Chapter XVI: Reunion

THIRTY years ago Pope Leo XIII issued his beautiful Encyclical Letter on the Reunion of Christendom. He invited the separated Churches of the East, the Russian Church, and the Protestant Churches of the West to form again one fold under one Shepherd, and thus fulfil the prayer and the will of Christ. He protested that it was no love of domination but a pure sense of duty as Pope which urged him to make this appeal. Later on the annual novena of prayer before Whitsuntide was enjoined on the faithful throughout the world for the same intention. More recently still a petition for the reunion of Christendom was added to the Litany of the Saints. These and other measures have had their effect on the Christian world. Some years ago it was calculated that in response to Pope Leo’s letter at least one hundred thousand Eastern schismatics had come back to the Church. During the same period many distinguished converts have joined the Church in America and in England. For some years past a strong movement towards reunion has been gaining ground in England. In 1920 the Conference of Anglican Bishops who met at Lambeth issued their “Appeal to all Christian People’ in favour of reunion. As is well known, since then certain informal conversations between Catholics and Anglicans have been held at Malines in Belgium, and more formal conferences at Lambeth between representatives of the Church of England and representatives of the Evangelical Free Churches. In 1922 a committee of six Anglicans and six Evangelicals was elected to meet under the presidency of the Archbishop of York, to report on certain fundamental questions of principle which had become prominent in the discussions of the Joint Conference. Those fundamental questions were (a) the nature of the Church, (6) the nature of the ministry, and (c) the place of Creeds in a united Church. The report was duly drawn up in a series of short propositions, and it was accepted by the Conference. It has been published by the S.P.C.K., with the authority of the Anglican Archbishops and of the Moderator of the Federal Council of the Evangelical Free Churches. We may, then, take these propositions as embodying the belief of representative Anglican and Nonconformist divines of to-day on the important questions with which they deal. In the first place, we are chiefly interested in the propositions which describe the nature of the Church. Reunion is impossible until clear and sound notions on that all-important subject are held by all parties concerned. Discussion will help towards this end, so I propose to state some of my own views on the propositions of the Report concerning the nature of the Church of Christ.

According to the Report, the Church has not been instituted by men: it is a creation of God. It consists of members who have passed out of this world and of others who are still living in this world, “but it has its expression in this world in a visible form.” ‘ This visible Church was instituted by Christ as a fellowship of men”; it is “an ordered society here on earth,”

Here a Catholic must pause and put a question for which there is no answer in the Report. If the Church has a visible form in this world, if it is a fellowship of men and an ordered society, and Christ himself thus instituted it, then it must have a visible head. Christ, of course, is the supreme head of all the Churches in heaven and on earth, but he is invisible. All visible societies of men require a visible head. No ordered society can exist without one. Where is the visible head of the visible society which we call the Church of Christ ?

The Report teaches that the Church is the Body of Christ, and as there is only one and can only be one Christ, so there is one and can only be one Church. Men become members of the Church by baptism. The Church visible on earth ought to express and manifest the one life of the one Body by its own visible unity. This it did in New Testament days. But now “there are different and even rival denominational Churches independent of each other,” and at least “temporarily separated’ from each other.

But, we ask, how can these different rival, independent, and separated Churches make one visible Church of Christ ?

The answer of the Report is that these separate and independent Churches, in as far as they have the marks which ought to characterize the Church visible on earth, are parts of that one Church of Christ. But they possess those marks in very varying degrees of completeness or defect. “Some, indeed, may be so defective that they cannot rightly be judged to be parts of that Church.”

To this Catholics would object that many different, rival, independent, and separated societies cannot possibly make one society, nor can many different, rival, independent, and separated societies be parts of one society. You may put together a quarter of an apple, a quarter of a pear, a quarter of an orange, and a quarter of a plum, but these four parts do not make one fruit. They remain four quarters of four different fruits. Moreover, Christ gave marks to the visible Church which he founded in order to distinguish it from other bodies which were not his Church. It is very true that those marks are not possessed by some Churches which call themselves Christian, and we need only use our eyes and common the sense to see it. “But such judgements,” says the Report, somewhat cryptically, “are limited to the sphere of the visible Church on earth; it would be presumption to claim that they are valid for the whole Church of Christ !”

Let us dwell a little on this fundamental question of the marks of the true Church of Jesus Christ.

The Lambeth Conference Report says very truly that as the Church of Christ on earth is a visible Church, it must possess certain visible and recognizable marks whereby it can be seen and known by men. Christ took care that his Church should be readily distinguishable from other societies which were not his Church but which would lay claim to the honour, as he well foreknew. According to English law, genuine gold and silver plate must be stamped with a hall-mark, so that buyers may not be cheated. Christ impressed his marks on the Church which he founded, so that no synagogue of Satan could be mistaken for it. In order that such a mark may fulfil its function, it must be more easily recognizable than that which it makes visible. Hence it will not do to say that the preaching of the true faith is a mark of the Church of Christ. We know the true faith from the preaching of the true Church of Christ; we do not know the Church of Christ from the preaching of the faith. Moreover, if a mark is to serve its purpose, it must be a really distinguishing mark, not something which is common to all the objects concerned. If I want someone who does not know him to distinguish John from Thomas and Andrew. I must not tell him that John has two arms and two legs, when those marks are common to all three.

Moreover, the marks which Christ gave to his Church so that it might be a city set on a hill and clearly visible from all the country round have been known and named from the earliest times. Two were expressly inserted in the Apostles’ Creed. Besides the Jewish synagogue there were heretical conventicles almost from the beginning. Catholicity or universality was a feature which was quite conspicuous and one which clearly distinguished the Church of Christ from the synagogue and from the local conventicles of the heretics. Not less clearly did the note of Holiness distinguish the Church of Christ from the Pharisaism of the synagogue and the licentiousness of the early heresies. Oneness and Apostolicity were, of course, marks of the Church from the beginning, but they were expressly added to the other two during the fourth century, when all four were regularly repeated in what we call the Nicene Creed. Christians of East and West continued for centuries to profess their faith in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Theologians differed in their enumeration of the marks of the true Church of Christ. Some reckoned only two, others three, others, again, six, nine, ten, eleven, and twelve. Bellarmine gives fifteen, among them being Antiquity and Indefectibility, but he acknowledges that they can all be reduced to the common four of the Nicene Creed if anyone prefers that number.

Luther taught that the marks of the true Church were these seven: The true and uncorrupt preaching of the Gospel; the lawful administration of Baptism; the lawful administration of the Eucharist; the lawful use of the keys; the lawful election of ministers to preach and administer the Sacraments; public prayer, psalmody, and catechism in a language that could be understood by the people; and the mystery of the Cross, or the bearing of persecution and suffering for the sake of justice. Bellarmine observes that Luther was careful not to mention the marks of the true Church which were assigned by the Nicene Creed and solemnly reaffirmed by many General Councils of the Church. The Church which Luther set up was neither One, nor Holy, nor Catholic, nor Apostolic. Luther knew this as well as anybody else, and so, as Bellarmine remarks, he said nothing about the marks of the true Church, even though they were taught by the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed. He characteristically substituted seven indications of his own which are not true marks at all. They cannot be recognized more readily than the Church herself, nor can they serve as distinguishing features of the true Church of Christ.

In this respect the Lambeth Conference seems to have copied from Luther. The Report asserts that the visible and recognizable marks by which the visible Church can be seen and known by men are the following: “(a) The profession of faith in God as revealed and incarnate in Christ; (6) the observance of the two Sacraments ordained by Christ himself; (c) an ideal of the Christian life protected by a common discipline; (d) a ministry representative of the Church, for the preaching of the Word, the administration of the Sacraments, and the maintenance of the unity and continuity of the Church’s witness and work.”

There is a close similarity between these so-called marks and those assigned by Luther. It is quite clear that they cannot serve to distinguish the true Church of Christ from false claimants of that honour. They are the common characteristics of all, or nearly all, the heretical and schismatical bodies which have separated from the Church since the days of the Apostles. It is hard to understand how the Lambeth Conference could accept and endorse the assertion of the Report that they have been regarded as the marks of the true Church “since the days of the Apostles.” And yet, sad to say, the Report is compelled to confess that when tested even by these so-called marks ‘some of the Christian Churches may be so defective that they cannot rightly be judged to be parts of the one visible Church of Christ at all.”

That portion of the Report which deals with the Christian Ministry begins by stating that the Christian ministry is a divine ordinance and that it has been an integral part of the organized life of the Church from the beginning. It exercises the powers and functions which are inherent in the Church in the name and by the authority of Christ himself. No one may take this honour upon himself. The Christian minister must have an inward call from God and an outward commission given him by the authorities of the Church. It is in accordance with Apostolic practice and the ancient custom of the Church that this commission should be given through Ordination by the laying on of hands and prayer of those who have authority to ordain. The members of the Committee and of the Joint Conference express their belief that divine grace is thus given to the ordained in response to prayer and faith.

The wording of these general propositions is carefully chosen, and it is not wonderful that they met with acceptance by the Joint Conference. Difficulties begin to appear when we descend to details. What is the nature of those powers and functions inherent in the Church which are exercised by the Christian ministry ?

The teaching of the Catholic Church on this point is precise, clear, and by no means without warrant of Scripture. Christ left a twofold spiritual power in his Church: the power of Orders and the power of Jurisdiction. The power of Orders is the power to consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ, to administer it in Holy Communion, together with all that is needful for the proper exercise of this power and all that it implies. It thus comprises also the power to forgive sins in the Sacrament of Penance. The power of jurisdiction gives authority to preach the Word of God, to bind and loose, or to make laws, and to govern, direct, and correct the faithful who are subject to it. All this the Catholic ministry does in the name and by the authority of Christ. It has pleased Christ that the power of Orders should be transmitted through the higher to the inferior ranks of the clergy by Ordination. Ordination consists essentially of the laying on of hands and of prayer. It is a sacred rite which gives the power of consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ, and makes the minister capable of forgiving the sins of those who are subject to him. Ordination also gives the grace which is necessary for the dutiful exercise of the spiritual powers which it confers. Neither the Apostles nor their successors could have annexed to Ordination the power of producing effects such as these. God alone can give an external rite the power of giving grace. Ordination, then, by the laying on of hands and prayer is a sacred sign which produces grace; it is a sacrament which has been instituted by Christ. It must be administered according to the rite instituted by Christ by one of the higher rank of the clergy according to an ordinance of Christ. If it is otherwise administered it is no sacrament, no ordination at all, and it does not give grace or transmit any spiritual powers. Thus the power of Orders which is inherent in the Church must be transmitted from one to another, from bishops to priests, by means of the Sacrament of Orders. Those ministers who exercise their sacred functions in the Church to-day have received power and authority to do so from their predecessors, who in like manner received it through Ordination from their predecessors, and so on up to the Apostles. Apostolicity, then, or the transmission of Orders and Jurisdiction from the Apostles, is a necessary mark of the Church of Christ. If any modern religious body has tampered with the Sacrament of Orders so that it is no longer what Christ made it, that religious body has lost the Christian ministry and is no longer an integral portion of the Church of Christ. That is precisely what happened in the Church of England at the time of the Reformation, and for that reason Leo XIII declared that Anglican Orders are null and void. For similar reasons most of the Protestant bodies have lost the Christian ministry.

The seventh paragraph of this section of the report is so curious and so tell-tale that I transcribe the whole of it.

“Within the many Christian Communions into which, in the course of history, Christendom has been divided, various forms of ministry have grown up according to the circumstances of these several Communions and their beliefs as to the mind of Christ and the guidance of the New Testament. These various ministries of Word and Sacrament have been, in God’s Providence, manifestly and abundantly used by the Holy Spirit in his work of ‘enlightening the world, converting sinners, and perfecting saints.’ But the differences which have arisen with regard to the authority and functions of these various forms of ministry have been and are the occasion of manifold doubts, questions, and misunderstandings. For the allaying of doubts and scruples in the future, and for the more perfect realization of the truth that the ministry is a ministry of the Church and not merely of any part thereof, means should be provided for the United Church which we desire, whereby its ministry may be acknowledged by every part thereof as possessing the authority of the whole body.”

The report, then, acknowledges that the Christian ministry is a divine ordinance and that it exercises its powers in the name and by the authority of Christ. Since the days of the Apostles the ministry has been perpetuated by Ordination, by a sacramental rite. The separated communions changed the rite in use by the early Church in order to suit their own circumstances and their own beliefs as to the mind of Christ and their private interpretation of the New Testament. Hence various forms of ministry which now cause doubts, scruples, and misunderstandings. To allay these is necessary if we are to have a united Church of the future. They cannot be allayed by again tampering with the institution of Jesus Christ. The only possible way is to recover that institution by accepting it from the Catholic Church, which has preserved it faithfully from the beginning.