Yesterday, I shared the general audience address of Pope Francis from last week on Christian unity. Today I would like to offer some simple commentary and explanation of this amazing address.
The pope began his audience by saying:
Today I will focus upon another expression with which the Second Vatican Council indicates the nature of the Church: that of the body, the Council says that the Church is the Body of Christ (cf. Lumen Gentium, 7).
Lumen Gentium, in English, means: “The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church.” It is one of sixteen dogmatic documents that make up the whole of Vatican Council II’s work. Lumen Gentium was the third of the sixteen formal documents, or decrees, that were passed by the council between October 1962 and December 8, 1965. Here is a part of that dogmatic constitution cited by Pope Francis last week:
The present-day conditions of the world add greater urgency to this work of the Church so that all men, joined more closely today by various social, technical and cultural ties, might also attain fuller unity in Christ.
It is generally agreed that this “urgency” was one of the primary reasons for Vatican II. It is also understood that this is a primary reason for the “New Evangelization” – now a major part of official Catholic teaching. I, for one, pray that the new evangelization will grow and capture the hearts and minds of millions of Catholics, especially in the U.S.
He then added to this quotation from Lumen Gentium his own words, saying:
I would like to start from a text of the Acts of the Apostles which we know well: the conversion of Saul, who will then be called Paul, one of the greatest evangelists (cf. Acts 9:4-5). Saul was a persecutor of Christians, but while he is on the road leading to the city of Damascus, suddenly a light envelops him, he falls to the ground and hears a voice saying “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? He asks: “Who are you, Lord?”, And the voice answers: “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting” (v. 3-5). This experience of St. Paul tells us how deep the union between we Christians and Christ Himself
You will note, if you read the entirety of the pope’s address in context, that he is not denying that the Roman Catholic Church is the one church but rather he is using statements from Vatican II to remind us that all of those who share in the one Spirit are true brothers and sisters in Christ. This is THE important thing to note in the first part of his general address on Christian unity.
This statement confuses both Catholics and evangelicals. How can it be said that we evangelicals are not inside the one church yet we are called brothers and sisters? In short, the answer to this query has to do with specific Catholic thinking about the nature of the church. Because the church has one earthly head, the bishop of Rome, and because the Catholic Church confesses itself to be the one continuous church of Christ, both sacramentally and historically, it claims to be the visible true church on the earth. But, and this is essential to understand, the Catholic Church does not claim that only members within her communion are true brothers and sisters in Christ. (It doesn’t even claim that all Catholics are true brothers and sisters in Christ, given what it also says in many other places about the necessity of true faith and works that reveal the grace of God at work in the human soul through divine love in operation.) There are brothers and sisters in Christ who are not Catholics. At another place Vatican II called these “separated” brothers and sisters, meaning separated from the communion on earth of the church sacramentally but nonetheless within the mystery of Christ’s body on the earth. It takes some careful and studied reading to see this but it is abundantly clear to all who do the work.
Related Posts
Comments
My Latest Book!
Use Promo code UNITY for 40% discount!
Removing the communion restrictions would go a long way toward clarifying this.
Right, it was humiliating to attend my son’s wedding in the Catholic church some years ago and not be able to receive the Sacrament because, according to Catholic missal statements, I am not in communion with the Holy Father. Sorry, I thought it was the Lord’s table, not the Pope’s.
The same goes for not being able to receive Communion in the Missouri Synod Lutheran church I have attended a few times. That has to do with necessary belief in “consubstantiation,” I think. It is not very unifying to attend other churches and be treated as a second-class citizen.
Richard, from the Catholic perspective, receiving Holy Communion is, among other things, saying with your whole body and soul:
“Lord Jesus, I am a baptized Christian who assents to and believes everything the Catholic Church teaches to be true about You, about the Eucharist, and about herself; help me, Lord, with any doubts and struggles I have with those teachings. Lord, I accept the governing authority of the priest/s celebrating this Mass, his bishop and all the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome, and of the Bishop of Rome himself. Lord, in my conscience I am not aware of any mortal sins for which I have not previously made a good sacramental Confession; help me, Lord, in my struggle with temptation and sin, and lead me quickly to repentance and the Sacrament of Penance should I fall after receiving you in this Holy Communion of your Body and Blood.”
Before receiving Holy Communion, a Catholic Christian should be able to say to himself and to his Lord that all the above truly pertains to him — that is to say that he or she is properly “disposed”, has the proper “disposition”. If not, then s/he should not go forward to partake of the Eucharist. Likewise, consider that to receive is to bodily witness to those participating in the Eucharistic liturgy that all the above does pertain to oneself.
How many Catholics actually understand that? I’m not sure… with sadness I can say that I expect many do not understand it, or have an erroneous conscience by which they excuse themselves to receive Our Lord without the proper disposition.
However, when we turn to the case of non-Catholic Christians, the situation is pretty straightforward. If they do not have the disposition outlined above (if they did, they would be Catholics already), then to receive would manifest a grave contradiction about their persons. Thus, their partaking of the Eucharist must be anticipated by their coming into full communion with the Catholic Church and attaining to the proper disposition, in and by Divine Grace (not merely by human effort, of course).
I grew up in a family divided along Protestant and Catholic lines, so I am aware first-hand of the hurt feelings and sense of exclusion, even humiliation, that can arise from “closed communion”. Stepping back a bit, surely it is a powerful reminder that, in fact, not all Christians are united in what they believe and with respect to Church governance. It ought to be too a powerful motivator to — by prayer, charity, and dialogue — personally work for unity among Christians, that we may all be one as the Lord Jesus prayed we would be.
What I’ve outlined above is not simply my personal take on the matter, or a view conditioned by present historical circumstances. From recent papal teachings, reaching back through the Second Vatican Council, to Trent and further back, this is simply “meat and potatoes” Catholic teaching and will always be so.
One final thought is that Catholic Christians, myself included, could certainly do a better job of helping our non-Catholic friends to understand the “why” of our rules regarding Communion, and to do so with charity and respect. I hope I have done so here (which is not to say that I expect you will relish my words or agree with me).
Pax Christi.
I wanted to note also that while Lumen Gentium is an extremely important document, it simply must be read alongside a related document, Pope Pius XII’s “Mysitici Corporis Christi” (The Mystical Body of Christ), published about 20 years prior:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061943_mystici-corporis-christi_en.html
Lumen Gentium cites Pius XII’s encyclical several times, and if they are not read together, one risks not possessing the full vocabulary and immediate doctrinal context needed to properly parse the document of the Second Vatican Council.
Michael, I’m afraid you’ve lost me in the technicalities of Catholic teaching, in which I have no expertise. I guess it depends on what we think Holy Communion really is, based on what Scripture says about it (and Scripture looks at it from several different angles). Personally, I focus on Jesus’s words, “This is the new covenant in my blood,” and see the Lord’s Supper as a parallel to the meal of Moses and the elders of Israel on Mount Sinai, when “they beheld God, and ate and drank” (Exodus 24:11). I also focus on Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 10:16-17, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” There’s nothing here about our acceptance of any ecclesiastical authority, or about any personal “disposition” we might have. The rite is a koinonia, or participation, in the covenanted community which is the body of Christ, and its efficacy doesn’t depend on my beliefs. The very act of participation is an act of loyalty to Christ and obedience to his ordinance, “Do this,” and an affirmation of our response to God’s covenant. In other words, that action itself is the statement of belief; it doesn’t have to follow from some prior acceptance of belief.
Richard, thank you. You express your beliefs clearly and beautifully, and I respect that.
Obviously, there is a divergence between your understanding of the Lord’s Supper and that proposed for belief by the Catholic Church. The best short but thorough statement of Catholic teaching on the Eucharist is, I think, the chapter dedicated to that sacrament in the universal Catechism promulgated by Pope John Paul II:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c1a3.htm
The same Bishop of Rome also published a beautiful teaching letter on the Eucharist, “Ecclesia de Eucharistia”:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/special_features/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_20030417_ecclesia_eucharistia_en.html
Peace of Christ be with you.
Thank you John. I understand the evangelical understanding of the Church better than the Catholic view. I’m finding it hard to understand their view that they are the one true continuous Church on earth but at the same time allow for those outside the Catholic walls to be considered part of Christ’s body. I will continue reading to flesh this out.
Richard John Neuhaus often spoke of how the Catholic Church sees the FULLNESS of the Catholic faith subsisted in “that Church led by bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome,” but that it was a departure from Catholic teaching to see the Church of Rome as the entire Catholic church “without remainder.” While you & I would differ with that formulation, it’s a great place to begin!
Michael Bradley liked this on Facebook.
Denise Murphy Plichta liked this on Facebook.
Kevin Branson liked this on Facebook.
Sarah Canatsey liked this on Facebook.
Barry Grecu liked this on Facebook.
Albert Anthony Cota liked this on Facebook.
Lori Bragg Harris liked this on Facebook.