Pular para o conteúdo principal

Some Reflections about.Communion and Covenant

I have been looking attentively over some arguments put forth by some scholars in recent days about the significance of the proposed Anglican Covenant as a legitimate way to overcome the conflict that we are living within our Church.

With full respect for the people who adopt this strategy as a legitimate way to overcome the crisis, I would like to point out some limitations in the construction of an theological instrument without considering the more heartfelt incarnational meaning of the word Koinonia.

As I said in the Epiphany West Conference in Berkeley, I reaffirm that Communion is built with feelings more than in theological agreements. This is the most profound meaning of the Greek sense of Koinonia.

Sharing the holy table, dreaming together, acting jointly in the world motivated by the God's love does not demand, necessarily, a theological covenant.

When people starts to feel the need of a clear and a consensual definition on beliefs, as an agreement that makes demands on everyone who subscribes to it, communion is under serious risk. Historically, agreements are the result of a political negotiation between opposite parties.

No theological agreement is able by itself to overcome the trauma of rupture in personal relationships. The Missio Dei is generated from love and not from ecclesiastical policy. The primary place of the Christian Faith is a table where all the world is invited to share the food of life. Around that table Christ himself offered to his friends and gave them the most powerful proof about love. All the Law was completed and surpassed by the sharing of bread and wine with friends. Reverence, kind words, remembrances, love and dreams were the ingredients of that dinner, not discussion about orthodoxy or theological considerations about correct hermeneutics or such issues.

By no means do I want to underestimate the role of the theology, the speech "about" the faith, that can be useful to instruct us for a better dialogue with the rationality of the world. But I want to reaffirm that it cannot solve differences. In the past years of the Enlightenment (or Modernity as some scholars prefer to call it), the search for a minimum consensus was important. But in our era the level of inter-subjectiveness is replacing the idea that of universal and definite truth.

My basic question is: can a covenant built on a set of principles or statements resolve the crisis? When someone decides not to share the most important symbol of love and friendship in relation to others, koinonia is off the agenda.

What is more important? The table or the theology? A good and useful theology is generated by the table and depends upon it -- not the contrary! Remember the way of Emmaus: the breaking of the bread was the final discovery!

Comentários

John disse…
I am very much in agreement with this point of view! The current activity at the level of the Communion has it all backwards -- communion comes first, not theological declarations and agreements!

Estoy muy de aceurdo con esta perspectiva! La actividad actual a nivel de la Comunion anda al reves, pero primero viene la comunion, no las aclaraciones y acuerdos teologicos!
Luiz Coelho disse…
I often see this interconnected with my idea of tradition.

One of the reasons I consider myself an Anglo-Catholic (or a Catholic in the Anglican Tradition) is because I tend to emphasize tradition. And tradition, imho, and especially Anglican tradition is the vision of a round table at which Calvin and St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Julian of Norwich, St. Gregory of Nyssa, Hooker, Paul Tillich, the Wesley brothers and even Marcus Borg sit and discuss about varied subjects related to the Christian faith.

And of course that is a fantasy. Many of those would not agree with some of the views that were presented there and leave the table. I see the Anglican faith, however, as this fantasy of having all those important thinkers and theologians discussing forever, and of course starting from a set of beliefs in common (the creeds? the Chicago-Lambeth quadrilateral perhaps?)...

And what strikes me about that is that, to be Anglican, imo, is to take part of this table and agree with some of Calvin's arguments, or with some of St. Thomas Aquinas' arguments, or even with Bishop Spong's arguments... But always understand that others can see those issues from a different way... and what binds us are the common principles that we defined as a rule of "being part of that table" and not the hot topics that arise from the discussions there.

Sadly, the Anglican Communion lost this concept of sharing this table with all those who were here in the past and all those who are here now. Some want pre-formatted answers. Others want to follow entirely what just one (or a group of) theologian wrote.

And when we lose that, not only we lose the sense of being a communion. We lose the sense of being catholic. We become protestants, following one man or a small group of men... Nothing against the protestants, but when we become confessional "Anglicans", we lose this wonderful "autonomy" to agree with some concepts X wrote, but prefer Y when it comes to other subject.

The lost of this sense of communion and respect over disagreement is, to me, the lost of Anglicanism's most important feature.

Sadly...
Anônimo disse…
Francisco,
Teu posicionamento me parece correto e é sensível ao que há mais nuclear nas relações humanas: sentimento e compaixão. Uma Igreja sustentada em pura racionalidade não é Igreja, é ciência. Um abraço, Yamil
John disse…
Last night I used your statement in the context of a prfesentation to a local congregation on the current conflict in the Anglican Communion. Everyone was very enthusiastic about the point of view you expressed!

Anoche utilice su comentario en el contexto de una presentacion ante una congregacion local sobre el conflict actual en la Comunion Anglicana. Todos quedaron muy entusiasmados con el punto de vista que Ud. expreso en el ensayo.

Postagens mais visitadas deste blog

PEC 241: futuro sombrio e o re-construir utópico do povo brasileiro

A aprovação da PEC 241 pela Câmara dos Deputados representa uma comprovação de que a aliança política entre partidos e as elites que os representam vai consolidando um projeto de desmonte do Estado brasileiro, à custa das maiorias empobrecidas.

A receita é amarga e comprova que a Casa Grande está eufórica para destruir qualquer esforço da Senzala em ampliar direitos. A exemplo de outras elites latino-americanas, a elite brasileira está se deleitando em recuperar os seus privilégios com a maior rapidez possível, tirando da gaveta projetos que haviam esbarrado na firme resistência dos governos progressistas.

A esperança agora se volta para o Senado que deverá também analisar a PEC e - não tenho muita esperança sobre isso - reverter este processo de enxugamento de políticas públicas afirmativas. Pelos próximos 20 anos a população pobre do Brasil pagará uma conta elevadíssima para manter os privilégios de poucos.

A Direita terá, com base numa legalidade destituída de legitimidade, a garan…

Resistir contra o Ensino a serviço do Mercado

Os tristes fatos que estamos assistindo em nosso país revelam o quão difícil é lutar por direitos. Com mais de mil escolas e quase 80 universidades ocupadas contra uma reforma educacional imposta de cima pra baixo, sem discussão com a sociedade e destinada a mudar a proposta de formação de futuras gerações, os estudantes e professores não merecem ser tratados com violência pelo aparelho militar do Estado e nem com desdém pela mídia elitista.

A primeira vítima já está configurada: um adolescente morreu dentro de uma Escola em Curitiba. Até quando o governo manterá seu insano autoritarismo de achar que nosso país aceitará retrocessos no campo das conquistas que construimos na última década? Temos conhecimento de que infiltrados neste movimento estão procurando amedrontar estudantes e professores para enfraquecer a mobilização. Estas pessoas devem ser identificadas e isoladas para que se identifique seus mandantes.

Precisamos, como sociedade, denunciar, resistir e lutar por meios legít…

Message from Primate of Brazil about Primate`s Decision on the recent meeting in Canterbury

Brothers and sisters,
As I expressed earlier, I did not want to communicate anything prior to the end of the meeting regarding the heat of the debates that followed the discussion taken by the majority of Primates in relation to the Episcopal Church of the United States (TEC). In other words, the temporary suspension for three years from all decision-making entities of the Communion, rooted in [TEC]’s decisions with respect to the Matrimonial Canon.

Today I arrived in Brazil and would like to share a pastoral word with the Church regarding this matter. This issue took up a disproportionate amount of time from the meeting and was very difficult for all of the Primates. The most extreme position of the GAFCON primates was to demand an apology or require the withdrawal from the Communion of both TEC and the Church of Canada. This position caused a reaction that brought the Primates into the center of the debate, and the more progressive members sought alternatives that might have caused a …