Differing visions


I don't speak for anyone officially, as I'm sure will readily be agreed by all, and by some with thanksgiving, but... 
Examining ecumenical questions leads me to say there are several incompatible visions in the church world of how unity might be achieved. I'm not trying to be formal, precise or complete here, just to give my approximations of several viewpoints.

Orthodox: The church is rightly organized on an episcopal basis and the faith and ethos of the whole church define Christianity. Authoritative judgments about the faith are made in eccumenical councils. It would not contradict tradition to say that the pope is "first among equals" among the world's bishops, but the Orthodox cannot grant him the primacy of authority he claims.

Catholic: Everyone becomes a Catholic, that's what unity means.

Anglican: There is room to accommodate divergent views within one church. There can be shared fellowship between people of Reformed and Catholic tendencies. The one church includes low church, high church and Anglo-Catholics, with some overlap: Some people are comfortable in all three settings.

Charismatic Protestant: All true believers are unified already but too carnal to see it and act like it. Bad preaching is to blame; Ephesians Chapter Four says so.

Mainline Protestant: A committee has been appointed to look into the matter.

I'm sure there are other viewpoints. Those are enough to cite to make my point. We don't even agree on what unity is. Or, even if some of us here and there do agree on that, we are at odds on how to achieve it.

What does the visible unity our Lord desires for us look like? Is a federated cooperative unity among diverse churches enough? Would that at least be a step in the right direction? Is full intercommunion required? Do we all need to operate in lockstep, like Ezekiel's angels? Or is it enough to have a minimal agreement on core orthodoxy, leaving the rest open to in-house debates? As the old saw has it, if you don't know where you are going, you'll get there every time.

There are several ways the unity puzzle might be worked out, involving various combinations of the ideas held by the separated churches. Not every combination of ideas is workable, but some  are more sensible than others. For example, the episcopal model of church government seems broadly acceptable and the idea of councils is well established in church history. It would not be an insuperable difficulty for everyone to send a bishop (or supervisor or overseer) to talk with his peers, if only all could agree on what they would be talking about.

Or maybe we will think of something brilliant tomorrow, by God's help, that differs from all of the above.  I do not know which path is right, but I know that there is a right path. Christ calls for nothing that is impossible for us, and the angel told us that with God nothing shall be impossible. Some things, though, are difficult for us to do, particularly when our pride is involved, and if we want to hold on every one to his pride and position and power, we make impossible what would not be so, otherwise.

So, a question for the house: If your preferred vision of unity is not the one that goes forward, will you resist or cooperate with the one that prevails?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reality, fantasy and ecumenism

By Charles Marsh Recent conversations online and off have shown me something very curious. Some of what I believe to be Christian verity some other Christians take to be mere fantasy. They are cessationists and I am not . According to them, the things that I believe about tongues and prophecy and words of wisdom and of knowledge are sheer moonshine. So while in some churches I am thought orthodox enough, in others I am regarded as delusional or something rather like it. There are other matters in which, in like manner, some Christians view certain beliefs of other Christians as no better than free imagination, runaway fantasy or perhaps something worse: damaging falsehoods not harmless nuttiness. I admit to being somewhat dismayed by other Christians' newspaper novenas and Facebook prayer schemes. I do not think that is how prayer works. Their idea seems to be that if you repeat such and such a prayer x times, or republish it or "like" it or retweet it, then you w...
Read more

Science versus religion is a phony issue

By Charles Marsh The problem is that science, well suited to look at repeatable events, is at a loss about singular ones.  Some people suppose that science trumps religion, that a modern understanding of the world through science renders religious understandings obsolete. Some others suppose that religious understanding can be used to refute science. Both views are wrong. Science is rooted in philosophical naturalism. That is the stance that says we will explain what we see without reference to supernatural agencies. Science describes what happens without recourse to explanations involving angels, demons, gods, fairy godmothers, humors, vapors or ghosts. Acting on this basis, science has done a great deal of good. It has gotten rid of superstitions about what causes disease, where insects come from and a good many other misunderstandings. Notice that science is morally neutral. The same disciplines that give us vaccines and disease prevention can as...
Read more

What is a "Francisism"?

The first time I used the word I used it in attempting to explain some of Pope Francis's headline-grabbing remarks. This is what I said: This strikes me as another one of those Francisisms that generates lots of good press for Francis and then is walked back via more careful statements by others in the Church. I have remarked before on his tendency to do things like this. But it was not the first time I had encountered the concept. My remarks on this habit of Francis's go back a couple of years, to the early days of his pontificate. Francis tends to make sweeping-sounding statements that sound nearly un-Catholic in their generosity, toward gays, socialists, atheists, Lutherans and others. But when the statements are unpacked in light of Catholic faith and practice, they do not mean all that they seem to suggest. The statements are narrowly and logically true in some sense but really say less than they seem at first to say. Before I coined the word I wrote Pope Franc...
Read more