248 PART THREE: CONCLUSIONS in relation to the specific circumstances of Taizé and Bose. In my opinion, they thus resemble the type of learning that the strategy of receptive ecumenism envisions: acknowledging a deficit (in this case, of Christian unity and Eucharistic communion), while resorting to innovative resources for adequate solutions or answers (in this case, Eucharistic hospitality), with integrity (respecting the principles of Catholic theology and canon law). As such, their practice and its inherent theological rationale are deeply embedded in established (or recovered) Catholic theological traditions. Brother BF remarked that the experience of being unable to share the Eucharist with people with whom he felt in deep communion, while at the same time actually sharing the Eucharist with others with whom he did not feel very familiar, 535 had sparked a reevaluation of the notion of communion. Communion, one could say, is a verb rather than a noun. It starts in Baptism and is further developed in the life of Christians and churches. As such, one needs to acknowledge what is already present even if only potentially, just as much as what is still lacking. Eucharistic sharing does both, promoting the unity (implicitly) present and combatting the scandal of division. 9.2 CHALLENGING A COUNTER-ARGUMENT: THE ‘PAIN STIMULUS’ Implication Eucharistic sharing does not necessarily reduce ecumenical commitment but, rather, comforts the wounds of division. The pain stimulus is not dissolved altogether but is, instead, accompanied by a positive experience of incomplete but real communion, encouraging and enabling continuous efforts for full visible unity. This insight counters – or at least challenges – a key argument against Eucharistic hospitality. Observations Both communities are active and appreciated players in the ecumenical processes and dialogues. Both engage in activities directed at promoting Christian unity: they host visitors from various denominations (both prominent church leaders and lay faithful); organize ecumenical conferences; promote peace and reconciliation in places that suffer(ed) from (religious) conflict; participate in local ecumenical and pastoral initiatives, etcetera. Thus, both communities are significant and appreciated actors in local, national, and 535 Cf. BF-1,14a-b.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw