I like to follow Pope Francis because so often he teaches me something or causes me to look at things in a different way. Such was the case again recently. The source of his wisdom came from the reporters’ pens on his trip back from a meeting with the Romanian Orthodox Patriarch Daniel. I know a fair amount about the Orthodox Church and how its various manifestations---Greek, Russian, etc.---interact with the Roman Catholic Church.
Much of my interest stems from my long-time intrigue with and involvement in the ecumenical movement. The ecumenical movement recognizes the diversity within the Christian church and works for ways we can still be faithful together. Realistically this side of paradise, there probably will not be full Christian unity. We are a long way from people simply identifying as Christians---especially in this country. Instead folks still identify as Catholic, Nazarene, Baptist and so forth.
The real question then is how do we live and work together from our own houses? One historic response was that we don’t. There has been too much arrogance that I am right and you are not. Good for me and sorry about you! I don’t agree with this. At the same time, I can recognize that for me being religious makes more sense some ways than it does other ways. But that does not mean I am inherently right.
One of the places of sadness over the decades for me and I’m sure, many others, has been the time of communion. In some ways this is funny because traditionally Quakers don’t “take communion” any way. Having once done a great deal of study and writing on Quakers and sacraments, I concluded that Quakers basically argued for the non-necessity of outward forms of sacraments, i.e. having wine and wafer is not necessary to have a communal or sacramental experience with the inward Christ. But Quakers are indeed free to participate if we want.
That does not always mean I “take communion” when I am in a situation where the outward elements, i.e. wine and wafer, are available. But I feel free to do so if I want to. This is not an issue in Episcopal Churches and Methodist ones and many others. But when it comes to the Catholic Church, I know I am not supposed to participate. Non-Catholics are not supposed to participate. And so this has caused consternation, not only for non-Catholics, but for so many of my Catholic friends.
All this is background to the Pope’s recent statement on his ride home to Rome. Thomas Reese, author of the article, indicated “Pope Francis made an extraordinary statement on the role of theology in ecumenical relations.” This piqued my interest. Reese is exactly right when he notes, “In the past, church officials have stressed the need for theological agreement before Christian unity or Eucharistic sharing could be possible.” Effectively the rule of the game seemed to be to get the theology straight and then action can follow. And the effectively meant that non-Catholics could not take communion until the theologians worked it out and said we could. Of course, a Catholic could take communion in an Episcopal or Methodist Church. Or they could all come to a Quaker meeting, where communion would be spiritual and not mediated by real wine and wafer!
Apparently on the plane, the Pope switched logic. He is quoted to say, “Ecumenism is not getting to the end of discussions, it’s done walking together…” This is like picking up a kaleidoscope, giving it a twist and getting a whole new picture. It seems now to the Pope, “The journey is more important than the destination.” I like this because it feels right. And it feels right, because it gives hope for something that so many find desirable---recognizing some Catholics do not.
The Pope recognizes that so many different faith traditions already work ecumenically together in many ways. To the author, Reese, this recalls one of the Pope’s famous statements: “facts are more important than ideas.” I find this refreshing. Apparently, the Pope is ready to push this further---at least I hope he is.
It seems the Pope takes it further when he acknowledges, “there is already Christian unity…Let’s not wait for the theologians to come to agreement on the Eucharist.” That is both funny to me and profound. It is also daring. That is what I like about this Pope. And I can appreciate the insight of Thomas Reese in helping me understand how to interpret this. He says “Such a view would see the Eucharist as a unifying sacrament rather than a celebration of unity.”
The implications are clear. This is a case where “the people often lead the way and the theologians follow, not the other way around.” It does not mean theologians are unimportant, but it does mean they are not of paramount importance. For Quakers, we are all theologians---all reflect on our primary experience of faith. And at least, I agree we ought to be able to eat together and work together.
It’s good that we ask the theologians what they think, but let’s not wait for the theologians.
Much of my interest stems from my long-time intrigue with and involvement in the ecumenical movement. The ecumenical movement recognizes the diversity within the Christian church and works for ways we can still be faithful together. Realistically this side of paradise, there probably will not be full Christian unity. We are a long way from people simply identifying as Christians---especially in this country. Instead folks still identify as Catholic, Nazarene, Baptist and so forth.
The real question then is how do we live and work together from our own houses? One historic response was that we don’t. There has been too much arrogance that I am right and you are not. Good for me and sorry about you! I don’t agree with this. At the same time, I can recognize that for me being religious makes more sense some ways than it does other ways. But that does not mean I am inherently right.
One of the places of sadness over the decades for me and I’m sure, many others, has been the time of communion. In some ways this is funny because traditionally Quakers don’t “take communion” any way. Having once done a great deal of study and writing on Quakers and sacraments, I concluded that Quakers basically argued for the non-necessity of outward forms of sacraments, i.e. having wine and wafer is not necessary to have a communal or sacramental experience with the inward Christ. But Quakers are indeed free to participate if we want.
That does not always mean I “take communion” when I am in a situation where the outward elements, i.e. wine and wafer, are available. But I feel free to do so if I want to. This is not an issue in Episcopal Churches and Methodist ones and many others. But when it comes to the Catholic Church, I know I am not supposed to participate. Non-Catholics are not supposed to participate. And so this has caused consternation, not only for non-Catholics, but for so many of my Catholic friends.
All this is background to the Pope’s recent statement on his ride home to Rome. Thomas Reese, author of the article, indicated “Pope Francis made an extraordinary statement on the role of theology in ecumenical relations.” This piqued my interest. Reese is exactly right when he notes, “In the past, church officials have stressed the need for theological agreement before Christian unity or Eucharistic sharing could be possible.” Effectively the rule of the game seemed to be to get the theology straight and then action can follow. And the effectively meant that non-Catholics could not take communion until the theologians worked it out and said we could. Of course, a Catholic could take communion in an Episcopal or Methodist Church. Or they could all come to a Quaker meeting, where communion would be spiritual and not mediated by real wine and wafer!
Apparently on the plane, the Pope switched logic. He is quoted to say, “Ecumenism is not getting to the end of discussions, it’s done walking together…” This is like picking up a kaleidoscope, giving it a twist and getting a whole new picture. It seems now to the Pope, “The journey is more important than the destination.” I like this because it feels right. And it feels right, because it gives hope for something that so many find desirable---recognizing some Catholics do not.
The Pope recognizes that so many different faith traditions already work ecumenically together in many ways. To the author, Reese, this recalls one of the Pope’s famous statements: “facts are more important than ideas.” I find this refreshing. Apparently, the Pope is ready to push this further---at least I hope he is.
It seems the Pope takes it further when he acknowledges, “there is already Christian unity…Let’s not wait for the theologians to come to agreement on the Eucharist.” That is both funny to me and profound. It is also daring. That is what I like about this Pope. And I can appreciate the insight of Thomas Reese in helping me understand how to interpret this. He says “Such a view would see the Eucharist as a unifying sacrament rather than a celebration of unity.”
The implications are clear. This is a case where “the people often lead the way and the theologians follow, not the other way around.” It does not mean theologians are unimportant, but it does mean they are not of paramount importance. For Quakers, we are all theologians---all reflect on our primary experience of faith. And at least, I agree we ought to be able to eat together and work together.
It’s good that we ask the theologians what they think, but let’s not wait for the theologians.
Comments
Post a Comment