Is the Church holy as the Blessed Virgin was, on earth, holy or as Saint Joseph was, on earth, holy?

In other words, when we speak in the Mass (and elsewhere) of Jesus’ “holy Church”, do we mean that the Church is holy in a way that is deeply moving, and immaculate, or do we mean that the Church is holy in a way that is deeply moving, but relative? Is the sanctity of the Church immaculate or is it, however great and startling and moving, merely relative? In other words, are there sins in the meaning of “Church” or not?

I think this problem has currency with contemplative souls. Perhaps those of us with a contemplative vocation in the world have something to add that professional theologians may not see.

From an “historical” or “sociological” point of view, of course there are sins “in” the Church. To say otherwise would be to say that Christians do not sin. Totally absurd, presumptuous, uncharitable… a fall from grace.

However, from the point of view of the mystery of faith? The question has been contested since the Church began but it took on new urgency in the twentieth century. I will only say what I see. I’m not a theologian. I’m just a layperson and a non-theologian. But to me, the answer is clear.

Let’s say we want to assimilate the sociological definition to the definition of faith. Let’s say we want to call the Church’s holiness relative, like the sanctity of any one of her children (except Mary): holy but a sinner. We’ll have to live with the following consequences:

• The Church is not actually holy like Mary; she is only relatively holy, like the great contemporary figures of Saint Joseph or Saint John (Jesus’ cousin, the Baptist), or like great saints from history (Saint Francis, Saint Teresa, Saint Thérèse – any saint, canonized or not, however holy, whose life, or at least whose conception, was not immaculate). Then we are reduced to saying that the Church is only like Mary as the reality is like the idea or the type. Idea! Type! Not real! At this point, I calmly say that, if you want, you can have your words, but I’ll have the reality.
• We’ll also be forced to admit that the “creation” or “conception” of the Church was not immaculate. That’s rather like saying sin had a role in creating the Church. The Church is not, then, the total work of God. I don’t understand what I’m supposed to be thinking of any longer.
• We’ll find it rather bizarre that in twenty centuries of Catholicism, neither an encyclical letter nor a council has used wording that imputes sin to the Church herself. Even when it is said that the Church does repentance in her members (a very good work!), it is never said or even implied that she did the sins in the first place. She has sinners in her bosom; she repents, but she wasn’t active in the sin itself. In other words, the Church and sin cut across our hearts here below. Repentance is good, and the Church takes that path.* Given the ease with which language can be used imprecisely, the fact that no council or encyclical decided to impute sin to the Church, rather than her members, must either be a remarkable coincidence or the work of God.
• We’re putting sin into a mystery of faith. What other mystery is defined both by darkness and by light? If we want to think of both light and darkness in the same reality, we’re clearly interested in “going between” these two points and doing mental work – that is, prioritizing meditation over contemplation. The Doctors of the Church – such as Francis de Sales, Alphonsus, John of the Cross, Teresa, – never counsel placing meditation above contemplation. Why make an exception for the reality of the Church? What could possibly motivate someone to make such a choice? (I don’t know. To me it’s beyond comprehension.)
• We’re saying the Church of Heaven (defined by being, in the vision of God, totally pure) is not of the same nature as the Church in pilgrimage on earth (not totally pure). In other words, they are not actually the same Church. Any link between them is added on. It’s superfluous. They are linked by accident and by God’s goodness, but not by right and by God’s goodness. I find this unbearable. In actual fact, the contemplative must live continually with the Church of Heaven. Otherwise, life might get lonely. But Christianity doesn’t admit loneliness. Therefore the Church of Heaven and the Church here-below are the same church. Therefore the Church is immaculately holy. Sin, in our hearts here-below, wages war against the Church. The holy Church fights back – in the hearts of her members. Nothing more, nothing less.

In short, I really don’t understand any temptation to place sin inside the mysterious reality of the Church. I understand it as a shorthand way of talking when we are on an “historical” or “sociological” level. But to confuse history (or sociology) and theology (or contemplation) is the sign of a poorly integrated mental architecture. Different disciplines or knowledges or ways of talking are obviously not the same thing. Even a little child can tell us that! It is only the folly of adults to confuse different ways of talking.

When you’re thrown against the wall and just wanting to love, to contemplate, to skip past meditation – when you’re tired, mentally or physically – when the world is closing in and you just want to say, “Jesus!” – when this happens, you don’t want to stop and mumble words about Mary being the type of the Church, the Church having sin in her, etc. That’s just intolerable. It is not the universal vocation of the Christian to have the time for sequences of words and meditations. If someone has not realized this, then they simply don’t have the same tired, pushed-over existence that I do – which is a bit shocking, because I don’t think that I have an exceptionally tired, pushed-over existence. I don’t know what privileges have let them keep a meditation-heavy, sociology-heavy view of the Church. But not all of us have such privileges. And I frankly, openly, and honestly don’t believe their privileges have priority, because the Church is for little people.

Is the Church holy like Mary was holy in her earthly journey or like Saint Joseph was in his earthly journey?

Some related posts:

• Living with the Church of Heaven
• Theology of the Church (book)

– –

* This is the theme of a remarkable book by Georges Cardinal Cottier, Theologian for the Pontifical Household under Pope John Paul II. Unfortunately, I only know of it being available in French.