 |
 |
||||
 |
|||||
 |
||
 |
||
| Back to Archive 2000
08/06/00 The ecumenical movement and changes in the Church In Denver a couple of weeks ago, the Episcopal Church’s representatives in convention voted to enter into a formal alliance with the members of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. Without simply uniting both faith communities into one, the agreement is far reaching in the sharing of resources and the acceptance of one another’s ministers. The ELCA also has similar alliances with various Reformed (Calvinist) Churches and other Christian communities. Catholics should, I believe, be grateful to God that the painstaking conversations over many years that result in such agreements can come to visible fruition. Surely the Holy Spirit is at work in this effort in ways we don’t always understand. We should thank God and our fellow Christians that the intention to be visibly one, as Christ wills (John 17:11), is strong and continues to transform his disciples’ sense of mission today. Yet Catholics also recognize that this kind of alliance is not one we could make, because it presupposes a distinction between organization and faith that is not consistent with our profession of the faith that comes to us from the apostles. The reason why the agreement between Lutherans and Episcopalians is so noteworthy is because they officially differ over the nature and role of bishops in the Church. The bishop’s role is functional for both; but the Episcopalians, without always having the Catholic sense of Holy Orders as a sacrament, would have a more Catholic sense of the episcopacy as part of Christ’s will for his Church. Church organization, while functional, reaches also into the content of faith itself. The rejection of this sense of episcopacy, however, continues to define many Lutherans’ sense of who they are; and the Denver agreement is not acceptable to some Lutherans. The conventions that have ratified the alliance are willing to come together organizationally without healing the differences in faith that remain. There is a certain attractiveness to this venture, especially for Americans whose belief often follows practice. While Catholics should watch and pray for the Episcopalians and Lutherans in alliance, a unity of organization without unity of faith is inconsistent with our belief in “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church” (Nicene Creed). The Church’s life is shaped in each generation by the gifts given her by her Lord, and one of these is apostolic governance through the sacrament of Holy Orders. Bishops, priests and deacons enter into the constitution of the Church as founded by Christ upon the apostles. The Church is, in the words of the Second Vatican Council, a “hierarchical communion.” As a communion of the baptized, all are disciples; as a communion called together to be visibly complete around the table of the Lord, the disciples are served by those who make Christ present as head of his body. Church organization is not, therefore, simply a political or psychological or sociological concern. It is not merely functional but enters into our profession of faith. In the search for visible Christian unity, nevertheless, our understanding of the faith is scrutinized again to see if development is possible. The Catholic sense of the development of doctrine means that we do not reach back to apostolic times and regard any change thereafter as a sign of infidelity. The Lord is always with his Church, and the Holy Spirit guides us in our understanding of the faith. Sometimes development of doctrine comes about because of deepened insight into a mystery of faith. Development from within is evident, for example, in our understanding of the place of the Virgin Mary in the history of salvation. She is the mother of Jesus. In the early centuries, when the divinity of Jesus was questioned, the Church decreed that Mary is the Mother of God, since Jesus is the eternal Son of God. Developing insight into who Christ is led to deepened understanding of his mother. What is there inchoatively in the simple profession that Jesus is Lord gets spun out conceptually through the centuries until the Church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is ready to proclaim clearly and explicitly what she comes to recognize she always believed implicitly. Theologians sometimes help this process and sometimes hinder it. Thomas Aquinas was an obstacle in recognizing that Mary was conceived immaculate. A later theologian, Duns Scotus, cleared the way to our understanding of how one can be truly saved even though she is without sin. Sometimes development of doctrine comes about because of a change in extrinsic circumstances. The Church taught that it was sinful to charge interest for money loaned when money was just a substitute for something else. In capitalist economies, however, money is itself a commodity. Money produces more money and doesn’t just “stand in” for a cow or a piece of clothing. As the world moved toward market economies, the Church came to understand the changed nature of money and began to distinguish just interest from usury. The teaching on what is just in using money had to change as money itself changed. Something similar occurred as the nature of political states changed. When everyone in a state had to profess the religion of the ruler, religious liberty meant one thing. When a state declares itself in its constitution to be neutral in matters religious, religious liberty means something else. An American theologian, Jesuit Father John Courtney Murray, did the research into the nature of a “limited” state which enabled the Church to recognize a change in the political order which called for a change in teaching. The circumstances had changed, and the teaching designed to meet those circumstances developed. Development is not repudiation or contradiction. This is a very important point, it seems to me, because not only the Church but even individuals sometimes are hurt when someone questions what they have done. A critique is not always a rejection. There is, however, a consistency, including a logical and intellectual consistency, in Christian belief across the ages. In every age, the Church, if she keeps her eyes on her Lord, sometimes conforms to the customs of the people and sometimes condemns them. The very people who complain today that the Church should be silent or change her teaching on abortion because the Church should “keep up with the times” will often condemn the Church for silence on racism, at a “time” when she was conforming too well to the ethos of the age. The bishops, in particular, as successors of the apostles, have the obligation to see that the Gospel is preached in its full integrity in every age and to all people. Our understanding of the Gospel can develop from within and from circumstances; it can not simply be subject, however, to external political pressures. When that has happened, the Church has betrayed her Lord. Let us pray that developments in ecumenism will enable us to deepen our understanding of the faith. And let us pray now for Lutherans and Episcopalians as they come together in a new venture that is of great importance for all those who call Christ Lord. God bless you.
God bless you. Sincerely yours in Christ, Francis Cardinal George, OMI
|