I was not sure how to approach this week’s blog. The two
chapters assigned in Rausch (Towards a
Truly Catholic Church, Chapters 5 and 6) discuss one of the very areas
where the Catholic Church and my Baptist beliefs diverge. Leadership, or, in
other words, who gets to safeguard church traditions and why? How did we get
where we are today from a Catholic Church perspective, as well as from a
Protestant or Baptist perspective? The questions may be even more basic than
these: Do we need a leader and if so, what kind and why?
I believe the whole of the biblical experience answers a
resounding ‘yes’ to the first question. Genesis starts out, “In the beginning,
God...” We had the perfect leader, but with us being human, that wasn’t good enough! We
needed a leader we could touch, see and physically relate with. The rest of the
Old Testament follows the natural path of human leadership, including the good,
the bad and the ugly! Then we had the wonderful experience of the perfect
leader in Jesus Christ - A servant, kind, turn-the-other cheek, smart,
Spirit-led, God-ordained leader! Someone we could touch and relate to. We’ve
been trying to re-create that type of leadership ever since!
As Rausch points out, the early leadership of the church
after Jesus’ ascension fell to the apostles, Paul and others, and later to a
myriad of pastors, teachers, deacons, presbyters, bishops, etc... Today’s
Christian churches still reflect that mix. Even within the Catholic Church
there are varied opinions. Vatican II turned the Church from a purely
monarchical type of leadership to one that embraces many within the church as
being called together to lead (128). But is this view of the leadership in the
Catholic Church, as more inclusive instead of exclusive, the working practice
of the Church, or is the Pope still viewed as the infallible ultimate leader by
most practicing Catholics? I’ll leave that discussion to my classmates!
Baptists have leaders. So do Presbyterians, Episcopalians,
the Assemblies of God, and on and on. If you’re interested, or even curious, here’s a link that
does a good job of describing basic Baptist beliefs, including leadership. Many
of them we hold in common with the Catholic Church. Some are diametrically opposed
to each other. Do we need leaders? Yes, they are a Spirit-given gift to all of
us. Why do we need them? Because we human and I believe we work better with
some type of leadership in place. But what kind and how much authority do they
have? Those questions will likely be debated for the next several centuries. As
Ecclesiastes 1:9 states, “What has been will be again, what has been done will
be done again; there is nothing new under the sun (emphasis mine).
-Kathy
The comic is from ‘Catholic Comics’ on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MoreCatholicComics
Kathy, thank you for sharing about the Baptist Church both in class and with the link you posted in your blog. You pose interesting questions about leadership and authority. In social work school we learned the difference between authoritative and authoritarian parenting which can also be applied to leadership styles. An authoritative parent/leader has clear expectations, is encouraging, open to others’ opinions and listens in an effort to help a person meet or exceed expectations. An authoritarian leader dictates right and wrong, is rigid and doles out punishment. For years the church leaders (monarchy) took on an authoritarian role providing dogma and consequences. I think one of the goals of Vatican II was to encourage people to embrace their gifts and to emulate the gospel using those gifts but that does not always shine through. I had the pleasure of attending a Methodist retreat; a beautiful, fruitful experience. The leader, a female pastor, was kind, smart and welcoming. Over the years, she and my friend from that church, introduced me to Julian of Norwich, Richard Rohr, spiritual direction, the Ignatian exercises, the labyrinth and LIM! Why is it that I had to go outside of the Catholic Church to learn about and experience some of the riches from the Catholic Church? Why stay in the Catholic church it is seemingly more concerned with imparting information than with my spiritual formation? The answer came in the months after my father died. I found great comfort in attending mass, the same mass that my father attended without fail for 83 years. When my world was turned upside down, I depended on the constancy of traditions handed down from Jesus to Peter to the Bishops to the priests, to us. “ In these communities, … Christ is present through whose power and influence the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic church is constituted. For the sharing in the body and blood of Christ has no other effect than to accomplish our transformation into that which we receive.” (LG 26) Through mass I could enter into sacred space and be healed and strengthened by being one with Christ in a sacramental way. I experienced growth toward Christ through the leadership, hospitality, and comradery of my friend and her church but I also grew from the solidarity and sacrament of the Liturgy of the Eucharist as celebrated by a priest given authority through the ages from Christ himself.
ReplyDeleteHow does the Catholic Church encourage us to explore our faith and gifts with the greater community? How do we learn from others? I believe the Catholic Church, at least my experience in the Catholic Church, has much to learn from other churches in tending to the flock at the local parish level in providing an authoritative leadership that encourages exploration and growth in the Spirit. While I embrace its tradition I wish that Jesus’ words to Peter, “Tend my lambs, feed my sheep” were fostered more in that tradition among its own members and with all people without fail.
Dear Kathy,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your thoughts here and would like to follow up on your (rhetorical?) question: "But is this view of the leadership in the Catholic Church, as more inclusive instead of exclusive, the working practice of the Church, or is the Pope still viewed as the infallible ultimate leader by most practicing Catholics?"
I would also like to point out that Serenity H has also responded to this but did so under Laura's posting.
From my perspective, understanding infallibility in its proper way is essential to addressing your question. As I noted emphatically last week, this is not a papal "superpower." Nor is it necessarily a burdensome relic of an authoritarian, monarchical Church of the past that has to be regarded in a negative light and something we are now sort of embarrassed of in today's post-Vatican II era of collegiality. These are caricatures of what infallibility means, and it is more helpful to move beyond these to look for the authentic wisdom the teaching carries.
Infallibility in the Catholic understanding is first and foremost a statement about God and God's steadfast commitment to God's gathered people, the Church. If we take seriously the Church's fundamental mission to hand on the content or deposit of faith (aka divine revelation culminating in Jesus Christ, handed on via scripture and tradition) and we take seriously the animating, empowering and guiding presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church to accomplish this, then we are left with two conclusions: the Church is called to communicate authentically our faith and that the Holy Spirit is intimately involved in this. This is the key idea behind infallibility. It is fundamentally the Church's infallibility, though it comes to expression through the ministry of our bishops, specifically the Bishop of Rome.
When it comes to communicating the faith, the Pope as Bishop of Rome and as head of the universal Church has a special teaching role. This is a teaching role he shares in some respect with all the bishops around the world; teaching is a key charism of the bishop's role. As we noted in class, from the early church onward, the Bishop of Rome has been recognized by his brother bishops has having a special role, a special authority. In light of this in our present day, the Roman Catholic Church sees a teaching function proper to the Pope that has a universal scope.
Putting this together with the paragraph above, we are left with the special teaching ministry of the Pope, coupled with the understanding of the Holy Spirit as intimately involved in the Church's effort to hand on the content of faith. Infallibility then means that when the Pope teaches in his most official capacity (called "ex cathedra") on a matter of faith or morals (these all indicate that the occasion has to be a formal gesture concerning serious content) the Holy Spirit preserves him from making an error.
NB: Lumen Gentium 25 also emphasizes that the Church's infallibility is not exclusive to the Pope - it includes the universal ordinary magisterium (bishops around the world) as well as when the bishops are formally gathered with the Pope as one voice on a matter.
I hope this helps. Infallibility is a beautiful sign of God's faithfulness and guidance - it is a teaching about the power of the Spirit, about trust, and about God's mercy in and through the work of us imperfect servants.
Blessings,
Daniella