[Russia and the Universal Church] [Previous] [Next]
The Church is not only the perfect union of mankind with God in Christ, but it is also the social order established by the Divine Will in which and through which this union of the Divine and the human may be accomplished. Founded on eternal Truth, the Church is not only the perfect Life (in the future), but it has also always been in the past and still is in the present the Way which leads to this ideal perfection. Man’s social existence upon Earth cannot be excluded from the new union of the human and the Divine which is accomplished in Christ. If the elements even of our material life are transformed and sanctified in the sacraments, how can the social and political order, which is an essential form of human existence, be left a prey to the warfare of selfish ambitions, the clash of murderous passions and the conflict of erroneous opinions? Since man is essentially a social being, the ultimate aim of the working of God in mankind is the creation of a perfect universal society. But it is not a creation ex nihilo; for the material of the perfect society is given us, namely society in its imperfect state, mankind as it is; and this is neither excluded nor suppressed by the Kingdom of God, but drawn into the sphere of the Kingdom, to be regenerated, sanctified and transfigured. The religion which seeks to bind man’s individual being to Christ is not content with an invisible and purely spiritual communion; it desires that man should communicate with his God throughout his entire being, even by the physical act of feeding. In this mystical but real communion, the matter of the sacrament is not simply destroyed and annihilated, it is transubstantiated, that is to say, the interior and invisible substance of the bread and wine is lifted into the sphere of Christ’s ascended bodily nature and absorbed by it, while the phenomenal reality or outward appearance of these objects remains without sensible change that they may act in the given conditions of our physical existence and so establish a link between that existence and the Body of God. So also must the collective, common life of mankind be mystically transubstantiated while retaining the “species” or outward forms of earthly society, and these very forms must be duly ordained and consecrated to serve as the actual foundation and visible instruments of the social activity of Christ in His Church.
The ultimate aim of the work of God in mankind, regarded from the Christian standpoint, is not the manifestation of the divine power — that is the Moslem conception — but the free, mutual union of mankind with God. And the proper means of accomplishing this work is not the hidden operation of Providence guiding individuals and nations by unknown ways to uncomprehended ends; such a purely and exclusively supernatural operation, though always necessary, is not sufficient in itself. Moreover, since the actual historic union of God and Man in Christ, Man must himself play a positive part in his appointed destiny and as a social being communicate in the life of Christ. But if mortal men here below are actually to have a real share in the invisible and supernatural government of Christ, then that government must assume visible and natural social forms. Some social institution, whose origin, end and powers are divine, while its means of action are human and adapted to the needs of historic existence, is essential to represent and minister to the perfection of divine grace and truth in Jesus Christ that this perfection may operate in, and co-operate with, imperfect human nature.
If the Church is to guide the common life of mankind towards the goal of divine love, and to direct public opinion on the road to divine truth, she must possess a universal government divinely authorized. This government must be clearly defined so as to be recognizable to all, and permanent so as to form a standing court of appeal; it must be divine in substance so as to be finally binding upon the religious conscience of every instructed and well-intentioned person, and it must be human and imperfect in its historic manifestation so as to admit the possibility of moral resistance and allow room for doubts, struggle, temptations and all that constitutes the merit of free and genuinely human virtue.
Though the supreme authority of the Church may admit of various administrative forms according to differences of time and place, yet if it is to form the primary basis of union between the social conscience of mankind and the providential government of God, and to share in the divine Majesty while adapting itself to the realities of human life, it must always as the center of unity preserve its purely monarchical character. If the supreme authority of the Universal Church were vested solely in the collective administration of a council, the unity of her human activity linking her to the absolute unity of divine truth could only be based on one of two things: either on the perfect unanimity of all its members, or else on a majority of opinions, as in secular assemblies. The latter supposition is incompatible with the majesty of God, Who would be obliged constantly to accommodate His will and His truth to the chance convergences of human opinion and the interplay of human passions. As for unanimity or complete and permanent harmony, such a condition of the social conscience could, by its intrinsic moral excellence, undoubtedly correspond to the divine perfection and infallibly manifest the action of God in mankind. But while the political principle of a majority vote comes short of the dignity of God, unfortunately the ideal principle of immediate, spontaneous and permanent unanimity is equally far in advance of the present state of man. That perfect unity which Jesus Christ in His high-priestly prayer held up before us as the final objective of His work cannot be assumed as the present and obvious starting-point of that work. The surest way never to achieve the desired perfection is to imagine that it is already achieved.
Conscious unanimity and solidarity, brotherly love and free agreement, such is the universally accepted ideal of the Church. But the difference between an idle dream and the divine ideal of unity is that the latter has an actual foundation (the δός µοι που στω of social mechanics) from which to gain ground little by little on Earth and to achieve gradual and successive conquests over all the powers of discord. A real and indivisible principle of unity is absolutely necessary to counteract the deep-seated and active tendency to division in the world and even in the Church itself The principle of that universal religious unity of grace and truth, which is eventually to become the very essence of the life of each individual believer and the perfect and indissoluble bond between him and his neighbor, must none the less in the meantime have an objective existence and act everywhere under the “species” of a visible and definite social authority.
The perfection of the one universal Church consists in the harmony and unanimity of all its members; but its very existence amid actual disharmony requires a unifying and reconciling power immune from this disharmony and in continual reaction against it, asserting itself above all divisions and gathering to itself all men of good will, denouncing and condemning whatever is opposed to the Kingdom of God on Earth. Whoever desires that Kingdom must desire the only way that will lead mankind collectively to it. Between the hateful reality of the disharmony reigning in this world and the longed-for unity of perfect love in which God reigns, there is the necessary road of a juridical and authoritative unity linking human fact to divine right.
The perfect circle of the Universal Church requires a unique center, not so much for its perfection as for its very existence. The Church upon Earth, called to gather in the multitude of the nations, must, if she is to remain an active society, possess a definite universal authority to set against national divisions; if she is to enter the current of history and undergo continual change and adaptation in her external circumstances and relationships and yet preserve her identity, she requires an authority essentially conservative but nevertheless active, fundamentally unchangeable though outwardly adaptable; and, finally, if she is set amid the frailty of man to assert herself in reaction against all the powers of evil, she must be equipped with an absolutely firm and impregnable foundation, stronger than the gates of Hell.
Now, we know, on the one hand, that Christ foresaw the necessity of such an ecclesiastical monarchy and therefore conferred on a single individual supreme and undivided authority over His Church; and, on the other hand, we see that of all the ecclesiastical powers in the Christian world there is only one which perpetually and unchangingly preserves its central and universal character and at the same time is specially connected by an ancient and widespread tradition with him to whom Christ said: Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build My Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. Christ’s words could not remain without their effect in Christian history; and the principal phenomenon in Christian history must have an adequate cause in the word of God. Where, then, have Christ’s words to Peter produced a corresponding effect except in the Chair of Peter? Where does that Chair find an adequate cause except in the promise made to Peter?
The living truths of religion do not compel the reason in the manner of geometrical theorems. Moreover, it would be unsafe to assert that even the truths of mathematics are unanimously accepted by everyone for the sole reason of their intrinsic proof; they meet with general acceptance because no one is concerned to reject them. I am not so simple as to hope to convince those who are influenced by other motives more powerful than the search for religious truth. In setting out the general proofs of the permanent primacy of Peter as the foundation of the Universal Church, my only aim has been to assist the intellectual task of those who deny this truth, not from personal or emotional reasons, but from unconscious error and inherited prejudice. In pursuance of this aim, I must now, while keeping my eyes always fixed on the brilliant searchlight of the Biblical record, embark for a moment on the dark and uncertain domain of universal history.
No comments:
Post a Comment