Antoine Arjakovsky

Je ne connaissais en fait ni les évangélistes ni les pentecôtistes. La présentation du revd Dr Norberto Saracco, de la Good News Evangelical Church, en Argentine, m'a beaucoup intéressé et réjoui, tellement que je vous recommande vivement de lire son texte qui n'existe pour l'instant qu'en anglais.

Cette présentation me confirme dans mon opinion qu'il faut comprendre l'Eglise comme une réalité personnelle et non comme un concept, qui postule l'homogénéité en tous temps et en tous lieux. Même si je me sens proche des remarques à la fois bienveillantes et critiques faites par le théologien catholique p. Jorge A. Scampini au texte 'Appelés à être l'Eglise une', il faut de toute urgence que les théologiens comprennent cette nécessité de se dégager du conceptualisme, souvent critique, injuste et institutionnel.

L'Eglise a des visages différents en fonction des contextes et c'est toujours la même Eglise. L'Eglise a des densités de relations inter-confessionnelles différentes en fonction des personnes et c'est pourtant la même Eglise. Si nous la regardions comme une échelle vivante réunissant le ciel et la terre nous accepterions cette unité par capillarité, par niveaux de conscience beaucoup plus facilement. Nous serions beaucoup moins tenté de protéger Dieu de toute hérésie, ou plutôt de protéger notre représentation de Dieu de toute opinion partielle. Tandis que au contraire, tant que nous cherchons à montrer que le vinculum symbolicum doit être indissocié du vinculum sacramentale et du vinculum hierarchicum, comme nous l'a exposé ce matin le père Scampini, nous oublions de nous situer.

Oui la confession de foi est indissociable de la vie liturgique et de la nécessité d'un ordre dans l'Eglise. Je ne le conteste pas. Mais ceci concerne un certain niveau de discussion, un certain de degré de corporéité, un certain degré d'intensité dans la connaissance mutuelle. Pourquoi le joug de l'unité toujours plus dense doit-il toujours l'emporter sur la primauté fondamentale de la joie du seul fait d'être chrétien ? Etre au pied de la croix ne suffit-il pas à notre identité chrétienne globale ? Ce n'est ni du minimalisme doctrinal ni du new age que de dire cela. C'est prendre conscience que, avant tout, notre identité chrétienne est amoureuse, sapientielle, tournée vers les plus démunis, et ensuite seulement tournée vers nous-mêmes, vers nos imperfections, vers la nécessité impérative de mieux nous comprendre.

Je me suis senti plus proche aujourd'hui de Norberto Saracco que de Jorge Scampini.

New Possibilities in the Quest for Visible Unity
A Contribution from the Evangelical Churches of Latin America
Dr J Norberto Saracco



You belong to the same church as me,
If you stand at the foot of the cross.
If your heart beats in time with to my heart,
Give me your hand. You are my brother, my sister.

For decades the words of that chorus have been sung by millions of evangelicals throughout Latin America. It has been a sort of theme song in meetings and activities at which brothers and sisters of different denominations met. Its ecumenical theology is simple: if you are at the foot of the cross, you belong to the same church as I do; if your heart beats in time with my heart, you are my brother, my sister.

That simple statement reduces centuries of ecumenical discussion to the barest minimum, but it also glosses over our real divisions.

Diversity and plurality, values which are a legacy from our Protestant history, have drifted towards fragmentation and polarization. These have been features of the life of the evangelical churches and, for the Pentecostals, almost a measure of their spirituality!

However, today it is different. In recent years, it has been the evangelical churches, and particularly the Pentecostal churches, that have worked hardest in the quest for the visible unity of the church. The strengthening of the National Alliances and Federations of Churches, the establishment of Pastoral Councils in thousands of cities, and joint mission and evangelism projects are only some examples of this. We know that it is not the same in all places and that there is still much to be done, but it would be wrong not to acknowledge the truth of this.

For the evangelical churches, unity comes out of their faithfulness to the Word of God and and out of mission. In the Lausanne Covenant, it is put like this: “We affirm that the visible unity of the church in the truth is the will of God. Evangelism is also an invitation to unity, since unity strengthens our witness, just as disunity is a denial of our gospel of reconciliation.”

For evangelical churches, unity is not based on the recognition of a hierarchical authority, nor on dogmas, nor on theological agreements, nor on alliances between institutions. We have to accept that that way of doing ecumenism has gone as far as it can. We know one another better than ever before, we have said to one another all that we have to say, and we understand exhaustively the causes of our divisions. What is the next step to be? The ecumenical agenda must disentangle itself from the past and become open to the ecumenism of the future. In a dynamic and lively church, like the church in Latin America, there is an ecumenism of the People of God, which declares, like the song I mentioned to begin with, that if you and I are at the foot of the cross, then we belong to the same church, so, give me your hand, let us walk together, you are my brother, my sister. I admit that this ecumenical simplicity may be disturbing, but its sole aim is to help an ecumenism that has come to a standstill to break out of its inertia.

Why can we not listen to the millions of Christians who have no understanding of our divisions? In recent decades, we have in fact witnessed the weakening of denominational structures. There has been a globalization of religious experience. The lines of authority, loyalty and spirituality cut across the different denominations. We cannot ignore the dangers in this new situation, but we must also ask, Will this not be, perhaps, the breath of the Spirit? Will it not be that God is creating something new without our being aware of it?

We are being asked, how can the evangelical churches relate to the fellowship of churches which belongs to the World Council of Churches?

When the question is asked in that way, the diversity among the evangelical churches and the diversity among the WCC member churches make an answer impossible.

I can, however, suggest some possible ways how they can relate to one another…


We need to regard one another honestly with mutual respect and appreciation. In the past, we evangelical churches in Latin America have (in inverted commas) “evangelized” by exposing the weaknesses of the Catholic Church. Today it is different. In the 1970s we were also not able to understand the struggle of our brothers and sisters who, at that time, were risking their lives by being witnesses to Jesus Christ, his justice and his truth. Since then, we have, more than once, publicly and privately, repented of this. Unity becomes, however, difficult when our brothers and sisters treat us as sects, when they regard Pentecostals as a threat, and see in the growth of evangelical churches an advance of the pro-war right. Unity cannot be built on misrepresentation and prejudice.
We need to understand that the religious map of the world has changed and that the map of Christianity has also changed. The centre of gravity of the church has moved from the North to the South. The fact that this Assembly is taking place in this city of Porto Alegre is not a coincidence. We, the Christians from this part of the world, therefore have this not-to-be-missed opportunity to make our unity in Christ visible in our day-to-day commitment to mission. Our impoverished peoples, our pillaged lands and our societies in bondage to sin present us with a challenge. An ecumenism of mission is possible in so far as Jesus Christ is proclaimed as Saviour and Lord and the gospel presented in its entirety. We believe that the centrality of Jesus Christ points up the difference between the mission of the church and religious compassion. We need to be clear. Latin America needs Jesus Christ and we should come together in mission to declare that truth.
We need to accept our diversity as an expression of the grace of God that itself takes many forms. There are different ways of being church and in recent times that diversity has multiplied. It would be a good ecumenical exercise to find out what are the limits to diversity that we are prepared to accept. But we need to accept one another without reservation, without dividing churches into first-class and second-class. It needs to be an acceptance without ecclesiological word-play (communities of faith, ecclesial communities, churches, and so on), which is an attempt to conceal our inability to acknowledge others as part of the one church.
Allow me to end with a question. Suppose we were to give the Spirit a chance? We have used oceans of ink and tons of paper in writing about unity. That has not been a waste of time, effort or money. But it has brought us as far as we can go. Is not this the time for a new Pentecost? Only a Spirit-filled church will see racial, sexual, economic and ecclesiastical barriers come down. Only Spirit-filled lives will stop calling “impure” or “unclean” what God has called holy, and stop regarding as sacrosanct what is “unclean”.

The unity of the church will be a work of the Spirit, or it will not be at all.