"Church" Is as Church Does
Last week, big news from the Vatican which could have an impact on future ecumenical relations with other Christians.
But I’m not talking about what you might think I’m talking about.
You may suppose I’m referring to the “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church,” dated June 29, 2007, from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Holy Office), where Benedict XVI used to be in charge. This brief, new document deals with limits on the use of the term “Church” in Roman Catholic thinking.
Actually, this is not really news. Over the years there have been several documents on the subject. They all make pretty much the same point: that in classic Roman Catholic usage, “Church” refers in a definitive way only to the Roman Catholic Church. Under certain circumstances, “Church” can be applied to the Orthodox Churches, but that’s about it. Protestants just don’t fit in. The point has been made repeatedly in recent years:
· In the June 30, 2000 Holy Office “Note on the Expression ‘Sister Churches’” – which doesn’t seem to mention that Pope Paul VI had used that very term in reference to the Anglican Communion in 1970.
· In the “Declaration” Dominus Iesus of August 6, 2000, also from the Holy Office, which is subtitled “On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church.”
· And just this week, in the Holy Office’s “Responses,” yet another text on the same theme.
Naturally there have been some rather irate responses to the “Responses.” Some have felt, and with reason, that this document could be considered a rather high-handed and ecumenically awkward reversion to claims that seem dismissive of others – and not strictly necessary or helpful for the doctrine of the church, for that matter. Atheists (who are enjoying something a boom lately) are having a grand time with this.
It remains to be seen how much damage has been done by this unilateral reminder of obstinacy at Rome. Still, it is notable that the point cautioning Roman Catholics to restrict their use of the word “Church” has to be revisited and restated so often. Could it be that people just don’t get it?
Anyway, the “Responses” document doesn’t seem to be creating a very large stir worldwide among Roman Catholics. There, the big news last week was…. Latin Masses! The Pope has loosened restrictions on celebrating the pre-Vatican II Mass, the Tridentine liturgy from the days of the Council of Trent. (1545-1563) In this case as well it remains to be seen whether folks will flock to the old liturgy. And whether a potential resurgence of Tridentine practices will have a further chilling effect on possibilities in ecumenism.
But I’m not talking about what you might think I’m talking about.
You may suppose I’m referring to the “Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church,” dated June 29, 2007, from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Holy Office), where Benedict XVI used to be in charge. This brief, new document deals with limits on the use of the term “Church” in Roman Catholic thinking.
Actually, this is not really news. Over the years there have been several documents on the subject. They all make pretty much the same point: that in classic Roman Catholic usage, “Church” refers in a definitive way only to the Roman Catholic Church. Under certain circumstances, “Church” can be applied to the Orthodox Churches, but that’s about it. Protestants just don’t fit in. The point has been made repeatedly in recent years:
· In the June 30, 2000 Holy Office “Note on the Expression ‘Sister Churches’” – which doesn’t seem to mention that Pope Paul VI had used that very term in reference to the Anglican Communion in 1970.
· In the “Declaration” Dominus Iesus of August 6, 2000, also from the Holy Office, which is subtitled “On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church.”
· And just this week, in the Holy Office’s “Responses,” yet another text on the same theme.
Naturally there have been some rather irate responses to the “Responses.” Some have felt, and with reason, that this document could be considered a rather high-handed and ecumenically awkward reversion to claims that seem dismissive of others – and not strictly necessary or helpful for the doctrine of the church, for that matter. Atheists (who are enjoying something a boom lately) are having a grand time with this.
It remains to be seen how much damage has been done by this unilateral reminder of obstinacy at Rome. Still, it is notable that the point cautioning Roman Catholics to restrict their use of the word “Church” has to be revisited and restated so often. Could it be that people just don’t get it?
Anyway, the “Responses” document doesn’t seem to be creating a very large stir worldwide among Roman Catholics. There, the big news last week was…. Latin Masses! The Pope has loosened restrictions on celebrating the pre-Vatican II Mass, the Tridentine liturgy from the days of the Council of Trent. (1545-1563) In this case as well it remains to be seen whether folks will flock to the old liturgy. And whether a potential resurgence of Tridentine practices will have a further chilling effect on possibilities in ecumenism.
posted by David at 9:28 AM
1 comments
