When I'm ruminating on a problem it seems like the whole world has something to contribute. For example, my daily routine includes listening to several podcasts and reading several blogs. Today there were two podcasts and a blog post that seemed to contain lessons, though I'm not sure they made things very clear.
Podcast #1: The Tragedy of Dogma by Dr. Clark Carlton
In this short lecture, Dr. Carlton explains that dogma, or rational thinking about God, is an obstacle to prayer. Because of where I am on my own spiritual journey I find that I tend to defend the dogmas of Orthodoxy, particularly when confronted with the dogmas of other traditions like Roman Catholicism. It is easy to line up teachings side by side, compare and contrast them, and throw out the ones I don't like. What's harder is putting those dogmas aside and getting to the heart of the matter -- the person of Christ. How do you discuss Christ? I think you don't.
Podcast #2: The Mystery of God by Fr. John Oliver
This podcast approached a similar topic through a story about Vacation Bible School. Fr. John's observations of the difference between the children's experience of Church and his own is that the children are less bound by rigidity and give God room to be God. They're less dogmatic and more experiential. Same lesson: less dogma, more Christ; fewer human definitions, more still small voice. On the one hand I know that I tend to rest in dogmas when everything else seems uncertain, and on the other hand I blame the Roman Catholic church for putting too many definitions on God and not giving Him freedom to be Himself. Is that contradictory, or is my retreat into dogma a natural reaction to being confronted with it? Strangely, Chris seems to be mostly free of his church's dogmatic leanings, so I don't know where my reactions come from.
Blog post: Christ Crucified by Fr. Stephen Freeman
Here is where everything comes together: "To believe that Christ was crucified and risen from the dead and not to empty ourselves and take on the form of a servant is not to be a Christian at all." Again we see the dichotomy between believing and doing, so that point is firmly hammered home. But the question I have about my own life is here, in St Paul's letter to the Philippians: "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others."
It seems that all of these arguments could make a case for me agreeing to raise my children in the Roman Catholic church. The decision would involve sacrifice, a step away from dogma, and action in the interests of another. It would also clear a huge barricade between us and marriage. But I still have so many reservations about the Roman Catholic church that I'm not clear on how that decision would bring me (or my children) to Christ. I'm sure if I were mature in my faith I would be more able to step away from the Church and continue to find God where I am, but I don't think I can do it. I feel like I am single-handedly miring us in this holding pattern, and I'm not always sure I'm making the right decision by holding fast.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Dogma is, I think, a difficult thing for Western Christians to apprehend in an Orthodox manner. We tend to think of dogma as absolute concepts to which we must hold perfect allegiance (or suffer consequences). But so often in the Church's services and the writings of the Fathers, the phrase saving dogmas comes to the surface. The Fathers regard dogma as salvific. With this understanding, to step away from dogma is to step away from salvation, from Christ.
The proper caveat is, of course, to realize that our dogmatic tradition is not to be identified with Christ. Jesus is not our concepts, and dogma does not equal Jesus. Rather, dogma is a sure guide to the path to experiencing Christ. The imbalance of this caveat is to downplay dogma as though it really has no central role to play in our spiritual lives.
In the particular situation being discussed here (dogma and its relation to an inter-faith marriage, especially regarding children), there is no way to reconcile these matters fully. We were not meant to be married outside the Church nor even to have to consider what it might mean to raise our children in a faith we do not ourselves hold to. The situation is fundamentally a broken one.
We cannot fool ourselves into thinking that the Orthodox Catholic faith and the Roman Catholic faith are essentially compatible. They are not.
All I think that can be done is to see making a broken choice as being an incomplete move toward salvation. That is, marrying someone outside the Orthodox Church, though not ideal (and traditionally not even permitted), could be beneficial to your and his salvation. Raising your children outside the Church could be beneficial to your family's salvation. None of these things would normally be beneficial, but they might be in some cases. (For instance, would you be more likely to forsake Christ if not married or having children?)
From the point of view of attempting to reconcile these things rationally, it seems to me only possible from the Roman Catholic viewpoint: Orthodoxy is "valid" to Rome, and so, logically speaking, the way to go is to choose Orthodoxy, because it is entirely far from clear that Rome is "valid" for Orthodoxy (which doesn't even really have such a category). In any event, I have known a number of couples composed of an Orthodox Catholic and Roman Catholic whose children were raised Orthodox, with the RC spouse remaining in good standing with his own communion.
I do not believe, by the way, that the "huge barricade" to which you refer is entirely of your own making or entirely in your hands for its unmaking. You have to determine for the sake of your own salvation (and his) whether giving ground on this issue is going to be beneficial. Either way, sacrifices will have to be made. The question is whether they're worth it.
Don't think your kids won't see the grandeur and truth of Orthodoxy if they're raised Catholic. Children see more than just what their parents actively show them. If they're your children, they'll experience Orthodoxy.
It's not the same as actually raising them Orthodox; I won't suggest it is. But I'm using myself as an example: I "grok" the Methodist and Quaker traditions more than most Catholics, because I had a similar strong exposure from my Protestant-raised mother. And there's a healthy dash of both influences in my own personal spirituality (despite it being quite small-o orthodox with respect to Catholicism).
Even if the kids were to stay Catholic as adults -- and there's no guarantee they won't convert to Orthodoxy -- their faith will have a strong Orthodox influence. They will be comfortable around icons and won't question the Eucharist. They'll probably use words like Theotokos. They'll have a world of perspective on the Filoque, apostolic succession, and Sacred Tradition -- a perspective that "just Catholic" kids plain won't have. Sometimes contrast and perspective makes faith stronger.
I'm probably the last person who you'd want saying this, but I am praying for the both of you. I'm sure there's a connection between East and West and, of all the people on that bridge, the two of you are the pair I think are most likely to find the way across.
Post a Comment