Divided by a common language
Oct. 29, 2009 by hweidner
No, this is not about how British and American and Canadian and Irish and Welsh and Scottish English differ.
This is about the difficulty of Christians talking to each other and for people of different faiths to speak to each other.
For instance, “original sin” is a blocker. Sin means for most people something terrible someone has done. So Catholics get asked why they believe babies are morally defective or blemished! When say, something like myself, tries to say that the doctrine of original sin means that the world we orginate from is not the world God intended…seemingly obvious enough…they don’t believe me because of the word “sin.” Then, in the best medieval tradition, the best western medieval tradition, I should say, I try to explain that what they they are confusing is this obvious condition of limitation with what is called actual sin. Actual sin is a morally, freely, chosen defective deed. This takes an informed conscience, a developed mind, a free act. (Of course, it gets worse when we talk about serious sin, venial sin, mortal sin, etc etc…because for some sin is sin and that is all that counts.)
Then I get asked if I believe that the human race is “fallen.” Well, there are Christians who interpret that word to mean to mean that all human beings are going to hell unless they explicitly accept Christ as their savior. Dr. Billy Graham was interviewed by Larry King one night and Larry King said, “Dr Graham, you preach that unless a person accepts Christ as their savior, that person is going to hell. I have not accepted Christ as my savior. Am I going to hell?” And, of course, Dr. Graham, a thorough evangelical Baptist, said, “Yes.” Larry King knew he would say that and simply moved on to the next question.
So we Catholics can say that the human race has fallen from where God intended it to be but this by no means fallen in the sense that it is on its way to hell unless an explicit act of faith in Christ is made.
So these are not complicated words but they divide us and can otherwise confuse unless we take care.
Yes, these distinctions are important. And yet, for Catholics, it seems to me there’s serious reason to fear that Larry King would, indeed, be cast into the outer darkness were he to pass away soon after that interview. It’s a narrow gate, after all, and if you have heard the good news (at least as presented by Billy Graham, perhaps not the best source but not the worst either) but have made a habit of ignoring or dismissing it, you will find yourself in a pretty tough place when that good news comes to its fulfillment. It’s perfectly appropriate for Billy Graham to warn Larry King that hell is dangerous and real- that to be saved from it requires a choice.
However, I’m definitely with you on the main point here- for us, it is surely best to withhold anything like final judgment on these matters. Our own merit is doubtful enough, dependent completely on His great grace; the last thing we need to do is condemn others. Our standards are out of whack, no matter how much theology we know or how sincerely we strive to be holy- we’re as fallen as the next guy. Far be it from us to try to nail down the channels of God’s grace for our own conceptual convenience, to doubt His power even within faithless hearts. Maybe Larry King will have his moment of truth and choose to follow the Good Shepherd, whether formally or inwardly. All things are possible, etc.
The task, I think, is not so much reassuring those outside our own theological fold that we’re not automatically condemning them- although that’s worth doing. The task is to speak the truth of our faith without compromise- which, uncomfortably, involves some hellfire and brimstone- but to present the magnificence of God’s love, the boundlessness of His saving grace, with the same uncompromising clarity. Christ’s Church is more than an important institution, it’s the *only means* of salvation- this we should be unafraid to say. Yet there are many ways of relating to the Church, and the Church as Christ’s mystical body reaches far beyond its formal membership. Maybe a better response to King’s cynical question would be a glimpse of hope. “He who has begun a good work in you…”