Earlier in the week, my Facebook friend the Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP – the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Member of Parliament for Salford – resigned from Her Majesty’s government. Her resignation was a heavy blow to Gordon Brown’s premiership, not least because she resigned on the eve of the Local Elections (she was the minister responsible for Local Government!) but also because she failed to compliment Gordon Brown’s leadership and was prominently wearing a brooch with the caption “Rocking the Boat“. Although Mrs Blears “exit interviews” didn’t directly challenge Mr Brown, the confluence of factors has led many to interpret her actions as a direct and unambiguous challenge to Gordon’s future – a clear indicator that Brown’s political authority has eroded from beneath his feet and pointing to deep divisions within the parliamentary Labour party.
The result has been total paralysis, and throughout today there has been the gradual realisation that the government has been left (at least temporarily) ineffectual – they are unable to effectively respond to the pressing challenges of modern politics and are instead forced to spend their time defending themselves and repairing their own foundations. On a day when we need to be addressing the issues of global debt, poverty and the worldwide recession, the government have been forced to address issues of internal polity, infighting, and disputes of the internal forum that are largely irrelevant to the people who they are appointed to serve.
The severity of the challenges that face the government are, at least, matched by the challenges that face the Church. In a post-modern age of rampant secularism and moral relativism, the Church’s solemn duty to proclaim truth is ever more challenging: the world has lost its religious grammar and spiritual understanding. In order to respond to these challenges, the Church must be unified, lest the Church falls into Labour-esque internal paralysis.
Hazel Blears’ actions are akin to a poisonous ecclesiology – one where the outside appearence of communion and unity is maintained but an internal rebellion against the hierarchy is allowed to be seen through passive agression and lip-service approaches to communion – thwarting of the personal agenda burdens the individual with anger and resentment which ultimately draws attention away from the mission of the Church. Minor rebellions (such as refusing to observe the bishop’s directive on the colour of the clerical shirt) and overt statements of personal preference (not joining in certain hymns due to personal distaste) are certainly very minor matters, but they may point to a deeper rot – an internal disunity.
I have noticed a culture of “Bishop jokes” and “Bishop commentary” – priests and laity adopt disrespectful nicknames (almost always tongue-in-cheek but often rather crude and terribly amusing) for the bishops in a way that is reminiscent of a public school locker room. Occasionally I hear one bishop referred to as a “heretic”. The Catholic Press and the blogospher commentate endlessly on the Bishops’ behaviour – everybody seems to have an opinion and when the bishop’s opinion differs from their own, there are harsh words spoken. Much of this seems to me to be natural – even healthy, and few would want to return to an era when the Bishops saw the laity role as one of praying, paying and obeying.
Indeed, I am guilty of both the former (the nicknames) and the latter (the criticisms), sometimes in a big way. The anger or upset that people feel at certain decisions that a bishop or other ecclesiastic makes is a genuine feeling and it must be handled and expressed – but I am increasingly aware of my need to examine my conscience on these matters, because I believe (in accordance with the teaching of the Church) that the Bishops are divinely appointed as successors to the apostles and are consecrated to stand in Persona Christi Capitis – in the Person of Christ, standing at the head of our local Church. Our Bishop is in a special way another Christ – he is Christ for our diocese, and regardless of his failings (for which he must account before God) he deserves the respect that derives from his Holy Orders. I must take care that I do not find myself opposing Christ in the person of my Bishop – as his son in the faith I might want to gently mock or find need to comment on an aspect of his mission, but the overriding sense ought to be one of love, service, communion and solidarity. Likewise, Parish Priests are duly appointed to serve particular parishes. They assume the cure of souls, and the Holy Spirit sends them, albeit working through the Bishop or his Vicar.
Christ’s prayer in the Gospel of John that “we may all be one” demonstrates how important unity is to Our Lord. The duty to strive towards Christian unity is often interpreted as working on an inter-denominational basis – but there is increasingly a need for intra-denominational unity (as can be seen by the fragmentation of the Anglican Communion). For we of the Roman Catholic Church, the quest for unity with the successor of St Peter begins in prayer – a commitment to pray for the Pope’s intention and religious submit intellect and will to faithful adherence to the Magisterium of the Church, under obedience to Christ’s Vicar on Earth.
