Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 07:28:08 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: What's Important And What Do You Do?
              23 Jul 1992 15:02:39 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

Darren,

Your questions about attending a church of whose policies one disap-
proves seem to reflect a Protestant understanding of churches.  Since
you are a Protestant, this is not at all surprising, but not everyone
shares that understanding.  Having seen how even the best-intentioned
and irenical non-Catholics sometimes misunderstand and misrepresent
Catholic teaching and practices I am hesitant to try to describe
Protestant beliefs, so what I am about to say should be understood as
a very broad generalization.  Also, I am writing to describe the
beliefs, not to try to prove that the Catholic view is correct, so I
will not cite scriptural and historical evidence to support my be-
lief.

Many (most?) Protestants seem to think of Christ's Church as only the
fellowship of the elect.  It is an invisible Church with no necessary
organizational structure.  Individual churches, denominations, con-
gregations, etc. are man-made assemblies of members of the one,
invisible Church who agree on certain theological points they find
important or on a particular style of worship, or something like
that.  I think that from time to time on Christia some people have
said they had moved to a new home and were looking for a church.
From that point of view if someone finds that he disagrees with the
policies of his local church or denomination it is no big thing to
look for another one that he finds more congenial.

The Catholic view of Christ's Church, which I think is shared by
Eastern Orthodox Christians with some important modifications, is
that Jesus founded His Church as a specific organization.  This does
not deny the idea of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ.  That
is a central Catholic doctrine.  However, the Mystical Body and the
organization are interrelated.  We believe that Jesus founded his
Church with the Apostles as the first bishops and St. Peter as the
first pope.  (Eastern Orthodox Christians accept the first part of
that statement, but not the second.)  The bishops of today are the
successors of the Apostles and derive their authority to teach and
govern through that succession.  The Church is not just a denomina-
tion.  While a Catholic may move from one parish to another for
reasons of style, leaving the Church itself is a major step that
involves abandoning basic beliefs.

You asked specifically about the Episcopal Church.  It is in the
middle.  Some Anglicans/Episcopalians are very High Church, and
insist they are "Catholic but not Roman."  Some others are very Low
Church and insist they are Protestants.  Some others are somewhere
in between.  I will leave it to Episcopalians to discuss this point
in more detail if they want to.  I mention it only to point out that
especially for those Episcopalians who take a relative High Church
view, the idea of leaving their church because of policy disagree-
ments is not as simple as it would be for a Baptist.

Also, it is important to remember that a church's political policies
are not the same as its doctrinal statements.  Especially for church-
es, such as the Episcopal Church, that have national organizations,
statements on political and social issues generally are written by
ecclesiastical bureaucrats.  These bureaucrats frequently are not
representative of the church as a whole.  (This is a problem in the
Catholic Church, too.)  Therefore, a pro-life Episcopalian can de-
plore and oppose the pro-abortion policies of his church without
having any disagreements on doctrinal issues.  (The pro-abortion
policies may be incompatible with Episcopal doctrine, but that is a
problem for the pro-abortion Episcopalians, not the pro-life ones.)

You say, "One person remains Episcopalian at least in part hoping to
change the stand of the Episcopal church.  My (unclear) question was
about where the line should be drawn in such situations; is it okay
to be a member of the KKK if you hope to change the KKK?  Would it be
okay to work with the Gestapo while trying to change it from within?
At what point does remaining a member become improper, and why?"

I find that question bizarre.  Churches exist to serve God, to wor-
ship God, to proclaim God's revealed truths to the world.  I think
that is a point on which Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants agree.
Someone who believes in God and in Jesus as Lord, God, and Savior,
recognizes that these are good things to do.  If a member of a church
comes to the conclusion that his church is not doing these things the
way God wants them to be done, it makes sense to decide whether the
things to which he objects are abuses or corruptions that should be
corrected internally or are fundamental defects that make it neces-
sary to find another church that is doing them the way God wants them
done.   However, there is no good reason to belong to the KKK.  The
Klan is a hate group that exists to promote white, Protestant, na-
tive-born-American-of-northern-European-ancestry supremacy over
blacks, Jews, Catholics, and immigrants.  One cannot improve the
Klan.  If one removed the objectionable features there would be
nothing left.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU