4 PART ONE: INTRODUCTION question of Eucharistic sharing in ecumenical contexts: “as long as no eucharistic fellowship exists, there will be no church fellowship, and as long as no church fellowship exists, there will be no eucharistic fellowship.”3 The only way to escape this paradox seems to prioritize either Eucharistic communion or ecclesial communion as a prerequisite for the other. The Roman Catholic Church, interpreting the Council’s statement that the Eucharist is the “source and summit of Christian life,”4 encountered this problem, too. Since the Church emphasizes the function of the Eucharist as expression of full unity, it does not consider Eucharistic sharing as a viable way towards restoration of such unity in general, even though current regulations permit Eucharistic hospitality towards individual non-Catholic baptized as a channel of grace under certain conditions. This study explores two places where Eucharistic hospitality is practiced in order to learn from their experiences and to reflect on the place of Eucharistic sharing in the context of ecumenical rapprochement. One important conclusion will be that, in these particular contexts, the dynamic of Eucharistic hospitality transcends the individual spiritual needs of the respondents and, as a consequence, embodies a general ecumenical relevance. The first chapter outlines the evolution of the ecumenical movement, which intended to reverse the schisms inflicted to the church. It summarizes some of the main currents in the movement’s history, the stagnation of its progress, and explores the debate concerning one form of spirituality that might enable a new step forward, namely, Eucharistic hospitality. Against that backdrop, I will make an argument for studying the decades-long tradition of Eucharistic hospitality in the ecumenical monastic communities of Taizé and Bose. Starting from these very practices, this study intends to enrich the debate on that controversial topic by confronting theology with the reality of concrete instances of Eucharistic hospitality. Because of significant developments in this debate parallel to my research, the chapter is rather elaborate as it aims at presenting the evolving status quaestionis properly. 3 Heinrich Fries and Karl Rahner, Unity of The Churches: An Actual Possibility, trans. Ruth C.L. Gritch and Eric W. Gritch (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 123. Originally published as Heinrich. Fries and Karl Rahner, Einigung der Kirchen - Reale Möglichkeit, Quaestiones Disputatae (Freiburg: Herder Verlag, 1983). 4 Second Vatican Council, Unitatis Redintegratio, Decree on Ecumenism, 1964, sec. 11, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_ 19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html (henceforth cited as UR).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw