[pt] Qual o sentido do tempo na história do homem? Sabemos que vivemos no tempo dos homens (Chrónos). Mas como diz a Sagrada Escritura: não somos deste mundo, ou seja, não somos deste tempo. O próprio Cristo disse: meu reino não é deste mundo. Diante dessas considerações, a dissertação faz uma exposição atualizada dos termos Chrónos e Kairós na dýnamis do Espírito Santo - no sentido de situar o homem na realidade do tempo, a partir da leitura bíblica de At 1,6-8 - e, principalmente, dos termos Chrónos e Kairós, exaurindo uma reflexão sobre a ação do tempo na história do homem dentro da dinâmica da passagem do Chrónos para o Kairós; viver bem o Chrónos, reconhecendo, entretanto, que já chegou o tempo da graça, o Kairós: o Cristo que está entre nós. A encarnação do Verbo qualifica todo este sentido de tempo: conhecemos o antes e o depois de Cristo. Assim, Jesus Cristo é este grande qualificador do tempo e a sua atuação no mundo nos traz três dimensões diferentes de tempo. O estudo reflete sobre estes três tempos de atuação de Deus na história dos homens: o tempo de Israel; o tempo de Jesus e o tempo da Igreja. Deste modo, o estudo de Chrónos e Kairós são refletidos à luz bíblica e analisados na dýnamis do Espírito Santo, através da exegese e da hermenêutica bíblica, sistematizada e elaborada com oportuna pesquisa dos termos e sua atuação nos três tempos de estudo, perpassando elementos primordiais de compreensão, tais como: missão, testemunho e Igreja. Portanto, o estudo visa a colocar o leitor em uma perspectiva de tempo, bem como refletir sua atuação neste tempo, no Chrónos e no Kairós, desejando que cada um saiba descobrir o verdadeiro Kairós de sua vida, a graça de Deus que se manifesta. / [en] What is the sense of the time in men´s history? We know we are living in the human time (Chrónos), but as the Sacred Scripture states: we are not from this world, or, we are not from this time. As Christ said: my kingdom is not from this world. Taking these facts into consideration, the report explains the updated terms Chrónos and Kairós under the dýnamis of the Holy Spirit, in order to locate the man in the reality of the time in the Holy Bible literature of At 1,6-8, persuing an reflection about the of time in men´s history within the dynamic of chronological age from Chrónos to the Kairós, to live well the Chrónos, but keeping in mind that the time of grace has already started, the Kairós, the Christ among us. The incarnation of the Verb qualifies this time sense as we know the before and after Christ, and then Jesus Christ is the Major Qualifier of the time. His Action within the world brings us three different perspectives of time. It reflects about the three times of God Action over the men´s history: Israel time, Jesus time and the Church time. Thus, the study of Chrónos and Kairós are reflected in the Holy Bible and further analyzed within the dýnamis of the Holy Spirit through the interpretation and the exegesis of the Holy Scripture. A very careful research of these terms was developed, considering very important elements of study: Mission, Testimony and Church. This study intends to place the reader into the context of the time, leading the reader to reflect this chronological time into her reality. In the Chrónos and in the Kairós, wishing that men and women shall know how to discover the true Kairós in their lives. May each person be able to discover the grace of God shown in every day life.

In this study we will attempt to discover the background of [apostolos] among its pagan ancestors. In addition to this area, we will also be concerned with the Jewish background which exerted a formative influence on the meaning of the word. Finally, an attempt will be made to see the result of this combination of backgrounds as it came to be reflected in the New Testament.

Comme son titre l’indique, la présente thèse porte sur la canonicité de la Conférence des évêques. Elle vise à réfléchir au degré d’autorité decette nouvelle institution spécifiquement latine. La Conférence des évêques est devenue un organe permanent, alors que le Synode desévêques né en 1965 sous le pontificat de Paul VI n’a pas reçu cette caractéristique. La Conférence des évêques est-elle une expression de lacollégialité épiscopale ? Le Concile Vatican II (1962-1965) l’a admise comme l’une des composantes de cette collégialité. Vatican II l’aconsacrée et institutionnalisée (Constitution Lumen Gentium et Décret Christus Dominus), mais sans parvenir à lever toutes les questionsliées à son autorité et à sa juridiction. Le Synode des évêques de 1969, dont le thème annoncé était précisément la collégialité vécue, a aussiabordé la question des Conférences épiscopales. À cette Assemblée synodale, le débat a concerné principalement les moyens à mettre enoeuvre pour réaliser une coopération réelle et efficace entre Rome et les Conférences épiscopales et pour garantir une meilleure autonomie àces Conférences, sans pour autant entraver la liberté du Pape, ni porter atteinte à l’autorité de l’évêque diocésain. Il s’en est suivi une plusgrande détermination des principes qui régissent d’une part les relations entre les Conférences épiscopales et Siège apostolique, et d’autrepart les liens des Conférences épiscopales entre elles.Mais ce débat n’a toujours pas été tout à fait dirimé, surtout quant à l’autorité magistérielle de la Conférence des évêques. La qualificationjuridique en 1983 par les soins de la codification latine semble n’avoir pas suffi. Témoigne de ce malaise persistant le Synode des évêques de1985. Celui-ci a formellement demandé une réévaluation de l’institution de la Conférence des évêques : « Puisque les Conférencesépiscopales sont particulièrement utiles, voire nécessaires dans le travail pastoral actuel de l’Église, on souhaite l’étude de leur « status »théologique pour qu’en particulier la question de leur autorité doctrinale soit plus clairement et plus profondément explicitée, compte tenude ce qui est écrit dans le décret conciliaire Christus Dominus n° 38 et dans le Code de droit canonique, can. 447 et 753 ». Cela aoccasionné deux efforts institutionnels, l’un consultatif (L’Instrumentum laboris de 1987 de la Congrégation pour les évêques), l’autre décisionnel (le Motu proprio Apostolos suos de 1998). Dans cette dernière norme de requalification théologique et juridique, le Pape Jean-Paul II réaffirme de manière plus décisive la spécificité de la Conférence des évêques. Ce vaste dossier peut sembler redondant et lancinant. Les chercheurs peuvent constater que le problème de l’autorité de la Conférence des évêques s’avère encore difficile à trancher. En effet, les principaux paramètres de l’édifice ecclésial ne sont-ils pas profondément interrogés ? / As it is suggested within the title, the present thesis focuses on the canonicity of the Conference of bishops. It aims to reflect the degree ofauthority of this new specifically Latin Institution. The bishops Conference has become a permanent body, while the Synod of bishops whichwas born in 1965, under Pope Paul VI did not receive this feature. Is the Conference of bishops an expression of episcopal collegiality? TheSecond Vatican Council (1962-1965) was admitted as a component of this collegiality. Vatican II was consecrated and institutionalized(Constitution Lumen Gentium and Decree Christus Dominus), but failed to raise any issue relating to its authority and jurisdiction. The 1969Synod of bishops, whose theme was announced, more precisely lived collegiality, also addressed the question of episcopal conferences. Atthe Synod Assembly, the debate has mainly concerned the means to implement in order to achieve a real and effective cooperation betweenRome and the bishops' conferences, and to ensure greater autonomy to these conferences, without impeding the freedom of the Pope, orundermining the authority of the diocesan bishop. There ensued a greater commitment to the principles which govern, on the one hand, therelationship between the Episcopal Conferences and the Apostolic See, and on the other hand, the links between the different episcopalConferences.But that debate has still not been completely invalidated, especially as it refers to the teaching authority of the Conference of bishops. Thejuridical qualification, in 1983, through the efforts of the latin codification seems to have been insufficient.The Synod of Bishops, in 1985, demonstrates this persistent discomfort. It has formally requested a reassessment of the institution of theConference of bishops: « Since the Episcopal Conferences are particularly useful, even necessary in the current pastoral work of theChurch, we want to study their theological " status " so that in particular the issue of their doctrinal authority would be more clearly anddeeply explained, taking into account what is written in the conciliar Decree Christus Dominus, item N° 38 and in the Code of Canon Law,can. 447 and 753 ». This situation derived to two institutional efforts: an advisory one (The Instrumentum laboris of 1987 of theCongregation for bishops), then another one, a decision (the Motu proprio Apostolos suos 1998). In this last theological standard and juridicalrequalification, Pope John Paul II reaffirms, more decisively, the specificity of the Conference of bishops. This extensive file may seem to beredundant and haunting. Researchers can notice that the problem of authority of the Conference of bishops remains difficult to determine. Infact, are the main parameters of the ecclesial structure not deeply questioned ?