Whose ecclesiology is it?
This week’s issue of the Evangelist (the Albany R.C. Diocese weekly) has a very nice interview with a Polish priest that visits the area every summer. See: Polish priest has adopted Albany Diocese.
Fr. Krzysztof Podstawka is the rector of a parish in the Lublin Archdiocese and is editor of the Archdiocesan weekly newspaper.
My pastor met Fr. Podstawka after the funeral of Albany’s former bishop. Fr. Podstawka remembered giving a retreat in Poland at which my pastor was a participant. I was impressed when I learned of his sharp memory for such details.
The interview, in Q&A format, was put together fairly well. The most interesting sections were on the differences between the ‘American’ Church and the Church in Poland.
Fr. Podstawka spoke of a priest’s normal duties in Poland, daily confessions (at least forty minutes), three wedding per week (more in the spring and summer), teaching religion in the parish, daily mass, devotions, and seven masses every weekend (with a homily for each).
The funniest question was as follows (emphasis mine):
Q. The Albany Diocese has some guidelines for foreign priests who want to become part of the Diocese, such as a minimum three-year stay, the ability to speak English understandably, and the necessity of understanding American culture and ecclesiological differences. What do you think of those guidelines?
A. They are good guidelines. When a priest comes here from another country, there is a lot to learn. The priest must be able to speak the language of the people. Even if he knows the language, it might be difficult for him in the beginning to fluently speak English.
If we speak about ecclesiological differences, we must be careful. We are one Church; our faith is the same everywhere. But small things about the Mass and other celebrations are different from what they are in Poland. [For example,] the power of the laity [here] is much bigger than in Poland.
Fr. Podstawka gets in right, small cultural differences, no ecclesiological differences.
That is a strong statement. Having been in the Albany Diocese over eight summers, and being as sharp as he is, he knows the glaring ecclesiological differences. This was his moment to teach —“ and he didn’t waste it.
I think the writer meant ‘ecclesiastical’ not ‘ecclesiological’.
Do you see the terms defining the same thing, i.e., how the Church defines itself?
I can’t perfectly describe it but no. Ecclesiological to me means essential: ‘The church has bishops; they have many of the gifts of the apostles.’ Ecclesiastical can be about adiaphora: bishops’ conferences for example. Which is why I think it was a wrong word choice and probably (I hope) an innocent mistake.