Piotr Kopiec Ecumenical Lessons of History: the Polish Example Ekumenske izkušnje iz zgodovine: poljski primer Abstract: From its outset, the ecumenical movement struggled with a problem of memories, particularly concerning collective memories of nations. The first ecumenical gatherings had to bridge the wounds of remembrance of people who belonged to different and often hostile nations. Nevertheless, this early experience had helped elaborate teaching that later became a theological ‘vaccine ’ for the following decades of ecumenical strivings. Ecumenism needs this vaccine, since existential and spiritual clashes of fidelity to Jesus’s call to unity and loyalty to national identity still happen. The article aims to showcase the work of two Polish ecumenists who advocated for Christian unity and, at the same time, for reconciliation between Poland and its neighbours during the communist epoch. An extensive outline of the ecumenical theory on nationalism, nation, relationships between nations and the Church, and reconciliation among nations precedes the presentation. Keywords: ecumenism, history, remembrance, reconciliation Izvleček: Od svojega začetka se je ekumensko gibanje soočalo s problemom spominov, zlasti kolektivnih spominov narodov. Prva ekumenska srečanja so morala premostiti spominske rane ljudi, ki so pripadali različnim in pogosto sovražnim narodom. Kljub temu je ta zgo- dnja izkušnja pomagala oblikovati nauk, ki je pozneje postal teološko »cepivo« za naslednja desetletja ekumenskih prizadevanj. Ekumenizem to cepivo potrebuje, saj se eksistencialna in duhovna trenja med zvestobo Jezusovemu klicu k edinosti in zvestobo narodni identiteti še vedno pojavljajo. Članek želi predstaviti delo dveh poljskih ekumenistov, ki sta si priza- devala za krščansko edinost in hkrati za spravo med Poljsko in njenimi sosedami v času komunistične dobe. Predstavitvi sledi obsežen oris ekumenske teorije o nacionalizmu, na- rodu, odnosih med narodi in Cerkvijo ter o spravi med narodi. Ključne besede: ekumenizem, zgodovina, spomin, sprava Ecumenism is primarily about seeking visible unity among Christians. However, this general goal encompasses different methods, aspects and fields of involvement. It is reflected in adjectives employed to denote ecumenism, such as ‘spiritual’, ‘doctrinal’, ‘social’, ‘practical’, to name but Edinost in dialog Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 Izvirni znanstveni članek Original scientific paper (1.01) Besedilo prejeto Received: 5. 10. 2025; Sprejeto Accepted: 26. 10. 2025 UDK UDC: 27-675(438) DOI: 10.34291/Edinost/80/02/Kopiec © 2025 Kopiec CC BY 4.0 76 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC a few. Years of ecumenical actions have showcased how difficult ecume- nism is. Rather modest successes of doctrinal dialogues, new conflicts among Christians over ethical issues and the continuing politicisation of Christianity well bear out this opinion (Sonea 2023, 1). History and historical experiences are among the most troublesome areas of ecumenical strivings. Different views on past experiences, cultures and ideas effectively hinder theological dialogue and thus ecumenical efforts. They are the more challenging, as they often concern national, ethnic, or group identities and lead to confrontation between the ecumenical vo- cation and identity belonging. From the very beginning, ecumenists have discerned this tension, particularly in two crucial moments in ecumenical history that occurred immediately after the two great wars. Hence, the origins of ecumenical organisations, such as the Life and Work movement and the World Council of Churches, have produced many prophetic do- cuments on the nature of interdependencies among Christianity, nationali- ty, and politics. Having been a fruit of shared theological reflection among Christians, often from nations hostile to each other, they still appear as a valuable source of peace in today’s world. However, ecumenism is not only a matter of agreements among official delegates of the Churches who produce theological documents. It is also a matter of the everyday life of many people who live by the conviction about the supreme value of Christian unity and who demonstrate how this value can change the history of nations and societies (World Council of Churches 2016, 17). Their work often remains hidden, or is known only to a tiny circle of professional historians who deal with the ecumenical movement. Like other countries, Poland has also had ecumenical heroes who, through their patient and arduous activities — often unappreciated and sometimes dangerous to them — overcame the boundaries of nati- onal, ethnic, and confessional identities to showcase ways of Christian reconciliation. The article aims to showcase the work of two Polish ecumenists who advo- cated for Christian unity and, at the same time, for reconciliation between Poland and its neighbours during the communist epoch. It aims to emp- hasise their role, as already mentioned, which is often unknown, in the modern history of Poland and Central Europe. The presentation relies 77 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE on excerpts from interviews conducted by the author. However, it is pre- ceded by an extensive outline of the ecumenical theory on nationalism, nation, relationships between nations and the Church, and reconciliation among nations. Besides the interviews, literary analysis is the primary method employed in this article. 1 The ecumenical theory: between Christian universalism and national particularism It may be trivial to reference the famous tenets of history by Ernst Troeltsch. However, as one of the leading representatives of Protestant liberal theo- logy, he can be considered a good patron of an ecumenical view of history, especially since his consideration of history was formulated with theologi- cal purposes in mind. When discussing the method of scientific approach to history (criticism, analogy, correlation), the German theologian, therefo- re, argued that »all events in history constitute a stream in which each event is related to others; nothing may be isolated from the fabric of history, nothing may be taken out of context as absolute« (Reischle 1901, 267). Such a historical correlation helps discern lesser-known historical facts, appa- rently insignificant events, gestures or decisions that nonetheless turned out to be groundbreaking for history. The history of the ecumenical movement provides many examples of this. Already during the preparatory meeting of the Life and Work movement in Geneva in 1920, one of the pioneering ecumenical organisations, came to a clash between French and German delegates: the former refu- sed to participate unless the Germans confessed to guilt for starting the Great War, whereas the Germans were not eager to take full responsibi- lity. A prophetic role was then played by Ernesto Giampiccoli, a delegate of the Waldensian Church from Italy, who said that, although he had lost his son because of the war, he was convinced that the conference would be an occasion for Christian love towards people from enemy nations. Next, he invited conference participants to say the Lord’s Prayer together, emphasising the words »And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us«. Paul Bock, a historian of the ecumenical move- ment, wrote that Giampiccoli saved the young ecumenical movement from building itself on the rocks of nationalism (Bock 1974, 33). 78 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC Giampiccoli’s utterance can be regarded as a motto for a future ecumeni- cal approach to the idea of the nation. It was of special significance in the interwar period, when European countries were immersed in authorita- rian (at least) political systems. The two early ecumenical organisations: the Life and Work and the Faith and Order had to challenge the results of prevailing nationalism and ongoing totalitarianisms, such as Nazism and communism. Interestingly, the consequences of nationalistic stances affected the ecumenical movement both externally and internally, as many theologians were not able to avoid thinking in terms of national belonging (Hugh 1962, 150). Stockholm and other interwar ecumenical conferences (in Edinburgh, Lausanne, and Oxford) addressed many non-theological issues: poverty, the consequences of urbanisation and industrialisation, secularisation, education, and nationalism. In particular, the last gathering, held in 1937 under the shadow of an oncoming war, focused on the consequences of ideology and nationalism. The conference’s motto, Let the Church Be the Church, was supposed to draw attention to a conviction that the Church must not be merged with or entangled with any ideology; instead, she must be a critic of each secular world order. While observing increasing political tensions and conflicts among European countries, participants of the conference strove to de- velop a shared Christian theology of the state. The post-conference report confirmed the conviction that the state is a historical reality to which the highest authority in the political sphere is ascribed. However, on the other hand, the state is subordinated to the authority and will of God; it aims to uphold law and order and is called to serve the people living within its boundaries. Eventually, the state is not the ultimate source of the law; instead, it is a guard and advocate of the law given by God. For Christians, God is the supreme and ultimate authority (Bock 1974, 31). Since the conference was taking place in the shadow of what was happe- ning in Nazi Germany, much was said about the necessary boundaries between state and nation. The Life and Work members emphasised that the state and the nation must not be subjugated to one another. Nation, and, more precisely, one’s belonging to a nation, ought to be regarded as God’s gift to humans. Yet, concomitantly, they warned that, as with 79 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE every gift, it can be misused or employed to render evil. Each sort of na- tional egoism, which uses the idea of the nation to oppress other nations or national minorities living within the borders of a given national state, is a misuse of God’s gift (Kopiec 2022, 8). The Life and Work conference in Oxford took place in the shadow of the oncoming war. The beginning of the World Council of Churches occurred in the shadow of the war’s consequences and, furthermore, in the face of an increasingly intense ideological clash between the capitalist West and the communist East. During the founding assembly held in Amsterdam in 1948, the theologians must have dealt with wounded post-war societies and nations hating each other. Nevertheless, despite the fresh experiences of the horrific war, the idea of Christian universalism crossing national and cultural boundaries lo- udly reverberated during the meeting. It was manifested already by the words »the kingdom of the Son wider than nation, deeper still than race« (Visser’t Hooft 1949, 22) from the hymn Oikoumenikos sung at the ope- ning of the first plenary session. Such universalism was also reflected in the idea of a responsible society that prophetically emerged in the space of conflict between communism on the one hand and consumer capita- lism on the other. The conference’s delegates held that »man is created and called to be a free being, responsible to God and his neighbour. Any tendencies in State and society depriving man of the possibility of acting responsibly are a denial of God’s intention for man and His work of sal- vation.« (Visser’t Hooft 1949, 77) The next WCC’s assemblies followed the path of Christian universalism and a conditioning of national belonging marked out in Amsterdam and earlier, at the interwar ecumenical conferences. For example, during the first WCC assembly organised in 1975 in Nairobi, Africa, ecumenists listed disordered nationalism among the »structures that obscure the confession of Christ« and argued that »in our discussions with one another we were also sensitised to the fact that a kind of nationalism can develop which is a distortion of the legitimate search for cultural identity and can obscure our confession of Jesus Christ the Unifier«. (Paton 1976, 47) 80 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC The quotations above are merely samples of the WCC’s teaching on nati- onalism and national idea. Actually, each of the eleven WCC’s Assemblies referred to the issue of a contrast between Christian universalism and national particularism. However, the WCC is not a sole ecumenical orga- nisation – it functions alongside other bodies, whether of international or national reach, such as the Conference of European Churches (CEC). This organisation, founded in 1959, gathers different Churches from Europe, representing Orthodox, Lutheran, Reformed, Old-Catholic and Anglican traditions; in addition, it strictly cooperates with the Catholic Council of Bishops’ Conferences in Europe. Among many areas of invol- vement (theological dialogue, human rights, human work, cooperation with EU institutions, integrity of creation, just peace, and migration), the CEC, since its inception, has emphasised the Church’s role in reconciliation among nations. Glen Garfield Williams, the organisation’s first general secretary, mentioned that: The roots of the tree strike back to the last period of World War II, when, even before the dust of the last battle in Europe of that fearful conflict had settled, ecumenical efforts were under way to build bridges between churches of the former enemy nations. From a devastated Europe, with millions of stateless people on the move and the continent beginning to divide itself into eastern and western blocks, the process of reconciliation of peoples, churches and leaders became dominant. Who better to tackle such an issue than the Christian churches? Indeed could Christian warmth and fellowship bridge the gap which was beginning to unfold into the ‘cold war’? (Gurney and Negro 2009, 11) This quest for reconciliation is thus somewhat inherently ascribed to the Churches, and the CEC played a crucial role in reconciling post- -war European countries. Here, it is worth mentioning the European Ecumenical Assemblies as among the most significant undertakings of the CEC (Basel 1989; Graz 1997; Sibiu 2007), which are now regarded by many as a pinnacle in European ecumenism. Especially the gathering in the Styrian capital that took place under the motto Reconciliation: a Gift of God and a Source of New Life (Noll and Vesper 1998, 331), concentrated on the theology of reconciliation in its many dimensions. It even worked out a hermeneutics of reconciliation, defining it comprehensively as a 81 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE quest for visible unity among Christians, the reconciliation of nations, cultures, societies, genders, and finally, an internal reconciliation of each human being. When specifying the theology of reconciliation, the Graz Assembly indi- cated some of its features. First, reconciliation must not omit justice and truth, and, as a consequence, it must not be reduced to a mere cheap to- lerance that relativises the guilt committed. Second, laws relied on justice must be put in light of God’s grace; otherwise, they can be mere instru- ments of political goals. Third, this Christian mercy is not an abstract idea; rather, it is mirrored in the intergenerational and intergender relationships of many Christian families and transmitted through history. Fourth, when seeking visible unity, the Churches must strike a balance between the two positions, in order to foster a more Christian culture on the one hand and avoid the instrumentalisation of religious differences on the other. Finally, reconciliation among nations, societies and cultures will be unfeasible without an existential reconciliation; it means, without coming to terms with the end of biological life, without a resignation from ensuring control on each aspect of human life, without a promotion of a sense of superiori- ty and oppositions of winners and loser in societies (Noll and Vesper 1998, 331). Also, this last feature is an expression of Christian universalism. The above-outlined excerpts from the reconciliation theory, created by large ecumenical organisations, can help envision what their teachin- gs are on national and cultural particularisms and Christian universalism, as well as their role in building more peaceful and just relationships among different social entities. It also introduces a more detailed aspect of this teaching, that is, a reconciliation of memories. 2 Reconciliation of memories Giampiccoli’s words were about the consequences of nationalism and about reconciliation. Of course, reconciliation is a primary condition of each ecumenical action. Nevertheless, it also requires a patient and integrated work of historians and theologians to unveil the often almost forgotten causes of divisions, to purify remembrance of centuries of unjust 82 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC opinions, stereotypes, and polemics, and to come to terms with different views on historical facts. It seems, however, to be one of the most challenging fields of ecumenism, often because Churches are deeply tied to national ideas and are supposed to be strong advocates for national integrity and community. Born in the time of national Darwinism and unfolding despite a national imperative, the ecumenical movement created a model of approach that helped act beyond national particularisms, without rejecting the national identities of the people involved. It must be said, however, that building this model often occurred against their own nations and Churches. Reconciliation usually entailed confessing one’s guilt and asking for forgiveness, even if one’s own Churches and nations regarded such confessions as acts of tre- ason. The reactions of German society at the time to the announcement of the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt by the Evangelical Church in Germany clearly illustrate this. In addition, reconciliation has diverse aspects, including reconciliation of remembrance or memories. This is a point at which an allegiance to con- fessional or national identity clashes especially strongly with Christian universalism. It has certainly not been a chief topic of the official ecume- nical dialogues conducted by the Churches on a global level. Actually, among the sheer theological issues – such as the Trinity, sacraments, eccle- siology, Mariology, and controversies over ethical problems – a healing of memories is rarely addressed by official interchurch dialogues. Yet, some significant examples, such as the report Called Together to Be Peace- makers by the International Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Mennonite World Conference can be given. Unlike similar ecumenical agreements, this document focuses on historical ruptures and the her- meneutics of history (of course, sheer theological issues are addressed as well). Hence, both partners declared that the dialogue needs to contri- bute to healing memories and, thereby, to reconciliation between divided Christians. A healing of memories encompasses several steps: a purification of mem- ories, a call for a spirit of repentance, ascertainment of a shared Christian faith and an openness to move beyond past isolation and a readiness to begin new relationships. As this list suggests, a healing of memories is a 83 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE comprehensive and cohesive program that occurs not only at the intellec- tual and conceptual level but also engages all dimensions of a Christian attitude. The primary condition for healing memories is a spiritual wish to be closer, which is in accordance with Christian love. What does this program look like in detail? Purification of memories means first that past events and their circumstances need to be reconstructed as precisely as possible. We need to understand the mentalities, the conditions and the living dynamics in which these events took place. A purification of memory includes an effort to purge from personal and collective conscience all forms of resentment or vi- olence left by the inheritance of the past on the basis of a new and rigorous historical-theological judgement, which becomes the foundation for a renewed moral way of acting. (Called to be Together 2007, 253) This general definition, when addressing an example of the Catholic- Mennonite relationship, means taking concrete steps, such as a revision of the different and sometimes opposite views of the history of Christianity. For example, both sides of the dialogue discerned the facts of the history of the Middle Ages, the Protestant Reformation and the post-Reformation diffently, thereby reinforcing negative stereotypes and polemics. The do- cument emphasises the significance of the Second Vatican Council and its readiness to acknowledge the culpability of Catholics as well. Yet the purification of memories would be merely an intellectual act witho- ut a spirit of repentance. Both sides blatantly state that »when Christians are divided and live with hostility towards one another, it is the proclamation of the gospel that often suffers« (Called to be Together 2007, 255). Christians, both Catholics and Mennonites, have reasons to »ask God’s forgiveness as well as forgiveness from each other« (Called to be Together 2007, 255). In this regard the Catholic side recalled the Day of Pardon, proclaimed by John Paul II during the Day of Pardon on March 12, 2000, and calling to a steadfast attitude of the Catholic Church to ask forgiveness for the sins of her members committed in the service of the truth and sins »which have harmed the unity of the church« (Called to be Together 2007, 256). The 84 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC Mennonite side acknowledged regretting »words and deeds that contri- buted to fracturing the body of Christ« (Called to be Together 2007, 257). The third step is discovering and ascertaining what is in common. This is a conceptual foundation on which further relationships can be built. Catholic and Mennonite stress, for example, that the Christian’s first responsibility is to praise God, to pray and read the Bible. Then the agreement lists other common elements: the faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour (fully divi- ne and fully human), the trinitarian faith as expressed in Apostle’s Creed, numerous perspective on the church and her role on matters of mission, evangelism, peace and justice, life of discipleship, and finally, the situation of Christian faith in rapidly secularised world. Of course, the list of what is in common does not cancel existing differences. The last step of the healing of memories program is a commitment to fos- ter new relationships, including future cooperation. Without such a com- mitment, the program would remain merely a declaration. Obviously, the above-presented healing of memories program refers to the interconfessional area. However, one can easily imagine that ecumenists, when equipped with the mandate to seek Christian unity, can transmit it to the sphere of reconciliation among nations. 3 Polish ecumenism and reconciliation These earlier excerpts of ecumenical theory can be illustrated by living examples of people involved in ecumenism in Poland who not only de- dicated their lives to Christian unity but also discerned that reconciliation among nations and confessions is inherently tied to the ecumenical man- date. At least the two introductory remarks can be formulated before their presentation. First, the beginnings of ecumenism in Poland were confined to small circles and leaders who understood the ecumenical imperative in Christianity, even though the confessional and social situation in Poland called its relevance into question. Second, Polish ecumenism was initia- ted and developed by the people of the borderlands, whether national, confessional, or cultural, by those for whom living between cultures and languages was a part of their upbringing. 85 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE It may be redundant to describe the historical process of ecumenism in Poland, as it is well documented and covered in numerous studies. Nevertheless, some selected information is needed to contextualise the presented persons. The official history of Polish ecumenism began in the interwar period, when Churches of different Protestant traditions, and later the Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church, joined the World Alliance for International Friendship through the Churches. Nevertheless, this and other acts of the interwar ecumenical relationships in Poland were rather incidental and met with reluctance or indifference (Gastpary 1978, 35). The atrocities of World War II and the widespread persecutions of Churches imposed by communist authorities in the 1940s and 1950s left little place for interconfessional relationships. However, two moments of the post- -war Poland were of high importance for Polish ecumenism: the founding of the Polish Ecumenical Council in 1946 (a body including Churches of Protestant, Orthodox and Old Catholic traditions) and the establishment of the Commission for Ecumenism of the Polish Bishops Conference in 1966 (Glaeser 2016, 31). Nevertheless, ecumenical institutions in Poland experienced many ruptures and difficulties and functioned in the shadow of the communist state control. The aftermath of the Second Vatican Council, the pontificate of John Paul II and the collapse of communism have contributed to an ecumenical opening. Notably, the 1990s and 2000s were marked by ecumenical achi- evements, such as common declarations by churches in Poland on mutual recognition of baptism, interconfessional marriages, the integrity of cre- ation, and the preservation of Sunday. Ecumenism became obvious and mainstream, though still contested by many vocal groups stemming from each tradition. On the other hand, it has still been a matter of appointed de- legates, lacking grassroots enthusiasm and widespread interest. Nowadays, ecumenism in Poland is seeking to redefine its purposes and fields of acti- vity. It also meets new challenges, such as secularisation of the vast part of the society, especially among younger generations on the one hand, and increasing confessional fundamentalism on the other. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, the consequences of migration and political polari- sation bring about new frameworks for ecumenical work. As already stated, Polish ecumenism has been a matter of tiny circles and leaders who were able to discern the significance of the ecumenical 86 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC mandate (Żurek 2021, 5). Of course, it would be unfeasible to list them in this short paper. Nevertheless, the article wants to give voice to some of them, especially to those who linked a quest for Christian unity with reconciliation among nations. The interviews with them shed a new light on the history of the ecumenical contribution to the political and cultural relationships between Poland and its neighbours. In the article, two ecumenist leaders will be summoned: Archbishop Alfons Nossol and Halina Bortnowska. In their work towards ecumenism, they made a significant contribution to post-war Polish-German reconciliation. Even though this reconciliation was sometimes referred to as a reconcilia- tion-kitsch (Versöhnungskitsch), and, according to many critics, it was still rather a wishful thinking, or merely a matter of only a part of the societies on both sides, it brought a great deal of memorable acts and achievements that have bridged both nations. Actually, when considering post-war expe- riences and memories of the war atrocities, this reconciliation was hardly imaginable. Yet, it became a matter of fact, at least to a certain degree, mainly due to the prophetic gestures and words. Their best-known examples, though not specifically ecumenical, are the two famous documents issued in 1965: the Ost-Memorandum by the Evangelical Church in Germany and the Pastoral Letter of the Polish Bishops to their German Brothers, We forgive and ask for forgiveness. Both documents were groundbreaking and served as points of reference for the next steps in reconciliation (Muszyński 2016, 140). Both also became »canonical« texts for many other efforts at rapprochement between nati- ons (it is worth noting that the Pastoral Letter is awaiting inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage List). Finally, both entailed hysterical and hostile reactions in their countries, including accusations of treason. For Poles, the Pastoral Letter was also all the more critical as it was breaking a petrified approach perpetrator – victim and a view on Germans as ‘natural ’ ene- mies (in accord with a famous saying from 17 th century »as the world is, Germans and Poles will never be brothers«; by the way, these words were recently, in July 2025, cited by one of the Polish bishops during the sermon delivered at the Sanctuary of Our Lady in Częstochowa). 87 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE 4 The living examples Referenced ecumenists did not directly participate in the preparation of both documents. But they worked behind the scenes, earlier and later, relentlessly striving for Christian unity, and, concomitantly, for the Polish- German rapprochement. 4.1 Archbishop Alfons Nossol Archbishop of Opole, Silesia, Alfons Nossol, is among the most famous advocates of ecumenism and reconciliation in Poland. The list of his works and achievements is too extensive to be presented, but it is worth menti- oning that he was the founder of the Ecumenical Institute at the Catholic University of Lublin, the first such institution in Poland. Having been born and grown up on the borderline between Poland, Germany and Czechia, he had experienced cultural and linguistic diversi- ty as something natural. As a young vicar, he observed a post-war turmoil, departures of Germans and the arrival of the Polish population resettled from the Soviet Union. About the significance of his homeland, he con- fessed that: My life in Upper Silesia shaped me. Here, it was always extremely important to distinguish between otherness and foreignness. In Silesia, we enriched ourselves with this otherness. We benefi- ted from the fact that many people from the Eastern borderlands came to Silesia with their own mentality, which was emotional and different from the more rational Western mentality. Silesia has always been a region of three cultures: Czech, Polish, and German. This is an extremely valuable asset. We tried to understand people in their otherness, and they felt as if they were in their own castle: understood, authentic, sincere, and only in this way could they achieve even greater humanisation, that is, greater happiness. This mutual complementarity essentially brings people closer together, but also leads to a personal deepening of the mystery of God. In order to accept otherness as a value, one must be open to the diversity and multidimensionality of human culture, thinking, and attitudes. We cannot reduce everything to a single path. What kind 88 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC of God would it be if He were only accessible in a single line? (2018) However, his approach to professional ecumenism began at the Catholic University of Lublin. When attending a doctoral course in Theology, he was asked by the then Rector of the University, Rev. Wincenty Granat, to ela- borate on the Protestant position on given areas of the Dogmatics treatise (Granat was then preparing his famous handbook on Catholic Dogmatics and decided to include Protestant and Orthodox perspectives). Nossol got in touch with Protestant theologians from Western Germany and thereby initiated a more intensive cooperation with them, including their travel to Poland. However, such arrivals were extremely difficult to organise at the turn of the 1950s and 1960s. As a place where a network of theological friendships transcended national and confessional borders, the Catholic University of Lublin became one of the first steps toward reconciliation between Poland and Germany. As mentioned earlier, 1965 was a groundbreaking year in the history of this reconciliation, when Ostmemorandum and Reconciliation letter were issu- ed. Nossol, being ‘inside ’ this exchange of acts, said: The Reconciliation letter of 1965 was preceded by the Memorandum of the Evangelical Church in Germany, which emp- hasised that Germany must finally officially recognise the borders on the Oder and Neisse rivers. It also contributed significantly to the subsequent exchange of letters between Roman Catholic bishops from Poland and Germany. West Germany did not want to recognise the border on the Oder and Neisse rivers politically, leaving it to a peace agreement, and so the Polish side continued to wait. The Evangelical Church in Germany clearly emphasised in its Memorandum that this was the most concrete way to achieve mutual rapprochement. Therefore, the Catholic Church wanted, in a sense, to help settle this international issue of definitively esta- blishing the western border, leading to stable peace. Here, howe- ver, the Polish episcopate miscalculated somewhat, because the German Catholic episcopate was not so decisive, saying that they should not interfere in politics and that it was not their business. 89 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE It was considered that it was necessary to wait for a peace confe- rence to settle the matter. (2018) When he began his duties as a bishop of Opole and a professor at the Catholic University of Lublin, for years Nossol worked patiently and tire- lessly for reconciliation between Poland and Germany, as well as for de- veloping ecumenical relationships. Often his labour was not understood and was harshly criticised, not only by the communist authorities, but even by some more conservative Polish bishops. His professional life aboun- ded with unexpected moments when his decisions impacted the history of global ecumenism, such as an acute reaction of Protestant delegates to the announcement of the Declaration Dominus Iesus. I remember what happened when the Declaration was published. For 17 years, I was a member of the Commission for Dialogue with Lutherans. At that time, we had a plenary session near Rome. When the news of its publication reached the Lutherans, they decided that the dialogue should be suspended. Together with Cardinal Walter Kasper, who was the chairman of this body before me, be- fore he became the head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, we tried to convince them to first look at the text of the declaration together. At the time, there was a danger that if we began to interpret some of its provisions in a restrictive manner, ecumenism could face a difficult future. Yet, it was not easy. Cardinal Walter Kasper took a rather general approach to the issue and was met with outrage from the Lutherans, who felt that he was dictating terms to them. I tried to approach the problem from a broader perspective and give it a more anthropo- logical focus: auf den Einzelnen bringen. My assumption was that conflict would lead nowhere and that we had to stop our brothers at all costs! I suggested that we calmly analyse the text of the decla- ration together, and then, if the Lutheran part of the commission decided to leave, we would interrupt the proceedings. I undertook to discuss the most contentious and sensitive issues with Cardinal Ratzinger, whom I have known for many years. Thus, we managed to cool down the emotions somewhat. (Nossol 2018) 90 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC The twilight of communism in Poland and the first years after the political change marked a period of profound social transformation. The Polish society experienced ideological pluralism, often leading to relativist chaos on the one hand, and increasing economic and social exclusion on the other. In his diocese, in which the largest population of people of German origin lived, Nossol has built the Church socially and ecumenically invol- ved and respecting national identities. He also consequently advocated for reconciliation among Poles and Germans. He again found himself in big politics in 1989 in Krzyżowa (Kreisau) in Lower Silesia, a place symbolic in the history of German resistance against the Nazis, when the Reconciliation Mass was celebrated, in which the then German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and the Polish Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki parti- cipated. During the Mass, both politicians shook their hands when the celebrant said the traditional formula »give each other the sign of peace«. It was another sign of reconciliation, facilitating difficult discussions befo- re the German reunification in 1990. When recalling this day, Nossol said: The tension in Krzyżowa was palpable. A distinguished elderly gentleman approached me and suggested that I omit the litur- gical sign of peace so as not to put Prime Minister Mazowiecki or Chancellor Kohl in an awkward situation. It was then that I re- alised the power of this gesture. I replied that it was part of the liturgy and could not be omitted. There was another attempt by a young man, well-trained in philosophy, who stated that every rule has exceptions. I replied that he could contact the Holy See and possibly ask for permission to apply an exception. He laughed a little diabolically and walked away. There was no exception, but there was blessed restraint. I saw the event in Krzyżowa as a unique opportunity in the pro- cess of Polish-German reconciliation. I thought to myself: occasio nobis data est. There is an opportunity to shake hands, to enga- ge in dialogue, to break down stereotypes and mounting mutual prejudices. It was also a good opportunity to help the inhabitants of Silesia in some way, to call for equal opportunities for them and respect for their cultural and confessional diversity. At the time, I was unable to grasp all this so clearly. I know one thing: ecume- nism helped me in this matter and opened me up to a greater 91 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE and broader concept of humanity, without ideological or political constraints. I knew it would not be easy. The night after Krzyżowa, a message appeared in large letters on the bishop’s curia: »Nossol to Berlin – get out!« I thought, »Let it be«, but worse still, it was also written on the church wall in my hometown. My loved ones suffe- red, and that was more painful. And then someone added to these inscriptions: »German medicine for Polish hospitals.« Sometimes I think that’s how it has to be. You can’t treat everything so deadly seriously, because then you won’t get much done. (2018) Focusing on the ecumenical impact on reconciliation among nations, this short summary of the unpublished interview with the archbishop can be concluded with his ecumenical testament about the ultimate purpose of Christianity. It also reflects the whole life of the Silesian bishop for whom dialogue and reconciliation have been an inherent commitment of the Christian mission to the world: Christianity, by its very nature, should integrate. It should bring all people together, regardless of their religious beliefs or national and social affiliations. After all, we all have the same anthropological goal: to permanently enrich the human being internally. And this happens when we open ourselves to transcendence. And the goal of all authentic transcendence is, sooner or later, God. I would like to refer to the thought of John Paul II from his programmatic encyc- lical Redemptor hominis, that the shortest path to God for a human being is another human being, every human being. (Nossol 2018) 4.2 Halina Bortowska For Halina Bortnowska, the next interviewed ecumenist, reconciliation with Germans was not merely an additional activity stemming from the ecumenical mission; rather, it was an existential source of her ecume- nical involvement. A renowned Polish intellectual, long-time journalist of Tygodnik Powszechny and Znak, two of the most important centres of an independent thought in communist Poland, an Observer in the Second Vatican Council and in the General Assemblies of the World Council of Churches, Bortnowska critically and creatively reported the 92 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC situation in the Polish society and Christianity, striving steadfastly for the Church more open to the challenges of modernity and more ecumenical. My life is difficult to describe because it is very chaotic. Today, I find it difficult to follow these paths because it all happened somewhat by accident. One of the beginnings of my ecumenical awareness and a very lasting pillar was the feeling that cooperation betwe- en two countries, Poland and the GDR, was necessary. I do not promote the term ‘Iron Curtain’, even though it was widely used at the time, because I am aware of how porous it was and how well we managed to organise things in spite of the ‘curtain’, or simply by ignoring it. This is even a better term, because ‘in spite of’ would mean that we were fighting something, and we were merely trying to do our job. This involved lively contact with East Germans at a time when Poland was full of contempt for that country. The exis- tence of the curtain could have fostered mistrust that those who had crossed it had paid for it in some way. Personal acquaintance was very important, as it enabled people to overcome this mistrust. When navigating this ecumenical network, or being at its main hubs, it was always about getting to know people so that we could trust each other, gain something from it, and be sure that nothing unnecessary would be taken away, that we could be trusted, and we could trust others. (Bortnowska 2018) Having been deported as a child to Germany during World War II, she very early met with the German language and ambivalence of the attitudes in the German society. Despite the cruelty of the war, she had never hated the Germans; on the contrary, she accentuated good memories from this time: It helped me that I met people who demonstrated a ‘disarming’ attitude. Germans, as well as Poles in Germany, forced labourers had been there for a long time, had settled in and were particularly concerned about the fate of children. After returning to Poland, I could only dream of such good food as there. Our guardian, a gar- dener from a tannery, was able to bring us grapes. And he deman- ded underwear, shoes, and warm clothes for us from the Germans, because we had nothing. The kindness of people, including the 93 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE Germans, whom I met, helped me a lot. The Germans, who were hungry themselves because times were very hard then, would throw us a piece of bread or a tomato wrapped in paper through the fence, and their behaviour meant a lot to us. When we went to town, someone gave us a bread card, and the priest in the church told them to make room for us. We were ashamed to sit down, lest they catch lice from us, but the priest ordered it, so they made a decent place for us. (Bortnowska 2018) Studying philosophy in the best Polish universities (such as in Toruń and Lublin, where she met Karol Wojtyła, later Pope John Paul II), and abroad, in the Netherlands, knowing the most influential Catholic intellectuals of that time, an excellent fluency in several languages, all that helped her to become an efficient ecumenical ‘influencer ’ of that time. Her ecume- nical commitment overlapped, however, with an intensive activity for the sake of reconciliation. Actually, her personal story illustrated how inter- confessional and ecumenical bodies have contributed to building bridges among earlier hostile nations. When acting ecumenically, she met with people and circles that went down in the history of the resistance against communist regimes in Europe and sought rapprochement among nations and societies. She said: The topic of reconciliation appeared on the initiative of Germans, because our primary contact was the Action Reconciliation Service for Peace (Aktion Sühnezeichen Friedensdienste), but we only took it seriously after some time. At first, they wrote us tender letters in German, and no one responded to them. Not even in Tygodnik Powszechny. When they tried to write to us in Polish, it bore fruit. We started corresponding with them, then they appeared in per- son, and we became very good friends. The centre was Berlin, and then, for example, Merseburg. Eastern Germany became one of my small homelands, and I was involved in very lively contacts with this country. My presence in that environment was connected to the fact that we had entered into an entire ecumenical network covering parts of Germany, and were also in direct contact with the World Council of Churches. We were partners there and participa- ted in the programs designed there. The people from there had the main initiative, although the WCC also played a part, because one 94 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC of its prominent leaders, Thomas Wieser, was appointed curator of what was beginning to happen between Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary. We had small but quite significant groups of partners from these countries, and we organised mee- tings using what and where we were allowed to. In Poland, it was possible to arrange meetings without telling anyone, by making arrangements with a farmer’s wife, who was rewarded with work in the meadow somewhere in the Tatra mountains. In Prague, it was possible to use their network, a fairly energetic structure compo- sed of highly educated and very dedicated people, most of whom were associated with Charta 77. It was very closely related to what continues to this day as a semi-official Catholic Church in the Czech Republic. The Czech Brethren also participated in our ecumenical group and work ; and everything was rather a free Church, some of whose members had spent several years in prison. To this day, I try to find out what is going on there, and so far, they do not wish to talk about it. We met for a few years, and we feel that we have never really stopped being connected to these people with whom we shaped our lives and our future. (2018) This excerpt from the interview, when recalling the names of the well- -known movements and institutions and simultaneously tying them with ordinary, weekday details, tells much about the scope of overlapping ecumenical involvement and a quest for reconciliation. Hanna Bortnowska (like Alfons Nossol, and many others who could not be referred to in this article due to its limits) were the living example and witness of such a spi- ritual, intellectual and existential permeation. To conclude, it would be best to recall Bortnowska’s confession about ecumenism: I experience the question of ecumenism a bit like drivers do. Anyone who has driven a small Fiat and then switches to a bus feels strange, as if they had a much larger body and had to fit into the bus. We had the feeling that our Christianity had taken on such a form that we must always try to fit it in its entirety. It is a feeling that this is not a relationship between the first and the second, but that this is what existence is all about. This relationship is much 95 Unity and Dialogue 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 ECUMENICAL LESSONS OF HISTORY: THE POLISH EXAMPLE simpler, deeper, and more natural than any agreement. It is a com- pletely different experience of ecumenism than treating it as in- ter-church negotiations. We had no right to conduct them; they were always interpersonal matters, although we used inter-church agreements because they are a kind of basis. (2018) Conclusion From its outset, the ecumenical movement struggled with a problem of memories, particularly concerning collective memories of nations. The first ecumenical gatherings had to come through over the wounds of remembrance of people who belonged to different, and often hostile, nations. Nevertheless, this early experience had helped to elaborate tea- ching that later became a theological vaccine for the following decades of ecumenical strivings. Of course, ecumenism still needs this vaccine, since existential and spiritual clashes of fidelity to Jesus’s call »may they all be one« and loyalty to national identity will certainly happen. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and its interconfessional aftermath prove this obser- vation well. However, ecumenism is called to go beyond national and historical par- ticularities, somehow by default. Presented above are excerpts from the ecumenical theory as well as ecumenical witnesses recorded in the in- terviews, demonstrating the often prophetic role played by ecumenical leaders, by people who were not afraid to sacrifice their loyalty to the nation for the sake of ecumenical purposes. Sometimes, their decision was manifested by small gestures and words; other times, by more spectacular appearances. However, irrespective of this, they have created an ecumeni- cal paradigm that discerns that the quest for Christian unity offers efficient (maybe the most efficient) methods, concepts, and motivations for the reconciliation of nations. | No new data were created or analysed in support of this research. Za podporo tej raziskavi niso bili ustvarjeni ali analizirani nobeni novi podatki. 96 Edinost in dialog 80 (2025) 2: 75–96 PIOTR KOPIEC References Bock, Paul. 1974. In Search for a Responsible World Society. The Social Teaching of the World Council of Churches. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press. Bortnowska, Halina. 2018. Personal commu- nication. 11. 12. Called to be Together to Be Peace-makers: Report of the International Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Mennonite World Conference. 2007. In: Jeffrey Gros, Thomas F. Best, Lorerei F. Fuchs, eds. Growth in Agreement III. International Dialogue Texts and Agreed Statements 1998–2005. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Gastpary, Waldemar. 1978. Protestantyzm w Polsce w dobie dwóch wojen świ- atowych 1914–1939. Warszawa: Chrześcijańska Akademia Teologiczna. Glaeser, Zygfryd. 2016. Początki i rozwój ruchu ekumenicznego w Polsce. In: Józef Budniak, ed. Encyklopedia polski- ego ekumenizmu 1964–2014. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Papieskiego Jana Pawła II. Gurney, Robin, and Luca M. Negro. 2009. CEC at 50: A Brief and Incomplete History of the Conference of European Churches. Geneva: Conference of European Churches. Hugh, Lynn H. 1962. The Conference at Stockholm. In: Harold E. Fey and Margaret Frakes, eds. The Christian Century Reader. New York: Association Press. Kopiec, Piotr. 2022. Propheticness of the ecumenical social thought: the »Life and Work« Oxford Conference about the state and economic order. Studia Oecumenica 22: 7–21. Muszyński, Henryk. 2016. Przebaczenie i pojednanie między Polską i Niemcami jako dar i zadanie: W 50 lat po wy- mianie listów biskupów polskich i niemieckich. Pedagogia Christiana 1: 139–162. Noll, Rüdiger, and Stefan Vesper. 1998. Reconciliation: Gift of God and Source of New Life: Documents from the Second European Ecumenical Assembly in Graz. Graz: Council of European Bishops’ Conferences. Nossol, Alfons. 2018. Personal communicati- on. 2. 7. Paton, David M. 1976, Breaking Barriers: Nairobi 1975. The Official Report of the Fifth Assembly of the World Council of Churches, Nairobi, 23 November–10 December, 1975. London: SPCK. Reischle, Max. 1901. Historische und do- gmatische Methode der Theologie. Theologische Rundschau 4/7: 261–275. Sonea, Cristian-Sebastian. 2023. Ecumenism as Hope: The Prophetic Role and the Eschatological Function of the Church. Religions 14: e1225. Https://doi.org/10.3390/ rel14101225. Visser’t Hooft, Willem A. 1949. The First Assembly of the World Council of Churches held in Amsterdam, August 22nd to September 4th 1948. London: SCM Press. World Council of Churches. 2016. Called to Dialogue: Interreligious and Intra- Christian Dialogue in Ecumenical Conversation. Geneva: WCC Publications. Żurek, Sławomir Jacek, ed. 2021. Ludzie dialo- gu i ekumenizmu. Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL.