On why the church may appear slow, and how enduring realities find expression in a changing world.
Years ago, while studying theology, I often heard the modern world contrasted with the Church. The modern world was described as fast-moving and constantly changing, while the Church was seen as slower, more cautious, responding over decades or even centuries.
But perhaps this difference is not simply a matter of pace.
While it is true that the modern world today changes continuously – it evolves, responds and shifts with new information – the church is supposed to hold onto truths that are unchangeable – that lie outside of time.
So the Church doesn’t just “move more slowly” – it’s trying (at least ideally) to be faithful to something that doesn’t move at all. So it ends up in this strange position: it claims something unchanging but expresses and understands it through history – which is why it looks slow. Not because it’s simply lagging behind, but because it’s constantly trying to answer:
How do you speak something timeless… inside time? *
That is far more difficult to do than to just “keep up”.
Note: *This question extends beyond the church itself. Whether I am reflecting on peace, Italian culture, aggiornamento, Vatican II, or the worlds of Marcovaldo and M. Hulot, I find myself returning to the same underlying question: how do enduring realities – peace, beauty, truth, and tradition – find expression in a changing world without losing their essence?