The Church and the charismas according to St. Paul

José Comblin

21/07/2009

Opinión

^-A ⁺A

Paul’s letters reveal the nature of the early Church in the communities he founded approximately 20 years after the death of Jesus. At its inception, the Christian community enjoyed all the privileges of childhood.

We must refer to the Epistles that are genuinely authored by Paul: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Philemon. His disciples wrote the other letters attributed to Paul after his death, in come cases up to 30 and 40 years later. But these disciples changed the ecclesiology undoubtedly because the communities themselves had changed. The most decisive change was the creation of permanent ministers to direct the community - presbyters and deacons not established by Saint Paul. Similarly, the Acts of the Apostles describes a Paul that is quite different than the one who composed the letters. To this different Paul are attributed all the changes that occurred in the period after his death and before the Acts were written. The author of the Acts never met Paul nor was he acquainted with Paul’s letters. The writer accepts folk traditions and adds speeches and episodes that represent his own theology, not the theology of Paul.

1. The people of God

We contend that the underlying concept of Paul’s ecclesiology is the concept of the people of God. “People” is not a sociological concept. Upon studying various sociological essays, I discern that sociology is not about people because the concept of people is not a sociological classification; it is not observable. Rather, “people” denotes a theological categorization because it is an ideal projected like the promise made to Abraham.

Paul views Jesus’ disciples as the continuation of the people of Israel. The heads of Israel betrayed God’s promises to Abraham and abandoned the true Israel. The true and definitive Israel can be found in the communities of Jesus’ disciples, both Jews and Gentiles, as the promises to Abraham not only were addressed to a small segment of humanity, apart from the rest. Abraham’s descendants had to envelop the entire boundless world. But the Jews raised barriers and prevented the entrance of ethnic communities separate from the Jews. This is described in Chapters 9 - 11 of Romans, constituting Paul’s essential ecclesiology.

Paul does not seek to convert individuals; he wants to extend the people of God to the far corners of the world because that is the plan God revealed to Abraham. Jesus came to carry out that plan of Abraham. He died for that cause. But afterwards, his disciples broke down the barriers and spread out throughout the world so that the nation of God could encompass Jews and non-Jews. Jesus did not come to save souls; his mission was to reestablish Abraham’s descendants, breaking down the barriers and taking charge, personally, of the leadership of that people.

A people envelop the entire human existence. Jesus did not come to teach a religion or wisdom; he came to change every aspect of life. “People” encompasses everything from economy, politics, culture, to corporeal life, from the food we eat to natural resources. All these facets comprise “people”. The disciples’ mission was to bring into being the people that will be the people of God, integrating all other peoples in the unity of Abraham’s project. There is room for everyone because barriers no longer exist. Jesus suppressed all barriers that originated from one culture, one segment of humanity, and one lifestyle, from some closely guarded Jewish leaders detached from other peoples. In raising practically insurmountable obstacles, the leaders of Israel made the entrance of pagans nearly impossible. Now the people are open to all and Paul believes it will soon envelope all humanity.

The Pauline communities and other disciples called by other Apostles constitute the inception of this now free and open people. They are numerically insignificant but Paul’s faith consists of the following: He sees in them the beginning of a new humanity reunited in a shared life in which diversity is united in love and solidarity.

2. The “ekklesia” (congregation, church)

Initially, the disciples of Jesus believed their gathering did not need a name. They were Jews, members of the chosen people of Israel. Within Israel they were followers of the way of Jesus. They awaited the kingdom of God that Jesus had announced. But the kingdom did not materialize. It appeared farther away than they had foreseen. The concept of the kingdom of God grew to be the day when this world would come to an end, ushering in a new world, anticipated as a great miracle of God. But now it seemed exceedingly distant in time. The disciples could not simply wait for that day in the remote future. They lived on the earth; earthly life continued. They had to give themselves a name, all the more so after pagans converted and disciples began to distance themselves from Orthodox Judaism.

Paul gave all his communities the same name to express a sense of unity. The name Paul adopted was “ekklesia,” a brilliant choice because it is a very significant word.

The word “ekklesia” had but a single meaning. It referred to the assembly of peoples, the “demos,” that met to govern a city. It had no other meaning. Paul knew exactly what he was doing in choosing that particular word. He did not choose a word with a religious connotation. During those times, various types of religious associations existed in Greek cities. However, Paul knew that he was not going to create a religion or a cult in the city. A religion or cult did not interest him. For Paul, his life was the cult of the disciples of Jesus. Paul’s mission was to call for the formation of a people. A city’s communities represented a people, the people of God in that city. They were the true people, forming a genuine “demos” even though they were an inconsequential minority. But Paul’s vision looked far into the future, with an invincible faith. There gathered the people, in that assembly of disciples that was the assembly of the people.

The communities were a people that formed “ekklesia” - they governed themselves, without chiefs, without anyone ordering them. It was the genuine fulfillment of the Greek ideal of the city. Within themselves, the disciples formed an authentic “democracy,” achieving the ideal never attainable by the Greeks who permitted slavery and class separation.

The true translation of “ekklesia” should be “democracy.” Jesus’ disciples formed a democracy in each city. However, the term was not translated accurately. Latin borrowed “ecclesia” from the Greek, without retaining its meaning. In Spanish this became “iglesia,” a word devoid of meaning. It means nothing. It became the name of an institution.

Those who belong to the Catholic Church can perceive the extent we have distanced ourselves from Christian origins. Today people who think the Church is and should be a democracy will be condemned as heretics. We are precisely at the polar opposite of the early Christian communities.

In the Christian “democracy” everyone was equal, everyone could speak, everyone could participate in the assembly’s decision-making process. It was really the advent of freedom, the nucleus of a new people, a new humanity. The communities did not meet to hold a service or to practice a religion, but to share life together in the fraternity of an association of equals. Sharing life was the reason for these gatherings. It was natural for them to share meals together because to live together is to eat together.

The closest resemblance to the original sense of “ekklesia” were the Christian base communities [that emerged in Latin America in the late 1960s, flourishing during the 70s and 80s, particularly in Brazil], a development unheard of since the Middle Ages although

certain Protestant groups formed similar communities, particularly in the United States.

3. The Gifts of the Spirit in the Communities

The Church, that “democracy,” forms a single body because it is the body of Christ. Every person is an organ of the body of Christ. Christ Himself unites all the parts of his body. He unites all the parts of the body through the gifts of the Spirit, which are diverse. Every individual receives a gift of the Spirit. The gift is the capacity to serve others. Everyone serves each other; everyone is at the service of each other. Such is the nature of unity. Unity if formed by the Spirit.

Paul left three lists of gifts or services that he calls charismas. The lists are not the same. There was no official classification. The communities must not be copies of a uniform model.

1 Corinthians 12, 8-10: “To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.”

1 Corinthians 12, 28-30: “And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.”

Romans 12, 6-8: “ We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.”

There is no need to probe the nature of the specific content of each gift. What matters to us is that all members had a role to play in the community. If someone presides, it is not to command but to assemble. In Pauline communities, no one commands and no one imposes. They did what Dom Helder Camara said when he arrived in Recife: “Here two words are banned: command and demand.”

Of course these communities were small and did not require major organizational structure. Problems, conflicts, and rivalries arose but these situations were not solved through a leader’s imposition.

Paul always reclaimed his condition as “apostle” because Christ himself had called him, as well as the “Twelve,” although under different circumstances, and he had authority to announce the Gospel. During his itinerant mission, he founded many communities. He upheld authority as father of the community, which conferred him sole authority.

Nonetheless, it is important to observe the way Paul exercises that authority. He does not command; he does not impose. We have a very significant testimony in 2 Corinthians. As is widely known, 2 Corinthians is not one, specific letter but a collection of letters that comprise a series. The various letters are readily recognizable. 2 Corinthians contains five letters, all of which refer to an event that occurred in Corinth.

While Paul was in Ephesus, a crisis erupted in Corinth. Someone challenged Paul’s authority and led a group of opponents (2 Corinthians 2, 5-6). Paul hurried back to Corinth. His stay was brief and unsuccessful. The opposition leader insulted Paul, openly challenging him in public. Paul decided best to leave and wait for a more opportune moment to introduce a different strategy with reconciliation in mind.

From Ephesus, Paul wrote a letter urging the disciples to reconcile with him. That letter is contained in 2 Corinthians 2, 14 - 7, 4. It was a letter of apology. It was not the first because in 2 Corinthians 2,3.4.9 Paul mentions a letter he wrote in tears. Some believe the reference was to 2 Corinthians 10-13, but this letter does not appear to have been written with such strong emotions. If it is not that letter, then the letter written in tears has been lost. With all certainty, the letter penned in tears was the culmination of the crisis.

Paul then sent Tito to Corinth to offer a solution; the Corinthians had to acknowledge the apostolic authority of Paul. Tito’s mission was a complete success. He traveled on to share the news with Paul. Paul was so impatient that he left Ephesus to meet Tito halfway. They met in Macedonia, probably in Philippi. Paul was so delighted that he wrote the Corinthians a letter of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 1, 1 - 2, 13; 7, 5-16).

After achieving reconciliation, Paul wished to resume the matter of collecting aid for the poor of Jerusalem, an initiative of the Corinthians that had fallen to the wayside when crisis broke out. Paul sent two letters to discuss this action, insisting on it. He hoped to stir the Corinthians to action. This is recounted in chapters 8 and 9 of 2 Corinthians.

This episode is very interesting. Paul could have invoked his stature as apostle, to impose his will. He could have issued a sentence condemning the rebels or even expelled them from the community. Instead, he preferred the avenue of dialogue for the ultimate goal of obtaining reconciliation.

In today’s context, it is quite striking that there is no ordination. Each individual receives a charisma directly from the Spirit. The charisma is accepted because the disciple’s ability is manifest. No one is assigned a specific vocation. Spontaneity suffices to solve problems that arise in community life. The gifts of the Spirit are never lacking. The communities were small. There was no formal organization.

The absence of a minister or any kind of liturgical or ritual charisma is equally striking. These days ordainments and ritual or liturgical ministries are of prime importance for the Catholic Church, to such an extent that these concerns have extinguished the community’s gifts. No one in Corinth was ordained in order to baptize others. No one was ordained or appointed to preside the celebration of the Eucharist, associated with community meals. The person who presides the Eucharist, in other words, the person who distributes the bread, presides over the meal. This is the person who says grace or thanksgiving at meals.

Such was the situation because Christian communities had no liturgical service. All rituals of the Old Testament vanished, replaced by a real, not symbolic, cult. After this, the temple becomes the disciples themselves as a body. God resides within them (1 Corinthians 3, 9-17).

The sacrificial cults come to an end. The sacrifices become the corporeal life of the disciples, their actions inspired by the Spirit (Romans 12,1; Philippians 3,3). The priests are all disciples who offer their daily life lived in their own body.

There is no liturgical ritual. The liturgy is real life. Later the influence of the Old Testament and the pagan religions persuaded the Christians to form a symbolic liturgical cult. At that point ministers ordained for that cult make their appearance. After Constantine, the radical development of a liturgical cult by his ministers took hold. The Church became clergy-centered and the charismas vanished, at least from Christian conscience and official Church structure. During Paul’s time no one imagined ordaining priests for the cult. The ministries were real services for the community or for the poor.

4. A Church that is poor

The subject of poverty is fundamental in Paul’s ecclesiology. We must hasten to clarify that the issue of the Church of the poor bears not the slightest resemblance to the contemporary issue of the preferential option for the poor. Those who take a stand for the poor can only be rich. The Church that chooses that option is a wealthy Church. Such is the condition of the Catholic Church today. When the bishops took a stand for the poor at Medellin, they knew they were wealthy and represented a wealthy Church. They wanted to accept the challenge represented by the condition of a wealthy bishop who claims to be the successor of apostles who were poor.

Paul makes a lengthy analysis of the issue of poverty in 1 Corinthians 1,17 - 2,16 and 3, 18-23. The subject of poverty is linked to the subject of the cross. Paul announces Jesus crucified, and his ecclesiology derives from this essential issue. The supreme poverty is the cross. The cross represents the worst human degradation, and complete powerlessness. The cross is an object of shame. To be crucified is the greatest shame. It evokes contempt, rejection, and jeers: the cross reduces the human being to garbage.

Now then, God chose the cross, the garbage, the scandalous, and the shameful to create a new humanity. That cross is present in the poor. God chose what humanity holds in greatest contempt. God chose the poor. The poor are chosen to initiate humanity’s walk to freedom. The poor are the chosen because they are rejected, abused, reduced to powerlessness. God chooses the weakest in order to demonstrate that his force acts through that which is “weakest.” The community of Corinth is an example of the manifestation of his power of creation. In Corinth there are few wealthy people, and the community is basically comprised of the poor (1 Corinthians 1,26).

The Church according to St. Paul is that Church of the poor that was the dream of John XXIII.

There is a special insistence on cultural poverty. God rejected the wisdom of the wise and chose the madness of the cross. Madness means intellectual weakness and cultural poverty. We need no help from Greek philosophy. True wisdom is the wisdom of the cross. It is the wisdom of the poor.

But poverty of course is also material. We have a description of that material poverty in Paul’s portrayal of his life. In his mission Paul himself was a vital example of the wisdom of the cross. “I was in the midst of you trembling in my weakness and misgivings. My word and my preaching had no brilliance or cunning to seduce listeners, but the proof for you to believe lay in the power of the Spirit, not in the wisdom of men, but due to the power of God” (1 Corinthians 2, 3-5).

This is how Paul describes the material poverty: “We are madmen on account of Christ; and how cautious you are about Christ! We are weak; you are strong! You are all highly regarded; we are despised! Until now we have suffered hunger, thirst, cold, and mistreatment. We have no safe place to live and we are exhausted, working with our own hands. We are cursed and we bless; we are persecuted and we endure; we are defamed and we console. Until now we are considered the garbage of the world, the dung of the universe!”.

(1 Corinthians 4, 10-13; 2 Corinthians 11,16 -12,10).

If we look back upon the 2000 years of Church history, how do we avoid fright when we regard the enormous breach that separates us from those origins? Despite everything, there was always a remnant; a small minority that was loyal to its origins and poor communities heard the message of the madness of the cross. Next to them there was so much wealth, so much power that it concealed the Gospel!

In the conquest of America a few missionaries reproduced Paul’s message: the Dominicans on the Island of Hispanola, the Franciscans in central Mexico, the Jesuits in their Guarani missions. Adjacent to them was the power and wealth of a Church bonded to the conquerors. Even to our days, how power seduces!

You hear about a great mission in Latin America. But what can the Church that we have become announce to the poor masses of Latin America? What authority has the Church that seeks so much power? The paramount mission can only be the conversion of the Church to accept the vocation to serve the Latin American poor. The Church has nothing to teach and everything to learn. The true Church is in the midst of the poor like a Church crucified, devoid of human wisdom, without prestige, without buildings, or university diplomas, really the dung heap of the world, ignored and despised. It is there we will find the cross of Christ that we know not how to teach.

That is the great lesson Saint Paul hands down to us. It is madness, but we can try to be mad!

(Talk given in a Theological Conference in Sao Paulo, Brazil, march 2009 ).

https://www.alainet.org/en/articulo/135231