http://www.uscatholic.org/church/2008/07/cafeteria-catholics
I often write in order to sort something out in my own mind. Bringing what's tumbling around in my head in an irritating way to the page can bring clarity. So I hope it to be with this issue of "cafeteria Catholics". What does this mean? It is typically used as a derogatory term for those who claim to be Catholic yet do not believe or practice everything the Church teaches. Right away, the use of this term toward others puts one into a "holier than thou" position, which brings about the sin of pride. The remedy to pride is humility. That's why I liked the "Cafeteria Catholics" article from U.S. Catholic linked above. It encouraged in me the impulse to lighten up, to not take myself so seriously, and to detach from the scrupulousness I have been witnessing among certain Catholics and have noticed in myself.
It is understandable that as a recent convert to Catholicism, I would be disturbed by the memory of statements made by RCIA staff members that they do not believe everything the Church teaches, and especially by the claim of one of them that neither does our priest. Maybe people in a leadership position would serve newcomers to the faith best if they did not openly express their doubts. Then again, maybe knowing that even devout Catholics can have a crisis of faith, or experience periods of questioning certain teachings, provides an important role model. It is human, and a natural part of the faith journey, to go through various stages of maturity. I do think that if a leader does express disbelief that he or she should do so with caution, and with a specific explanation given and particular purpose for sharing it.
The priest who authored the article speaks a lot about the diversity of Church members. This makes me think of something my grandpa once said: "Everyone sitting in church believes a little bit differently. The important thing is that we go." I think that stuck with me because of its simple but profound truth. Everyone sitting in Mass is there to worship God to the best of his or her ability, and no one does it perfectly. They are there to receive Jesus in the Eucharist, whether or not they have a complete understanding of, or belief in, the Church's teachings. One parishioner may have theologically or historically valid reasons in mind for why she thinks the Church should allow the ordination of women. Another might be struggling with why the Church thinks contraception is intrinsically evil and may not entirely agree.
When the priest in the article talks about the teaching of transubstantiation being a difficult one for answering a definitive "yes" or "no" in regard to belief, he comes across as potentially heretical. Yet I think he is trying to say that he believes in the Real Presence of Jesus in the consecrated bread and wine, but that how this miracle takes place could be explained and understood in a number of ways. In the Bread of Life Discourse in John 6: 47-59, in tandem with the events of the Last Supper in the synoptic Gospels, the truth of what the Church calls transubstantiation is clear.
Jesus talks graphically about the necessity of eating of his flesh and drinking his blood, and at the Last Supper he establishes the sacrament of Communion, which explicates how exactly we will be able to partake of his body and blood. But this is still a great mystery of the faith, and theologians have used various metaphors for how the bread and wine still looks and tastes the same but has somehow become the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus, which he gives us for spiritual nourishment and to conform us to himself in one Mystical Body. Transubstantiation is the official Church teaching, but that does not exclude other notions of the Real Presence, as long as they do not conflict with Church doctrine. Being overly scrupulous can have the effect of taking the awe and beauty out of the great Mystery of Faith.
When it comes to faith, not everyone has to be in the same place, on the same page. Faith is a state of being which lives, breathes, and grows. It can even have its dark nights of the soul. The key here is that we don't judge one another's spiritual path. That we seek to understand another person's view, find the common ground, and engage in compassionate, meaningful dialogue. Yes, I believe everything the Church teaches and submit to her authority in matters of faith and morals. At the same time, I endeavor toward a faith that is personal, that is unique to me.
For example, I believe in the Trinity, the teaching established by the authority of the Catholic Church that there is one God in three divine persons--the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This is Church dogma, which all of the faithful are compelled to believe. My personal theology is that in the relationship of the three persons of the Trinity there exists a "feminine" dimension, though of course God is pure spirit, neither male nor female. That God contains the perfection of the qualities of both a father and a mother is official Church teaching. The way I understand the feminine principle of the Trinity doesn't contradict Church doctrine as far as I am aware.
Basically I believe that the biblical character of Wisdom reveals the feminine nature of God, and most expressly the bridal-maternal qualities of the Holy Spirit. It is also Church teaching that the Virgin Mary is the "dwelling" of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, I perceive that Mary is a personal manifestation and especial sanctuary of Wisdom. There have been and are orthodox Catholics who believe in a similar way, such as Thomas Merton and St. Maximilian Kolbe, while there are others who decidedly don't.
The Church does not demand a blind obedience to her doctrines. She does, in fact, encourage intellectual discernment in regard to religious beliefs and the application of the informed conscience in moral considerations.
We do not all need to believe in exactly the same way. The notion that everyone should be the same is actually part of the heresy of modernism, which the U.S. seems especially prone toward, and from whence "political correctness" is derived. Perhaps most damaging is that our sins of pride and our rigid, judgmental scruples will be reflected in our children. We need to accept our differences, even if we strongly disagree. We must try to see Christ in every face; but I'm not there yet, and that's okay. I just need to do my best to follow our Lord. And that's all we can ask of one another. If we truly need to correct a brother or sister in a matter of grave importance, let us do so with humility and lovingkindness.
topics
Showing posts with label Bread of Life discourse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bread of Life discourse. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Holy Communion through a Child's Eyes
The Last Supper
Beezy's religious education class is currently preparing for their first sacrament of Holy Communion, which will take place at Mass on April 28. "I can't wait to have the bread and wine, can you?" she asked me. I will receive my First Communion at the Easter Vigil at the end of March. I know that she will be bummed that she has to wait longer than me! Why the excitement? Is it because she will get to taste wine? No, she has already tasted wine, and she didn't like it. It's because Catholics believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist; that is, the bread becomes Jesus' body, and the wine becomes his blood. This is called transubstantiation, and it is understood literally.
When I was in my 20s, I scoffed at a young Catholic woman who tried to explain transubstantiation to me. "That's just silly!" I remarked. "It's only a symbol," I said with confidence. "But that's what we believe," she answered in exasperation. I show you my lack of humility and my arrogance, dear reader, to illustrate that we often fail to believe in things that we can't logically explain and understand. But why believe that the bread and wine are really Jesus' body and blood at all? Because Jesus said so, that's why. I give you John 6: 52-58:
"The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?' So Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.' "
And that's what Beezy told me. Communion is so exciting because it makes you live forever! But this is a parable, the non-Catholic might argue. First of all, from a literary standpoint, this is not a parable, and you will just have to take my word as a Bachelor of English for it. Also, when Jesus teaches in parables, he always explains the metaphor. He says that this is like that, specifically using the simile language of "like" or "as" to clear up the listeners' confusion. He doesn't do that here. In fact, "After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer walked with him (v. 66)." He doesn't call them back. He doesn't say, "Wait, I was speaking in parable! It was a metaphor!! Let me explain!!!" He lets them go, for they have no faith.
Jesus always explains his parables, so this is evidently not a metaphorical story. There is no plot; this passage is labeled as a discourse. And Jesus repeats himself five times in a row to make sure we get this! This is of the utmost importance, a teaching not to be missed or brushed off as merely symbolic. He expected his true disciples to believe even if they did not understand, yet he does eventually tell the twelve how, exactly, they will be able to eat of his flesh and drink of his blood. I give you Matthew 26: 26-29:
"Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, 'Take, eat; this is my body.' And he took the chalice, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, 'Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.' "
Did Jesus say that the bread and wine were like his body and blood? No, he said, this is. Again, no explanation of a parable, because this is no metaphor. Holy Communion is the center of Catholic faith and worship. It literally provides spiritual sustenance and eternal life. It is Jesus abiding in us, and we in him, body, soul, and divinity. And it is of undisputed historical record that the earliest Christians believed and practiced this, in the very first century of Christianity. This is why I am joining the Catholic Church and raising my child Catholic. She deserves this gift from the hand of our Lord and Savior, and this is Organic Mothering at its best! I wish I could find that Catholic woman that I laughed at and apologize to her. I thought I was right, but that was no excuse for my disrespect of her beliefs, and I rejoice that I was wrong after all!! As Jesus' mother Mary said, "Do whatever he tells you."
Wedding Feast at Cana
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)