236 PART TWO: AN EMPIRICAL ACCOUNT Taizé practices in particular, there is a maximization of recognition: they acknowledge ‘Eucharist’ – a notion beyond full comprehension itself – as broadly as possible. Still, throughout the interviews, there are some traces of constituting elements. Ordained ministry, for example, is presupposed as a fundamental aspect. The definition of ordained ministry, though, diverts from the strict Roman Catholic understanding, extending to realities in the Protestant churches. ‘Do we have two Eucharists?’ is a very fundamental question. In Taizé, this question is answered with a clear ‘no’. This answer sparks two possible responses: either only one of the Eucharists is the true Eucharist and the other is a fraud, or both are distinct but legitimate manifestations of Eucharist. Even though, from the point of view of clarity, the first option is attractive, the community firmly believes in the latter. As we have seen in section 4.3, this implies uncertainty and hesitation when it comes to defining what can be considered Eucharist and what cannot. Nevertheless, the community opts to live with this uncertainty rather than to unjustly disregard other Christians and their practices and beliefs. In their effort to reunite Christians from various denominations, the community chooses to take a leap of faith rather than rely on definitions. Recognizing the Eucharist as a fundamentally universal category transcending denominational identity is the very basis for this choice. 8.3 EUCHARISTIC SHARING: SUMMIT OR SOURCE? The monastics explicitly or implicitly contemplate the now classic differentiation between the Eucharist as “source and summit of the Christian life.” 521 They do not express an unambiguous vision on the relationship between unity and sharing the Eucharist. This is not surprising since this question has been at the core of the problem all along. Brother TC adequately explains: “it's supposed to be about unity, the Eucharist. And so, it doesn't make much that it becomes the source of division, or the... or the place where division is manifested, it doesn't... it's a kind of contradiction.” 522 The intrinsic incompatibility of Eucharist and division urges him to stress that any Eucharist, be it in ecumenical or intradenominational settings, should be celebrated with unifying intent. TC adds a rhetorical question: “If you receive the Eucharist without any wish for unity, {laughs} it would be a kind of contradiction almost, 521 LG, sec. 11. 522 TC-1,18a.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw