Dear Deacon El,

Funny you should mention that . . .

When I attended a Western Rite Orthodox conference in Toronto, it was mentioned that one of their priests "defected" to the Eastern Rite Antiochian Church.

"I guess he liked the icons with the big eyes . . ." he said to which everyone snickered.

Hmmmm . . .

My eyes widened quite a lot at that comment!

Alex

While the Catholic Church does not belong to the WCC, it does belong to simliar bodies at the national level. I don't see how that is possible if your professor's thinking is one with the Catholic Chruch.

One would also have to be naive in the extreme to think that their is not an active secular conservative effort to dismiss all Christian social action as somehow related to Liberation Theology and therefore to be dismissed.

In truth, Liberation Theology has never been a movement of significant action in North America. To speak of it in the context of our societies is a red herring.

Axios

I think that Brother Axios has made a good point.

Theologies come and go. While in the hegemony, it seems that the principles of one or another theology rule and represent the standard.

For those old enough to have survived one or another epoch, it is clear that this is NOT true.

There is absolutely no question that the Lord's mandate to love God and love one's neighbor is the core of our Christian (and Catholic/Orthodox) belief and practice. HOW we love our neighbors can be predetermined only by the Gospel itself and not by the prevailing "theology-of-the-day".

I think of the good people of the Salvation Army. They are no slaccards in terms of serving those who are most in need: i.e., the addicted, the poor, the less-gifted, etc. And they have an "approach" that involves uniforms, disciplined life actions and prayers, and structured lifestyles. And they reach and save many people.

But I would be foolish to assume that the Salvationist approach is going to work with club-kids, i.e, the late teens early twenties folk. And so, I'd be remiss if I just accepted the Salvationist approach and attempted to impose that on the kids. It would probably not work. The "kids" don't have parental responsiblities, or job responsiblities, or a sense of self-worth that the Salvationist approach would presume to be present, and that their apporach would adress.

We've got to find something else for them.

The same is true for the people of Russia. Is it fair to assume that "Russian Orthodoxy" and all it pomps and works, is going to be the best response to the REAL spiritual needs of the people? I have no problem whatsoever - as a "Catholic" -- in supporting Russian Orthodoxy, but I wonder deep in my heart if I am best serving the needs of the people by telling them that Russian Orthodoxy is "their only pathway" to salvation? I'll support "THE CHURCH!!!!" as best I can (Catholic or Orthodox or Orienal Orthodox), but I must also be attuned to the realities of the people and how best to bring them to God.

Can I do less for these children of God?

Blessings! And conundrums.

Dear Axios,

You say that the Roman Catholic Church, while not a member of the WCC is part of national bodies that are similar. Well I looked up the web site of the National Council of Churches USA and as I suspected, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops - the official hierarchy of the Catholic Church is NOT listed. Here is a quote from the NCC site describing their membership:

"The 36 Protestant, Orthodox and Anglican member communions (denominations) of the National Council of Churches include 140,000 local congregations and 50 million persons in the United States."

Notice no mention of the Catholic church. That is because it does not see itself as a "denomination" among others. Oh sure the Church does have official ecumenical dialogue with other Christians. This has been a priority since Vatican II. It is just the idea that the Church of Christ is splinted into various factions that the Church rejects. Remember one of the signs of the Catholic church is that it is ONE [along with HOLY and CATHOLIC].

Dr. John you speak of the "theology of the day". Is this just in reference to liberation theology, or are you saying that one ecclesiology is just as valid as another? Well I don't agree with that. Even in your post you say:

"I'll support "THE CHURCH!!!!" as best I can (Catholic or Orthodox or Orienal Orthodox)"

But if one follows the WCC/NCC church models - what of Protestant denominations? How about non-denominational para-church organizations like the Salvation Army who for the sake of concord dispensed with the necessity of baptism? I have to say, for my part, while I can admire the zeal & faith of some of the individual members of these groups I don't subscribe to the model of church they represent.

PAX

Benedictine,

When I said "similiar bodies at the national level", I had thought the use of the plural in bodies was sufficient to indicate that the use of the term national was not specifically in reference to this nation (the nation the BF is hosted in; I realize we have Canadian and British posters here).

The Catholic Church is a full member of 55 national Church Councils. It also belongs to uncountable local councils of churches both in the USA and elsewhere.

Axios

Dear Axios,

I stand corrected. I did a little on-line research and did indeed discover that the Catholic Church is part of both the Canadian Council of Churches and "Churches Together in Britain and Ireland" - the successor of the British Council of Churches.

However the point that I was making, and I think my former professor was getting at, is best explained in this quote from Dominus Iesus:

The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection — divided, yet in some way one — of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists, and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and ecclesial communities must strive to reach". In fact, "the elements of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other communities". "Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church".

This rationale is one reason, my instructor believes, why Rome is not part of the WCC. Now how the bishops of local churches are able to negotiate this in order to participate in national ecumenical bodies... I don't know the answer. It does seem however that there is some official credibility & recognition to the line of thinking I described in my initial post.

PAX

Dear Dr. John,

At the outset, when a Ukie Cath'lic like me rises to the defence of Russian Orthodoxy, you know there's just got to be a lot of sincerity involved!

You asked if Russian Orthodoxy, with all its pomp and works, is the best thing for the Russians?

Why can't the Russians themselves answer that, rather than have Catholic and Protestant missionaries (and now a Byzantine ex-Jesuit) tell them?

But that's just an aside . . .

I think it is because it is the most culturally and spiritually relevant form of religious faith and praxis that they have - and it is something they keep coming back to, no matter how many New Martyrs made it into the calendar.

But before we can ask that question, shouldn't we answer the question with respect to the West itself?

How has the horizontal emphasis of social and political theology assisted with the fulfillment of vertical spiritual hunger in the West?

How has the identification of Christianity with a number of contemporary ideologies and "isms" helped make Christian faith "relevant" without altering the message of its Founder?

How has the separation of Christian faith from culture in the West aided with social progressivism?

For the Russian and other Christians, the West represents a kind of decadence that some of them would now like to try on for size.

Let's not flatter ourselves into thinking that we can actually teach the Russians and others who suffered for Christ in ways we cannot imagine about what it means to follow Christ as individuals, families and societies.

Social action for them means tearing down oppressive political parties and governments that acted "in the name of the people" without ever having asked them what it was they wanted or needed.

Alex

Esteemed Benedictine,
May I attempt a poor stab at articulating how bishops of local churches "negotiate" Dominus Iesus?
Maybe their thinking goes along this line:
"If we don't fully *join* in dialogue and mutual efforts with what we consider to be defective ecclesial communities, we end up talking only to ourselves (as do, for example, Greek Old Calendarists and myriad other small sects). The Catholic Church is more than these. God's will that *all* may be one is not served by isolationism on anyone's part."

Yes, PEACE, more now than ever.

Dear Benedictine,

Yes, I understand and appreciate the point you were making as a point you were making. My point was simply that the position outlined by your professor seems to be one judgement some Catholics hold, while other Catholics, including the episcopate of 55 countries, make a different judgement.

It is a matter of judgement, and something that a legitimate diversity of opinion can exist within the Catholic church. Just as within Orthodoxy, various jurisdictions have made various judgements.

Axios