February 11, 2011 Church and Society 'is no longer the membership of the society's sense of crisis is among the factors that are undermining our society. The doubt is that this crisis will involve, in one way or another, the Church. But to dispel this fear, and indeed to think in a positive and key to the future, was the bishop Mariano Crusade, secretary general of the Italian Bishops Conference, in the cathedral in Messina. In the lecture, held on February 7 2011 at the theological week of the Diocese in Sicily, we publish excerpts here.
----
The subject's present character of singular relevance in a time of widespread cultural - that define an oxymoron - revoked the permanent choices and links. Nevertheless it is an issue of long-term human experience and reflection that touches many areas of life personal and social life, membership of a civil nation - from spontaneous recall in this sesquicentennial year unification of Italy - but in a globalized world, membership of the Church in a pluralized of cultures, beliefs, religions [. ..].
The question of Church might seem, at first, quite simple. So much more, as it is inclined to regard the Church the same way as any other company belonging to the Church and to interpret the key only in sociological. Even in the Church would come, so by choice; and belonging to it should have, therefore, the decision of individuals to serve on it. A determination of course subject to revocation, because firmly anchored in the free election of each, and the strength of which, therefore, depends only on the involvement of individuals, with their decision, since their assets to take part. In other words, the Church does not represent a special case of a more general corporate membership. It affected, however, and for this reason, the same dynamics that characterize the membership of associations, groups or societies in the context of post-modernity. Whatever it is, in fact, the opinion that one gives to the present time, it is difficult to escape the impression that you register now, a real crisis of membership or memberships - when you realize - always think themselves rather fragile and fluctuating. And everything seems to be intrinsically to do with some features common to the cultural horizon today. It is quite obvious that any clear and stable membership now appears under threat, it is true that we are in the era of postmodernity, in fact - as stated by the famous Polish sociologist Zygmunt Bauman -, 'because we are postmodern contingencies are opposed any attempt to acquire a fixed identity of the subject, which remains so until the end of his days. We are postmodern because the mix of the many socially recognized identity is constantly changing with the passage of time. We are postmodern because [...] to the subject the process of identity construction is not so much to complete a single project of life, but rather in maintaining open and ongoing projects in their attualizzabilità.
If these traits express something of the manner of perceiving and living of our contemporaries, it is clear that they denote a fragile belongings. The phenomenon is even more evident when one considers the general disrepute in which social institutions pay the most diverse and complex and various reasons for this, not least the fact that the crisis of modern reason seems to take over the 'cult of emotion', which should be the ultimate criterion of any choice and, therefore, any membership, as well as the mode in which it should be. How appropriate notice Giovanni Ferretti, the current era seems characterized by the "growing awareness of the rights of the pulses and sen-ment in the field of ethics, until the declaration of feelings of immediacy: 'Go where your heart takes you,' you have the right! The law of the free sentiments are thus replaced the law of reason, who sees what is true and correct objectively binding. Although one wonders if in fact the feelings are so free as often thought. " All this can only exacerbate the fragility of any kind belonging. And, insofar as the Church is treated as any other kind of society, it is no wonder that belonging to it can be read and interpreted in a similar way.
may be symptomatic, in this sense, the opinion that a scholar like Charles Taylor gives the possibility of religious affiliation in the present era, the famous Canadian philosopher defines authenticity or 'expressivist', as each individual feels the duty and be able to express himself, an era that, for this, would lead to a type of religious affiliation, which he calls postdurkheimiana, different from the typical kind of membership of an earlier era, which he defined rather paleodurkheimiana and neodurkheimiana. Taylor says explicitly: "Just like in the world neodurkheimiano, membership of a Church which does not claim appears to be not only wrong but also absurd, contradictory, equally absurd appears postdurkheimiana era, the idea of \u200b\u200bjoining a spirituality that does not look like your way, the way that motivates you and inspires you. [...] The injunction is therefore, in the words of a New Age festival: 'Do you accept only what rings true to your inner self'. " In other words, if in the recent past epochs belonging to a 'Church' was dictated by a convinced adherence to the 'Church', after all it was accepted that religion was intended to believe, today we would be in a different time because, not only means to freely join a 'church', but the claim has to decide to embrace their own spirituality and the path to take to pursue it. Obviously, when you will develop the theme belonging to the Church, can not and should not be too casually pass this first level of consideration and reflection. The Church is also a company, like any other community or society is affected and, therefore, of 'mechanisms' that characterize other memberships in the different eras in which they occur.
This may also be useful to consider as well as membership in the Church may be perceived and experienced by some, today, in a fluctuating never taken in a convinced and finally, combining with other affiliations, even antithetical. This can be useful also to understand how membership in the Church can also lead to an attitude exactly opposite, belonging to a rigid and fanatic, tend to be exclusive not only of other types of memberships, but also other ways in which in the same Church, one can live and receive the membership. Indeed, the fragility and volatility of belonging and membership rigid and fanatical tendency may eventually be two sides of same coin. In this age of crisis of identity, expressiveness and authenticity, you can live ecclesial belonging fluid, weak or intermittent and may face the same situation with the option exactly opposite: it consists in assuming that belonging to your Church group, its movement, its 'experience' as if they were the only mode of belonging can be for the Church, and the significant finding in the Church or its expression in a refuge and safety, the more sophisticated, the more you live, in fact, a 'society of 'uncertainty'.
What is needed once Once that call is to interpret the Church in these terms means thinking like any other affiliation, as simple as choosing the single individual. What genuine concern, which must therefore always be considered, but what, at the same time, partial and unable to capture all the singularities of Church [...]. It is too likely, in fact, to speak of liberty as something that not only makes us just autonomy, but as something that would be independent from everything and everyone. In truth, we are autonomous but not independent. Our freedoms are always included in a world that above, and without which it would be unable to. The dynamism of Church and called him back in a unique way: the fact that the Church now makes it even clearer that we are called and that our membership is free, indeed, a clear answer. One could trace the theological point of such a dynamic hub as follows: membership in the Church can not be self-production of the Christian: it is the gift of Christ in the Spirit. What we intended, however, this gift is the conformation of the Christian to Christ, then make the free and active, thanks to the participation of freedom and of of Christ, due to being-for-others [...]. The Church membership is not a static reality, but structurally dynamic. It is, in fact, Christians and you are to belong to the Church by virtue of the Spirit that makes Christ present. They, on closer consideration, I actually say that the irrevocability of the gift of God and, therefore, that membership in the Church is not something that can be compromised in the root of our locks, our changes and even from our sin [...].
The full membership of the Church there is, objectively, where possible celebrate the Eucharist. There, in a full, there is the Church, and there, so you can full membership in the Church. But this means by the Christian who belongs to the Church, and the membership is not something that can be taken for granted, it is reality that must be fed into the continuous reception of the gift of Christ in his body that if it is irrevocable, however, remains inexhaustible. It's something you can not know in advance, so all possible developments in themselves and in the Church, of which one belongs and to which you belong. T his stroke can be very useful to understand the application of attention to the feeling that with all its mutability, characterizes the man of today, including in its membership: it highlights the changes that we can really be a Christian. At the same time, however, for the patience that the regular weekly return of the gift requires the reception, the stroke can also be educational and critical of the idea that membership should be measured only on what 'feels', without ever setting dispute the fact that even being asked, to be truly human, to be checked and 'hierarchy'. A second aspect of Church is that it can never be sectarian, but structurally open. In fact, it has its source, as shown, the offering of Christ. An offer that is open to everyone and that everyone wants to achieve. This offer, therefore, establishes a membership in the Church, a community of those who have accepted this gift, which can not be conceived in a sectarian and closed. It is a membership that, in contrast, requires a careful and close to all that is human, since there is nothing human that does not want to get the gift of Christ. Also in this sense, the singularity of Church can offer as an instance of criticism of any attempt that might be, in these times, to search for a Church 'refuge hot' and Ouna convenient source of identity that creates, however, fences and an inability to dialogue than those who are not Church.
Finally, one can not invoke the fact that, since membership in the Church can not be reduced to the choice and the decision of each individual, but is due to the gift of Christ in the Spirit, it carries within itself the inherent constant reminder of their the transcendence of Christ and the multifaceted way in which he is present in Christians and they are open to Him As a result, no method can ever claim the alleged date of run out of membership in the Church. It must always be open to other methods, and, on the other hand, each mode is authentically ecclesial membership only if and to the extent that it is open to others, it does not boast the claim of 'hoarding' the gift of Christ. Even this could be a particularly illuminating now, since membership in the Church may be marked by the identity crisis and could therefore be experienced as a membership drive and fanatic character, with traits of exclusion, not only to those who are not Christian, but even to those who, like us, Christian, spent his Church membership in ways different from ours. Marian Crusade
0 comments:
Post a Comment