Holy Impatience

Tonight I read theological work for the first time in a month: an essay by Rahner called "Notes to an Impatient Catholic", composed immediately after the council. After two pages I stopped to write here. My absence from this (primarily theological) blog has accurately reflected my unwillingness to arrange or discuss my thoughts on certain (primarily theological) topics. Laziness, listlessness, and busy-ness have been the context of my disengagement from the Church and theological study, whose root is resentment, anger, and disappointment - impatience. I would like to begin where I left off, considering ecclesiogenesis (J. Haers' intriguing coinage) and then taking a sharp left into a dark woods.

Haers reinforced the point made by Hans Kung regarding disappointment in the Church. Formally, 'Church' is defined as the place of God. 'Church Activities' are any activities that facilitate the movement of the Holy Spirit, for example. But in this relationship, the Church is tethered to God, not God to the Church. The Church is only the Church insofar as it fulfills its obligation to be the place of God.

The right-hand turn into the idyllic meadow is to mention that any activity that is God-filled, that is, any activity that promotes connection/love, is a Church activity. ecclesiogenesis - church building - is building love. Theology, the study of the Church, is then the study of love. The idea of ecclesiogenesis was remarkable to me at the time because of the attitude change required to call a sunny day 'the Church', or a good conversation 'the Mass'. I valued and enjoyed the process of both formalizing my everyday life, and de-formalizing a stuffy, jargon-filled institution with its own jargon and stuffing.

But we will take the left-hand turn. In this liberated mindset, I now observe the gaping ills of our institution. Roman Catholicism reflects and perpetuates evil. Does it do so in proportion to its promotion of good - of loving connection, of God? Who can judge? It institutionally neglects and criminalizes an entire gender (one of two genders, half of possible genders, half of possible humans). It ignores or promotes inequality and violence. Structurally, it is a portrait of corruption and ego. What can outweigh these allegations? Can even my favorite theologians argue the institutional church out from under these faults? Would even the lofty, progressive visions from the deep corners of Catholic intellegensia scratch the boulder of bureaucratic indifference?

I entered theology because I was introduced to Catholicism and knew there had to be more. Someone else must have seen how ridiculous common piety seemed. There must be some depth to all of this, somewhere. And I found a cavern of riches, powerful visions of God, positive and convincing interpretations of scripture, and goals for a changed institution. I am now impatient to see these changes in my church.

That is a holy impatience. I want the Church institution to more perfectly resemble, more closely seek out, the Church idea. I am happy to sit out, for now. I have already tapped-out of the fight for one year; I would not mind two, or even ten. I will not cast dispersions, I will not use hyperbole. I will spread the word that the church we have is not the Church we want, the Church of God. And when the disappointment of our worldwide millenial failure crushes me, I will stop, and enjoy a church-free world. I will make my church on the Fly, over a blanket in the grass, playing transistor radio jazz instead of pipe organs and drinking Abita instead of bad wine.

I have not left the Church. Sin is failure to love, and I have not sinned. I am simply impatient with some folks.