Love the Church

There is nothing like a Papal Conclave to grab the world’s attention, as even the networks give it live coverage, reserved for major world events. Even many non-Roman Catholics were glued to their TV screens, as reporters filled the space with “expert” commentators, speculation on “front-runners,” and Vatican trivia. Since the serious part of the proceedings are secret, the TV is left with less action than reporting a live move-by-move chess tournament, but they carry on valiantly, if not very usefully, to keep the talk going. The drama of the eventual white smoke and appearance of the unexpected (rarely a “front-runner”) new pontiff makes for a happy ending. And many millions of unchurched, or rarely churched, have formed an impression of the Church from this exposure.

“The Church?” What response do we receive if we ask people in general what that means to them? This close to a Papal Conclave, I suspect for many, especially unchurched people, the response would be of a rich, colorful, mostly irrelevant institution filled with ceremonies, archaic customs, finely vested clergy and sublime classic religious music sung by skilled choirs in settings of resplendent art.

At other times, the response might be more a picture of a plethora of denominations, in various stages of disagreement with each other, with a wide range of institutional splendor, or lack of it, and agreement mostly in denouncing anything regarded as fun. Increasingly, American Christianity is identified as a partner, or even source, of right-wing politics.

For others, the Church is represented by the clergy or even a hierarchy. A Mormon might well identify it as the apostles in Salt Lake City, others with a particular pastor, still others with a face on TV, such as Joel Osteen or Bishop Jakes. The majority of the world’s Christians, with apostolic bishops, can easily identify their hierarchy. And with the Papacy, Roman Catholics have the highest profile hierarchy of all, as noted above.

While all of the above are aspects of churches, none of it defines the Church, at least the Church the New Testament and historic Christianity talk about. After Hurricane Katrina, I remember watching a TV news reporter talking to an Episcopal priest on the Gulf Coast. The priest was standing on a lot where a pile of flattened wreckage was all that remained of the church building which had stood there. “Do you feel sad about losing your church?” the reporter asked. “I haven’t lost my church,” the priest replied, waving his arm to indicate parishioners behind him who were poking in the wreckage, looking for items to salvage.

Indeed. “Built on a Rock, the church doth stand, even when steeples are falling,” as the classic hymn written by Bishop Grundtvig proclaims. The Church began, and thrived for some centuries with precious little institutional structure, minimal hierarchy and no church buildings. She exists today in that form in some places around the world.

But many still remain unclear on an accurate definition of the Church. More than a few identify with the physical building, perhaps because of its beauty, perhaps because it is historic, perhaps because family donated a stained glass window or similar gift, perhaps because of relatives buried in the churchyard.

Others see the Church as an organization, with a budget and wealth in property, or investments, and, as noted above, run by clergy who define what the organization is. But organizations, whether ecclesiastical or not, are run by flawed people. The scandals of recent decades regarding pedophilia and recurrent problems with leaders who steal the organization’s money or muddle the Christian message with a political ideology or drastically breach its moral standards have driven away many people because they see a flawed group in which they want no part.

It is a wonder, in fact, that the Church continues to survive, and in many ways, to thrive, after two millennia of flawed sinners leading it. In that timeframe, all other organizations, even powerful seemingly indestructible empires have risen and fallen, fading into the dustbin of history. The key to this may be found in the Book of Acts, as it describes the events of the first Christian celebration of Pentecost (see Acts 2), whose anniversary we are currently observing. A sound “like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven,” and “all of them were filled with the Holy Spirit.” Peter, in explaining the event, quotes the prophet Joel, “God says, I will pour out my Spirit.” In other words, we have help.

To put it another way around, Arnold Toynbee (“A Study of History”) quotes a “well known Roman Catholic man of letters,” who said, “I believe that the Catholic Church is divine, and the proof of its divinity I take to be this: that no merely human institution conducted with such knavish imbecility would have lasted a fortnight.”

Loving someone is not about admiring their perfection. “Love covers over a multitude of sins,” Peter tells us (1 Peter 4:8). This includes love in the Church and for church people. Even knavish imbeciles need to be loved, even as we struggle against the imbecility and its consequences.

This brings us back to the definition of the Church. Paul in particular uses the analogy of the body. In baptism, we are entered into the Body of Christ, and “we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Ephesians 4:15-16).

Thus, to love the Church is nothing more nor less than to love the Body of Christ, the “very members incorporate in the mystical Body of thy Son, which is the blessed company of all faithful people” (post-Communion thanksgiving prayer, 1928 BCP). The “members incorporate” are all sinners. So are you. So am I. Nevertheless, here we are, accepted into the Body of the most holy Head.

Nor when you love someone does it work just to love their head. We function as incarnate beings, all sealed into one being, as does Jesus, hypostatically among us, united through Eucharistic action, repeatedly and infinitely. How Jesus tolerates this, miserable sinners absorbed into the holy Unity, can be explained only by love, specifically agape love.

As we celebrate another in the long series of anniversaries of the birth of the Church at Pentecost, we give thanks for the gift of the Spirit, promised by Jesus to his disciples. As the Spirit still today continually heals, corrects and guides the Body of Christ, we hear the words of Paul to “live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us” (Eph. 5:2). Knaves, imbeciles and all of us damaged humans can love and be loved. That is what it means to love the Church.

+Win Mott