The main theme
underlying all of the readings I have chosen is the catholicity of the Church
as the Mystical Body of Christ which manifests as the universal sacrament of
salvation. The first reading I have chosen is Reading 15 “Many Models, One
Church” by Joseph A. Komonchak. Komonchak discusses the concepts of “diversity
in unity”[1]
and “fullness in unity”[2].
He refers to Cardinal Avery Dulles five models of the church.[3] He
then discusses Yves Congar’s approach to Catholicity.[4]
Central to the understanding of the
Catholicity of the Church in this article is the quote in Lumen Gentium (#13)
“In virtue of this catholicity, the individual parts and to the whole church so
that the whole and its individual parts are enriched because all are
communicating with one another and working to achieve a fullness in unity”.[5]
Komonchak believes that true Catholicity means to be committed to ‘diversity in
unity’ which he sees is an expression of the Vatican II concept of ‘fullness of
unity’.[6]
Komonchak also refers to the
teaching of Pope John Paul II, in regards to Lumen Gentium #13, that the
Catholic Church is a communion of diverse local churches with one another.
These diverse local churches enrich and challenge one another. John Paul saw
his own role as the successor of Peter as a ministry to serve this enriching ‘diversity
in unity’.[7]
Pope John Paul II perceived that
this restoration of the ‘fullness of unity’ could not be complete without the
contribution, reunion and spirituality of the Eastern Orthodox churches.
In 'Orientale Lumen' he expresses his ardent desire for a "full
manifestation of the Church's catholicity to be restored to the world" in
the context of the reunion of the Eastern Orthodox Churches.[8] In
his encyclical ‘Ut Unam Sint’ he writes:
“In this perspective an expression which I
have frequently employed finds its deepest meaning: the Church must breathe
with her two lungs! In the first millennium of the history of Christianity,
this expression refers primarily to the relationship between Byzantium and
Rome…the vision of the full communion to be sought is that of unity in
legitimate diversity.”[9]
The Second
Vatican II was also concerned with this ‘fullness of unity’ in regards to
reconciliation of the Eastern and Western Churches. In ‘Unitatis
Redintegratio’ it states,
“The very rich liturgical and spiritual heritage of
the Eastern Churches should be known, venerated, preserved and cherished by
all. They must recognize that this is of supreme importance for the faithful
preservation of the fullness of Christian tradition, and for bringing about
reconciliation between Eastern and Western Christians.”[10]
The Russian theologian, philosopher
and writer Vladimir Soloviev also wrote of the importance of the reconciliation
of the Eastern and Western Church especially in regards to his own faith
tradition, the Russian Orthodox Church. He also stressed the need for the
Petrine Ministry for the full functioning of the Church.[11]
Soloviev also stresses that this full reunion of East and West can only come
about through the ethno-religious community of the Jews or Judaism. He believes that it is the Jews in both the
Western and Eastern Churches that will bring about this fullness.[12]
If the Eastern and Western Churches are the lungs of the Mystical Body of
Christ then Judaism is the heart that pumps blood to the lungs. Besides the
lungs and heart there are many other diverse but important parts of this
Mystical Body.
The understanding that the church is not
uniform but has ‘diversity through unity’ is very important. Too many Western
Catholics whether liberal, modernist, neo-orthodox, orthodox, traditional,
conservative, Latin traditionalists etc. see the Church and it’s spirituality
as uniform or they desire the Church to be uniform and are displeased with its
rich diversity. I like the image of the Church as a rich and tasty banquet made
up of different dishes from which one can partake and enjoy. However if we take
all these dishes and put them in one giant bowl, one ends up with a horrid and
tasteless mess which we call uniformity.
The unity of the church is preserved
through the Petrine Ministry and the infallible magisterial teachings of faith
and morals. However while remaining within the bounds of these teachings
(always interpreted with the priority of love and mercy) and in loving union
with Peter’s successor there is immense room for great diversity in customs,
rituals, spiritualities, philosophical approaches, charisms, devotions, dress, music,
dance, artistic representations, institutions, evangelistic methodologies and
theologies. Uniformities whether to the
right or the left in my opinion deform the mystical Body of Christ and its
witness in the world.
The second reading I have chosen is
reading 6 “Redefining the term Sacrament” by George S. Worgul in his book “From
Magic to Metaphor: A Validation of Christian Sacraments”. Worgul mentions that
in the traditional Baltimore Catechism a sacrament is described as “an outward
sign instituted by Christ to give grace”. He then proposed his own definition
of Sacraments as “symbols arising from the ministry of Christ and continued in
and through the Church; which when received in faith, are encounters with God, Father,
Son and Holy Spirit.[13]
He notes that the Baltimore Catechism uses the term sign while he prefers
symbol.[14]
Worgul notes that all symbols are signs but that symbol in his opinion is more
potent than other signs.[15] I would agree that the almost judicial
understanding of sacrament in the Western Church needs further development and
theological reflection more in accord with the Eastern Church’s understanding
of ‘mysterion’ (mysteries). However, Worgul’s
suggestions, for symbols and a changed meaning of ‘instituted’, seem to me to
be heading in a direction outside the parameters allowed for Catholic theological
development. His changes would turn sacraments into sacramentals. Sacraments
are instituted by Christ, sacramentals (such as the Rosary) are instituted by
the Church.[16]
The Catholic Church has never taught
that the sacraments are symbols and for a very good reason. The sacraments are
signs (not symbols) that have an outer face which may involve certain symbols
being used in its celebration. For example in the celebration of the sacrament
of baptism the water, candles, white clothing, oil etc have symbolic meanings but
the sacrament itself is not a symbol. The inner face of the sacrament is divine
Grace.
The church itself is considered as
the universal sacrament of salvation.[17]
This also is not a symbol but a sign which is accompanied by many symbols. The
church however is only this universal Sacrament of salvation because she is the
Mystical Body of Christ[18]
which contains the seven sacraments. Without the sacraments the church becomes
merely another human institution not the Mystical Body of Christ. This does not
mean that divine grace is limited to the outward face of the seven sacraments
or indeed the human and legal boundaries of the Catholic Church as an
institution. Potentially, the Catholic
Church as the Mystical Body of Christ encompasses all humanity as this
universal sacrament of salvation.
The third reading I have chosen is
reading 16 is from “Sign and Promise: A Theology of the Church for a Changing
World” by John Thornhill. This is a rather interesting article that emphasises
the importance of understanding the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ and
the Universal Sacrament of Salvation rather than a judicial and administrative
society or organisation. Thornhill surveys the understanding of the Church by
theologians, throughout the centuries of the Church’s history.
For me the most interesting part of
the article is the mention of Christ as the primordial sacrament. The French
Jewish philosopher Levinas refers to primordial as immemorial past. This leads
one back to the ‘beginning’ (bereshit) in Genesis. In a sense the written story
of Genesis One is a kind of primordial sacramental sign that points to the
mystery of the concept of the Hidden Primordial Messiah and his Kneset (Assembly/ Gathering)[19].
This “Gathering of waters” in Genesis 1 is pointing to the Church as the
Mystical Body of the Messiah. The hidden Terumah
(priestly lifted offering of first (reshit)
tithes[20])
of Genesis 1,[21]
points to the sacrificial offering (Terumah
and Korban) of the Messiah, which is
the New Covenant Sacrifice.
Another emphasis that I found
fascinating was Thornhill’s stress on ‘the others’[22]
which would resonate well with the ideas of Emmanuel Levinas on ‘alterity’.[23]
Thornhill while appreciating a lot of the modern rethinking feels that it may
have become too in-ward looking. This new orientation is often missing a
concern for mission and evangelisation which is focused on the other.[24]
Christian theology using certain elements of Levinas’ post–modernist philosophy
on ‘alterity’ (otherness) as a paradigm
may be helpful in balancing this focus.[25]
The
obsession of some rigidly ‘orthodox’ Catholics with the judicial, institutional
and administrative aspects of Catholicism almost deifies the Code of Canon Law
into a Biblical text. They forget that the last canon states that the salvation
of souls is the supreme law of the church and thus all the preceding church
laws should be interpreted in the light of this supreme law.[26]
Thornhill’s writings encourage us to refocus on Christ and the Church as the
Mystical Body of Christ rather than an over-emphasis on the judicial,
institutional and administrative aspect of its organisation.
The fourth reading I have chosen is
reading 11 “An Ecclesiological Presupposition” which is from “Priesthood: A
History of Ordained Ministry in the Roman Catholic Church” by Kenan B. Osborne.
Osborne’s main argument or point is that
one’s ecclesiological presuppositions affect how one’s views the development of
ministry in the Church. He lists two main groupings of Catholic theologians.
Firstly there are those who believe that Jesus established the Church and its
ministries and structures in detail during his life and secondly those who
believe that the Church and its ministries and structures arose after the
Resurrection under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.[27]
The point he makes about one presuppositions
is very important. However, it is not only one’s ecclesiological
presuppositions that influence one’s understanding of the ministries and
structures of the Church but also one’s Christological and Biblical
presuppositions. Edward Schillebeeckx,
for example, doesn’t believe in the historical reality of the Resurrection or
the resurrection experiences of the apostles or of Paul[28]
and as a result would not fit in either of Osborne’s two groupings.
There is a need for a grouping
between the two groups that believes that Jesus in seed form (the mustard seed
of the parable) did establish his Church (Messianic Community) with its new
sacrifice and new priesthood within the People of Israel. After the
Resurrection, guided by the Holy Spirit and this new priesthood, these
seedlings developed and grew into the more fully fledged structures and
ministries of the Church. These structures and ministries, while maintaining
their original purpose, changed and developed exteriorly and culturally
depending on the historical and cultural developments of the times. Our understanding
through the centuries grew deeper and richer so that today we understand the
mystery of the Church in a deeper way that does not deny the understandings of
the past but enriches them.
At times unfortunately people in the
Church lose the insights and riches of the past and the believers of the new
generations need to renew these riches before they can enrich them further with
deeper and new insights. The Church especially needs to renew itself regularly
in its Jewish and Biblical roots as well as in the teachings of the apostolic
fathers, the great mystics, doctors and saints of both the Western and Eastern
Churches.
[8] Orientale Lumen 1 <http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_02051995_orientale-lumen_en.html>
[9] Ut Unam Sint 54 <http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint_en.html>
[10] Unitatis Redintegratio
15 <http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html>
[11] Father Ray Ryland, “A Russian Who Challenged Orthodoxy to Reconcile With
Rome”, <http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/a-russian-who-challenged-orthodoxy-to-reconcile-with-rome>
[12] Judith Deutsch
Kornblatt, Doubly Chosen: Jewish
Identity, the Soviet Intelligentsia, and the Russian Orthodox Church (USA: University of Wisconsin Press,2004).
[13] George A Worgul, From Magic to Metaphor: A Validation of
Christian Sacraments (USA, Paulist Press, 1980), 123.
[16] Baltimore Catechism 1061 <http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson27.htm>
and Catechism of the Catholic Church
1677 <http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c4a1.htm>
[17] Lumen Gentium 48. <http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html>
[18] Lumen Gentium 8. <http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html>.
[21] Hidden in the first
‘well’ of the text by counting from the tav of Be-reshit, 26 letters 4 times.
[22] John Thornhill, Sign
and Promise: A Theology of the Church for a Changing World (Australia:
Harpers Collins, 1988), 48.
[25] See Glenn Morrison, Theology of Alterity: Levinas, von Balthasar
& Trinitarian Praxis (USA; Duquesne University Press, 2013).
[27] Kenan B Osborne, Priesthood: A History of Ordained Ministry
in the Roman Catholic Church, (New York: Paulist Press, 1988), 123-124.
Bibliography
Baltimore Catechism <http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson27.htm>
Catechism of the Catholic Church <http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c4a1.htm>
Code of Canon Law <http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P70.HTM>
Lumen Gentium. <http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vatii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html>
Orientale Lumen
<http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_02051995_orientale-lumen_en.html>
<http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_02051995_orientale-lumen_en.html>
Unitatis Redintegratio
<http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vatii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html>
<http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vatii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html>
Ut Unam Sint <http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jpii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint_en.html>
Komonchak, Joseph A. “Many Models, One Church”, Church (Spring1993), 201-204.
Kornblatt, Judith Deutsch. Doubly Chosen: Jewish Identity, the Soviet Intelligentsia, and the Russian Orthodox Church USA: University of Wisconsin Press, 2004.
Levinas, Emmanuel. Alterity and Transcendence USA: Columbia University Press, 1999.
Morrison, Glenn. Theology of Alterity: Levinas, von Balthasar & Trinitarian Praxis USA; Duquesne University Press, 2013.
Osborne, Kenan B. Priesthood: A History of Ordained Ministry in the Roman Catholic Church, New York: Paulist Press, 1988.
Ryland, Ray. “A Russian Who Challenged Orthodoxy to Reconcile With Rome” <http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/a-russian-who-challenged-orthodoxy-to-reconcile-with-rome>
Schillebeeckx, Edward. Jesus: An Experiment in Christology London: Collins, 1979.
Thornhill, John. Sign and Promise: A Theology of the Church for a Changing World (Australia: Harpers Collins, 1988).
Worgul, George A. From Magic to Metaphor: A Validation of Christian Sacraments USA, Paulist Press, 1980.
