Speaking about those who live together without being married, one bishop reportedly said, “There are absolutely valid and important elements even of sanctification and of true love that may be present even when one does not fully realize this ideal.”I'm not too wrapped up in this issue, even though it affects me directly. I prefer to wait to see what happens.
Within the Church, this idea isn’t new, but some see it as radical: It’s theological concept known as graduality, or gradualism, which suggests that since most people develop in their moral behavior gradually over time, the church should engage individuals where they are, rather than reject them outright for not meeting an ideal.
What I think is at issue here is the transition of Christianity being the dominant force of the West to becoming an embattled force. The Church has to reckon with individuals who have built their lives in the modern world before coming to the Truth.
It's the difference between saying, "Don't go off the path," and "Come onto the path." When the path of traditional marriage was the norm, it was easier to address the more difficult aspects of moral life.
I expect that the Church will eventually settle on some kind of "wounded seekers" perspective. Modernity has led us astray and encouraged individuals to--not just reject--ignore moral teaching. What is a forty-five-year-old to do, divorced twice and with children from each marriage, when he or she turns to the Church?
The Christian mission in our century is to reclaim lost ground. It's an overwhelming task; how can the church reintroduce the concepts of the self and the self's place in the universe when most Westerners, even those with a desire for conversion, have no basis for understanding them?
No comments:
Post a Comment