Vincent Kundukulam
The event of Cornelius described in the Acts of Apostles has something to say about the process of Synodality. The interesting thing is that Cornelius received the Holy Spirit even before he received baptism (Acts 10, 3-6). Similarly, the pagans received the Spirit while they were listening to the apostle Peter (10, 44). The fact that the Holy Spirit spoke to the pagans already before receiving baptism gave to St. Peter the firm conviction that Spirit is actively present among the pagans and that they are part of God’s salvific mission. Peter publicly announced this conviction when he was accused of having dined with the non-Jews: “God shows no partiality, in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him” (10, 34). Peter did not seek any authentication from his colleagues to believe in the work of Holy Spirit outside the followers of Jesus as he had received certification directly from God. He asked: “If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God? (11, 17).
In fact, it was the reception of the Holy Spirit by Cornelius before baptism that pushed the apostolic Church to make the bold step not to reinterpret its identity in terms of ethnicity. Peter realized that it is not membership in a particular nation or observance of specific ritual that make one acceptable to God but the fear of the Lord and the righteous action. The category of people of God was thus extended to all those who fear God and do the right. Another interesting thing to be noted here is that Peter depends on Cornelius to understand the real meaning of the vision he had. It means that the first head of the Church showed the humility to listen to a pagan in order to have clarity regarding the revelation he got from God. It teaches us that listening to the followers of other religions shall help us to understand better the identity and mission of the Church. If Jesus advised the Pharisees and Scribes to do the same what the pagan Samaritan did in order to acquire eternal salvation (Lk 10, 37, why should we be ashamed to learn from other religious believers?
The question, whether the followers of other religions can be valid partners for dialogue, has been alive since the Second Vatican Council. One of the best expressions of this apprehension was the fishy talks in Vatican against the late Pope John Paul II, who conducted the World Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi on 27 October 1986. The debated question was whether a Pope can validly pray with other believers? Certain theologians argued saying that he did not pray with other believers; rather he was together with them in prayer. Anyhow, John Paul II, understanding the whispers in the corridors of Vatican, addressed the Roman Curia on 27 December 1986. He said: “There is only one divine plan for every human being who comes into this world (Jn 1, 9), one single origin and goal, whatever may be the colour of the skin, the historical and geographical framework within which one happens to live and act … The differences are a less important element, when confronted with the unity which is radical, fundamental and decisive” (no 3). “Every authentic prayer is called forth by the Holy Spirit, who is mysteriously present in the heart of every person”. The response of saint John Paul II is a continuation of the stand taken by St. Peter two millennia ago. If there is only one divine plan of salvation and if all religions are partakers of that same salvific plan, is it not fair and necessary that all those who represent them sit together and discuss about realizing God’s will upon earth?
kundu1962@gmail.com
