Home
Owner Profile
Books
Articles |
There
is no
question
that the
papacy of
John Paul
II will be
best
remembered
for its
attitude
of
penitence
about
disastrous
historical
errors of
ecclesiastical
praxis.
The
document Memory
and
Reconciliation
is
unprecedented
in its
acknowledgment
of these.
It will
probably
remain as
the best
evidence
of the
necessary
continuation
at the
millennium
of a
process of
descent
from the
hubristic
insanities
of
Christendom.
It comes
close to
the
terminus
of an arc
of
spiritual
inflation
that began
with the
persecution
of the
Donatists
at the end
of the 4th
century,
reached
its
appalling
zenith
with the
sacking of
Jerusalem
in 1099
and began
a rapid
and
salutary
descent in
the 17th
century
with the
scientific
revolution.
However,
that arc
remains to
be
completed,
for Memory
and
Reconciliation
- although
aiming at
the
purification
of memory
- chooses
to forget,
or ignore,
crucial
errors of
doctrine
and praxis
which lie
ready for
repetition
were the
church
again to
be offered
the poison
chalice of
church-state
unity.
It is
clear that
Catholicism
still
contains a
chauvinist
rump, not
at all
happy with
any kind
of
apology,
and this
must at
all costs
be
deprived
of the
means of
disgracing
the church
again.
Chief
among
these
doctrinal
time-bombs
is
Augustine
of Hippo's
appalling
exegesis
of Luke
14:16-23.
This is
the
parable in
which the
rich man,
whose
friends
won't
attend a
marriage
feast,
instructs
his
servants
to search
the
by-ways
for
strangers,
and
"compel
them to
come
in".
It is
clear from
the
context
that the
"compulsion"
approved
by Jesus
here would be
no more
than that
required
to
overcome
the
natural
hesitation
of a tramp
invited
out of the
blue to
feast with
his social
superiors.
Augustine,
principally
in the
letter to
Donatus,
stretched
this to a
justification
of the use
of state
coercion
to
suppress
the
Donatist
movement
in north
Africa,
compelling
all to
accept his
brand of
orthodoxy.
In The
Letter to
Donatus,
Augustine
addressed
the
argument
for
toleration
used by a
Donatist
correspondent.
This was
to the
effect
that
Jesus's
question
"Will
you, too,
go
away?"
to the
disciples
following
the
eucharistic
teaching
(John
6:45-47)
was an
acknowledgment
of their
full right
to do
exactly
that.
Augustine
contrasted
Jesus's
humility
on his way
to the
cross with
the
divinely-ordained
and
new-found
power
acquired
by the
post-resurrection
church,
from
Emperors
Constantine
and
Theodosius.
This gift,
he argued,
was in
itself
proof that
the church
did have
the
authority
to compel
whom it
wished
into
conformity.
"Compel
them to
come
in"
became the
fundamental
text of
Christian
intolerance
for 1,500
years. It
has still
not been
challenged
or
repudiated
by the
teaching
church,
even
though a
contrary
teaching
was
adopted by
Vatican II
(that
"the
truth may
convey
itself
solely by
virtue of
its own
truth".)
It is
clear also
that the
genesis of
this
Vatican II
teaching
came via
the
18th-century
Enlightenment,
rather
than via
the
church's
own
theology.
The fact
remains
that the
church has
still to
provide a
scriptural
foundation
for the
principle
of
religious
freedom.
On the
other
hand, the
corruptive
effects of
the
church-state
alliance
are
absolutely
clear, and
this is
the second
major
omission
from the
Memory and
Reconciliation
document.
Although
it alludes
to the
church-state
link as
the
context
within
which
mistakes
were made,
it does so
in order
to
exonerate
the church
from full
responsibility.
This
simply
will not
do.
As we
witness
here in
Ireland
the cost
to the
prestige
of the
church
that has
flowed
from its
period of
secular
power
following
independence,
we must
insist
upon the
perennial
truth that
power
corrupts -
specifically
the
coercive
power of
the state.
The truth
is that
Christendom
itself
replaced
Christ's
self-sacrifice
with
coercion
as the
major
argument
for
Christian
conversion.
We are
still
lumbered
with
explanations
of the
crucifixion
that
misrepresent
the
Christian
deity as
so wedded
to
self-satisfaction
as to
require
the son's
payment of
a debt his
Father
would not
cancel.
This is so
contradictory
and
nonsensical
as to make
the whole
idea of
atonement,
and of a
Trinity
founded
upon love,
totally
opaque. On
the other
hand, the
cross for
many today
has become
symbolic
of divine
solidarity
with their
victimisation,
an
entirely
contrary
perspective.
Which
interpretation
does the
church now
officially
hold?
Behind
virtually
all of the
errors
admitted
by the
church in
Memory and
Reconciliation
- the
persecution
of
heretics,
of Jews,
the
Inquisition,
the
toleration
of
slavery,
the rape
of
cultures
in the New
World -
lies the
spectre of
the
church's
alliance
with the
state, the
ultimate
source and
locus of
coercive
power.
Until that
has been
acknowledged
fully, the
church's
memory
will
remain
partial,
and a
resumption
of
Catholic
coercion a
future
option.
Let us
purify the
church's
memory
perfectly,
and secure
its future
credibility
by
highlighting
the basic
source of
its
historical
mistakes.
Jesus's
separation
of church
and state
- unique
among
religious
leaders in
the
ancient
world -
was
betrayed
by the
church,
with
terrifying
consequences.
(The
Irish
Times,
Tuesday,
April 25,
2000)
Top of Page
|
|