What can *we* do?

Estelindis

Many churches in Ireland have been criticised a great deal in recent times. It often seems that most of the criticism is reserved for ordained clergy, consecrated religious, and the hierarchy/leadership. However, the majority of Christians (including myself) are laypeople. Christ calls each of us to help those in difficulty and to heal the marks of suffering, just as much as He calls priests and nuns (though in different ways). If Christianity in Ireland is seen as a failure, isn't it ourselves, in many ways, who have failed? What can we do to be witnesses of Christ in the world? In what ways can we rise to the radical challenge He posed when He called on us to love our enemy as well as our neighbour?

I would like this to be a positive, constructive thread. While I realise that many people are already doing great work as Christians, I am looking for ways to go even further. What can we do - yourself, myself - rather than simply pointing fingers at others?

homer911

In a nutshell, live your life for Christ - that can be in very small things and in very big things.

For the "big" things, volunteering is a good place to start..

The Quadratic Equation

The answer is simple, and living up to it is the constant lifelong challenge.

"Wherever you go, preach the gospel; when necessary, use words . ... " - St Francis of Assisi

Estelindis

I will post my own thoughts on this subject, as I included myself in the challenge.

There are many ways to represent Christ to the world, but I think they mostly fall into two categories (which can also be used to describe Christ's life on Earth): words and deeds. I won't try to set up a false dichotomy whereby one of these is somehow good and the other is automatically bad. I think both can be great or awful depending on the approach one takes.

In terms of words, a big dilemma that faces me is how to represent Christ in the world without pushing Him onto other people. I feel a bit offended if people with different beliefs try to force me to think like them and I wish they would respect me more than to behave that way. Accordingly, I can't treat others as I would not want to be treated. Besides, being "preachy" is often counter-productive and gives one's beliefs a bad name.

On the other hand, if I don't talk about Christ, does that mean I'm ashamed of Him or embarrassed about Him? Does it mean that I care more about others not thinking I'm preachy than I do about sharing His Word with the world?

The solution I've been trying for most of my life is to live as best as I can as a Christian, making no efforts to hide how important God is to me, but not generally trying to bring up faith issues as conversation points. If I'm saying goodbye to my friends to go to Mass then I'll say "I'm going to Mass," just like I'd say "I'm going to the library" if that was where I'm going; I won't be ashamed or afraid for them to know that I practise my faith. Then I will try to be as good a family member or friend as I can be and mostly leave it there. If I do bring up faith as a conversation topic, it will be because I want to get someone's perspective on something, not because I want to force my perspective on them. Besides, others bring it up often enough (as I am one of the most religious people that most of my friends know) that it's usually discussed enough without me having to start it.

Besides (again), I don't think "words" need always to be explicitly about Christ. I know God loves me, that He loves the whole universe and everyone in it. My words can communicate Him by communicating love. I always have to try to communicate in a loving way.

Furthermore, on the topic of words, I will always try to think about the views that I have. I owe it to myself and those with whom I communicate to speak reflectively, not thoughtlessly.

Finally, I must speak bravely and be able to disagree with anyone who wields influence, whether in the churches or in secular society, if I feel it is necessary and assuming I have thought clearly about the topic in question.

When it comes to deeds, I think that giving some time and money to good causes is a start. When I see someone in need of assistance, or just someone who needs someone to talk to, I shouldn't turn away. My dilemma here, though, is that I am only one person and can only give as much time or money as one person has. Actually, I can't even give every last bit that I have, as the layperson, who interacts with the world via the workplace and family much more than the typical priest or nun, has responsibilities towards co-workers and boss, family, friends, etc. She or he can't just drop everything for the sake of giving all time and money to those without homes or food. Anyway, I think that this doesn't mean that they get off the hook without giving any. Some can and should be given. Otherwise, we ask how the Christian's deeds help those people mentioned earlier: family, friends, and co-workers. The Christian should be there for them in times of difficulty, share love and fun, etc.

Finally, a big dilemma for me is how to act in a way that helps those who have been abused by members of the Church. If we, as laypeople, represent the majority of the body of Christianity, then I feel it falls to us to do whatever we can to help those who have been hurt, particularly in cases where some in the hierarchy have been slow to act. The thing is, I don't know what to do to help. I can go on marches with abuse survivors and those who support them to offer my support as well, but I'm not sure what other paths are available to me. It's not like I'm a professional counsellor and can offer those kind of services. Maybe setting up a fund to help pay for counselling would be a good idea? Those of us who feel that not enough of Church funds and/or property have been given could act to ameliorate that ourselves, right? Or would that be seen as letting the leadership off the hook?

Those are just my thoughts for now. Maybe, later on, some obvious omission will hit me with the force of a hammer.

Estelindis

Hmm. Well said, Homer and Quadratic Equation. Perhaps I am overcomplicating things?

Fanny Cradock

It's a good question - and one I think that has few easy answers.

Does Christianity (in all it's flavours) adapt or remain the same? Both options seem problematic. Adapt to the prevailing culture and you run the risk of loosing your identity. One would think that any short-term gains from parroting cultural norms would soon be lost as what you say gradually become irrelevant. The distinctive message of the Gospel would become distorted and washed out in the milieu of other worl-view. Remain apart from the culture and you become detached from the lives of people. This has happend in a largely post-Christian Europe. I suspect that both are concurrently happening in the US at the moment.

Aside from doing the things Chrsitians have often been good at over the years - the difficult and dirty things like helping those in need - it seems to me that the church (and any time I mention the church I am collectively speaking about all denominations) has been slow to address the rise in scepticism (both the healty and unhealthy sort). It is seemingly illequipped to provide answers to the difficult quiestions and critics of Christianity are only too keen to make statements about faith being blind, that religion is for the weak and credulous, that science, which has now taken on a quasi-religious meaning for some, invalidates religious truth claims and religion is inherently harmful. The church has not offered a consistently rhobust defence to these claims. The happy news is that good answers do exist and that there does seem to be a revival in Christian apologetics. Churches need to nourish the spirit as well as the mind (Mark 12:30).

All in all, I take a long view on these matters. It might be that some time will pass before we see a revival in the west. It might be that it never happens. That, I think, is up to God. However, Matthew 5:13-16 offers us guidance when we think about our priority for today.

Estelindis

Fanny, I think that if Christianity is genuinely the universal message of salvation that it claims to be then it should be possible to reach out to people in all places and times. It's certainly going to be harder in some societies than others, though. Part of the difficulty, of course, is that all of us are part of these cultures and it can be difficult to detach ourselves or realise that value x, y or z is part of a certain cultural-historical development and may not be a timeless value.

I agree very much about your words on scepticism. I think it's important for Christianity to engage with scepticism and respond to it, to show that our beliefs are robust and more than able to answer whatever questions people ask of it.

As for whether or not we'll see a revival of Christianity in the west, Enda McDonagh commented to me recently that many people take solace in the words that there will always be a Church on Earth (need to find a reference for that), but that it was never said that the Church would always be in a particular country on Earth. Consider how strong the Church was in Northern Africa in its first centuries, compared to today. That could easily happen in other places if we don't take the challenge of our faith seriously and try to live the gospel.

soterpisc

As Catholics we need to show testimony of our Faith, Teach it to our Children. Show we are real believers. Each of us has its part to Play in the Church. We need to be faithful to that. No loose sight of Christs help in the real presence in the Eucharist.