How can you be a christian without Church?
- a thesis paper -
by
Eberhard Haller
(translated by Emilia Vaiciulis)
Note:
The following thesis-paper was prepared for a discussion about the
subject “How can you be a Christian- without Church?”, as part of the
programme of the Volkshochschule Ottobrunn near Munich, directed by Mr
Eisfeld on 22.4.1999 at the Wolf-Ferrari-House in Ottobrunn.
In order to make easier the internal understanding and also the
preparation for a further and more intensive discussion about these
problems, as epilogue of my thesis-paper, I would like to explain my
own ecclesiastical situation, which, in my opinion, also results from
the sedisvacancy, and to illustrate further the final passage of the
thesis-paper: “From my point of view, the dilemma (of lacking
ecclesiastical authority and the obligation of restitution of the
Church as institution of salvation) can be only be solved, if all the
activities concerned anticipate this restitution, and with the
reservation of a subsequent and definitive justification through a
re-established hierarchy”.
Christ didn’t found his Church as mere community of faith, whose
members support the same convictions, but primarily as institution of
salvation , in order to continue His work of salvation. The highest
authority concerning the practising and maintenance of the teaching
office, the pastorate and the priesthood belongs to the only and
one Church, through the person of Saint Peter and his successors, it is
said, an authority transmitted to Peter directly by Christ. Only the
Church is legitimised by Christ to administrate the good of the
revelation, and only in it the Christian experiences God’s authentic
will of salvation. As a consequence, not only the declaration of the
revealed principles of faith and the acceptance of given moral
principles, but also the acceptance and the receipt of the instruments
of salvation by Christ, and above all of the sacraments administrated
by the Church as institution of salvation, through which the Christian
are given a hidden, but at the same time real (personal) participation
to God’s Life, are part of the authentic Christian identity.
You could share the point of view, that, for being a Christian in
general it is sufficient to believe in God, who revealed Himself in
Jesus Christ, and to follow the corresponding moral rules. The
performance of these postulates, for which- from this point of view-
you don’t need a Church, would be sufficient to be able to be designed
as Christian.
This is a misconception. The concern is not only to consider certain
doctrines to be true, to fulfil certain commandments, but also to
accept God’s offer of salvation, God, who, through His death of
expiation has given to the mankind the opportunity to unify himself
again with Him- the concern is the stipulation of the New Alliance. The
stipulation of this New Alliance is only possible through the
acceptance of the instruments of salvation offered by the Church, above
all by participating to the sacrifice of the mass celebrated by the
Church. “Salus extra Ecclesiam non est”- “Outside the Church there is
no salvation” (Cyprian of Carthage, letter 73, chapter 21) means that
Christ has entrusted the truth and the means of salvation exclusively
to the Church he founded and that He has legitimised it exclusively to
administrate them for the salvation of the souls. Who knows about the
character of the Church as true and exclusive legitimating institution
of salvation, mustn’t remove himself from it, since the Church is
necessary for salvation. The mediation of salvation through the Church
is God’s will and not human presumptuousness.
Now there can be the objection that the Church as institution of
salvation alienates its mission, acts according to its own interest,
becomes a sheer instrument of power, which terrorizes psychologically
the faithful through its moral demands; and that, in comparison with
the faithful, the members of its hierarchy practise the least what
demanded to them: brotherly love, etc. For this reason, in their
opinion, the best Christians have abandoned the Church- as they would
say, the official Church- in order to dedicate themselves to the
fulfilment of the Christian ideal without its alienating strains.
As said before, only the Church is legitimised to create the
prerequisite of the achievement of the salvation and of the
re-integration into the Alliance with God. For this reason, a religious
life outside the Church is destined to failure, without the instruments
of grace, which permit the participation to Divine Life. This itinerary
is forbidden to Christians also therefore- in spite of all the
justified critics to certain office-holders- because, in this way, they
refuse the mediating role of the Church between mankind and God, they
apparently want to be bound to. As a consequence, implicitly they would
also distance themselves from God.
Independently from this fact, we can ask the question, whether a
situation could occur, which would let appear as justified to take
distance from the present official Church, even if the belonging to the
Church founded by Christ is accepted as necessary for salvation.
After the previous explanations it should be clear, that the Church in
its self-understanding can and is allowed to be conceived only as
Christ’s institution of salvation. The respective office-holders are
only administrators-and not the owners- of the truths and means of
salvation. Of course, the faithful have the opportunity to examine,
whether the announcements and the dispositions of the current hierarchy
correspond to God’s will, since This has been revealed, and has an
unabusable value. Turning away from the actual hierarchy would be
allowed only in case those directly and evidently falsify and
manipulate the truth and the means of salvation and betray the Christ’s
heritage and mission. This turning away doesn’t mean abandoning the
Church as institution of salvation, but represents only a special
demonstration of loyalty towards Christ, the Head of the Church, to
whom, in this extreme situation, would be given the preference. In the
named case, as Christian you wouldn’t only have the right, but also the
obligation to take the facts of betrayal and apostasy into
account, and to go against the supporters of a Church which has
become an abused and salvationless institution not to be recognized any
longer as legitimised authority.
|
