It’s true!
But not in the way you might think.
Or the way that the We Are Church folks might want.
For those who may not be aware, We Are Church is a church “reform” group that started in the German-speaking world some years ago (where they go by the name Wir Sind Kirche). They are in favor and opposed to all the trendy, politically correct dissenter items: women priests (for), clerical celibacy (against), homosexual sex (for), etc.
Personally, I’ve never been able to get past the fact that they don’t have an article in their name. I don’t know if the absence of one grates on German ears as much as it does English speaking ones, but in English you need an article—either definite (“the”) or indefinite (“a”)—before the word “Church” in their name. How can you expect me to take your movement seriously when you can’t even come up with a grammatical name for yourself?
It seems that this name is part of some trend where it’s considered more spiritual to use bad grammar.
Y’know, like in that awful hymn-thingie: “You satisfy the hungry heart, with gift [singular!] of finest wheat.” Did that start as a typo at the music publisher or what? Don’t they have proofreaders at Oregon Catholic Press? In English you either need to put an article (“the,” “a”) in front of “gift” or make it plural or something. It can’t stand there as a bare singular noun. That’s not the way English-speakers talk.
Anyway.
When Pope Benedict was in Germany recently, he gave a talk to a group of seminarians, and he took a swipe at the We Are Church folks.
First, he stressed to the seminarians that a proper Christian perspective
requires us always to look beyond the particular, limited “we” towards the great “we” that is the Church of all times and places: it requires that we do not make ourselves the sole criterion.
That right there is a shot across the We Are Church folks’ bow, because it is precisely this that they do. Indeed, it’s why they have the name they do. Grammatical issues aside, we know what they are asserting by the claim: We (not the Church’s episcopal hierarchy) are the Church in a way that allows us to function as the ultimate criterion of the contents of the Christian faith and thus allows us to disregard the doctrine and discipline as proclaimed and established by the bishops. We therefore assert our identity “as Church” over and against the Magisterium to the extent they would disagree with us.
But Pope Benedict points to a greater “we”—not just trendy dissidents of our own day—but “the great ‘we’ that is the Church of all times and places.” We must thus look beyond ourselves and our own views and must embrace the fulness of Christian tradition, which casts a much different light on the favorite issues of modern dissenters. If the voice of the whole of Christian tradition is allowed to speak, you will find a clear rejection of women priests and homosexual sex, as well as a healthy respect for the Latin Church’s discipline of clerical celibacy.
Pope Benedict then engages the We Are Church folks directly:
When we say: “We are Church” – well, it is true: that is what we are, we are not just anybody. But the “we” is more extensive than the group that asserts those words. The “we” is the whole community of believers, today and in all times and places.
He thus takes their slogan and subverts it, repointing it in its true (if still ungrammatical) sense of who the Church is. It is far broader than the We Are Church folks would like us to notice.
Pope Benedict then goes on to address one of the key ideas of the dissidents, that doctrine and discipline should be decided in terms of what a majority think:
And so I always say: within the community of believers, yes, there is as it were the voice of the valid majority, but there can never be a majority against the apostles or against the saints: that would be a false majority.
So he recognizes a role for “the voice of the valid majority,” but this majority is not valid if it is “against the apostles or against the saints.”
He concludes:
We are Church: let us be Church, let us be Church precisely by opening ourselves and stepping outside ourselves and being Church with others.
So, again, let us not make ourselves the sole criterion, ecclesiastically speaking.
I’m sure that Pope Benedict didn’t intend it this way, but there is a certain feeling that one can be tempted to indulge when an irksome group like We Are Church has its self-assertive, ungrammatical name for itself is subverted like this.
There ought to be a word for that.
But let’s resist the temptation.
What are your thoughts?
Comments
Post a Comment
My thought? That Pope Benedict is utterly brilliant.
Jimmy, completely agree with you that the Pope hit another homerun. As for whole lack of an article angle, I’m sorry to say that it doesn’t grate on German ears the same way that it does on English ones. It’s just one of the quirks of that language. As another example, “I am an American” translates as “Ich bin Amerikaner.” Including the singular article makes it sound stilted to a German ear. But the “Wir sind Kirche” crowd deserve your criticism all the same, if only for their sheer arrogance.
requires us always to look beyond the particular, limited “we” towards the great “we” that is the Church of all times and places: it requires that we do not make ourselves the sole criterion.
Nice to know he reads his Chesterton.
Thanks for this posting.
“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around.” GKC
I like one commander in chief one keeper of the faith I would hate to see 1000 different masses and policys. I am proud of our church. It is nice to know if for the most part if I am attending Mass any where else in thw world it will be like mine back home. Change needs to come from a well educated top down with and ear open to the laity and minor clergy however I am Roman Catholic and not Protestant. God bless, Dr Thomas
Thank you everyone for beating me to the Chesterton references. Thank you for posting this, Mr. Akin.
“They are in favor and opposed to all the trendy, politically correct dissenter items: women priests (for), clerical celibacy (against), homosexual sex (for), etc.”
The thing about trendy, politically correct dissent is that it’s oh so boring. What trendy people everywhere don’t seem to realize is that trendy gets old very quickly.
Close to home, in our family lives a woman who makes herself Pope, against priestly celibacy, against “those old men in Rome,” for pro-abortion politicians, for priestesses, in short, a Protestant who goes to Mass.
Had you limited your comments to what the Pope said, it could have been a good article. Your ingnorance of German grammar - and, dare I say, lack of charity for those who may not agree with all aspects of post-biblical Church orthodoxy (female priests, celibacy) - made it a petty piece. “Wir sind Kirche” has a different meaning from “Wir sind die Kirche”. The latter is exclusive (in the sense of “only we are the church”), the former allows for others, to, claiming to be Church (in the sense of “we, too, are church”). The fact that Christ gave the key to Peter does not mean that he thereby determined that only men can be priests or popes, just as it does not mean that only men called Peter can be. Jesus made himself pretty clear when He wanted to be, and he left it to us and our consciences to show us the way to salvation within his Church. I consider myself pretty mainstream, abhor abortion and homosexual acts but am not sure that Jesus meant to bar women from the priesthood and clergy from the sacrament of marriage - and the early Church was sure that He did not.
LOL. They leave out an article? So what are we to make of “they are in favor and opposed..” Huh? Well which is it? ANYWAY, What is really not being addressed is the root of the groups like this. Why do they want female priests, an end to celibacy and an ok to homosexual acts? Because they don’t see fidelity to Christ’s teaching in the Church they know now. They don’t see greatness of soul. They see power more than dying to self and compromise more than love and so little faith that they think overcoming sin or temptation is impossible. Perhaps they have never experienced grace in others or believe in its power. And they live in a world that thinks man is the answer to every problem. A priest once said, “The worse things get the holier we who know the truth should become.” Sounds like the right answer to me even though I fail often. It should be our goal every day.
Well Jesus gave the keys to Peter. Thou art Peter, gospel of Matthew. That is the structure of our Church and if change comes it will be well thought out and top down. God bless. Dr Thomas
Yes, the church’s strength has always been her slowness to change, not leaping on every passing trend. The wisdom of the ages is the wisdom of the church. What kind of anchor moves with the tides?
About trendy opinions, John Paul II once pointed out that for about fifteen centuries most good Catholics considered Jews a cursed race. Just because the majority thinks something does not make it true.
From what I have seen, besides lacking a sense of history, the “We Are Church” crowd is quite parochial, unable to see the Church beyond Western Europe or certain regions of the US. Asia, Africa Middle East or Latin America, where the concerns and issues are different.
@Peter: What makes an all-male priesthood and clerical celibacy post-biblical? A female priesthood (outside of pagan religions) is not mentioned, though an all-male priesthood is (the old covenant). Also, celibacy is encouraged by both Christ and Paul.
“he left it to us and our consciences to show us the way to salvation within his Church.”
He left it to the Church to guide and form our consciences and show us the way to salvation. Our consciences do little if they are not formed properly. How do you know that one who promotes abortion and homosexuality does not have a more properly formed conscience than you? The only way to know for sure is to have an objective means of measuring, which in this case is the doctrine of the Church, which includes an all-male priesthood.
Thank you, thank you for bringing this up! We have such a great Pope who, like the last one, is not afraid to take on any and all comers who presume to to be the “real” Church. I guess the We Are Church people consider the rest of us to be mere slobs?
My admiration for our Holy Father is unbounded. He may yet return the spirituality misplaced by VCII. Peter has no regard for the Magisterium. That is anathema.
Thank you for this article. You did a good job at putting this issue into more understandable language.
I have been busy studying and re-reading the Holy Father’s address about this issue. I also know German
and listened to a German version. Personally I had never come across the “we are Church” statement,
except last week by an acquaintance. I hope I never find myself in a situation again where I could not defend my believes other than getting into an argument.
I loved all the comments too.
One thing the Holy Father mentioned to the seminarians was what Saint Peter said: “Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15)
Let us hold on to these words.
“In English you either need to put an article (“the,” “a”) in front of “gift” or make it plural or something. It can’t stand there as a bare singular noun. That’s not the way English-speakers talk.”
While I may admire the general body of the article as concerning our Holy Father, it seems that Jimmy Akin doesn’t consider Brits “English-speakers”.
Across the pond, people “go to hospital”, “go on holiday” or where even a lucky few “went to university”.
Hilarious.
Listening to the BBC:
“The Pope will be in Hospital for the next two days…”
“He went to University…”
The moment some claim ” We Church ” outside the Catholic Church is anti catholic. Thereis only one Church and WE All are in that Church. Let us believe in that Church and obey the authorities.
There is a sense in which we should embrace the true democratic majority, what G.K. Chesterton called the “democracy of the dead” which has always agreed with the Holy Father, as opposed to We Are Church’s “arrogant oligarchy of those who happen to be walking around.”
The Christian life is a life of FAITH, not ceremonial religion or organized formalism. We read in Hebrews 11:1, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Many people refuse to live by faith; instead, they prefer to see, hear, touch, smell, and taste religion. Catholicism eliminates faith. When a Christian prays, they do NOT need to pray through a statue of Mary. Rather, the Christian prays to God from within the heart. Jesus said, “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you” (Luke 17:21). The kingdom of God is within your heart only if you have been born-again through the blood-atoning work of Jesus Christ. No religion can save you, not even the Baptists. ONLY Jesus can save you (John 14:6). The Catholic religion offers all the external manifestations of religion, but their hearts are FAR FROM GOD because for doctrines they teach the commandments and traditions of men. The “Immaculate conception of Mary” is NOT taught in the Bible. The “Seven Sacraments” are NOT taught in the Bible. The “Rosary” is NOT taught in the Bible. The little wafer on a pole that the Catholic masses worship is NOT Jesus, and this evil religious practice is certainly NOT taught in the Bible. Think for yourself!
Don’t forget friend, the road to destruction is often paved with good intentions…
“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” -Proverb 14:12
@Christian, consider the following:
Catholics do not believe externals reveal ALL that is hoped for and unseen, so how does it eliminate ALL faith? In addition, did God undermine Moses’ faith in the burning bush, Elijah’s in the whispering wind, Abraham’s in showing him the sky? Did Jesus undermine faith by healing the withered hand or leprosy? Why does God have them build the ark of the covenant, using incense in order to indicate His presence, or give them actual tablets on which He placed His commandments? Why do the handkerchiefs/aprons of Paul or the shadow of Peter heal if externals are irrelevant? If externals eliminate faith, why does God use them so much?
Also, let’s see what else is not in the Bible: the list of books that are supposed to be in the Bible, that the canon of scripture is closed, the idea that we are supposed to use Scripture alone, the author of the Gospel of Mark, that public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle, and so on. Each of those things are ‘man-made’ traditions, so I assume you disagree with all of them.
Does Jesus tell His followers to ignore what the Pharisees say and think for themselves? The problem with thinking for yourself, as you demonstrate, is that you can more easily come to the wrong conclusions.
There is so much more that can be said, but I do not want to re-invent the wheel, so I suggest you do more research as to what Catholics believe and why so that you can reduce your ignorance. Beware, friend, because your good intentions may be leading you down the road to destruction…
d2-that was a beautiful reply to ‘christian’, I certainly don’t believe he’s being genuine. Many non-catholic ‘christians’ post on catholic websites to ‘preach’ to us how pagan we are for talking into ceramic figurines and worshiping Mary as the forth person of the trinity. I guess if they make us sound so pathetic, they’ll end up looking a little better. Their problem, however, will always remain-there is no substance to their arguement.We don’t do as they say we do…they just wish we did so they could be justified in accusing ...may god have mercy on us all.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.