Skip to main content

Change of Era

I really like Pope Francis.  Of course, I have never met him and there is no reason to assume I will ever get close to him, much less meet him.  In fact, I probably should not even say I like the Pope.  Rather I like what the Pope is saying and doing.  Somehow I assume the guy I would meet, if I met him, would be the kind of guy who resonates with his message.  I am sure he is a steely kind of guy.  You don’t become archbishop, cardinal and, then, Pope by being a patsy!
           
Most Catholics I know like the Pope, too.  I know there are circles within this country and abroad that don’t like what he is doing.  They perceive him to be a threat to the traditional Catholic Church they think this world needs.  I figure when you have over one billion people in your organization, there will be some who don’t like you!  My hope is he lives long enough to see much of his spiritual agenda realized.
           
The recent speech the Pope delivered to a large gathering of Italian clergy meeting in Florence is a case in point.  I don’t have the full text in English and cannot read Italian, so I am dependent on reporting sources who provide the gist of it in English.  At the big gathering the Pope told those Italian Catholics that the church needs to be open to change.  I will admit that when the Pope speaks about the church, I usually want it to be the one bigger Christian church, not simply Roman Catholicism.  I agree that the church needs to be open to change.
           
Indeed, the church faces the same dilemma other organizations do: innovate or die!  Change will happen; we probably have little choice about that.  We can sometimes choose how to change and how fast we do it.  I am clear the Pope is saying, now is the time.  A line from that speech to the Italians says it nicely. The Pope said, “We are not living in an era of change, but a change of era.”  I loved that because I think it is so true.  I am ready for that kind of challenge and change.
           
I know many folks are not ready for the challenge nor the change.  They prefer the status quo.  It is easy to say that the world is going to hell in a hand basket and the church is the one place where we kind find solace in the midst of the cultural maelstrom.  This perspective is naïve and doomed.  While we might choose to stay as we are, we would be choosing to become some 21st version of the Amish.  We can opt for being quaint, but I prefer going with the question: how do we need to be open to change?
           
What does being open to change look like?  One place the Pope explicitly gave focus was on doctrine.  I thought this was a clever move.  Typically we think of doctrine as some article of faith set in stone.  Although my own Quaker tradition does not use creeds, such as the Nicene Creed, I know a great deal about creeds.  The Nicene Creed lays out for a huge majority of Christians what “right thinking” about God, the trinity, etc. is.  The thing about creeds is they are supposed to be the corporate statement of belief.  If effect the creed says, “this is what we believe.”
           
The Pope, as I understand him, is not saying the creeds are wrong.  In fact it is hard for me to imagine any Pope in the future saying something like, “the Nicene Creed is wrong.”  Rather what I think will happen is to acknowledge that the Nicene Creed is a good articulation of who God is, what the trinity is, why Jesus came to be human and so forth.  But it is just one way of putting it.  Because the Pope is open to change, he thinks doctrine probably could be articulated in additional ways.
           
So the Pope tells the Italian gathering, Christian doctrine “is not a closed system incapable of generating questions, doubts, queries, but it’s alive, and able to unsettle, animate.”  That is amazingly profound to read.  Doctrine is not a closed system.  Remember, the Pope is calling for us to be open to change.  And so doctrine---what the church has always said---has to be vulnerable to change.  I can imagine the Pope saying that doctrine can change, but that does not mean God has changed.
           
Doctrine is not a closed system.  Closed systems are incapable of generating questions, of entertaining doubts, of refusing to welcome queries.  It helps me to remember that the Pope was a scientist before he became a priest, bishop, archbishop and now Pope.  Science is fueled by questions, doubts and inquiries.  And so should our quest for the God of Truth.
           
I value the Pope’s view that real doctrine in the church is alive.  It is as alive as the Spirit that moves among us.  In fact, as a Christian I am willing to see the movement of the Spirit somehow related to the movement of the Spirit that animated Jesus during his earthly ministry and may somehow still be part of the “resurrected Jesus,” whatever that means in our new kind of doctrine.  I like the idea of a doctrine that is somehow alive.
           
I wonder though, is it the doctrine that is really alive or is it the people doing the new thinking---the new theological work---to make our perspective of God fit what will become our verbal articulation of it?  The new doctrine itself won’t unsettle us; it will be the spirited people creating new ways of responding to and verbalizing the work of God in our midst.  It is an exciting time; it is a change of era.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I-Thou Relationships

Those of us who have read theology or, perhaps, those who are people of faith and are old enough might well recognize this title as a reminder of the late Jewish philosopher and theologian, Martin Buber.   I remember reading Buber’s book, I and Thou , when I was in college in the 1960s.   It was already a famous book by then.   I am not sure I fully understood it, but that would not be the last time I read it.   It has been a while since I looked at the book.             Buber came up in a conversation with a friend who asked if I had seen the recent article by David Brooks?   I had not seen it, but when I was told about it, I knew I would quickly locate and read that piece.   I very much like what Brooks decides to write about and what he contributes to societal conversation.   I wish more people read him and took him seriously.             Brooks’ article focused on the 2016 contentious election.   He provocatively suggests, “Read Buber, Not the Polls!”   I think Brooks puts

Spiritual Commitment

I was reading along in a very nice little book and hit these lines about commitment.   The author, Mitch Albom, uses the voice of one of the main characters of his nonfiction book about faith to reflect on commitment.   The voice belongs to Albom’s old rabbi of the Jewish synagogue where he went until his college days.   The old rabbi, Albert Lewis, says “the word ‘commitment’ has lost its meaning.”    The rabbi continues in a way that surely would have many people saying, “Amen!”   About commitment he says, “I’m old enough when it used to be a positive.   A committed person was someone to be admired.   He was loyal and steady.   Now a commitment is something you avoid.   You don’t want to tie yourself down.”   I also think I am old enough to know that commitment was usually a positive word.   I can think of a range of situations in which commitment would have been seen to be positive.   For example, growing up was full of sports for me.   Commitment would have been presupposed t

Inward Journey and Outward Pilgrimage

There are so many different ways to think about the spiritual life.   And of course, in our country there are so many different variations of religious experiences.   There are liberals and conservatives.   There are fundamentalists and Pentecostals.   Besides the dizzying variety of Christian traditions, there are many different non-Christian traditions.   There are the major traditions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and so on.   There are the slightly more obscure traditions, such as Sikhism, Jainism, etc.   And then there are more fringe groups and, even, pseudo-religions.   There are defining doctrines and religious practices.   Some of these are specific to a particular tradition or a few traditions, such as the koan , which is used in Zen Buddhism for example.   Other defining doctrines or practices are common across the religious board.   Something like meditation would be a good example.   Christians meditate; Buddhists meditate.   And other groups practice this spiri