Ecumenism in the Pacific: Are We Still Learning to Be One?
Some Sunday thoughts on Christian unity, our Pacific histories, and the changing meaning of ecumenism.
Sunday, 15 November 2026 | Christchurch, Aotearoa New Zealand
Today, Methodist and Wesleyan churches around the world are turning their attention to ecumenism in the Pacific and what it means for our understanding of Christian unity.
For us as Pacific peoples, this conversation is particularly meaningful. Christianity has become deeply woven into the fabric of our societies, shaping our histories, cultures, identities and relationships across generations. From the Wesleyan traditions of Tonga and Fiji to the Congregational heritage of Sāmoa and the many other Christian traditions throughout Oceania, our churches have long been places where faith, culture and community life meet. Yet, while the Gospel has brought our peoples together, the history of Christianity in the Pacific also reminds us that our journey has not always been one of unity.
As I write this, my flight has just landed at Christchurch Airport. I am here for the NZARE Conference, but with a little time before heading there, my thoughts have turned to today's theme. Coming from a Tongan Wesleyan tradition, I find myself wondering how our Pacific forebears understood Christian unity, particularly when the Gospel they embraced arrived through different missionary traditions, each carrying its own theological convictions, institutional structures and historical divisions.
Our Pacific Christian journey: Unity and division
In Tonga, for example, Christianity has been closely connected to the development of our nation, the monarchy and the spiritual lives of our kāinga. Yet the division within the Wesleyan Church in 1885, and the subsequent efforts towards reunification, remind us that our Christian history has also been shaped by disagreements over leadership, authority, identity and belonging.
Other Pacific communities have experienced similar tensions, although within their own distinctive historical and cultural circumstances. What interests me is that our ancestors did not encounter Christianity without already possessing deeply established ways of understanding relationships, community and belonging.
In Tonga, concepts such as vā, tauhi vā, kāinga, lotu and fonua continue to shape our responsibilities towards one another. Across the Pacific, other Indigenous understandings of relationality, reciprocity and collective wellbeing have similarly influenced how Christian faith is understood and practised. These cultural foundations raise an interesting question: Does Christian unity simply mean belonging to the same Church or agreeing on the same doctrines, or does it also require us to nurture the relationships through which our shared faith becomes visible?
Perhaps our Pacific ways of knowing, being and relating offer something important to this conversation.
When ecumenism found its Pacific voice
The modern ecumenical movement emerged from a desire to overcome divisions among Christian churches and strengthen their common witness to the Gospel.
In the Pacific, however, the movement developed within a particular historical context. Our churches were navigating the legacies of missionary Christianity, colonial influence, emerging political independence and the growing desire for Indigenous leadership. The gathering of Pacific church representatives at Mālua, Sāmoa, in 1961, followed by the formal establishment of the Pacific Conference of Churches in 1966, marked an important moment in this journey.
Pacific church leaders increasingly recognised that Christian unity was not simply about bringing different denominations together. It was also about enabling Pacific Christians to shape their own theological understandings and respond collectively to the realities affecting their peoples.
Over subsequent decades, the ecumenical movement expanded its concerns to include cultural identity, Indigenous self-determination, nuclear testing, social justice, climate change and the wellbeing of Pacific communities. These developments have given Pacific ecumenism a distinctive character, one that connects Christian unity with our relationships, our collective responsibilities and the lands and oceans to which we belong.
But have we changed our understanding of ecumenism?
This is where my thoughts have settled this morning. When ecumenism first emerged as an organised modern movement, one of its central concerns was the division of the Christian Church. The prayer of Jesus in John 17:21, ‘that they may all be one’, provided a powerful theological foundation for bringing Christians into deeper fellowship.
Today, particularly within our Pacific context, ecumenism seems to carry a much broader meaning. We speak about the Pasifika Household of God, relationality, ecological justice, decolonisation, cultural identity and the collective wellbeing of our communities. These are important concerns. Indeed, I believe our Pacific perspectives have much to contribute to the wider Christian understanding of what it means to live faithfully together.
Yet I also wonder whether, in embracing these wider responsibilities, we may have gradually shifted our attention away from some of the theological questions that first brought the churches together. Are we still genuinely seeking unity among Christians, or have we become more comfortable cooperating on social issues while leaving our denominational divisions largely untouched?
And when we speak of the Household of God, are we expressing a deeper understanding of the unity for which Christ prayed, or are we beginning to redefine ecumenism in ways that deserve further theological consideration?
I do not necessarily see these as competing possibilities. Rather, they invite us to examine what we have gained, what we may have overlooked, and what remains essential to our Christian calling.
Perhaps our Pacific relational wisdom has something to offer
One possibility that interests me is how our Indigenous understandings of relationships might help us reconsider Christian unity. For example, within our Tongan understanding of tauhi vā, relationships are not sustained simply because people belong to the same family or community. They require ongoing attention, respect, reciprocity and responsibility.
Could we understand ecumenism in a similar way?
Perhaps Christian unity is not simply an institutional achievement, but an ongoing relational commitment. It requires us to recognise one another, acknowledge our differences, repair broken relationships and remain accountable to the faith we share.
This does not mean that theological differences are unimportant. Nor does it mean that our cultural values should replace the theological foundations of Christianity. Rather, it suggests that our Pacific ways of knowing, being and relating might offer meaningful insights into how the unity of the Church can be lived, nurtured and sustained.
I would love to hear your thoughts
These are simply some thoughts that have occupied my mind this Sunday morning while making my way to the Conference. I certainly do not claim to have all the answers, and I recognise that our Pacific Christian experiences are far from uniform. Perhaps those of you from Tonga, Sāmoa, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Kiribati, Tuvalu and other Pacific communities, including those of us living in the diaspora, might see these questions differently.
I would particularly welcome your thoughts on a few questions:
1. How do you understand ecumenism within your own Pacific cultural and Christian context? Has that understanding changed across generations?
2. Have our Pacific values and relational traditions strengthened the ecumenical movement? What might our Indigenous understandings contribute to the wider Church?
3. Has ecumenism moved too far from its original concern for Christian unity, or have its wider social, cultural and ecological responsibilities helped us understand that unity more deeply?
4. What should the future of ecumenism look like for our Pacific churches, particularly for younger generations growing up across our islands and diaspora communities?
I am particularly interested in hearing from fellow ministers, theologians, church leaders, educators, young people and members of our Pacific Christian communities. Different perspectives, including those that challenge my own thinking, are most welcome. For me, the question is not simply whether ecumenism has changed. Change is inevitable as our churches encounter new realities and responsibilities.
The more important question is whether these changes continue to bring us closer to the unity for which Christ prayed. Perhaps the future of ecumenism in the Pacific lies not only in what our churches can accomplish together, but also in how faithfully we learn to belong to one another in Christ.
I would value your perspectives. Let us continue this talanoa, learn from one another's experiences, and consider together what Christian unity might mean for our Pacific peoples today.
Mālō ʻaupito, and blessings to you all on this Sunday.