A reader writes:
How would you respond to a deacon during a homily who said: "If everyone were to leave this building, it would no longer be a Church–the people are the Church?
I’d say that he has a point but he’s expressing it in a rather boneheaded way.
It’s true that, THEOLOGICALLY SPEAKING, the Church of Christ is the body of people who are incorporated into Christ and that particular churches (e.g., the church of the Diocese of San Diego) are bodies of people who are incorporated into Christ and united to their bishop.
But it’s also true that Christian tradition across MULTIPLE LANGUAGES–INCLUDING LATIN–has received the usage of referring to specific buildings used by the Church as "churches" (Latin, ecclesiae).
Now, of these two uses the first is the original and more important, but human beings of normal intelligence normally have no trouble allowing words to have TWO OR MORE senses and being able to distinguish which sense is being used in what circumstance.
For an individual to pedantically insist on one usage to the exclusion of another usage that has DEEP roots in Christian tradition for his own pet theological concerns is to reject the customs and linguistic identity markers of the Christian community and MAY serve as a sign that he has a problem adhering to that community as it has traditionally understood itself.
It’s the verbal equivalent of a religious not wearing a habit, and it’s no surprise that many dissidents have highly stressed the idea of the Church as a community of people to the exclusion of other senses (e.g., church buildings, church hierarchy). Some–and I’m not accusing your deacon of being a dissident–have even banded together under the ungrammatical banner "We Are Church."
When one encounters such brazen defiance of established Christian linguistic custom, it’s enough to make one want to say, "TALK NORMAL, YA IDJIT!"
I don’t suggest that you should seriously say that to your deacon, though. If you are looking for something practical to say to him, you might try something like this:
Dear Deacon:
I was disturbed by your recent homily in which you said that "If everyone were to leave this building, it would no longer be a Church–the people are the Church."
While it is true that the original and more important meaning of the word "Church" refers to a body of people, Christian tradition has long received the usage of referring to buildings used by the Church as "churches." This is the case even in Latin. Most people have no trouble distinguishing the senses that different words have and are smart enough to handle both the idea of the Church as a people and the idea of churches as buildings.
You should be aware that when you criticize a deeply-embedded Christian usage of a term, it is quite disturbing to the faithful. Since you are rejecting the linguistic customs of the Christian community, it raises doubts in the faithful’s minds about how well you adhere to that community as it has historically understood itself.
If you don’t want to raise such doubts in the minds of the people to whom you are trying to minister, you may wish to find a way to express the fact that the Church is primarily the body of people incorporated into Christ without attacking long-held word usages of that community. After all, referring to church buildings as "churches" is part of "the Pope’s English."


