One cannot wait until at point of explosion while it comes to an urge for change. But the authority always seems to be suppressing the cry. The Age of Progress was a result of the blindness of the Church authorities and the state. It burst in France, to quench the hunger of the liberty, property and what later translated to nationalism. The sensed urgent need for the change was not spiritual or religious this time rather was to lead a revolutionary move for the multitudes of common peasants, the working class people. They were rising for liberty, what the church was considering that the liberty will come by grace too. The state was just of the well-beings; the learned and the earned, and in the other hand, the Church was just was supporting the injustice behaves of the state authorities. Struggle burst out between ordinary people and the state and followed by the church. While reading the commotion between the revolutionary people and the church’s rigid and discriminatory approach, I imagine a diagram, which can be drawn as below:
Considering extreme actions of the two conflicting parties, they were heading opposite directions. They had to be considering of the Christ as mediator, but if the church was not ready to put Christ in priority then who could expect the people who were ready for bloodshed to make change of their aims.
The state can be bias and discriminative to the people; selfish terrors and autocrats can be the kings, emperor or governments But the Church, can she be so? Question usually raised why the church was not ready to serve the people? Why Church was not obeying the Lord’s commandment, which is to love regardless of who people are neighbors or enemies. Why the Church was not fulfilling Christ’s commission to her, which is to make disciples by reaching to all nations? What I understood from reading is the Catholic Church became simply unable to serve God through these to predicament (supposed to be obeying compulsorily) of fulfilling the Great Commandment and the Great commission that is because of the leaders’ status, their hold on political affairs. What gives me is the Pope and his personal interest sometimes goes beyond human capacity and he exalts himself high above assuming that he is next to God in hierarchy. I dare to trace this only analyzing the Vatican Councils the Popes were having vested interest, which became obvious when the papal infallibility presented to define and pass to be activate all over the world. Every council met for the strong backward hold to be taken by the Church, while the world was crying for change, liberty and renaissance. But the popes and the Church authority constantly attempted to reject the move of the time. And ridicule is this, the whole course of the council were not to do much for the Scriptures, Biblical dealing with the current urges of the local churches, and fulfillment of the Biblical mandates as Christendom to serve the Lord. But they heavily concentrated on how to get more honor from the common people, what style and dress up should be consider as sacred and what ornaments would be hung in the clothing of the pope and priests. Simply they were focused on outward appearance, not inward and heart issues. So there was not possibility for the agreeing and serving environment among the Churchmen and the ordinary people, who were trying to get liberation. They were heading entirely opposite way, even the Church seemed unable to focus on God and try to serve as His people.
Republished in new layout 6/11/2013
Discussion about this post