Ekklesia, Part VIII: Communion Amidst the Threat of Polarization

This is the final article in an eight-part series on the nature and mission of the Church in the contemporary world. As Roman Catholics, we believe that being a disciple of Jesus means living out our commitment through active involvement in the community called Church. In this series we have explored the origins and characteristics of the Christian community, as well as some of the challenges that the Church faces in the contemporary world.

In his book A People Adrift (Simon & Schuster, 2003), Peter Steinfels, who writes on religion for The New York Times, talks in a nuanced but straightforward way about polarization within the U.S. Catholic Church. He speaks about the strategies by which various camps in the Church attempt to demonize those with whom they disagree. In the statement of the Catholic Common Ground Project entitled “Called to be Catholic,” written shortly before the death of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin in 1996, there was also a reference to polarization among Catholics. The statement speaks of a division between Catholics that blocks candid and constructive response to the situation of differences and challenges within the Church. It alludes to a dynamic of fear that affects the Church’s discussion of important issues.

One author who has attempted to address this reality of division is Timothy Radcliffe, OP, the former Master General of the Dominican Order. In What is the Point of Being Christian? (Continuum, 2006), Radcliffe offers some compelling observations about the core of our Christian faith that provide an important backdrop to his discussion of polarization. He suggests that as followers of Jesus Christ the grace of God gives us the capacity to resist the degradation of relationship into bonds of ownership and exploitation, of dominance, violence and unconcern. In Christ the capacity for relationship has been transformed. Drawing on the ideas of fellow Dominican theologian Herbert McCabe, Radcliffe remarks: “Our human vocation is to go on searching for new and deeper ways of belonging together, new ways of speaking, which realize our capacity for communion more profoundly.” (159) He describes Christ as the one who bore in his body all the violence that human beings turn against each other. Christ bore in himself all the breakdown of communication in human history. The resurrection of Jesus represents the victory of communion over all that separates us from each other. We remember and proclaim this victory every time we celebrate the Eucharist, which is the sacrament of pure communion in Christ. In a striking comment, Radcliffe says, “There is no universal language of pure communion except Christ, and we do not yet know fully how to speak the Word that he is.” (161)

Radcliffe suggests that there are two distinct ways of envisioning what it means to be Catholic today. He recognizes that these categorizations do not do justice to all of the diversity within the Catholic Church, but he thinks that they illuminate two different ways of envisioning the Church and its mission. He calls the first group “Kingdom Catholics.” These Catholics view the Church primarily as the people of God on pilgrimage toward the reign of God. They are inspired by an outward-looking theology that prizes the liberation that Christ has brought for all people. The description of the relationship between the Church and the world found in Gaudium et spes (The Pastoral Constitution on the Modern World of Vatican II) resonates with the convictions and the vision of these Catholics. The Church must dialogue with the world and discern the signs of the times – the many ways that God is still speaking to us in and through contemporary realities. Kingdom Catholics tend to highlight the doctrine of the incarnation, God’s assuming human nature in Jesus and, with that, God’s embrace of the entire human family. This view puts a strong emphasis on praxis – reflective action – particularly action inspired by the preferential option for the poor. This group of Catholics tends to be counter-cultural in its views about social justice.

Radcliffe calls the second group “Communion Catholics.” I disagree with this label because, as I will try to show below, “communion” (communio in Latin) is a foundational and inclusive notion that, I believe, can speak to both groups. Be that as it may, Radcliffe describes this second group as believers who particularly treasure the distinctiveness of Catholic identity, the exquisite beauty of the tradition. The theological work of Pope Benedict XVI inspires this group. Their central doctrine is the cross and they maintain that the center of the Church’s life is adoration and praise. They tend to be counter-cultural in their views about personal morality and the need for regular practice of the faith. Younger Catholics who are attracted to this way of thinking appreciate its emphasis on what is distinctive about being Catholic.

It is tempting for believers to become narrowly focused in their vision of what it means to be Catholic. Citing broader societal trends reported by prominent scholars, Radcliffe notes that the mobility of modern society pushes us toward communities of the like-minded. We tend to dwell with the people with whom we agree and cling to the vision that makes us feel comfortable. John Allen, Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, has offered similar observations drawn from his experience of addressing many different Catholic groups around the world. In the 2004 annual lecture for the Catholic Common Ground Initiative, Allen remarked: “The alarming phenomenon is not merely that Catholics seem angry with one another, but that they increasingly seem to be speaking separate languages. Self-identified ‘progressive’ Catholics read their own publications, listen to their own speakers, attend their own conferences and think their own thoughts. Self-identified ‘conservatives’ do the same. Hence when you bring people from these two camps into the same room, they have moved so far down separate paths that even if there is good will for a conversation, quite often a shared intellectual and cultural framework is missing.” (Origins, 2004, volume 34, p. 123).

My own experience as a Passionist priest and theologian resonates with the observations of Steinfels, Radcliffe, and Allen. In addressing a variety of groups of lay people, religious and diocesan priests, I have witnessed the difficulty committed Catholics often have in talking with one another. In a world that desperately needs to hear the message of the Gospel and the wisdom of the Catholic tradition, we cannot afford to allow our beloved Church to divide along ideological lines or, even worse, to become fragmented into a multitude of splinter groups.

It is my conviction that we need to retrieve the vision of the Church as communion. In a previous article in this series, we noted that the 1985 Synod of Bishops affirmed that the dominant image of the Church in the documents of the Second Vatican Council is that of communion. This ecclesiology was also important for the thought of Pope John Paul II, as well as for Pope Benedict XVI. A view of the Church as communion includes vertical and horizontal dimensions. As Susan Wood puts it, the vertical dimension means a communion in grace with the Father, Son and Spirit modeled after the communion of the three Persons in the Trinity. The horizontal aspect is that of communion with other Christians within the ecclesial community and the communion of particular churches within the universal Church. (Wood, “The Church as Communion,” in The Gift of the Church, edited by Peter Phan, p. 160)

An ecclesiology of communion represents a vision of a Church that is still very much “on the way.” We belong to a pilgrim Church, a community that often finds itself journeying through difficult terrain. Communion is not an either-or concept. In our ordinary relationships with other people, we experience distinct degrees or levels of communion with others depending on whether they are family members, close friends, acquaintances, coworkers, etc. Within the Church, communion also admits of varying degrees, and it is a reality that requires ongoing attention and enduring commitment in order that it may be deepened. Communion is all about relationship, and we know from experience that building relationships demands a great deal of attention and effort.

“Called to be Catholic” offers some recommendations for fostering communion in the Church amidst the experience of division and misunderstanding. It urges the leadership of the Church, both clergy and lay, to reaffirm and promote the full range and demands of authentic unity, acceptable diversity and respectful dialogue. It calls for dialogue that will encompass believers from the wide spectrum of theological views in the Church. It emphasizes that this dialogue must be accountable to the Catholic tradition. It also sets forth some principles for dialogue among Catholics that include the following: we should recognize that no single group or viewpoint in the Church has a complete monopoly on the truth; no person or group should envision themselves as part of a “saving remnant” that spurns other groups; we should presume that those with whom we differ are acting in good faith; we should test all proposals for pastoral realism and potential impact on individuals, as well as for their theological truth; we should put the best possible construction on differing positions, addressing their strongest points rather than seizing upon their most vulnerable aspects; we should be cautious about ascribing motives; we should help the Church engage culture in a way that acknowledges culture’s valid achievements as well as its real problems.

In my view, fostering and strengthening communion within our Church is a task that Catholics are called to take up with renewed vigor. This work requires the kind of respectful dialogue delineated in “Called to be Catholic.” Perhaps we could say that “communion” is both a noun and a verb. Catholics must seek to deepen the communion that the Church already is in its essence. This is hard work; it is often painstaking work. It is both a challenge and an opportunity for those who are in it “for the long haul.” And this work must take place at every level: at the level of the college of bishops in union with the pope, representing the particular churches of the world; within national and regional churches; in each local diocese; and within parish communities. Fostering and deepening communion in order that the Church’s mission may be carried out is the hard work that pastoral teams in parishes, hospitals, campus ministries and many other places have to do every day. Tensions between lay and ordained, women and men, conservatives and progressives are often very real at that level. They become creative, life-giving tensions when people learn to work together, respect one another, and sincerely dialogue with each other.

In his post-synodal instruction Christifideles Laici, Pope John Paul II said that the Church is the communion of each Christian with the Triune God and, by means of it, the communion of all Christians with one another in Christ. That is the gift of the Church; it is also the challenge to the Church for the 21st century.

Discuss

Robin Ryan, CP