Monday, November 16, 2009
We need saints
Recently I attended a worship event. It was traditional and featured some contemporary worship music. One of the songs we sang (can't remember the name) mentions the martyrs and I realized that we actually don't have any. Sure, they are part of our shared christian memory but there are not any in our church. Neither are there true saints in our church. Yes there are saints in our shared christian memory but they are "those saints of the ancient church back there in the past in the church before it was divided". Yes they are mine already, in a sense. But I thought to myself how disconnected I felt from them.
This started me thinking. We need saints, those holy examples of the Christian life that anchor our identity in a higher call. The problem with many mega churches and denominations is that few of them (any?) are built on real saints. They may be built on good men who are great administrators, but then the church is built on a personality and a business model. The Martyrs and Saints call us to return to a holy life, not an organization or theory. They beckon us to live lives of radical love for God and our neighbor. I don't want ta church built on an administrative model or a momentary culturally instigated christian response, I want a church built on the apostles, prophets, saints and martyrs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
There have been more martyrs for Christ in the 20th century than all the combined centuries since the birth of the church - particularly in China and Africa. The vast majority of these are not within either the Catholic or Orthodox communions.
As for saints, all who are in Christ are saints. It really is as simple as that. Once the CEC has been around long enough, perhaps it will look back and begin to honor some of those saints who have gone before us. Personally, I view St.Peter, St. Paul, and St Wigglesworth, etc as part of all our inheritance. To me, the boundaries of communion and denomination don't really exist for all who are in Christ are grafted into the same Vine and we'll all be seated at the same banqueting table at the end.
Apparently you feel the need to defend something. I will indulge you.
In saying that we need saints, I mean that we need those particularly Holy persons whose lives have demonstrated the sort of grace, unbounded charity, asceticism and dying that caused them to be remarkable persons. I understand that all believers are "hagios", made holy ones by virtue of the cross, but this teaching has also minimized the call to a holy life. Thus, one can be a saint because the bible says we are called saints, not because we are lovers of the Cross,or particularly holy, or honest or honorable.
Secondly, those martyrs, though not baptized (perhaps) in the Orthodox or Catholic churches, are none-the-less Orthodox by their confession. For the spirit of martyrdom is the Spirit of Jesus and of right belief.
The boundaries of communion is very much the issue. to suggest that, for you, they do not really exist is subjective and subverts the unity and authority of the doctors and saints of the church. This is the fatal protestant position -the moment you say "to me" you tear at the unity of the church's teaching and justify the "schizophrenic bride". To point merely to the mystical unity of the church while ignoring its ontological unity is gnostic. In the CEC we argued incarnational theology while in reality continuing denominationalism. If we are truly catholic and incarnational we have to advocate the ontological unity of the church, not undermine it. As a Catholic Christian I felt it was my duty to submit to the church, not as I wish it to be, but as it is, warts and all. And this I was taught in the CEC.
I find in interesting whenever I hear arguments like that from either the Catholic or Orthodox position. They point their finger at the Protestant mind-set as the root of the problem, but forget that Protestants are merely following in the example they themselves established with their mutual excommunication bulls centuries before the word "protestant" existed. The Church is split. The jeannie is out of the bottle. Unlike Peter, who humbled himself when he saw that Paul was right and he was in error, no one humbled themselves to maintain the unity of the Church 1,000 years ago and that root of pride has continued until this day.
It's not the first time God's best plans for man were thwarted. God never intended for Adam to sin. God never intended for Israel to want a king. And God never intended for the Church to be anything other than unified.
But man continually messes things up. And God adapts - though technically since He knew in advance, he anticipates would be better choice of words. Anyway, the point being, I no longer believe that it's God's goal to re-unify the Church in the way you seek. Evidence of watching who the Holy Spirit is using to bring the Gospel to world is clear, the Orthodox and Catholic Churches are not the only ones in God's will as they are. Pentecostals and evangelicals bring God-birthed streams that can not be ignored and do not need to disappear in order to obey God's will for unity. I believe you were taught that as well in the CEC.
You write "Unlike Peter, who humbled himself when he saw that Paul was right and he was in error, no one humbled themselves to maintain the unity of the Church 1,000 years ago and that root of pride has continued until this day."
1)This is true. And, as with everything, it begins in my own heart. So I, for my part, am choosing that humility and in accord with the Catholic tradition I am bringing my gifts there. Are you willing to humble yourself to maintain the unity of the church?
2)While I understand the pragmatic position, you are essentially arguing that because neither Rome or the East humbled themselves this absolves Protestants from doing the same. In effect saying, "continue the error because it already exists". The argument you propose can justify a thousand more denominations and is as equally arrogant as the those who wrote the Bulls of excommunication. Just because Israel got a King and He for-knew it did not mean that God was not displeased.
3)I am not arguing that those other streams need to disappear in order for there to be unity. IN fact, if those humbled themselves and brought their DNA into the catholic church the economy of those historic churches would only benefit, as would those entering. This is evidenced in the changing culture of the OCA and AOC, two Orthodox churches in the US that are becoming more evangelical as the balance of membership shifts from immigrant to Protestant American converts. ARe they what they should be yet? Perhaps not. But if one has to wait for the CEC to become what it could (have) be(en), why not wait for these churches to grow and develop within a more secure environment?
3)Pentecostals and Evangelicals expressed God given streams that have always been exhibited in the catholic tradition at one time or another. This is not an argument for denominationalism, it is an argument for the work of God among believing hearts. The church teaches nothing new. The three streams are always historically in expression at some place and at some time. It is a matter of economy, not "identity". In making it a matter of "identity" one elevates one's opinion on the modes of expression of the faith over the intrinsic unity of the Church.
4)I am troubled by arguments that do not make sense all the way down the line. If one makes a proposition in category A and the consequences result in B, then B is the answer for all the series of propositions in category A. For example, if one claims submission to the patristic mind of the church then the result is always going to be submission to The Church as we find it to be, not as we want it to be. The CEC cannot (and in fact is not) maintain a Catholic identity because that identity requires submission to authority. Therefore the CEC must retreat to a Protestant position where it can maintain a position of protest and independent opinion. The problem is that we spent years saying we are catholic. The cat's out of the bag, it can only be Protestant. Now, that is ok as long as one is honest about it. It would resolve a lot of conflict.
Anonymous, the previous is my last comment on this thread. I do not want a flame war and I have better things to do than argue. If you want to honestly ask questions I am happy to answer. If you want to justify the CEC or your position it in, or it's positions I really don't want to bother to engage you further.
Anonymous, the previous is my last comment on this thread. I do not want a flame war and I have better things to do than argue. If you want to honestly ask questions I am happy to answer. If you want to justify the CEC or your position it in, or it's positions I really don't want to bother to engage you further.
Post a Comment