THE CHOICES WE FACE

     There is a news item as I write this, published in Crux’s online edition, that Rev Andrea Barberini from the Italian diocese of Cremona has chosen to leave the Catholic Church and join “…‘the Inclusive Anglican Episcopal Church,’ the Italian branch of the ‘Anglican Free Communion International,’ which is an offshoot of a splinter group of Anglicans that dates from the late 19^th century.” Wow. That’s quite a jump.

     Fr Barberini’s explanation is that this body is in keeping with his own view on being an inclusive church, more so than the Catholic Church: “…[this move] permits me to be in full harmony with my spirituality…” His “spirituality” has to do with sexual issues, primarily.

I will not quarrel with Fr Barberini’s conscience on one level. But the episode does remind me of another comment made by a famous celebrity when talking about his choice of a specific Protestant denomination—he said he chose it because it was more in line with his own sensibilities.

This is a problem. To paraphrase G K Chesterton, I should not join a church because it reinforces what I am; I should join precisely because it offers me the grace to become what I am not but can and should be. As a church marquee once put it: “God loves me just as I am. And God loves me too much to leave me that way.”

If someone is convinced that religious truth exists, and that it is best presented in the dogmatic teachings of the Catholic Church, then one’s feelings, as subjective contributors to one’s internal conversations, cannot have a last or even a definitive word. Feelings are too “slippery.” I might finally decide to leave (or join) a church, but it cannot be because of my “sensibilities.” It had better be because of a crucial commitment to the central doctrines of the Faith.

The bottom line, it seems to me, is that while I may disagree with any of the Church’s declarations on dogmatic or moral principles, I should have the humility to realize that I might be the one out of step and not the Church. In my discernment, I must give the benefit of the doubt to the teaching, and this benefit must be supported by prayer and counsel (spiritual direction, for example). Then a decision in some integrity might be made, but never with the goal of reinforcing convenience for my own self as it now is—comfortable and stagnant.

When John Henry Newman became convinced that the Church of England was not aligned with Christ and that the Catholic Church was, he became a Catholic. It cost him dearly in terms of friendships and public status, joining a body that had no “human” attractiveness to him other than being what he saw as the repository of the truth of Jesus Christ in its fullness. But he did what he was convinced he needed to do.

Newman’s friend, the historian Johann Döllinger, left the Church after the declaration of papal infallibility at Vatican I, which he deeply opposed. Newman sympathized with Döllinger’s thinking but disagreed with his decision. It was a mark of impatience, Newman thought, that needed to be reined in. Let the Church correct itself in time, Newman thought. Impatience, for Newman, was a great temptation and a great defect. Perhaps if Fr Barberini would wait, change for the sake of inclusivity might come; perhaps the change would come, instead, in his own heart and way of understanding. Either way, let’s let the Holy Spirit be the timekeeper for the Church.

There is much angst about the process of the “Synod on Synodality” and what it means for the Church. But it’s only part 1 of a 2-part process. Let’s calm down; we need to have some patience. We don’t need to short-circuit things out of fear of losing prestige or privilege or position or power. Advent is coming soon—here at Our Savior we sing “Wait For The Lord” as our opening hymn for those Sundays. It’s a good reminder—let’s wait with patience; let’s let God be God.                                                                                                                              -Fr. David