Last week I mentioned that our friend and advisory board member Timothy George had gone to Rome at the pope’s invitation as a fraternal delegate to the general assembly of the Synod of Bishops. Timothy is, as readers may know, a Southern Baptist, and was there representing the Baptist World Alliance, perhaps in part because of his leadership of Evangelicals and Catholics Together.
He was invited to address the bishops and his remarks have been posted online. One quote:
In his encyclical, Ut Unum Sint, Blessed Pope John Paul II emphasized the memory of the martyrs as a living part of our Christian witness today. On a visit to the Basilica of St. Bartholomew several days ago, I was shown the beautiful icon of twentieth and twenty-first century Christian martyrs, from East and West, North and South. I was most moved to see there the likeness of two Baptist Christians, one a humble believer imprisoned and then killed by the Communists in Rumania, the other, Martin Luther King, Jr., a Baptist pastor from my own country. Jesus prayed to the heavenly Father that his disciples would be one so that the world might believe. As of old, the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church, so now the blood of today’s martyrs is the seed of the church’s unity.
An aspect of which is symbolized, of course, by the distinguished American Baptist speaking to the world’s Catholic bishops, in Rome, on a matter close to his and their hearts.
October 24th, 2012 | 3:55 pm
A symbol of a unity ultimately denied by withholding the Eucharist from this same speaker (I suspect). I offer this not as a flippant or petulant comment, but one of personal sorrow that the Pope will allow this man to speak to his bishops but at the same time withhold that full unity from him. In that sense the Unity is only perceived by the Baptist, who must overlook the reality perceived from his audience.
October 24th, 2012 | 4:47 pm
@Eddie,
I can’t speak for Timothy George but I would be surprised if he was offended at all. He is aware, more than you or I, of the differences between Baptists and Catholics. And he chooses where he stands. Then again, the article itself used “an aspect of which” with regards to unity. Let us celebrate where we are and not pretend we are somewhere else.
October 24th, 2012 | 5:05 pm
[Eddie R.] “A symbol of a unity ultimately denied by withholding the Eucharist from this same speaker (I suspect). I offer this not as a flippant or petulant comment, but one of personal sorrow that the Pope will allow this man to speak to his bishops but at the same time withhold that full unity from him. In that sense the Unity is only perceived by the Baptist, who must overlook the reality perceived from his audience.”
You’re right, we have different views of the meaning of the Eucharist. We don’t think it is solely intended to endorse or be a symbol of unity; therefore withholding it is not solely an act of withholding – or denying – that Christian unity. Neither, I believe, is this the Baptist position. Rather, this withholding is an acknowledgement of the different theologies. I suspect that Dr. George did not see the ‘denial’ of receiving Catholic Eucharist as an affront in the context of his visit.
You may find this article interesting:
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/dr-timothy-george-on-the-baptist-view-of-the-lords-supper
October 24th, 2012 | 5:13 pm
Eddie,
The fact is that these two groups – Baptists and Roman Catholics – are not in communion. It is easy for Christians who hold a low view of the Eucharist to criticize communions who have closed altars, but it would be unloving of us to give the true body and blood of Jesus to Christians who deny that it is present, and would therefore fail to discern the body. Truly, the baptists display the greatest stumbling block to any true unity by denying the baptisms of all Roman Catholics, considering them unbaptized. Ironically, most baptists today would take communion with Christians who they would not let join their churches until they were “properly” baptized.
October 25th, 2012 | 1:21 am
Thank you for your kind responses. I am quite aware of the divide between the Catholic and Baptist churches. That was my point, in fact. The article said his speaking to the bishops was a sign of unity. In fact, it was not, since there isn’t unity.
I am sure he wasn’t offended; neither am I. We understand the Catholic view of the arrangememt and the reasons. Still, the unity isn’t there. That is why I framd my mood as sorrow, because despite being invited as a fraternal guest of the Pope, the speaker was – and is – viewed by his fraternal audience as not acceptable for the Eucharist, perhaps the greatest sybol of unity in Christendom.
Again, not offended and not throwing rocks. But still disappointed at our state and the remaining walls to real unity.
Again, thank you for your responses.
October 25th, 2012 | 11:51 am
We are both sorrowful. But you framed your response in terms of Catholicism being solely responsible for the divide, and unreasonable if not schizophrenic in its stance. I think this garnered you the responses.
I don’t see any place where Timothy George himself hints that the Catholic position is unreasonable. Would you agree that perhaps we could better say that his speaking to the bishops is a sign of significant movement towards Christian unity?
October 26th, 2012 | 9:23 am
A symbol of a unity ultimately denied by withholding the Eucharist from this same speaker (I suspect). I offer this not as a flippant or petulant comment, but one of personal sorrow that the Pope will allow this man to speak to his bishops but at the same time withhold that full unity from him.
It’s not a “symbol of a unity”. Its the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. Quite frankly, it should be denied more frequently and from some Catholics as well.
October 28th, 2012 | 4:02 am
[...] Southern Baptist Theologian Addresses the Synod of Bishops – David Mills, First Things [...]
October 29th, 2012 | 1:11 pm
As a Baptist, his ‘communion’ in explicitly and fully denying the Presence is a profanation and must be denied to him for the sake of his immortal soul. It is charitable to deny it to him. If he has a problem with that, he IS the problem not the clear and carefully repeated words of Jesus Christ.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact