole, other than his or hers. In other
words, he states that we can’t find our humanity in the egocentrism, in isolation, rather the
identity through the otherness. In this dialectic relationship, the uni-verse becomes multi-verse, a
cosmic coexistence, and a relationship that generates encounter.
He also underscores the importance of the responsibility towards the other, which means to
correspond in solidarity, in a true relationship of altruism, namely, a practice of disinterested
and selfless concern for the well-being of others. By the way, altruism comes from alter, the
other, taking others seriously. Both “to respond” and “spouse” come from spondeo, meaning to
respond and correspond, to be responsible and co-responsible. C. Díaz ends his article in reference
to love. “Love is what matters”, he says, in allusion to St. Francis of Assisi (Díaz 1997:66-67).
3. How do we define our Christian Identity today?
In a very revealing article called Christian Identity, the author, Helen Rhee, starts with a critical
question: “What makes one a Christian and what does it mean to be a Christian? Answers to these
questions of Christian identity are not as simple as they might first appear to be. The concept of
identity is a twentieth- century notion typically associated with modern individualism, and scholars
tend to qualify its usage when speaking of the ‘emergence of Christian identity’ in the first two
centuries.

5. Nevertheless, it is still possible to speak of ‘Christian identity’ in constructing a sense of Christian
continuity and common boundaries in relation to (or in terms of) otherness and differentiation;
boundaries of Christian identity ‘involve selection out of both similarity and difference, and
promote interchange as well as distancing’ (Lieu 2002:311). This identity is constructed in constant
social interactions with the surrounding societies and cultures, ‘others,’ and defines and redefines
those ‘others,’ such as Jews, pagans, heretics, etc. Therefore, as any other identities, Christian
identity is “contextualized and contingent” (Lieu 2004:18) in history, yet it also presents and
projects Christian ideals and universal claims through the selective process of self-definition (Rhee
2005:7). Christians in the last two millennia have wrestled to define and live out their
Christian identities in the changing contexts of culture, time and space. In this age
of globalization and post-modern world, this question of Christian identity is all the more
poignant and complex” (Rhee 2010:1).
She goes on to say that “From a religious perspective, Christians have affirmed, with an
uncompromising rejection of polytheistic worship, the exclusive worship of the one true God as
the creator and redeemer (monotheism) like the adherents of Judaism and (later) Islam and unlike
most of the people in antiquity; but unlike the believers of Judaism and Islam, Christians have also
affirmed Jesus as divine as revealed in the Bible (New Testament in particular). Christians of
varying convictions in history and today more or less agree that the Bible holds a certain special
(revelatory) status and authority, which distinguishes itself as somethingmore than a depository
of human religious projection or wisdom. And Jesus revealed in the Bible is more than a great
moral teacher; he is a unique figure, the Son of God, Messiah, and Savior of the world, however
his self-claim is interpreted…” (Rhee 2010:1).
After analyzing the “exponential growth” of Christianity in the non-Western/North American
“Southern” hemisphere (Asia, Africa and Latin America) and the serious decline in the traditional
Western world, except the US, and the impact that it has in redefining the issues of Christian
identity today, she argues how “this appreciation leads to Christian pluralism and diversity that
acknowledges the role of particular culture and society in shaping Christian identities while
upholding the unifying “core” of Christian faith across every culture…” (Rhee 2010:6).
“However, --she concludes—each particular experience of the core or center (Bible/Jesus) would
not be the normative experience on par with the biblical revelation. In other words, African
experience of Jesus is just as valid as European experience of Jesus; Asian experience of Jesus is
just as authentic as American experience of Jesus. Therefore, ‘cultural particularities are
‘situations’ in which Christian people receive and give theological shape to the gospel. No such
situation constitutes a privileged cultural context as such’ (Mouw & Griffioen 1993:156–
157). What is rather normative for all of those diverse experiences would be their accountability
to the center or the core – how they interpret, experience and relate to Jesus revealed in
Scripture in their own local contexts. In this sense, the particular cultural appropriation of the
Christian center – the Bible and Jesus in the Bible – is essential to global experiences and
expressions of Christianity; in turn, it is the “universal” center that preserves the value and
necessity of contextual pluralism. In fact, only in light of such “center,” those diverse expressions

6. of Christianity can make legitimate claim of validity and authenticity” (cf. Mouw & Griffioen
1993:147) (Rhee 2010:7).
Another interesting article, in the same Dictionary of Contemporary Thought, mentioned above, is
called Other, written by P. Laín Entralgo and M. Moreno Villa, which will help us to further reflect
more specifically on our Christian identity.
The authors say that only with Christianity influenced by the worldview and anthropology of Israel
will emerge the question of its existence, although it was not understood primarily as an
intellectual problem, but basically ethical and relational (Laín & Moreno 1997:860). For
Levinas, the meaning of being can only beachieved in relation to the other. Yahweh challenged
Abraham making a covenant with him and talked to Moses "face to face" (panim el panim). Or
"Where is Abel your brother?" (Gen. 4:9) "Here the dyadic relationship gives way to a third party,
me and you, opens to the other of the two" (Laín & Moreno 1997:861).The two basic positions
arising in relation to the Other is its recognition or acknowledgement and our relationship to
him or her in multiple ways, which is not accidental, but constitutive of the being as a person.
“For the Christian thinkers –they write—the other human being is a corporealspiritual being, a
person created by God out of nothing, within which beat the first fruits of the Spirit (Rom. 8:23),
which allows him or her to realize that God is their Father, their brother (Christ) and their life-
giving Love (the Spirit), and that invites for friendship and to share their own life, since the
personal God (in the Old Testament), revealed as tri-personal (in the New Testament, by the
work of Christ), call the human beings as the other” (Laín & Moreno 1997:861).
The Other is mis-treated (or mistakenly treated) as an object, the person is understood as "it" and
not as "you", with whom I can have an encounter (Buber). The authors then mention several
wrong understandings in relationships, namely, to consider the other as: a) an obstacle, b) an
instrument, c) nothing. It is better to see the other as a beloved person, in constant love.
The Jewish author Emmanuel Levinas (1906-1995) has written many books on this topic, and
Professor Adolfo Ham summarizes his thoughts through the following points:
a. The relation with the Other is realized because I desire it. In the midst of my joys I find a face,
which limits my freedom and questions my being, it challenges me.
b. The other one will always be the Other. He/she will always send me to the Other and to a Third
one.
c. This relation is painful because it questions my ipsitas (my selfhood). This moment of the
encounter is the pain of the pangs of birth, which we have to suffer in order to receive freedom in
an original way.
d. Often times the Other is the orphan, the widow, the foreigner. We have to live the experience
of Abraham, to open our doors to receive the strangers, the beggars who knock at my door. In this

7. way the other is my neighbor, specially that one who needs the most. We can note that this other
person takes us to the Other (God) (Ham 2010:4).
We have to admit –and I deliberately mention this here, acknowledging your efforts on this
regard-- that the feminist theology has a lot to teach us on this issue of relating to others. In
reference to this, one of our outstanding theologians in Latin America, our Brazilian friend Ivone
Gebara says: “What we women want is the valuation of our humanity. It is not an abstract and
universal statement, but something we have to live and renew every day of our lives. And for that
we must be able to turn first to the materiality of our world, i.e. to or our physical reality which
includes embracing the differences between genders, ethnicities, cultures, ages and the
interconnection and interdependence of all things. It is not a superficial recognition but
something which is expressed in the capacity to approach the other, similar and different from me.
For this we need to mutually educate each other to listen without prejudice, without wanting to
assimilate the experience of others into our own, without reducing the other to our idea about
himself or herself. In general patriarchal religions are dogmatic and fundamentalists, and
exclude those who do not speak the same language or do not have the same history, which is a
way of affirming and defending their own truth” (Gebara 2011:76).
“In a world where one of the most used words is diversity, --concludes Ivone—we feel that in
many churches and theologies, it is a simply a rhetoric word, without any real impact on our
behavior and relationships. We continue with an individualistic androcentrism and
anthropocentrism to the extent of forgetting the message of the Gospel of Jesus which is to "love
one another as ourselves” … This situation invites us again and again to want to learn from each
other, to listen and to live tenderness and compassion among us. To abandon theological sexism
is an attempt to get out of the many imperialisms that dominate us. It is about taking small
steps to build relationships that allow us to feel today, and particularly today, our call for
freedom. It is not much, but it's something along the lines of our common responsibility to build
each day a world where all can be included” (Gebara 2011:76).
At this point, I would like to offer three examples or expressions of Christian Identityin order to
better illustrate these concepts:
1. The World Council of Churches is 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 the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
2. The Global Christian Forum creates an open space wherein representatives from a broad range
of Christian churches and interchurch organizations, which confess the triune God and Jesus Christ
as perfect in His divinity and humanity, can gather to foster mutual respect, to explore and address
together common challenges.
3. The International Union of Superiors General provides an international forum where superiors
general of institutes of religious Catholic women can share experiences, exchange information and
mentor one another in their role as leaders. Its mission is to build bridges that span distances,

8. borders and boundaries in order to create ways for members to be in communication, in
community and in communion.
4. Christian Identity through Confession and Discipleship
Having shared all these rich insights, let’s come back to the two questions regarding Jesus' identity
in our text according to Saint Luke. Further reflecting on this passage, R. Alan Culpepper notes the
following: “At this point in the Gospel, partial answers and proleptic references are giving way to
definitive statements ofJesus' identity as the Son of God. Jesus' question to the disciples is an
existential query that every reader of the Gospel must answer sooner or later: "who do you say
that I am?" Repeatedly the disciples and others around Jesus had asked one another who Jesus
was. Jesus now turns the question back on the disciples. He did not ask who he was but who they
believed him to be. Beyond the question of identity is the issue of confession (Culpepper
1995:203).
Peter gave the best answer he knew, the highest confession he could imagine, but it wasn't
enough. On the one hand, it failed to see the struggle and sacrifice that lay before Jesus; on the
other hand, it wasn't enough because it failed to recognize the sacrifice and demand that would
be required of any who confessed Jesus to be the Christ (Culpepper 1995:203).
The questions that mean most in life may be the questions of identity and relationship. “Who are
you?" "Who is God?" "What does it mean to be a follower of Jesus?" What do our answers to
these questions mean for our values, priorities, and commitments? The answers to these
questions, however, are not strictly cognitive, rational, or intellectual. They usually emerge from
experience and require a commitment of life. We answer these questions by the way we live.
Peter may have been partially right about who Jesus was, but he was completely wrong about
what following Jesus would mean for him. Jesus was on his way to a cross, not a throne, and
those who followed him must be ready to follow him on this road of obedience to God's
redemptive will and sacrifice for the salvation of others (Culpepper 1995:203).
Those who preach a cheap grace or a gospel of ‘health and wealth’ not only offer false promises,
but also they preach a false gospel. Discipleship and lordship are always interrelated. When we
offer false assurances, and teach a cross-less discipleship, we proclaim a distorted Christology. On
the other hand, when we preach a crucified Christ, the only authentic response is for one to give
up all other pursuits that might compromise one's commitment and devote oneself completely to
the fulfillment of the Kingdom tasks for which Jesus gave his own life. The nature of
our discipleship always reflects our understanding of Jesus' lordship (Culpepper 1995:203).
Discipleship is also a continuing process. That means first that however lofty our understanding or
obedient be our discipleship, most of us are probably not far from Peter—confessing but failing to
grasp the implication of our confession; understanding, but only in part; following Jesus, but
maintaining our own aspirations and ambitions also. The present tense verbs of the sayings on
discipleship should, therefore, not be overlooked. We might paraphrase: "lf you want to
continue following me, deny yourself now and take up the cross every day, and keep

9. on following me." What net profit is there if having gained everything you lose your own life?
(Culpepper 1995: 203).
There are many impulses in life. One is the impulse to acquire, take, hoard, own, and protect.
Another is the impulse to give and to serve'. One assumes that each of us can be the Lord of our
own lives and that our security and fulfillment depend on our ability to provide for ourselves. The
other confesses the sovereignty of God and devotes life to the fulfillment of God's redemptive
will in delivering and empowering others, establishing justice and peace, tearing down barriers,
reconciling persons, and creating communities. Those who devote themselves to these tasks
confess that the true fulfillment of life is to be found in the service of Christ and that our only
security is in him (Culpepper 1995:203-204).
There is a further truth hidden in the contrast between the present and the future in the coming
Son of Man sayings. In the context of teachings on discipleship, the emphasis is not on the
coming Son of Man but on the truth that the way we live in the present determines our
relationship to the Lord in the future. We are becoming who we shall be. Who we say Jesus is
now determines what he will say of us in the future. How we answer the question “Who do you
say I am?” through our day-to-day discipleship is the only answer that matters—but everything
depends on that answer (Culpepper 1995:204).
Jesus accepts his Messianic mission to the community. God chose Jesus as the Messiah of Israel,
but the choice did not mean Jesus was to remain on the sideline with the people he was to
serve. Similarly in the Church and the Christian community, vocation is a true call from God to
serve the people. All vocation, charisma and service, must be intended for the community,
particularly those in need. As a matter of fact, a concrete example and expression of
a discipleship which serves the community, affirming an authentic lordship of our Master, is what
you carryout in your different ministries, according to your UISG Directions, namely to:
• Address at every level the abuse and sexual exploitation of women and children, with particular
attention to the trafficking of women.
• Promote the education and formation of women by committing personnel and financial
resources to ensure the holistic development of women at every stage of life.
• Work for the cancellation of the International debt.
• The creation of a culture of peace.
• End the destructive behavior that causes global warming and climate change and threatens all
forms of life on our planet.
5. Christian Identity and Spirituality
Another critical aspect of our Christian identity is our Spirituality. According to the text of St.
Luke that we have been studying, just before Jesus raises the question on his identity, the author

10. says that he “was praying alone”. Many other passages of the Gospels refer to this practice,
particularly in critical moments like this one, when Jesus is preparing himself for his way to the
cross. Earlier in our paper we mentioned how important it was for St. Luke to state the spiritual
context of the confession, rather than mentioning the geographical location, as a way of
highlighting the fact that Jesus does not work alone, but rather in communion with his heavenly
Father.
In today’s secular and consumerist world, as we confess Jesus as “The Messiah of God”, we are
urged to deepen our spirituality, rooted in our Christian faith, which is “the assurance of things
hoped for, the conviction of things not seen (Heb. 11:1). This enables us to see beyond the
“natural” world, in order to “hope against hope” (Rom. 4:18). It equips us with a vision for a
discipleship, which empowers us to work for and to see “a new heaven and a new earth” (Rev.
21:1), providing a certainty that even when we don’t know what the future holds, we know for
sure Who holds the future. This indeed providesdynamos, a unique inspiration to work for a
better and more just world that other initiatives do not have.
In our mainline “historical churches” in general we need to further acknowledge the importance of
Pneumatology, i.e. to explore more on the role of the Spirit who empowers. In the Bible, the
Hebrew term for the Spirit is ruah. Its first meaning, and that of its Latin translation spiritus, is
"breath”. It refers to the breath of God as the power that gives life to the creatures (cf. Ps 104:29-
30). It appears as a manifestation of God's dynamism that is communicated to creatures. The word
is also known in the New Testament as the paraclete (Jn. 14:16.26; 15:26; 16:7), where it may be
translated into English as counsellor, helper, encourager, facilitator, inspirer, advocate, or
comforter and the early church identified it as the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5.8; 2:4.38). Saint Paul says in
Romans 8:26: “The Spirit helps us in our weakness”.
There is an important relationship between spirituality and ecumenism as well. This has been
underscored by Cardinal Walter Kasper, former head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting
Christian Unity, in his Handbook of Spiritual Ecumenism, published in 2007, which has provided
fresh insights on this important topic. In an effort to summarize his main points, regarding Spiritual
Ecumenism, I would like to share the following: (1) It is significant that when Jesus expressed his
desire for unity, he did not do so in a teaching or in a commandment to his disciples, but rather
in a prayer to his Father (Jn. 17:21). Unity is a gift from above, stemming from and growing
toward loving communion with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit; (2) Prayer for unity is the royal
door of ecumenism: it leads Christians to look at the Kingdom of God and the unity of the Church
in a fresh way; it deepens their bonds of communion; and it enables them to courageously face
painful memories, social burdens and human weakness; (3) Spiritual ecumenism also requires a
“change of heart and holiness of life”, arising from Jesus’ call to conversion. The way toward
reconciliation and communion unfolds when Christians feel the painful wound of division in their
hearts, in their minds and in their prayers. Only in the context of conversion and renewal of mind
can the wounded bonds of communion be healed.

11. And (4) Spiritual ecumenism, concludes cardinal Kasper, is called “the soul of the whole
ecumenical movement”. According to the Second Vatican Council, the ecumenical movement has
been brought about “under the inspiring grace of the Holy Spirit”. It is a spiritual process, carried
out in faithful obedience to the Father, following the will of Christ, under the guidance of the Holy
Spirit. The work of ecumenism, therefore, is rooted in the foundations of Christian
spirituality, requiring more than ecclesial diplomacy, academic dialogue, social involvement
and pastoral cooperation. It presupposes a real appreciation of the many elements
of sanctification and truth wrought by the Holy Spirit both within and beyond the
visible boundaries of the Catholic Church (Kasper 2007).
On this pertinent theme, our beloved brother, the Dominican friar from Brazil, Frei Betto, said in
an interview: “My spirituality is centred on the example of Jesus. I am impassioned by his
testimony and example. But I also feel spiritually enriched with other contributions, especially
that of Buddhism. I think that the Catholic Church is very poor in respect to meditation for reasons
that I am still studying. It has severely persecuted its mystics throughout history. For
me, spirituality is the language of the future. I give a lot of time to this, because I don't believe
that humanity will find a new path without diving deeply in spirituality. In other words, what
people are searching for is very close to them, but they don't know it” (Betto 1998:1).
And Betto expressed later in the interview: “Spirituality is not for the satisfaction of my
ego. Spirituality gives one the capacity to love others more, especially those who are most
needy. Jesus identified himself with the poorest people, so I believe that it is fundamental for
spiritualists to see in the poor, in the oppressed, the true presence of God. For my spiritual
liberation, for my realization, it is necessary that I love those around me. Subjectively I cannot
judge anyone, but objectively I find no value in a spirituality that does not rise to the liberation
of the oppressed. I believe in a spirituality that returns to make the entire world a place of
harmony and fraternity. And this means a fight against injustice” (Betto 1998:2).
I believe that Spirituality is not limited to our participation in specific spiritual practices (prayer,
Bible reading, praise), it is, rather to receive through them and through other means, the
necessary discernment of the Spirit in order to read accurately the signs of the times, to exercise
a liberating witness as a result of our relationship of dialogue with the God of life, the God of the
poor and of those excluded and who suffer. Paraphrasing the Swiss Reformed theologian Karl
Bath, who suggested that to be faithful witnesses to the Gospel, we ought to hold the Bible in one
hand and newspaper in the other;spirituality is the bridge that inspires us to carry out an
authentic discipleship that is connected both withthe Biblical text and the context where we
serve.
Spirituality, from a Christian perspective is an endeavour to live in obedience to the gospel of Jesus
Christ, in other words, it means discipleship. "Who do you say that I am?" Jesus asked his first
disciples. The response to that question is the disciple's spirituality in living a life consistent with
the Gospels.

12. Here, at the end of this segment, I would like to share a final concern, expressed through some
questions: ¿How is it possible to live an authentic spirituality when we, Jesus’ disciples, exclude
each other from the Lord’s Table? How is it possible for us to proclaim, work and struggle towards
a more inclusive world, where women, children, disabled people, persons surviving in the margins
of society are excluded, when in many cases we prevent each other from participating in the
sacrament of the “Holy Comm-union”? How is it possible that our confessional (and other)
differences interfere in our sharing at the Table?
6. Religious plurality and Christian Self Understanding
Another very important and relevant reality of how our Christian identity is shaped vis-à vis the
other is through interreligious relations and dialogue. In fact the main focus of the WCC’s work in
this area is to reflect and act upon the Christian Self-Understanding in a world of religious
plurality, in other words, to further understand how our own Christian identity is re-shaped or re-
imagined as we relate to brothers and sisters of other faith. Many ecumenical consultations and
initiatives have been organized with helpful and powerful inputs from the Roman Catholic and
other traditions.
A document, published in February 2006, under the title Religious Plurality and Christian Self-
Understanding was the result of a study process in response tosuggestions made in 2002 at the
WCC central committee to the three staff teams on Faith and Order, Inter-religious Relations, and
Mission and Evangelism, and their respective commissions or advisory bodies. Relevant to our
theme are paragraphs 42 and 43 where we read: “… Hospitality requires Christians to accept
others as created in the image of God, knowing that God may talk to us though others to teach
and transform us, even as God may use us to transform others” … “The biblical narrative and
experiences in the ecumenical ministry show that such mutual transformation is at the heart of
authentic Christian witness. Openness to the “other” can change the “other”, even as it can
change us. It may give others new perspectives on Christianity and on the gospel; it may also
enable them to understand their own faith from new perspectives. Such openness, and
the transformation that comes from it, can in turn enrich our lives in surprising ways” (WCC
2006:16).
The document goes on to say in paragraph 45 that: “Extending such hospitality is dependent on a
theology that is hospitable to the “other”. Our reflections on the nature of the biblical witness to
God, what we believe God to have done in Christ, and the work of the Spirit shows that at the
heart of the Christian faith lies an attitude of hospitality that embraces the “other” in their
otherness. It is this spirit that needs to inspire the theology of religions in a world that needs
healing and reconciliation. And it is this spirit that may also bring about our solidarity with all who,
irrespective of their religious beliefs, have been pushed to the margins of society” (WCC 2006:17).
In our WCC 9th Assembly, held in Porto Alegre, Brazil, on February 2006, one of the plenary
sessions was devoted precisely to the topic “Christian identity and religious plurality”. The
keynote presenter was The Most Rev. Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the most
senior bishop in the established church in England and the leader of the Anglican Communion

13. around the world. Among other thoughts, this is what he had to say: “…Our calling to faithfulness,
remember, is an aspect of our own identity and integrity. To work patiently alongside people of
other faiths is not an option invented by modern liberals who seek to relativize the radical
singleness of Jesus Christ and what was made possible through him. It is a necessary part of being
where he is; it is a dimension of ‘liturgy', staying before the presence of God and the presence of
God's creation (human and non-human) in prayer and love. If we are truly learning how to be in
that relation with God and the world in which Jesus of Nazareth stood, we shall not turn away
from those who see from another place. And any claim or belief that we see more or more deeply
is always rightly going to be tested in those encounters where we find ourselvesworking for a
vision of human flourishing and justice in the company of those who do not start where we have
started” (Williams 2006:5).
And he concluded with these words: “The question of Christian identity in a world of plural
perspectives and convictions cannot be answered in clichés about the tolerant co-existence of
different opinions. It is rather that the nature of our conviction as Christians puts us irrevocably
in a certain place, which is both promising and deeply risky, the place where we are called to
show utter commitment to the God who is revealed in Jesus and to all those to whom his
invitation is addressed. Our very identity obliges us to active faithfulness of this double kind. We
are not called to win competitions or arguments in favour of our ‘product' in some religious
marketplace” (Williams 2006:6).
Important to mention here as well are the interfaith gatherings in Assisi, called by the Holly
Fathers. In the most recent one, the “Day of reflection, dialogue and prayer for peace and justice
in the world” on 27 October 2011, hosted by Pope Benedict XVI, the general secretary WCC, Rev.
Dr Olav Fykse Tveit said: “We are here to let the conversion of Francis speak to us and to let the
conversation between us become a source for justice and peace. There is more to win through
the respect for the other. A sustainable peace requires that there is a space, a safe and
secure space, not only for me but also for the other. Christians are reminded that the cross is not
for crusades but a sign of how God’s love embraces everybody, also the other” (Tveit 2011).
Conclusions
Already near the end of Jesus' ministry in Galilee, it is obvious that his fame has spread throughout
the region, however, Jesus still raises some questions related to the perception or public opinion
people have in relation to his identity: have the crowds who have seen and heard him, really
understood who he is ultimately? All of those who have heard him, where are they and what are
they doing? To what extent have his message and signs influenced them? What is the answer of
the twelve? Peter responds on behalf of them, “Jesus is the Messiah of God”, the Anointed One.
But the direct question is also questioning us today. Twenty one centuries of Jesus’ history and
of Christianity, and yet, we, his believers and followers continue to confuse and mix-up his
identity, his message and his work.
This story from St. Luke testifies to the tension between the idea (hope) of human beings and the
power of God revealed in Jesus Christ. Human beings may fall in the temptation to make the

14. victorious Messiah features absolute, interpreting him as a Lord who wins the battle of life and
destroys enemy powers (identified with our personal enemies). However, God manifests his
presence through the journey of Jesus’ faithfulness to humanity and to creation, and only
through this loyalty, by accepting suffering and death, hope acquires its full sense (i.e. the
resurrection) (González 1976:1305-1306).
I would like to end my presentation by summarizing and highlighting some criticalpoints:
1. Our identity is always defined in relation to the other. As human beings we are not individual
islands, rather our identity or “sameness”, relates to affinities and affiliations, to forms of
belonging, to experiences of commonality, connectedness and cohesion. Our self understandings
and self identifications are informed and transformed by our relationship to the “other”. Issues
of permanence amidst manifest change over time, and ofunity amidst diversity are critical as
well.
2. More specifically, Christians are those whose identity is shaped by the effort to faithfully
depend on the Other (God) and to confess and follow His son, Jesus Christ, as a unique figure,
the Son of God, Messiah, and Savior of the world, according the revelation in the Bible. Christian
identity is“contextualized and contingent”.
3. Beyond the question of identity is the issue of confession. In the text of St. Luke, Peter gave
the best answer he knew, the highest confession he could imagine, but it wasn't enough. He both
failed to see the struggle and sacrifice that lay before Jesus and to recognize the sacrifice and
demand that would be required of any who confessed Jesus to be the Christ. We are called not
only to confess the Messiah, but also to be faithful disciples and the nature of our discipleship
always reflects our understanding of Jesus' lordship. Discipleship is moved by the impulse to give
and to serve, devoting life to the fulfillment of God's Kingdom and redemptive will in delivering
and empowering others, establishing justice, peace and integrity of creation, tearing down
barriers, embracing people, and creating reconciling and healing communities.
According to Saint Luke, just after Peter’s confession, Jesus sternly ordered and commanded his
disciples not to tell anyone, saying, ‘The Son of Man must undergo great suffering, and be rejected
by the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised’ (vv. 21-22).
Therefore, the title Messiah indicates that the history of humankind reaches its fullness in Jesus.
But, at the same time, we need to complete it by the expression "Son of Man", which in this
context, shows the same God who has descended, who has emptied himself, walks with
human beings and takes their suffering, transfiguring it from within (González 1976:1305-1306).
4. Christian Identity is closely linked to Spirituality. Authentic spirituality means, “to have God
within” (Leonardo Boff); to acknowledge, as St. Paul proclaimed at the Areopagus, that in God
“we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). It means to hear the voice of God who
says: “Be still and know that I am God” (Ps. 49:10), it implies to realize God's presence in our lives
and discover peace, the strength of the Holy Spirit who gives to those who ask, in open
silence. Spirituality assures the conviction that all pain, violence and confusion we have ever

15. known, through an encounter with Jesus Christ we are healed, uplifted and renewed to
garner strength, in order to open hearts to truth, to justice, peace in God'screated whole. Our
brothers and sisters in the Global South experience this in their daily lives, which is why they live
and practice a joyful faith and praise God with all their hearts and minds. Not long ago I read a sign
in San José, Costa Rica expressing this feeling: “Don’t tell God you have a great problem, tell the
problem you have a great God!” Authentic spirituality, as well, prepares us to serve in the Lord’s
Table, the banquet of the Kingdom, where no one is excluded.
5. In the modern ecumenical movement we deal with these issues of unity amidst diversity daily,
seeking to foster “visible unity” and a “reconciled diversity” among the Christian traditions and
communities, but also seeking unity beyond the churches, in a fragmented world. The
relation should be mediated by mutual respect and love. Jesus calls us to “love our neighbours as
ourselves” (Mat. 19:19). “Love is what matters” (St. Francis of Assisi).
6. Religious plurality and Christian-Self Understanding. Our reflections on the nature of the
biblical witness to God, what we believe God to have done in Christ, and the work of the Spirit
shows that at the heart of the Christian faith lays an attitude of hospitality that embraces the
“other” in their otherness. It is this spirit that needs to inspire the theology of religions in a world
that needs healing and reconciliation. Of course, we acknowledge that the issue is not easy. For
example, how Peter’s confession: “The Messiah of God” would be interpreted today by brothers
and sisters of the Jewish or by the Muslim, or by other religious traditions?
In conclusion we can state: a) only when the prospects of the Messiah of hope and of the Son of
Man, who assumes the suffering of history, are considered together, as an inseparable unit, a
valid picture of Jesus is achieved. b) Therefore, accepting Jesus is not simply confessing him,
together with Peter, as the Messiah; it is necessary to follow him in his journey of fidelity, in the
midst of suffering and death (González 1976:1305-1306). As Jesus said, according to the
recollection of St. Luke, just a couple of verses after the passage we have been analyzing: “…If any
want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow
me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake
will save it” (Lk. 9:23-24).
May the blessing of God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, be with you all, now and ever.
Amen.
Bibliographical References
Betto, F. (1998). Spirituality and Social Justice: A Dialogue with the yoga monk Dada
Maheshananda. Published in New Renaissance, Vol. 7, No.
3.http://www.ru.org/spirituality/spirituality-and-social-justice-a-dialogue.html
Gogol, E. (2004). El concepto del otro en la liberación latinoamericana, Bogotá, Ediciones Desde
Abajo.

16. González, A. et. al (1976). Comentarios a la Biblia Litúrgica. Libros de la Comunidad.
Nuevo Testamento. Ediciones Paulinas, Marova, Regina, Verbo Divino.Madrid.
Keck, L.E. et. al (1995). The New Interpreter’s Bible, Abingdon Press, Nashville, 1995. Vol. IX.
Culpepper, R.A. Luke Commentary.
Ham, A. (2010). Enmanuel Levinas (1906-1995). El Reclamo del Otro. Summary of a course of
philosophy.
Kasper, W. (2007). A Handbook of Spiritual Ecumenism. New City Press, NY.
Lieu, J.M. (2004). Christian identity in the Jewish and Greco-Roman world. Oxford University Press.
Moreno, M. et al (1997). Diccionario del Pensamiento Contemporáneo, San Pablo. Articles: Díaz,
C. Alteridad and Laín Entralgo, P. & Moreno Villa, M. Other.
Mouw, R.J., & Griffioen, S. (1993). Pluralism and horizons. Grand Rapids, MI: Eedmans.
Quintero, M. (2011). Mi vocación más fuerte ha sido la ecuménica. Artículos yensayos en honor a
Adolfo Ham. CLAI, Quito, Ecuador. Gebara, I. Adolfo Ham y lateología feminista.
Religious Plurality and Christian Self-Understanding (2006).
WCC. http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/3-
preparatory-and-background-documents/religious-plurality-and-christian-
selfunderstanding.html
Rhee, H. (2005). Early Christian literature: Christ and culture in the second and third centuries.
London and New York: Toutledge.
Rhee, H. (2010). Christian Identity. Article in pdf.
Tveit, O.V. (2011).
WCC.http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/generalsecretary/speeches/interfai
th-peace-meeting-in-assisi.html
Williams, R. (2006).
WCC.http://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/assembly/porto-alegre-2006/2-
plenary-presentations/christian-identity-religious-plurality/rowan-williamspresentation.html