It
is also a shrinking one. There is one
thing about the church of “yesteryear”—it was considerably fuller than the one
now, and spent less of its time angsting over its identity. Ironically, the first article in the magazine
dealt with a conference organized to help repair crumbling unity and recover a
common identity, saying, “What is an
Anglican? This is a big question…Our church is changing, and so is its
identity…” The church or college of
yesteryear, whatever its flaws, did not feel the need to hold conferences to
try to answer questions of fundamental identity. It knew what it was about, and got on with its
job, aided by its widowed Principal, its bachelor Dean of Students, and its
single men being trained for priesthood.
The
piece quoted above celebrating the change from the old form in yesteryear to the
present bright form as an inclusive theological community struck me as all the
more poignant in view of another piece I read the same day—namely, a piece
written by Ross Douthat in the New York
Times Sunday Review, entitled Can
Liberal Christianity Be Saved? In
this piece, Mr. Douthat quotes the statistics that the Anglican/ Episcopal
Church church attendance figures dropped 23% in the past decade, and that no
American Episcopal diocese saw churchgoing increase. To quote Mr. Douthat: “Both religious and secular liberals have been loath to
recognize this crisis. Leaders of
liberal churches have alternated between a Monty Python-esque ‘it’s just a
flesh wound!’ bravado and a weird self-righteousness about their looming
extinction.”
The transition and changes from yesteryear to
today were doubtless undertaken to help the church become more “relevant” (that
wonderful ‘60’s buzzword, now wonderfully dated, like the hoola-hoop). It was expected that making the church more
“inclusive” (our ‘90’s buzzword), would enable it to more effectively reach the
unchurched population with the Gospel, so that untold multitudes would again
darken the church door. Our liberal
inclusivism has not worked, as the depressing statistics reveal. Douthat again: “Instead of attracting a younger,
more open-minded demographic with these changes, the Episcopal Church’s dying
has proceeded apace.” It is almost as if the perceived solution for the
raging fire consuming the church is to pour on more liberal gasoline.
This should offer a cautionary tale for us
Orthodox. We are not immune to the same
forces which currently afflict the liberal Protestant churches and threaten
them with extinction in the decades or century to come. Unfaithfulness to the Holy Tradition brings
its own price. Liberal Christians may
rejoice in the changes and tell themselves that this is all for the better (the
presiding bishop of the Episcopal church in a 2006 interview rejoiced in the
low numbers of Episcopalians, saying that Episcopalians valued “the stewardship
of the earth” too highly to reproduce themselves), but the prospect eventual
self-extinction is not a cause for celebration, but for self-examination and
penitence. Ultimately, the slow
extinction of a church reflects the judgment of God upon a community which has
lost its way. The word which Christ
offered to the first-century church of Ephesus He offers to us as well: “Remember from where you have fallen, and
repent, and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will
remove your lampstand from its place” (Rev. 2:5). When we Orthodox are tempted to become
“relevant” or “inclusive” or whatever will become the buzzword of the next
decade, and abandon our Holy Tradition, we must remember this word of
Christ. We must remember “yesteryear” from
where we have fallen, and do the deeds we did at first. Otherwise we too may experience a disastrous
decline. We do not possess any immunity
from God’s judgment. Our North American
lampstand can also be removed from its place.
I had a very interesting chat with a woman who is part of the Mennonite Brethren church and has been turning her gaze more and more to the Orthodox church in recent years. Our discussion was centred on the use and function of patristic writings (she is part of a highly academic circle). My observation, having spent a number of energetic and theologically trained years amongst a variety of Protestants, was that the Church Fathers always seemed to be treated as a thing of the past, regulated to history, and the early church something of a lamented loss, never to return again. I expressed to her that as I grow in the Orthodox church, more and more I find that there is no such thing as 'history' in so much as the church fathers are here, present, relevant today as much as they were when they walked the earth, and how the "early church" doesn't seem as foreign as it once did in my theological training. Not to have a naive perspective, there are undoubtedly temptations all around to drive the church into any number of directions (as the Protestants so clearly demonstrate), but there is still a strong and comforting thread which keeps us connected to something rooted so much deeper than cultural or societal trends and that's got to speak for something. If nothing else, we continue to pray for the preservation of the Church and for God's mercy on its members.
ReplyDeleteDiana Butler Bass's response to Douthat's article. Could she be right? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diana-butler-bass/can-christianity-be-saved_1_b_1674807.html
ReplyDelete