The Ecumenical Letters 6

Third reply to Fairbairn of Fairbairn's Journal

Read Fairbairn’s previous letter here.

JMJ

Tuesday, July 15th

Fairbairn,

I was once again delighted to receive your letter. You gave me much to chew on, in particular your last question, which force a ruthless pragmatism on me. But I exceed myself. I should start with Sola Scriptura and authority.

You surprised me in turn with your remarks on Sola Scriptura; I did not expect quite that degree of similarity on the doctrine. You join a number of Protestant friends and acquaintances who are less absolutist on the it than I had thought necessary. I am not one to defend the doctrine or to distinguish between Calvin’s position on it and the more strict contemporary interpreters you described, but it seems to me that much of what the doctrine rejects is thought to be too “papist.” I mean that the strict interpretation of it seems to have more to do with rejecting Rome than with Calvin necessarily meant. Having said that, I do think it’s rather hard to separate that doctrine from Calvin’s own rather pointed rejection of Rome. Certainly, however, it is true that not all Protestants reject or ignore the Tradition to the same extant. I am minded of some of the excellent Anglican scholarship on the Patristics over the last two centuries, for example. But it seems to me that the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is bound up with a larger dispute about the nature of Tradition, what constitutes it and who safeguards it, if anyone. We may perhaps address this dispute in the future. However, it is your central thrust upon which I want most to expound at present.

I quote you at some length

I believe that this modern interpretation of sola scriptura has eroded the authority in a lot of modern Protestantism. Whether it be the episcopacy [sic] of an Anglican/Episcopalian/Methodist church, or the elders of a Presbyterian Church, many Protestant traditions do have the means for an authoritative church government, and strong leadership. It seems to me that the relatively recent Protestant divides along conservative and liberal political lines and the splintering of denominations as a result has wreaked havoc on those systems of authority.

There are, I think, two matters presented. First, a corrosion of church authorities in some way related to their actions around doctrine and authority per se. Second, subsequent difficulties, arising out of that corrosion, which play out in the exercise of these body’s governing power and engagement in the polis (broadly understood). In short, I think your point is on to something, but the causal order is inverted. As I illustrate this what I mean we will see a parallel— if not identical— problem exists within the Catholic Church. To explain what I mean, let me take up the distinction between power and authority which I mentioned previously. Most of what follows I have derived or cribbed from D. C. Schindler’s The Politics of the Real: The Church Between Integralism & Liberalism.

Power and authority, though related, genuinely belong to two different orders or categories. The operate differently in a metaphysical sense. Power, from the Latin “potestas” or “potentia”, refers to “ability” or “capacity” in an effective sense, that is to efficient causality. It is the ability or force to bring something about, to move from potency to act, to make something so, to execute. In contrast, authority, from the Latin “auctor” (author) and “augere” (to augment or make grow), refers more to the origin of things, to their source and even direction or orientation. Now, power and authority can and often do co-inhere in the same person, especially one given some kind of office (eg, a bishop). An office, that is a role or duty, entails an expanded agency on the behalf of the office holder, which he uses on behalf of others, specifically for the larger community in which or for which he holds that office. Parents have power over their children; their physical, mental, and emotional capacities far exceed those of their children and set bounds for them. They also have authority over them. They are responsible for their origin, well-being, and formation, representing to them what it means to be a man or a woman, a Christian, and a member of society. A subject-matter authority is one who represents what he knows to others, and he has this authority because he does this well. A bishop is an authority in the church because he re-presents the living bond of continuity with Christ’s Gospel, communion with our principal of unity (the pope), and Christ himself as alter Christus and high priest of his local Church. In short, while power brings things into being, authority bears witness to and makes tangible the Good, and orients powers towards what is true. Incidentally, this is why authority is often (and should be!) exercised with beauty and harmony in ceremony and official acts. The beauty attracts attention and denotes the importance of what is being witnessed.

Now, because authority is representative its exercise depends on two things, namely, 1) the quality of the representation of the good and 2) the reception of that representation and the accordance of respect due to it. For example, if a bishop uses his governing power to shield a priest from investigation in a case of sexual abuse, that bishop fails to act justly. He therefore fails as a representative of justice and what is true and good. This shreds his authority. Now, ultimately episcopal authority is rooted in Christ and the divine character of the Church he left behind, and this character is not destroyed by human sinfulness. But, the bishop’s personal exercise of authority, his claim as a witness of that character, is flatly contradicted, rendering its reception by his flock difficult if not impossible. How is his flock supposed to receive him in particular as a representative of Christ when he does that? This destroys the possibility of any personal respect for the bishop in one degree or another, often irreparably, and leaves him only the raw and arbitrary exercise of power unmoored from any ordering of goodness and righteousness. This is disastrous. Likewise, if Protestant elders or bishops betray centuries of Scriptural and traditional doctrine on moral questions or church disciplines, say marriage, ordination, or abortion, or abandon Gospel orthodoxy in favor or political ideologies writ large, they undermine themselves as representatives of the very message they claim to preach. People cannot see in them an origin and type of Christian living. Of course, these examples are interchangeable across our two churches; sex abuse cover ups are not the sole domain of the Catholic hierarchy any more than are particular instances of selling out the moral and spiritual doctrines of Christianity the province of Protestants. In either case, such personally compromised authorities are left only with raw power, a question of who controls the institutional decision-making mechanism. Absent any appeal to and cooperation with the intervention of the Holy Spirit, they are more than not likely to wither, at least locally where there is a failed authority figure or body. But my central point is that the crisis in Christian power is in fact rooted in a much deeper crisis in authority, itself rooted in a compromise or betrayal of the faith and doctrine.

Turing to your question, “…might be a cultural victory you would most like to see as a result of a Catholic/Protestant alliance in the short term?”, I admit I have had a hard time answering it. Partially because all of my thoughts revolve around more long term accomplishments. There are some pro-life victories I would like to see, and I would like to see Protestant and Catholic collaboration in various artistic disciplines (some of which we are already seeing). Nevertheless, I consider most urgent the re-sacralization of marriage and its definition as between one man and one woman, but his is still a ways away for us. A more immediately attainable goal, however, might be the banishment of gender ideology and LGBT+ activism from our own midst and from our shared society, especially where these threaten children. It has persisted far too long and hurt far too many people, and both Catholics and Protestants can hope to find a variety of partners in the effort.

Excuse, please, my prolixity in this letter, and its late date. I thought I had a good deal of ground I ought to cover. Pray for me as I pray for you. I remain

Yours in Christ,

~Benjamin