I was prompted by a recent article talking about the church to reflect on my understanding of what the church is and how does the church work in our contemporary world. The article was specifically about the Roman Catholic Church. Since there are over one billion Catholics in the world, this is a worthwhile thing to think about. Quakers are so tiny---especially in the USA---we could almost be a decent size Catholic diocese!
I already know a few things that are referenced in the article. I have read quite a bit of Christian history, so I know the fancy word for church is ecclesiology. That is a compound Greek word made up of a noun and a preposition. The noun (which is rooted in a verb) is the word, klesia, which means the “ones called.” This is the word used in the New Testament to talk about the encounter Jesus had with various men and women. For example, he approached a couple guys who were fishing and he invited them to “Follow me.” This is a “calling” of the men to be disciples.
The preposition in the word, ecclesiology, is the word, ek (or in English, “ec”). This preposition means “out of.” Hence the disciples-to-be were women and men who were called out of their normal lives and jobs into a new way of being. When Jesus called them, they entered into a new relationship with Jesus and with the others who had also responded to their own call. In some real ways these “called out” men and women formed part of a new community---a community of believers. It is appropriate to call them “the church.”
Ecclesiology is the fancy word to describe this group of called-out disciples---their way of believing and acting in the world. This new way was formed by their relationship to Jesus. They learned things by following him. He gave them new expectations and told them to let go of much that characterized their former lives. He did not take them out of the world. But he did take them out of former ways of being into new relationships and new ways of being. From the git go, they were the church and, as church, had a relationship with Jesus. This continued even after the death and resurrection of Jesus.
With this backdrop we can go to the article that prompted my thinking. I understand the opening line of the article, although it does not directly apply to me. The author, Jesuit priest Thomas Reece, says, “It is time to stop using the term ‘Catholic Church’ as a synonym for "Catholic hierarchy." He gives examples of how Catholics talk in this way. "The church teaches such and such…The church is homophobic and sexist. The church is authoritarian. I hate the church." But I also realize many non-Catholics and even non-Christians talk this way, too.
But the word, church, has multiple meanings---for Catholics and non-Catholics. Reese notes one theologian counts twelve different meanings for the word! Even in the New Testament, where the word is used multiple times, there are a variety of meanings. Church can mean a local congregation, to the body of Christ, to the Eucharist/Communion and, even, to the entire Church made up of all believers in all times and places. Indeed, church is a slippery word!
It is important, says Reese and I concur, to talk about the Church in more precise ways. For example, he claims we often mean the ecclesiastical hierarchy when we say “the Church.” When Catholics say something like, “the Church teaches,” it actually is the hierarchy (the archbishops and bishops) who are the teachers. The guy in the back pew is certainly not the teacher! This becomes especially important when we think about some contemporary problems. Reese has a poignant line when he warns, “We should not blame the people of God for the sins of the hierarchy.” He adds that Catholics do not choose their leaders. The Catholic Church is the place “where new leaders are chosen by current leaders.”
If we are not Catholic, we might be tempted to get smug, but we should not do that. Church leaders need to be vigilant everywhere to imitate everything Jesus asks of all the members of his church, His Body present in our contemporary world. Reese is correct to plead with all of us who want to talk about church to be careful and precise. That will take some practice and ongoing attentiveness.
I am especially sensitive to this because of the college-age group with whom I spend so much time. It is too easy for them to dismiss all of religion and people who believe because of their sense of what “the Church” teaches or does or does not do. They are quick to be dismissive of the whole thing. I routinely hear them say things like, “The Church will not accept homosexuals” or “The Church is hypocritical.” While there may be some truth in both of those general charges, sloppy language leads to rash pronouncements.
It is easy for those of us who still claim some kind of religious affiliation to acknowledge the Church is obviously not the building---and yet we go right on calling the building “the Church!” It is easy to talk about “the Church” on the corner. I am going to try to clean up my language and join Thomas Reese.
And I can do that with a good understanding of Church.
I already know a few things that are referenced in the article. I have read quite a bit of Christian history, so I know the fancy word for church is ecclesiology. That is a compound Greek word made up of a noun and a preposition. The noun (which is rooted in a verb) is the word, klesia, which means the “ones called.” This is the word used in the New Testament to talk about the encounter Jesus had with various men and women. For example, he approached a couple guys who were fishing and he invited them to “Follow me.” This is a “calling” of the men to be disciples.
The preposition in the word, ecclesiology, is the word, ek (or in English, “ec”). This preposition means “out of.” Hence the disciples-to-be were women and men who were called out of their normal lives and jobs into a new way of being. When Jesus called them, they entered into a new relationship with Jesus and with the others who had also responded to their own call. In some real ways these “called out” men and women formed part of a new community---a community of believers. It is appropriate to call them “the church.”
Ecclesiology is the fancy word to describe this group of called-out disciples---their way of believing and acting in the world. This new way was formed by their relationship to Jesus. They learned things by following him. He gave them new expectations and told them to let go of much that characterized their former lives. He did not take them out of the world. But he did take them out of former ways of being into new relationships and new ways of being. From the git go, they were the church and, as church, had a relationship with Jesus. This continued even after the death and resurrection of Jesus.
With this backdrop we can go to the article that prompted my thinking. I understand the opening line of the article, although it does not directly apply to me. The author, Jesuit priest Thomas Reece, says, “It is time to stop using the term ‘Catholic Church’ as a synonym for "Catholic hierarchy." He gives examples of how Catholics talk in this way. "The church teaches such and such…The church is homophobic and sexist. The church is authoritarian. I hate the church." But I also realize many non-Catholics and even non-Christians talk this way, too.
But the word, church, has multiple meanings---for Catholics and non-Catholics. Reese notes one theologian counts twelve different meanings for the word! Even in the New Testament, where the word is used multiple times, there are a variety of meanings. Church can mean a local congregation, to the body of Christ, to the Eucharist/Communion and, even, to the entire Church made up of all believers in all times and places. Indeed, church is a slippery word!
It is important, says Reese and I concur, to talk about the Church in more precise ways. For example, he claims we often mean the ecclesiastical hierarchy when we say “the Church.” When Catholics say something like, “the Church teaches,” it actually is the hierarchy (the archbishops and bishops) who are the teachers. The guy in the back pew is certainly not the teacher! This becomes especially important when we think about some contemporary problems. Reese has a poignant line when he warns, “We should not blame the people of God for the sins of the hierarchy.” He adds that Catholics do not choose their leaders. The Catholic Church is the place “where new leaders are chosen by current leaders.”
If we are not Catholic, we might be tempted to get smug, but we should not do that. Church leaders need to be vigilant everywhere to imitate everything Jesus asks of all the members of his church, His Body present in our contemporary world. Reese is correct to plead with all of us who want to talk about church to be careful and precise. That will take some practice and ongoing attentiveness.
I am especially sensitive to this because of the college-age group with whom I spend so much time. It is too easy for them to dismiss all of religion and people who believe because of their sense of what “the Church” teaches or does or does not do. They are quick to be dismissive of the whole thing. I routinely hear them say things like, “The Church will not accept homosexuals” or “The Church is hypocritical.” While there may be some truth in both of those general charges, sloppy language leads to rash pronouncements.
It is easy for those of us who still claim some kind of religious affiliation to acknowledge the Church is obviously not the building---and yet we go right on calling the building “the Church!” It is easy to talk about “the Church” on the corner. I am going to try to clean up my language and join Thomas Reese.
And I can do that with a good understanding of Church.
Comments
Post a Comment