Grandfathering our Causes

Today I read an article on the restoration and grand reopening of the cathedral of St. John the Divine in Manhattan, arguably one of the most beautiful works of church architecture in the US. A friend of mine recently turned me on to this place, and I've been eager to check it out next time I'm in NYC. But since the church building belongs to Episcopalians, I naturally wondered to myself, "What do they believe and teach there?"

I asked my friend, and I'm not sure if she got the question. She assumed that, since they are Christians, they are teaching Christian doctrine. But as is becoming ever more clear, one can't make any kind of assumptions when it comes to the beliefs of Episcopalians. (Fr. Atty recently said that "Christian" is the loosest word in the English language...) Indeed, For instance, I just read an account of a St. Francis Day Gaia Mass at the self-same cathedral some fifteen years ago, in which "worshipers brought their pets and ... a faithful dog or two [was] given Holy Communion". This account was related in the broader context of the long-held practice among Anglicans and Episcopalians of "open communion", i.e. serving the Eucharist to any believer. This understanding has gradually broadened, and made grand strides in the 20th century, and seems to be making grander strides still. Now it's seems that anyone, Christian or no, may receive communion in many Episcopalian parishes. The idea, I suppose, could be that the person obviously wants to, so why deny him or her? Maybe they'll end up accepting Christ in the process...?

 But I digress. As much as I'd love to go on regarding the sacrality of Christian Communion, this is not why I began this post. (I'd love to hear what you think, however, on that matter.) Instead, there was something in the New York Times article I read that kind of bugged me. According to the article, this was some celebration. Ton of the people were there. The massive organ was played for the first time in seven years. A Roman Catholic Cardinal and a Jewish rabbi were there. Celebrity firefighters and politicians came, most notably Hillary Clinton, who apparently gave a rousing speech. In his celebratory sermon, dean of the Cathedral, James Kowalski, summoned the thought of MLK, Jr. to the beauty of the moment. Kowalski gave voice to the parish's aspirations, including "to launch this new chapter of service to the world, to the life of the world in response to God’s gracious and all-encompassing love.” This is typical Christian language, for sure, but coming from via an Episcopalian conduit, the language is colored by the recent debates and near-rift over the role of homosexuals in church life. Kowalski tried to make it clear, apparently without any direct references, that the restored building would prove a bastion of "tolerance and diversity". Not of faith, hope, and love. Not of self-denial and pursuit of Christ above all.

I admit, tolerance and diversity are two traits often painfully lacking in church life. But compared to the love of Christ, that which surpasses all wisdom, knowledge and aspiration, I have to say that tolerance and diversity -- as priorities -- turn sickly and pale. Christ is all, and it is He who champions all justice and mercy. Our cowboy theology and pet causes take no precedent when faced with his commands:

   “ Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean;
      Put away the evil of your doings from before My eyes.
      Cease to do evil,
      Learn to do good;
      Seek justice,
      Rebuke the oppressor;
      Defend the fatherless,
      Plead for the widow. 
Isaiah 1:16-17

It's easy to read our personal passions into this. We can "seek justice" however we please, but if it is not clothed in goodness, and in love of GOD and his intimate communion, then ultimately everything we set our hand to will be flawed.

To top everything off, Kowalski in his sermon evoked the Reverend MLK, Jr., as one who "embodied hope." Kowalski remembered how "[MLK] said we must believe that a prejudiced mind can be changed by the grace of God, lifted from the valley of hate to the high mountain of love.” Indeed, this was King's mission, and is now his legacy. I wonder, however, how sound it is to impose his personal mission upon missions of our own. Can we really backtrack -- "grandfather" so to speak -- our own pursuits in the line of King's ideals? Would King have approved of the rift in Episcopalian communion? Would he have favored Kowalski's regiment? King emulated Christ in pursuing equality among all peoples. But as Kurt Vonnegut demonstrated in "Harrison Bergeron", equality is not all that easy to tag. Given the nature of the controversy among Episcopalians, would King have identified with their struggle?

Comments

[Adriana]

Great post!