There is a myth so dear to most Christians that we have developed various versions of it to comfort ourselves with. It goes like this:
Once upon a time the Church was perfect. Unfortunately in [A] [B] happened and things have never been the same since. For [A] substitute some date in the dim and distant past. If you don't know the date, a vague nod in the general direction of some past century or other will do. For [B] substitute the name of whatever it was that ruined things. A helpful list follows:
* the fall of Jerusalem
* the end of the New Testament era
* the Apostle Paul
* the suppression of the Gospel of Thomas
* the Reformation
* Vatican 2
* Sunday sports
* Constantine
* St. Augustine
The last two are particularly popular as villains because they each mark significant turning points in the development of the Church, very few people are as knowledgeable about them as they give the impression of being, and it's not difficult to find incriminating proof texts. I spent today listening as Andrew McGowan tried, and in my view, succeeded, in putting each into their historical context, and discussed each as an exemplar of a particular strategy for relating temporal power to spiritual authority. As Andrew pointed out, the Church has been conflicted and ambiguous from day one, as is to be expected of those who gather round one whose strength is demonstrated principally in an act of vulnerability and weakness.
The implications of the lectures we have received here have been discussed in caucus groups; yesterday I talked to other bishops and today was in a men's group and a group of people in their fifties. Discussion has been warm, and occasionally profound. Talking has helped me assimilate the material from Andrew and relate it to the not unrelated stuff I had been serendipitously reading before coming here. One of the theses emerging is the resonance between issues emerging around the formation of Christendom, and those emerging around its ending; a resonance important not because it marks out some golden era to which we should all strive to return, but because it shows the sorts of struggles we are likely to encounter as we learn to be a different sort of church than has ever existed before.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Location:Gladstone Rd,Auckland,New Zealand
Comments
You are just assuming that you will be shaping the Church of the future. Are you shaping and changing lives now? Why not?
That whole "good old days" thing drives me nutty. The old days were not necessarily better - there were dumb people doing dumb things, just as there are now. And there were happy people too. And the majority just muddled along.
And the future is not necessarily going to be worse. There will still be dumb people doing dumb things, and happy people too. And the majority will still just muddle along.
The problem comes when we try to blame something other than ourselves for the way things are, and assume that we can't change them. It's the whole "let's sit back and blame X" philosophy that irks me.
Maybe we wouldn't have to blame X if more of us got off our overly padded rear ends and got active making our communities the sort of places where we can look back on history and say, "you know what? History sucked. Today things are much better. Thanks to us!"
Okay, now I'm procrastinating / waffling. Didn't you say something about that in another post? ;-)