Jeff's blog on Saturday finally pulled the cover off the discussion. We now move from the so-called "theoretical" to "street-level."
And Jeff doesn't pull punches He not only pulls out the heavy artillery (to mix my metaphors)--Paul--but pulls out one of the very texts I have utilized in my discussions about the unity of the Church. Yep. We're talkin' down and dirty street tactics, all right. (Yes, yes. This is already sounding a bit on the cheesy side o' things, but humor me, if you will. Even if mine is very minimal.)
Okay, we all know the text Jeff used was from 1 Corinthians 12.1ff. I won't cite it, since you can either read the passage on Jeff's blog, or look it up in your own Bible. Now, I want to stress here: Paul was talking about the one Body. Yes, plurality of gifts--since there was apparently some jockeying around concerning the more spectacular gifts--is what Paul is emphasizing. But plurality and diversity are not Paul's point. Check out the letter in its entirety--and chapter 12 is a microcosm of sorts of the whole letter--and the point Paul is making is crystal clear: There is one and only one Body of Christ.
Now, let's take a look at Jeff's points in that context.
Jeff writes: The apostle might frown on our dogmatic discussion over who has the claim to the true church . . .
But is that right? Paul deplores the schisms among the Corinthian Christians, that is assuredly the case. But were the schismatics claiming to be the true Church, or emphasizing individual persons over others? Okay, it might be they were claiming it by implication, but let's at least emphasize that Paul deplored the schisms over charismatic leaders. Still, even if these folks were basically claiming to be the true Church (or the best Christians, or what have you), did Paul actually deplore the dogmatic discussion over the true Church? He says earlier (1 Corinthians 11.19), that he supposed there must be divisions (lit. "heresies" or perhaps "dissensions") among them, so that those who were genuine might be known. Apparently, there were false ones among the Corinthian Christians, and it was important to know true from false.
Jeff goes on: Maybe we need to look a little harder at the feet and the hands, perhaps take a closer look and judge by the fruits of the spirit and not by what we feel is incorrect dogma. Not to say that we can throw out creeds and sacraments . . . but just maybe if we took the Apostles letter to Corinth with a little more seriousness we might just have our hand forced, maybe.
Now, for the good solid Anglo-Catholic Jeff is--and he's right, you know, the High Mass (West) and Divine Liturgy (East) are really the only way to worship!--I fear that gatherings around champagne and lemon chiffon cake have upset his normal rapier wit. He almost, but not quite, divorces dogma from life. Yes, he sneaks it back in just after stating his point. And I think it's because, good ol' A-C boy that he is, he just will not throw out the wet baby, irrespective of soiled bath water.
Fact of the matter, as Jeff knows, our feelings do not determine the correctness or error of dogma. If a dogma is incorrect, it is wrong. All the hopeful feelings in the world (and outside it) will not make it any more true. By the same token, if a dogma is right, all our rationalizations and all our accumulated attempts at "experiencing the other" will not make it any less right.
Similarly, all the most moral of lives lived will not testify to the truth of a falsehood. If it is false, for example, to ordain women to the priesthood, all the most excellent skills of ministry, preaching and pastoring will not make the practice true. Similarly, if an all-male priesthood is true, all the bigoted, oppressive, and otherwise "asshole"-type behavior will not make the dogma false. At best, in the former case, it will make most winsome and attractive a lie. In the latter case, it will make ugly a truth--or, more accurately, it will pervert the truth, for one cannot believe truth and practice falsehood (and make no mistake, bigotry and oppression are an evil falsehood). In both these cases, truth is lost to a lie. And worse: lives are lost to the demonic. Because Satan is the father of lies.
Jeff ends by asking: [C]an we really limit Christianity to just those two [i.e., Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches] in light of Paul?
Well, yes . . . if either or both are the one true Church. Refer to my comments above: Paul's point is that the plurality of members in the Body testify to the unity of that Body. There were schisms, and there were some claiming minimally to be better Christians, but these did not negate that there was a genuine (one, true) Church which could be discerned.
With one last parting shot, Jeff avows: But I can't write off my Pentecostal or Free Church brothers and sisters that easily. I can say I feel they miss out on wonderful aspects of Christ, but they could say the same of me.
Well, of course, one can always trade barbs. But one need not write off anybody while claiming that "Here" (wherever "here" is) "is the one Church." That's a logical fallacy. God's grace is mightier than our understanding and our machinations. By claiming that the Church can be found in a particular spot (or spots), it does not logically obligate one to say that "There the Church is not." It's a case of what one knows and what one does not know. One may know that this entity is the one, true Church. It does not follow that one then knows which entity (or entities) are not the Church. In short, if we may take a typical Orthodox response: "We Orthodox claim to be the one Church of Jesus Christ. But God is not limited in his grace to act only within the 'borders' of the Orthodox Church. Thus, he may claim as members of his Church, those outside the Orthodox faith. That is something we cannot know. What we can know is that the Orthodox Church is the one Church of God." [Note: I'm repeating what I have read and overheard from Orthodox. However, Orthodox readers of this blog, may want to correct me, since I'm not Orthodox.]
Now, as you can see, this hardly ends the discussion. In fact, what I hope it does is keep the question back on the table. Hopefully Jeff, whose classes start up again soon, will be able to keep me thinking about these matters through his high-caliber blog.
A blessed Epiphany to everyone!
Posted by Clifton at January 6, 2003 01:16 PM | TrackBack