Comment (27)
Email
Print
del.icio.us
Technorati
diggIs inter-faith dialogue faltering?
The culture wars are bad enough. Now the Vatican says that Protestant churches aren't real churches. What's going on?
"If it isn’t Roman Catholic then it’s not a proper Church, Pope tells Christians" was the provocative headline for a front-page article in the London Times last month. The Vatican had just released a brief but meaty document to clarify what it regarded as mistaken views on interfaith dialogue.
The reaction was predictable. Protestant spokesmen welcomed Vatican honesty while criticising its "lust for power". Comments from the pews came thick and fast. "The Babylonian mystery religion is live and well in Papal Rome," wrote a Canadian. It was "self-serving exclusivism by the Pope," according to a reader in Seattle and "offensive and insincere" in the eyes of a reader in Melbourne.
Is Pope Benedict trying to revive the almost forgotten days of a Cold War of bigotry and intolerance between Catholics and Protestants? A closer reading of the 16-page document suggests that this is not the case at all. Let me explain.
When I was brought up I was taught that when saying in the Creed: "I believe (...) in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church" I was saying that I believed that this Church exists and that it is to be found in "the Catholic Church", which we understood as identical to "the Roman Catholic Church". My world was made up of Catholics (members of this one Church) and Protestants (who might be very good but were not members of the Church). We prayed for their conversion and were very happy when we heard of people – of whom there were many – who had asked to join the Church.
After the Second Vatican Council, especially perhaps in its immediate aftermath, things became more complex. It became unfashionable in the Catholic media to promote conversions. The buzz word was "ecumenism", often presented as dialogue between Christian communities without any real search for unity. What was sought was understanding, perhaps especially on the part of us Catholics: we had to learn to see all the good things which Protestants had. I remember my surprise at hearing of a German theologian actively dissuading a Protestant from becoming a Catholic, on the theory that it was better for him to remain (at least for the time being) a Protestant.
In part this change was justified by a tiny change in wording in a document from the Second Vatican Council. Before 1964, Catholics used to say that the Church founded by Jesus Christ is the Catholic Church. After 1964, they said that it subsists in the Catholic Church. Tiny? Yes. Momentous? Most emphatically. Almost immediately the change was interpreted as a sign that the Catholic Church was retreating from its claim that it was the authentic heir of Christ's legacy of doctrine and morals.
This was not true. All of the post-Vatican II popes have constantly reaffirmed the unique status of the Catholic Church. Why then had the phrase "subsists in" been adopted if it gave rise to such widespread misinterpretations?
We have to remember that Vatican II aimed, among other things, to be a Council open to the world and also, therefore, to Christians of other denominations. Anyone with a minimum of intelligence must recognise that many elements of Christianity are clearly to be found outside the strict limits of the visible Roman Church. The Council decided that it was good to state this publicly. This decision opened the door to cordial dialogue with those other communions.
Has this been fruitful? I think the answer is Yes. It has helped Catholics to open up to the riches of the Orthodox Churches and also to a better realisation that many Protestants are in good faith, have a great appreciation for much of Christ’s teaching and share many things with Catholics. In my own case, I remember discovering that 17th Century Anglicans had made extensive use of the works of mystics like St Teresa and St John of the Cross. And practical advances, like being welcomed, as a priest, to Anglican cathedrals; the introduction of Catholics to Anglican and Methodist hymns; the beautiful words of the Church of England marriage rite, and so on. Non-Catholics, for their part, have become much more willing to recognise the Pope as a world spiritual leader.
But there is also a down side. Seeing the good in other denominations (a good thing) has often led Catholics to think "we are all much the same" (which may be true, inasmuch as we are all sinners; but the difference, for Catholics, is that they believe they belong to a Church which is holy in spite of being made up of sinners) and then to adopt less demanding ways of behaviour of some non-Catholics (infrequent attendance at Church; acceptance of divorce and abortion and so on.).
This is one reason why Pope Benedict has asked his theologians (as did Pope John Paul II before him) to reiterate that the teaching about the nature of the Catholic Church has not changed. The Pope sees this not as a "put down" to non-Catholic Christians, but a stimulus. We still believe wholeheartedly in the Church, and that Christ has not failed. His Church still is on earth; still subsists.
For Protestants (and indeed for Orthodox), if they come round to admitting that Rome is not Babylon but a force for good, it means that they have "out there" a group of people who still carry the banner of the true Church, and the world is not confined to Christians groping around for unity and wondering whether Christ’s foundation has managed to survive.
Some consequences of the formulation "subsists in" are that the term "Church" (which previously was used by the Roman Catholic Church almost exclusively as referring to herself) can now be used, in a narrower sense, of those portions of the Church (including those not in full communion with Rome) which retain the Apostolic succession (the episcopate and with all the powers deriving from it).
Although the document says that the denominations resulting from the Protestant reformation cannot be deemed Churches from the point of view of Catholic doctrine, it is simply stating a logical consequence of their respective doctrines. Their notion of "Church" is different from the Catholic notion. Catholics respectfully recognise that Protestants freely decided in the 16th Century that the Catholic notions of priesthood and of the visible Church had no Biblical justification.
Finally, could we have saved ourselves a lot of trouble by not getting involved in what some see as a hornet’s nest with the phrase "subsist in"? This is a tenable opinion. Pope Benedict himself is reported as saying this summer that back in the days of the Second Vatican Council the enthusiasm of those involved was such that they didn’t realise that, as well as all the positive things emerging from the Council documents, there would also be a good number of negative ones.
However, we should not underestimate the good that has come from the ecumenical contacts of the last 40 years. The trust that Catholics have in the Popes should surely lead them to the conclusion that the best course is to keep hold of all the advantages flowing from Vatican II while remembering that what was taught before it remains true today. The two are not opposed and can go ahead together.
Father Andrew Byrne is a Catholic priest in London
I can’t help but be reminded of the scene in the gospels in which the disciples tell Jesus that they found people casting out demons in his name and forbade them from doing it because they were not one of their number. Jesus rebuked them reminding them that no one who is for him can be against him. As one baptised in infancy into the Catholic Church more out of convention than conviction, I discovered an adult Catholic Christian faith in no small measure through the witness of evangelical Protestants. We mustn’t lose sight of the “visible” and “invisible” church. Rightly or wrongly, I perceive the fullness of Christian revelation in the so-called Roman Catholic Church, which thus comprises the “visible” Church, as I understand it. I would be loath to pretend that my response to this revelation is in any way superior to that of my Protestant and Orthodox brothers and sisters (the “invisible” Church if you will). Many (perhaps most!) may well be far more closely joined to Jesus than I am. In the end, we have to join in Jesus’ prayer that we all be one. At the same time, we must pray that none of us thereby sacrifices truths we hold precious thereby diminishing the integrity of our response to Jesus’ call. After all, Martin Luther did say, “Here I stand – I can do no other.” I am sure Jesus responded to him with a love surpassing all understanding.
Let us see in what context the Pope is speaking. OFten we take a line out of a document and discuss on it out of context.
HAs any of you read the complete document? If not, it is not justified to comment in a manner we are. If you have read it, well and good. Go on and comment, but see that your comments don’t in more ways than one begin a process of destroying the ecumenism that has been building up already among us Christians and Catholics since 1965....
Human-made comments are human. We need to understad that. If the Spirit is saying something through these comments, it will become clearer sooner or later, or else it will die down.
We take the example of the time when the Jewish leaders were persecuting the Christians and one of the Wiser of them said, let us be careful, or we will find ourselves fighting against God itself!!
What is of God will last forever, in security and without fear.
Carolina
The Pope has stated it,and you have accepted his comments. That’s great, I have no desire to debate any of your response - but now what?
You are strong in your faith. That wounderful, now, how do you respond? Have you followed the call of John Paul II. Are you involved in the new evangelization? Are you reaching out to a world so much in need of Christ.
We need to go beyond a discusion of who has the best ‘lilly pad’ and who is the best frog, and work against our common foe.
I am reminded of the film Gladiator. We are faced with an unkown and powerful force behind the door. The gladiator rallied all others to work together - and they won!
You say that the Church will survive - and I believe that as well. However, what about the people; the poor, the humble, the little ones - the beloved of God - who are falling to the tactics of the enemy. Are you as active in fighting the enemy as you are strong in defending your Church?
Faith without works is dead.
What a ridiculous & deceptive claim Andrew Bryne & the other writers make for the Roman Catholic Church. It is false & misleading to claim that it is the church that Jesus established as His representative on earth. It is a cult that worships a man - the pope - according to him the same status & authority as the Lord. We are commanded to worship no other before the one God almighty, to pray to no other but the Holy & true Lord & that salvation is through no other intermediary but the Lord Jesus Christ but the catholic church ignores this & promulgates it’s own dogma of an infallible man in an infallible church. Now that’s heresy! So, rather than being “The Church” presenting “The Truth” it is leading precious souls from the “Real Truth” to what the apostle Paul called “another gospel” & we were commanded to flee from it!
Thank you Fr. Andrew Byrne:
And to all who do not understand, specially Catholics (I am so sad to see some of the comments ) Jesus came to give us the Truth..."and you will know the truth and the truth will set you free” He came to establish a Church too” a Church that would be always and forever guided by the Holy Spirit..."I am with you always” a church that would stand through the ages, as Jesus promised in Matthew 16:18-19 “the gates of hell will not prevail against my church !” Our beloved Catholic Church is that Church… anyone with some interest prayer and an open heart can find that out....and the Bible says this church is “...the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pilar and foundation of truth”.... Our beloved Pope Benedict has not said nothing new....and did not say anything that was not true. Catholics please go to a good RCIA course...be humble read the BIBLE and you will rejoice to know the gift you have...a gift that is for all. We do protestants no favours if we do not share the truth and extend an invitation....Jesus said himself in Luke 10:16 “He who hears you hears me and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects the one who sent me” The Catholic Church is the Church our Lord established. STUDY SCOTT HAHN’s books and buy and study DAVID B. CURRIE"S “Born Fundamentalist Born Again Catholic” it is ignorance that makes many not appreciate the Church. May God have mercy on you. Carolina P.
Jesus prayed that we`might all be one.
Perhaps because He knew what a mess we would make of things, and while we argue among ourseles, the ancient enemy makes advances on all sides and society slips into neo paganism.
We are like bull frogs, trying to control our own little puddles of water, while evaporation is slowly bring a pox on all our houses.
The solution, simple. We need to pay a little more attention to the prayer of Jesus - and less about ourselves. We need prayer, and a recognition that we face a common deadly foe.
Some of the comments here are examples of how ecumenism is very limited. Unity among all Christians, as desirable as it is, is unrealistic and the CDF document acknowledges that as its presupposition. All we can hope from ecumenism is understanding and respect of other faiths. To achieve unity, dogmas have to be abandoned, and that, at least for Roman Catholics and the Orthodox is impossible. I suspect that is also the case with the ecclesial communities, although one wonders, because so many of their beliefs are constantly in flux. If unity is to be achieved, it is most likely to be between the Roman Catholics and the Orthodox, both of which remain fairly untainted by the excesses of Enlightenment thinking.
As for unity within the Roman Catholic Church, that is a real issue. To claim that the Roman Catholic Church does not hold all the Truth puts the claimant outside the Catholic Church. If one would take the time to read the Vatican II texts, not in inaccurate translation, but in the official Latin, one would see how far certain segments of the Church particularly in the so called “developed” nations, that is, the so called “liberals” or “progressives”, have drifted from Vatican II teachings, often justifying themselves “in the spirit of Vatican II”, whatever that means, and indeed, it probably means nothing. It is fortunate that Benedict has the acumen and ability to begin a reform of the reform.
What the Bishop of Rome says about matters not to do with the Roman Catholic Church [Anglican orders, par exemple],
Mel Gibson’s “controversial” film, the DaVinci Code etc. etc. etc.: have nothing to do with anyone’s salvation.
We should get back to faith, hope and love, eh?
Charles Nixon
Thank you, Fr Andrew. Could I add something I recall from Pope John Paul II (I quote from memory) about members (faithful) of the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christians: “what unites us is more important than what divides us” (e g I think he referred to the sacrament of Baptism). I found that phrase very helpful (as a Catholic). The Church is a mystery, in the sense that it goes beyond our understanding, whilst not being opposed to it; and it is something about which we need study and to pray, asking the Holy Spirit to help us grow in all the virtues we (all of us Christians) need to grow in holiness and in presenting the Church to all our brother (and sister) fellow men (dare I use that word including men and women!).
Ecumenism is a very wide subject and in my article I was principally addressing the question of what the Catholic Church means when she uses the words “subsists in” with regards to herself and the Church which Christ founded. For this we need to go to the Church’s teaching authority. As the Vatican II decree on ecumenism states (I use Flannery’s translation) “In the Catholic Church, according to Catholic belief, its authentic teaching office has a special place in expounding and preaching the written word of God” (Decree “Unitatis redintegratio” 21c). This refers directly to scripture but can be applied to all aspects of Catholic doctrine. It is natural, and right, for Catholics to look to Rome for true teaching regarding what we have to believe. The Church is totally committed to ecumenism, but that also means that, out of loyalty and respect for the other parties involved, we should tell them the truth about ourselves.
I also tried to say in my piece that our claiming to be “the Church” is in fact a good thing for those who are not Catholics (or not yet so). We believe that the truth is here and can be found. Because if the Catholic Church did not make that claim, no other Christian community now does and we would be left with the unfortunate situation where no Christians claim to have the truth, and the truth would not be found anywhere. This is the tenet of relativism and Pope Benedict courageously is teaching that relativism is extremely harmful for the human race. Once the truth is found somewhere then others can be confident that they too have it to a greater or lesser extent, while at the same time admitting (as every individual Catholic admits – not the Church herself) that we have not got the whole truth and need to constantly and humbly keep on learning.
I consider the pope’s pronouncement a retrograde step which will harm the ecumenism which was slowly being built up. I believe that while we have truth, we (Catholics) do not have all the truth. I am also of the opinion that Vatican 2 denyers might well be heretics and that includes the pope. Recently I spoke to a Catholic, very active in our parish who said that a lot of people don’t like everything that came from Vatican 2. He was shocked when I suggested that, this was a Council, binding on all Catholics and his stance could well be heresy.
Because the Bishop of Rome says thus and so does not make it so . . . Fr. Charles Nixon
Anglican Priest
Page 2 of 2 : < 1 2