The Biological Community of the Church
by
Charles Graves
We have established the theological bases of the Christian community in describing the holy spirit within the brain and body and how it implements the message of Jesus in healing, conversion and redemption, changing the neuronal and synaptic structures to reflect the Christian religion. We have shown how, by certain ‘echoes,’ the historical Jesus and his work is reproduced physiologically in the working of the neurons.
Thus, it appears that the definition of the Church would be the multitude of individuals for whom these particular internal workings of the brain and body are similar throughout space and time. So, logically speaking, a unity of such individuals could be considered as the ‘Church’. These are people who have been forgiven their ‘sins’, who share in love towards the ‘forgiving One’ (i.e. Gd and the Trinity) and who try to live ethically under the leadership of the Forgiver (God). In general, these people are the ‘Church’.
In such a perspective what is the need for a clergy? How do the ministers of the church fit into our ‘biological community of believers? The reality of such clergy is portrayed often in the Biblical texts and such clergy are categorized as ‘prophets’, ‘apostles’, deacons, exhorters, healers, priests, leaders, bishops etc. In fact, every member has some ‘gift’ to implement such tasks.
Probably because of the multitude of these ‘gifts’ of the spirit there have arisen so many different ‘churches’ in the world. But regarding the three aspects of the holy spirit within our brains, there were at least three tasks that were the most important: healing from trauma, conversion from wrong attitudes, and redemption from sin. All of these concern blockages in the human vis à vis his/her relation to the Creator. And the essence of any religion is to take away such blockages and help the individual human to have a more perfect relationship between its creaturely life and the Almighty, the Source of such life in the universe.
Apparently, this healing, conversion and redemption require administrators or clergy in order to be fully operative. And, apparently, the credentials of these administrators much be such that they are recognized in their ministrations by the community as a whole. But since the church, essentially, is a spiritual community based upon the activity of the holy spirit within and the Holy Spirit of God (outside and historically represented by Jesus who received it ‘as a dove’ at his baptism), the administration of the three activities of the holy spirit must, themselves, be recipients of the Holy Spirit as Jesus was. By being recipients, they can also become purveyors as was Jesus himself.
Although these administrators have already been baptized and have received, like any ‘Christian’, the action of the holy spirit within and without, they need an extra dose, and this is provided by the ordination procedure. This extra dose of the spirit will be new, obtained ‘from heaven’ itself where the three persons of the Trinity live in unity as is said in the ordination chant ‘Veni Creator’ (which has been used since ancient times to ‘ordain’ priests, deacons (and bishops)):
‘Teach us to know the Father, Son and Thee (i.e,. the Spirit) of Both,
to be but one (Trinity) that through the ages all along – that this may be
one endless song’
When, during the ordination ceremonies this ’Veni Creator’ is sung, it illustrates the moment when certain administrators are asking the Trinity of divine beings in heaven to ‘come down’ upon the new administrator with a new dose of the divine spirit. And after that ceremony the ‘ordinand’ is, supposedly, a partaker of the dose and ready to use it in his/her ‘ministry’.
Through the same previously-discussed method of ‘echoes’ this event in the life of the administrator, this quality of being a ‘minister’, is recognized (by the working of the holy spirit within each member’s brain) as being an authoritative ministerial gift which will assist the members individually and collectively. It is the same ’echo’ as that between the ‘holy spirit’ implanted by God in each human brain and the Holy Spirit which ‘descended upon Jesus at his baptism’.
By this same Spirit the administrator’s ‘ministry’ within the Christian community is assured, Individuals and the group (of members) will recognize it by means of the same ‘echoing’ process within their individual and group consciousness. The church leader may have been elected by the congregation, but besides this, he/she has been ordained to their ministry by the holy spirit itself, in conjunction with other members of the Trinity, all of whom exist ‘in heaven’. This is the heaven toward which each member of the community is heading as their individual lives progress towards an end.
In this sense, of course, the clergy are like shepherds, tending to their flock of sheep and directing them, eventually, to ‘heaven’. Many of the elements of the ordination ceremony fall within this perspective; the new ordinand being told to be faithful in instruction, protecting, exhorting, comforting etc. the members of the flock. This can be done because the Holy Spirit shall be helping him/her in their ‘ministry’.
But the main concern of these ‘ministers’ will be to help the flock remember what the Creator has ‘done for them’ in healing, conversion and redemption from sin, and to facilitate this memory and the forgiveness and love which issues from it Thus the clergy must preside over the Holy Communion within the congregation where the believers experience again and again the ‘body and blood of Christ’, sacrificed for them and ‘their sins’. The ministers are responsible to install and perform this ‘priestly’ function in order to strengthen their flocks to persevere in their earthly ‘road towards heavenly places’.
And such ‘holy communion’ also strengthens the work of the holy spirit within the community as it fosters forgiveness (resulting from redemption from sin) and love. Although these aspects of religion can exist without ‘priests’ or ‘ministers’ they are facilitated by having such administrators.
The role of the Church in the history of the universe
The Church plays a role in universal history. Generally speaking, it ‘gives meaning’ to history, This is very clearly shown in the Book of Revelation, the last book in the Bible.
Although it may seem a small matter that the church is ‘preparing its members for heaven’ etc. the importance of such a small matter goes far beyond the imagination to an ‘eschatological’ end-point when the universe ends. When history ends (as it must someday when the Sun envelopes the earth) the Church has had its role to play and that will be ‘remembered’. The church symbolically represents the ‘best of human nature’ – human nature as it was intended by the Creator, ‘human nature redeemed from sin’, human nature loving the creator God and being loved in return etc. All this is involved but more also, including what humans have accomplished ‘in history’; how humans have built societies which have contributed to the life of mankind as a whole; how societies have protected ‘nature’ within God’s creation; how human societies have fostered reconciliation between peoples, etc,. etc. These ‘histories’ will also be ‘remembered’ as history comes to a close at the End of Time. These aspects will, in essence, be ‘justified’ as having done their part in making human history worthwhile.
The church community seems to be ‘in line’ with these ethical human accomplishments which will undoubtedly be ‘judged’ favorably at the ‘eschaton’ – at the end and final justification of what happened in history.
Such an end means the end of ‘no-god’ since the era of human choice no longer exists. There is no longer any possibility of living ‘as if God does not exist’. But, if history has meant something (which it surely must mean if a Divine Power created it) then those bad actions of humans in history must also mean something-. Of course, they will be ‘judged’ as bad and their proponents must alao suffer judgement. But, somehow, if ‘no-god’ becomes non-existent, ‘against god’ must also cease to exist and apokatastasis must become evident– ‘all humans are saved’. This was the position of Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa in the early Christian era. They argue that if humans are created ‘in the image of God’, that is ‘God-like’ as the Bible proposes, then humans can never totally lose this aspect of their nature, and eventually every person will retain the image of ‘god-likeness’.
A debate about this can go on while history continues, but in any case such a debate tends to go against a belief that any human can be ‘eternally condemned to hell’.
The Christian community, or ‘Church’, also proposes to its members that we should forgive others for their ‘no-god’ approach to life and the damage it has done. Such forgiveness can even have certain therapeutic values for our soul and well-being as some psychiatrists are telling us nowadays.
How a biological interpretation of Christianity may aid the dialogue between religions and cultures
A biological interpretation will take into account that both ‘holy spirit’ and ‘redemption from sin’ are innate properties of the human brain and not merely inserted into consciousness from external ‘religious’ sources. It indicates that Christianity is not, as some persons might suppose, a peculiar ancient religion not attractive to educated persons. Also, it might help to modify the opinions of some Christians that adherents of non-Christian religions cannot be ‘saved’. Also, our approach accepts modern brain research and research on the genome, and attempts to see religion in terms related to scientific discoveries about the brain.
In such a case, we would be obliged to see how, given the equivalence of ‘holy spirit’ or the aspect of ’redemption from sin’ as being existent in all human beings, all religions are similar in their dealings with such common equivalences. How, for example, can Buddhists deal with such phenomena as the possibility for neurons to be displaced to embody redemption from sin or healing from trauma. Obviously, these aspects must concern every religion and dialogue could take place between representatives of religions to show to Christians how they use such brain elements for the implementation of their own religions.
Ecumenism from the biological perspective
Ecumenism is an ‘echoing’ across a variety of people belonging to different ‘churches’. The functioning of the neurons and synapses in all of these people is quite similar – the holy spirit within the brains echoing that Holy Spirit which is ‘in heaven’, what ‘came from Jesus’ and which operates in the clergy administering each of their ‘churches’. But the way the system looks ‘from the outside’ – to some ‘objective’ observer living in the ‘real world’ of outward appearances, each church appears different. But for the Trinitarian churches who are members of the World Council of Churches – more than 300 of them around the world plus the Roman Catholic church - the workings of the neurons and synapses concerning church life is the same. This is why they are in the ecumenical movement – only the Quakers and Unitarians and some Baptists are outside.
It was decided when formal ecumenism was established in the modern world, that a Trinitarian view of God was prerequisite, and if this is accepted then, with the Bible as a reference, the reality of life in all of the member churches is basically similar. Each of the elements of the Trinity and their workings, according to the message of the Scriptures, is held in common by all.
What differs between them is church administration, practices of Holy Communion, methods of worship, ethical positions vis à vis abortions, marriage, divorce, wars, economics etc. Moreover, often such distinctions prevent crossovers – each ‘church’ believes in its particular methods and wishes that its members stay within their own fold. Yet some ecumenical activities can be experienced together, when all the participants can claim that they were baptized in the name of the Trinity. Moreover, those churches which do not baptize babies are not in the World Council of Churches, although they can participate in ecumenical activities.
In the more ‘catholic’ type of churches the important elements are church administration by bishops, priests and deacons and the Holy Communion seen as a sacrifice for sin. In more Protestant type churches the Holy Communion is a memorial of Jesus’ death on the cross with its ‘benefit’ for sinful humans, and also the clergy are organized more simply (although they must be ‘ordained’ like in the ‘catholic type, and receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit). Ecumenical worship has a validity, however, because of the commonalities of baptismal practices, belief in the Trinity and the working of the Holy Spirit both in the holy Communion and the life of believers.
Of course, the main problem of ecumenism – the split between the Roman Catholic Church and other Christian churches – still remains within Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox churches joined the World Council of Churches in 1948 at Amsterdam and in 1961 (Russian Orthodox etc.) but the Roman Catholic Church does not consider other churches to be ‘in communion’ i.e. sharing a common church foundation. What then is the biological difference between Roman Catholicism and other Christian churches? The main problem is what is called the ‘apostolic succession’ – that the only ‘really true and perfect Church’ is one which has bishops who can trace their ordination back to a line of ordinations beginning in the ‘apostolic days’ of St. Peter and St. Paul and that each bishop since that time has received the Holy Spirit from other bishops who have ordained him in succession back to the beginning of the Christian Church. This series of ordinations is claimed by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches and some Anglican churches, but the Roman Catholic Church believes it alone has preserved apostolic succession and correct doctrine in an unbroken fashion and that the Orthodox and other churches have ‘gone out of communion’ with Rome because of certain doctrinal differences.
Hence the biological difference is that the ordination of bishops in churches outside ‘Rome’ is limited in its effect. The Holy Spirit is supposedly not as fully represented in these bishops, because the apostolic succession has been for one reason or another, broken. Nevertheless, the Roman Catholic Church does not deny that the Holy Spirit is present in the non-Roman ordinations, only believing that it is somehow ‘partial’. Moreover, the Roman Catholics not only have bishops and archbishops but also a Pope, which the other churches lack. And in many ways the Pope’s administration of the church under his wing is considered to be more representative of Christianity than churches which are not under the ministrations of the Pope.
Although ecumenism has been active as a movement of church unity all through the era of Christian history, the reality of being ‘out of communion’ with Rome still persists vis à vis most other Christian churches. The only way forward, for some, would be that all administrators of non-Roman Catholic churches receive ordination from Roman Catholic bishops and thus ‘come into communion with Rome’. But most non-Roman churches then would be obliged to affirm and demonstrate that they had been lacking in apostolic-likeness and that by linking to Rome they have finally seen their errors. Moreover, the ethical and legal positions of many Protestant churches differs from the positions taken by the Popes, and Protestants would not wish their freedom of opinion on these issues to be abandoned, one example being that fully apostolic administrators in the Roman church are only male and that such administrators cannot marry.
But we think that the biological and mental reality of a Roman Catholic church believer is the same as that of a non-Roman Catholic Christian, since the Holy Spirit is the same and the Trinitarian belief is the same. The ordination rites in Roman Catholicism have something ‘different’ from Protestants and Eastern Orthodox because Roman Catholics believe such rites have a different ‘legal’ basis, but it is not possible for the Holy Spirit historically-speaking and concerning its effect in the brain, to be different, since there are not two Holy Spirits. It only remains for the churches to overcome their difficulties of organization, keeping in mind the unity of the Holy Spirit across the churches and its unity within the Holy Trinity. Ordinations of bishops cannot be an essential stumbling-block preventing unity between the churches since it is the same Holy Spirit which is acting, and for the non-episcopal (no bishops) churches it is believed that this very same Holy Spirit is received through ordination .
Charles Graves
Thus, it appears that the definition of the Church would be the multitude of individuals for whom these particular internal workings of the brain and body are similar throughout space and time. So, logically speaking, a unity of such individuals could be considered as the ‘Church’. These are people who have been forgiven their ‘sins’, who share in love towards the ‘forgiving One’ (i.e. Gd and the Trinity) and who try to live ethically under the leadership of the Forgiver (God). In general, these people are the ‘Church’.
In such a perspective what is the need for a clergy? How do the ministers of the church fit into our ‘biological community of believers? The reality of such clergy is portrayed often in the Biblical texts and such clergy are categorized as ‘prophets’, ‘apostles’, deacons, exhorters, healers, priests, leaders, bishops etc. In fact, every member has some ‘gift’ to implement such tasks.
Probably because of the multitude of these ‘gifts’ of the spirit there have arisen so many different ‘churches’ in the world. But regarding the three aspects of the holy spirit within our brains, there were at least three tasks that were the most important: healing from trauma, conversion from wrong attitudes, and redemption from sin. All of these concern blockages in the human vis à vis his/her relation to the Creator. And the essence of any religion is to take away such blockages and help the individual human to have a more perfect relationship between its creaturely life and the Almighty, the Source of such life in the universe.
Apparently, this healing, conversion and redemption require administrators or clergy in order to be fully operative. And, apparently, the credentials of these administrators much be such that they are recognized in their ministrations by the community as a whole. But since the church, essentially, is a spiritual community based upon the activity of the holy spirit within and the Holy Spirit of God (outside and historically represented by Jesus who received it ‘as a dove’ at his baptism), the administration of the three activities of the holy spirit must, themselves, be recipients of the Holy Spirit as Jesus was. By being recipients, they can also become purveyors as was Jesus himself.
Although these administrators have already been baptized and have received, like any ‘Christian’, the action of the holy spirit within and without, they need an extra dose, and this is provided by the ordination procedure. This extra dose of the spirit will be new, obtained ‘from heaven’ itself where the three persons of the Trinity live in unity as is said in the ordination chant ‘Veni Creator’ (which has been used since ancient times to ‘ordain’ priests, deacons (and bishops)):
‘Teach us to know the Father, Son and Thee (i.e,. the Spirit) of Both,
to be but one (Trinity) that through the ages all along – that this may be
one endless song’
When, during the ordination ceremonies this ’Veni Creator’ is sung, it illustrates the moment when certain administrators are asking the Trinity of divine beings in heaven to ‘come down’ upon the new administrator with a new dose of the divine spirit. And after that ceremony the ‘ordinand’ is, supposedly, a partaker of the dose and ready to use it in his/her ‘ministry’.
Through the same previously-discussed method of ‘echoes’ this event in the life of the administrator, this quality of being a ‘minister’, is recognized (by the working of the holy spirit within each member’s brain) as being an authoritative ministerial gift which will assist the members individually and collectively. It is the same ’echo’ as that between the ‘holy spirit’ implanted by God in each human brain and the Holy Spirit which ‘descended upon Jesus at his baptism’.
By this same Spirit the administrator’s ‘ministry’ within the Christian community is assured, Individuals and the group (of members) will recognize it by means of the same ‘echoing’ process within their individual and group consciousness. The church leader may have been elected by the congregation, but besides this, he/she has been ordained to their ministry by the holy spirit itself, in conjunction with other members of the Trinity, all of whom exist ‘in heaven’. This is the heaven toward which each member of the community is heading as their individual lives progress towards an end.
In this sense, of course, the clergy are like shepherds, tending to their flock of sheep and directing them, eventually, to ‘heaven’. Many of the elements of the ordination ceremony fall within this perspective; the new ordinand being told to be faithful in instruction, protecting, exhorting, comforting etc. the members of the flock. This can be done because the Holy Spirit shall be helping him/her in their ‘ministry’.
But the main concern of these ‘ministers’ will be to help the flock remember what the Creator has ‘done for them’ in healing, conversion and redemption from sin, and to facilitate this memory and the forgiveness and love which issues from it Thus the clergy must preside over the Holy Communion within the congregation where the believers experience again and again the ‘body and blood of Christ’, sacrificed for them and ‘their sins’. The ministers are responsible to install and perform this ‘priestly’ function in order to strengthen their flocks to persevere in their earthly ‘road towards heavenly places’.
And such ‘holy communion’ also strengthens the work of the holy spirit within the community as it fosters forgiveness (resulting from redemption from sin) and love. Although these aspects of religion can exist without ‘priests’ or ‘ministers’ they are facilitated by having such administrators.
The role of the Church in the history of the universe
The Church plays a role in universal history. Generally speaking, it ‘gives meaning’ to history, This is very clearly shown in the Book of Revelation, the last book in the Bible.
Although it may seem a small matter that the church is ‘preparing its members for heaven’ etc. the importance of such a small matter goes far beyond the imagination to an ‘eschatological’ end-point when the universe ends. When history ends (as it must someday when the Sun envelopes the earth) the Church has had its role to play and that will be ‘remembered’. The church symbolically represents the ‘best of human nature’ – human nature as it was intended by the Creator, ‘human nature redeemed from sin’, human nature loving the creator God and being loved in return etc. All this is involved but more also, including what humans have accomplished ‘in history’; how humans have built societies which have contributed to the life of mankind as a whole; how societies have protected ‘nature’ within God’s creation; how human societies have fostered reconciliation between peoples, etc,. etc. These ‘histories’ will also be ‘remembered’ as history comes to a close at the End of Time. These aspects will, in essence, be ‘justified’ as having done their part in making human history worthwhile.
The church community seems to be ‘in line’ with these ethical human accomplishments which will undoubtedly be ‘judged’ favorably at the ‘eschaton’ – at the end and final justification of what happened in history.
Such an end means the end of ‘no-god’ since the era of human choice no longer exists. There is no longer any possibility of living ‘as if God does not exist’. But, if history has meant something (which it surely must mean if a Divine Power created it) then those bad actions of humans in history must also mean something-. Of course, they will be ‘judged’ as bad and their proponents must alao suffer judgement. But, somehow, if ‘no-god’ becomes non-existent, ‘against god’ must also cease to exist and apokatastasis must become evident– ‘all humans are saved’. This was the position of Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa in the early Christian era. They argue that if humans are created ‘in the image of God’, that is ‘God-like’ as the Bible proposes, then humans can never totally lose this aspect of their nature, and eventually every person will retain the image of ‘god-likeness’.
A debate about this can go on while history continues, but in any case such a debate tends to go against a belief that any human can be ‘eternally condemned to hell’.
The Christian community, or ‘Church’, also proposes to its members that we should forgive others for their ‘no-god’ approach to life and the damage it has done. Such forgiveness can even have certain therapeutic values for our soul and well-being as some psychiatrists are telling us nowadays.
How a biological interpretation of Christianity may aid the dialogue between religions and cultures
A biological interpretation will take into account that both ‘holy spirit’ and ‘redemption from sin’ are innate properties of the human brain and not merely inserted into consciousness from external ‘religious’ sources. It indicates that Christianity is not, as some persons might suppose, a peculiar ancient religion not attractive to educated persons. Also, it might help to modify the opinions of some Christians that adherents of non-Christian religions cannot be ‘saved’. Also, our approach accepts modern brain research and research on the genome, and attempts to see religion in terms related to scientific discoveries about the brain.
In such a case, we would be obliged to see how, given the equivalence of ‘holy spirit’ or the aspect of ’redemption from sin’ as being existent in all human beings, all religions are similar in their dealings with such common equivalences. How, for example, can Buddhists deal with such phenomena as the possibility for neurons to be displaced to embody redemption from sin or healing from trauma. Obviously, these aspects must concern every religion and dialogue could take place between representatives of religions to show to Christians how they use such brain elements for the implementation of their own religions.
Ecumenism from the biological perspective
Ecumenism is an ‘echoing’ across a variety of people belonging to different ‘churches’. The functioning of the neurons and synapses in all of these people is quite similar – the holy spirit within the brains echoing that Holy Spirit which is ‘in heaven’, what ‘came from Jesus’ and which operates in the clergy administering each of their ‘churches’. But the way the system looks ‘from the outside’ – to some ‘objective’ observer living in the ‘real world’ of outward appearances, each church appears different. But for the Trinitarian churches who are members of the World Council of Churches – more than 300 of them around the world plus the Roman Catholic church - the workings of the neurons and synapses concerning church life is the same. This is why they are in the ecumenical movement – only the Quakers and Unitarians and some Baptists are outside.
It was decided when formal ecumenism was established in the modern world, that a Trinitarian view of God was prerequisite, and if this is accepted then, with the Bible as a reference, the reality of life in all of the member churches is basically similar. Each of the elements of the Trinity and their workings, according to the message of the Scriptures, is held in common by all.
What differs between them is church administration, practices of Holy Communion, methods of worship, ethical positions vis à vis abortions, marriage, divorce, wars, economics etc. Moreover, often such distinctions prevent crossovers – each ‘church’ believes in its particular methods and wishes that its members stay within their own fold. Yet some ecumenical activities can be experienced together, when all the participants can claim that they were baptized in the name of the Trinity. Moreover, those churches which do not baptize babies are not in the World Council of Churches, although they can participate in ecumenical activities.
In the more ‘catholic’ type of churches the important elements are church administration by bishops, priests and deacons and the Holy Communion seen as a sacrifice for sin. In more Protestant type churches the Holy Communion is a memorial of Jesus’ death on the cross with its ‘benefit’ for sinful humans, and also the clergy are organized more simply (although they must be ‘ordained’ like in the ‘catholic type, and receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit). Ecumenical worship has a validity, however, because of the commonalities of baptismal practices, belief in the Trinity and the working of the Holy Spirit both in the holy Communion and the life of believers.
Of course, the main problem of ecumenism – the split between the Roman Catholic Church and other Christian churches – still remains within Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox churches joined the World Council of Churches in 1948 at Amsterdam and in 1961 (Russian Orthodox etc.) but the Roman Catholic Church does not consider other churches to be ‘in communion’ i.e. sharing a common church foundation. What then is the biological difference between Roman Catholicism and other Christian churches? The main problem is what is called the ‘apostolic succession’ – that the only ‘really true and perfect Church’ is one which has bishops who can trace their ordination back to a line of ordinations beginning in the ‘apostolic days’ of St. Peter and St. Paul and that each bishop since that time has received the Holy Spirit from other bishops who have ordained him in succession back to the beginning of the Christian Church. This series of ordinations is claimed by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches and some Anglican churches, but the Roman Catholic Church believes it alone has preserved apostolic succession and correct doctrine in an unbroken fashion and that the Orthodox and other churches have ‘gone out of communion’ with Rome because of certain doctrinal differences.
Hence the biological difference is that the ordination of bishops in churches outside ‘Rome’ is limited in its effect. The Holy Spirit is supposedly not as fully represented in these bishops, because the apostolic succession has been for one reason or another, broken. Nevertheless, the Roman Catholic Church does not deny that the Holy Spirit is present in the non-Roman ordinations, only believing that it is somehow ‘partial’. Moreover, the Roman Catholics not only have bishops and archbishops but also a Pope, which the other churches lack. And in many ways the Pope’s administration of the church under his wing is considered to be more representative of Christianity than churches which are not under the ministrations of the Pope.
Although ecumenism has been active as a movement of church unity all through the era of Christian history, the reality of being ‘out of communion’ with Rome still persists vis à vis most other Christian churches. The only way forward, for some, would be that all administrators of non-Roman Catholic churches receive ordination from Roman Catholic bishops and thus ‘come into communion with Rome’. But most non-Roman churches then would be obliged to affirm and demonstrate that they had been lacking in apostolic-likeness and that by linking to Rome they have finally seen their errors. Moreover, the ethical and legal positions of many Protestant churches differs from the positions taken by the Popes, and Protestants would not wish their freedom of opinion on these issues to be abandoned, one example being that fully apostolic administrators in the Roman church are only male and that such administrators cannot marry.
But we think that the biological and mental reality of a Roman Catholic church believer is the same as that of a non-Roman Catholic Christian, since the Holy Spirit is the same and the Trinitarian belief is the same. The ordination rites in Roman Catholicism have something ‘different’ from Protestants and Eastern Orthodox because Roman Catholics believe such rites have a different ‘legal’ basis, but it is not possible for the Holy Spirit historically-speaking and concerning its effect in the brain, to be different, since there are not two Holy Spirits. It only remains for the churches to overcome their difficulties of organization, keeping in mind the unity of the Holy Spirit across the churches and its unity within the Holy Trinity. Ordinations of bishops cannot be an essential stumbling-block preventing unity between the churches since it is the same Holy Spirit which is acting, and for the non-episcopal (no bishops) churches it is believed that this very same Holy Spirit is received through ordination .
Charles Graves
Photograph: ‘rock painting’ in Australia photographed by Graeme Churchard, Bristol (UK)
