Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

Ecclesia de Eucharistia

On Its Ecumenical Import

By Clint Le Bruyns

(Clint Le Bruyns, is an Anglican ecumenist who is currently completing a research project on contemporary Anglican and Protestant perspectives on the Petrine ministry at the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa, where he also serves in the faculty of theology as Assistant Lecturer and Research Development Coordinator of the Beyers Naude Centre for Public Theology.)

The ’s latest (On the in its Relationship to the Church) – the fourteenth in his 25-year pontificate - was released in Rome on Maundy or Holy Thursday, April 17, 2003.1 Flanked by an introduction (1-10) and conclusion (59-62), the papal letter comprises six critical sections in which the Eucharist is discussed: (11-20); The Eucharist Builds the Church (21-25); The Apostolicity of the Eucharist and of the Church (26-33); The Eucharist and Ecclesial (34-46); The Dignity of the Eucharistic Celebration (47-52); and At the School of Mary, “Woman of the Eucharist” (53-58). Published in English, French, Italian, Spanish, German, Portuguese and Latin, it is a personal, warm, and passionate letter by the current pope on a longstanding theological treasure and dilemma (cf. 8).

Like all papal it is an internal theological document, bearing the full authority of the Vatican and addressing a matter of grave importance and concern for Roman Catholic faith, life and ministry. But papal texts are no longer merely Roman Catholic in orientation and scope. The “irrevocable” commitment to inaugurated at the (1962-1965) revolutionised the manner in which internal theological material would subsequently be written and read. The Vatican would, of course, still remain attentive to the issues and concerns of relevance for its own faith community, but would now also be aware of the wider community of churches – their issues and concerns, their questions and efforts, as well as their overall welfare on their Christian sojourn.

John Paul II’s most ecumenically popular encyclical (1995) popularised this new mentality and reality in a significant way. It gave serious attention to various issues confronting the Roman at the dawn of the third millennium, but also proceeded to address matters pertaining to other faith communions on unity, the Petrine office, and so on. Its ecumenical import was unmistakable and meaningful, resulting in a kaleidoscope of ecumenical responses, discussions, and literature that continue even to this day. But can the same be said and read of the pope’s latest encyclical?

While Ecclesia de Eucharistia is no Ut Unum Sint, its ecumenical import is of great resourcefulness to the continuing call to unity. After all, the pope has been careful to underline the intimate interrelation between the Eucharist and Christian unity, a connection no reader of the present encyclical should overlook: “The seeds of disunity, which daily experience shows to be so deeply rooted in humanity as a result of sin, are countered by the unifying power of the body of Christ. The Eucharist, precisely by building up the Church, creates human community” (24).

In the first place, this encyclical has as its subject one of the most church-dividing issues in the history of Christianity. In January 1982 in Lima, Peru, the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches released its magnum opus Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (BEM). Representatives from all major church traditions identified what they considered to be three highly divisive theological matters in the Church – Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry. The identification of the Eucharist as an ecumenical dilemma is readily discerned in a host of conversations and statements in

1 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic such bilateral dialogues as those between Roman Catholics and Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, Reformed, Disciples of Christ, and the Oriental Orthodox, which have been in existence since Vatican II.2

The pope himself has continually highlighted the Eucharist as a subject of ongoing importance in ecumenism. In Ut Unum Sint, for instance, he singles out “the Eucharist, as the of the body and , an offering of praise to the Father, the sacrificial memorial and real presence of Christ and the sanctifying outpouring of the ” as one of those “areas in need of fuller study before a true consensus of faith can be achieved.”3 The fact that John Paul II now in Ecclesia de Eucharistia addresses the Church on the Eucharist is itself an ecumenically significant sign that he is indeed in tune with the concerns and ideals of the modern ecumenical movement. His ecumenical consciousness has not ceased or waned since Ut Unum Sint. Of all the many issues his encyclical could have focused on, the pope discerned a matter of ongoing ecumenical significance.

In the second place, the encyclical is substantiated by a number of critically important ecumenically meaningful texts. The pope extends the teachings of the Second Vatican Council – Lumen Gentium, Ad Gentes, Sacrosanctum Concilium, Unitatis Redintegratio, Dei Verbum, and Gaudium et Spes – into the present moment. The teachings of his own Ut Unum Sint on ecumenism are contained within the letter. His articulation of the Roman Catholic Church’s irreversible stand on ecumenical commitment is reiterated and applied to the issues at hand in the present encyclical.

It be remembered that the pope expects his readers to observe the continuity and congruency of Ecclesia de Eucharistia with earlier teachings in the Roman Catholic tradition (e.g. transubstantiation at the Council of Trent, 15). The doctrine of the Eucharist expressed in his letter must not be viewed as anything new or different from earlier teaching. The Roman Catholic Church has not watered down its theological understanding of the Eucharist because of the ecumenical movement, as some internal critics may allege. On the contrary, the pope is cognisant of the prevailing dilemmas that jeopardise the integrity of the Eucharist among the churches, which causes him much anxiety and consternation:

It must be lamented that, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation [vis-à-vis liturgical reform] there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against “formalism” has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the “forms” chosen by the Church’s great liturgical tradition and her as non-binding and to introduce unauthorised innovations which are often completely inappropriate. I consider it my duty, therefore to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. (52)

What we must observe, though, is the great lengths to which the pontiff travels in couching this teaching in ecumenical language and documentation, so as to give ecumenical credence to an old teaching. In other words, the kernel remains intact, albeit within a modified husk. The pope is to-the- point in his intention: “It is my hope that the present Encyclical Letter will effectively help to banish the dark clouds of unacceptable doctrine and practice, so that the Eucharist will continue to shine forth in all its radiant mystery” (10).

In the third place, the encyclical’s ecumenical tone should not be overlooked or trivialised. In ecumenism, tone is everything!4 While it is true that the papal document restates Roman Catholic teaching on the Eucharist, and while it employs texts from such sources as the Council of Trent as well as the norms of Roman Catholicism’s two law codes – the Code of Canon Law and the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches – its tone is neither polemical nor manipulative. On the contrary, Ecclesia de

2 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

Eucharistia reflects a warm and respectful tone in talking about the Eucharist and other ecclesial communities.

For example, while there are various Protestant reservations with the Roman , the pope does not adopt a “shock-and-awe” approach by attempting to counter Protestant assertions with Roman Catholic forceful argumentation. He does not resist the Protestant resistors by resisting more forcefully. Instead, the pope chooses to overemphasise the glorious nature of the Eucharist in Roman Catholicism. He talks with wonderment and enthusiasm about “this most holy Sacrament” (2), anticipating a rekindling of “this Eucharistic ‘amazement’” (6).

Rather than highlighting possible weaknesses or inconsistencies in the Protestant web of beliefs, he chooses to magnify the strengths and integrity of the Roman Catholic understanding. His approach is of a constructive, sober, and savoury nature. The encyclical will most likely shed light on the attractiveness of a rich meditation on the Eucharist as articulated by the pope, cultivating “in our hearts a constant desire for the sacrament of the Eucharist” (34) and forging a new experience thereof (7).

Moreover, the specific vocabulary and language employed in the encyclical to refer to the non- Roman Catholic faith communities are telling. The pope uses such phrases as “these separated brethren” (30), thus continuing the ecumenical ethos of Vatican II. Furthermore, when the letter affirms the Decree on Ecumenism as “a special gift of God” (43), it highlights the special status of the Christian community as children who are in direct and authentic relationship with one another, albeit in different ways and degrees: “It was an efficacious grace which inspired us, the sons and daughters of the Catholic Church and our brothers and sisters from other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, to set forth on the path of ecumenism” (43, italics mine). Later again, the pope refers to the ecumenical community in this warm and accepting tone – “our brothers and sisters of different Christian confessions” (46; cf. 61, 62).

In the fourth place, the encyclical takes seriously the specific misunderstandings or misconceptions still fuelled in the hearts and minds of other faith communities of Christ. It does not only provide a rich articulation of its own theology, but proceeds to actually give attention to specific problems about the eucharist as held by other churches. One case in point concerns the Protestant allegation that the Roman Mass entertains a re-crucifixion of Christ, as opposed to a mere memorial of his passion. In reference to this matter, the pope argues for the sacrificial dimension of this sacrament:

The Church constantly draws her life from the redeeming sacrifice [of Christ]; she approaches it not only through faith-filled remembrance, but also through a real contact, since this sacrifice is made present ever anew, sacramentally perpetuated, in every community which offers it at the hands of the consecrated minister (12).

In other words, the encyclical affirms the Eucharist as a memorial, though not as a mere memorial. It is a much richer and more complex mystery of Christian faith. The pontiff states most poignantly:

The Mass makes present the sacrifice of the Cross; it does not add to that sacrifice nor does it multiply it. [By no means!] What is repeated is its memorial celebration, its “commemorative representation” (memorialis demonstratio), which makes Christ’s one, definitive redemptive sacrifice always present in time. The sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic mystery cannot therefore be understood as something separate, independent of the Cross or only indirectly referring to the sacrifice of Calvary (12).

So, the remembrance in the Eucharist is bound up with the sacrifice of Christ, which “is made present ever anew” (12) in the Eucharistic celebration. It means that it is not a repeatable act or event.

3 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

Citing The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the pope asserts: “The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice” (12). Moreover, employing Saint John Chrysostom, “We always offer the same Lamb, not one today and another tomorrow, but always the same one. For this reason the sacrifice is always one Even now we offer that victim who was once offered and who will never be consumed” (12). Protestant perceptions of the Eucharist as re-crucifying Christ should now be put to rest.

In the fifth place, the encyclical provides several points of entry for a greater appreciation and reception of the centrality of the Eucharist in the Protestant tradition. The pope asserts right at the outset that “[the] Church draws her [very] life from the Eucharist” (1), and that the Eucharist fulfilled a decisive role in the Church’s birth and upbringing (5), but a not insignificant number of contemporary Protestant churches would question the Roman Catholic assumption of this pivotal place of the Eucharist in faith, life, and ministry. Many other churches frankly consider the Eucharist in a more marginal sense. Some, like the Salvation Army churches, do not even celebrate the Eucharist within their ecclesial tradition.

The pope in Ecclesia de Eucharistia, overwhelmed by the glorious mystery and power of the Eucharist, seeks to share his wonderment of the Eucharist’s primary role in the Christian experience. The way in which he attempts this is of important ecumenical meaning. In one way he challenges his “separated brethren” to enlarge their understanding of the presence of Christ in the Church and world. “To contemplate Christ,” he contends, “involves being able to recognise him wherever he manifests himself, in his many forms of presence, but above all in the living sacrament of his body and his blood” (6). Protestants will certainly take issue with the doctrine of transubstantiation (cf. 15), coupled with the notion that Christ is present par excellence in the Eucharist (cf. 11), yet we must not remain unaffected by the essential factor in John Paul II’s statement – the omnipresence of God in Christ, which inevitably includes the .

This intimate companionship of Christ with us through, inter alia, the sacraments, may deeply console and empower us in a troubled and uncertain world as we confront and endure the harsh realities of human life. “It is in this world,” contends John Paul II, “that Christian hope must shine forth! For this reason too, the Lord wished to remain with us in the Eucharist, making his presence in meal and sacrifice the promise of a humanity renewed by his love” (20). Perhaps this affirmation could assist us ecumenically in a more creative and fresh way in wrestling with an old problem within a more promising framework.

I suggest, furthermore, that the pope unpacks the role of the Eucharist in Christian experience in another way: by relating the wonder and power of the Eucharist (i.e. what is of primary importance in Roman Catholicism) to those aspects most dear and primary in other churches. After all, he desires “the need to urge everyone to experience it ever anew” (7). For example, in Pentecostal Christianity a key emphasis rests with spiritual encounter and character in faith, life, and ministry. Therefore, a new appreciation and reception of the Eucharist in the Pentecostal tradition could occur as they come to terms with the pope’s assumption “that all who take part in the Eucharist be committed to changing their lives and making them in a certain way completely ‘Eucharistic’” (20). Ironically, Mary as role model of this “Eucharistic” lifestyle or character may meaningfully articulate something of the intimate connection between the Eucharist and its impact on human character (cf. 53-57).

For the Evangelical movement, with its emphasis on the saving of Christ, truth, and mission, the encyclical is equally relevant and resourceful. Proceeding from a knowledge of “Christ’s saving presence in the community” (9), it states: “From the perpetuation of the sacrifice of the Cross and her communion with the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, the Church draws the spiritual power needed to carry out her mission” (22). Evangelical Protestants may question the high profile of the Eucharist for the Church, but how much more digestible does this logic not become when we read

4 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic the following: “The Eucharistappears as both the source and the summit of all evangelisation, since its goal is the communion of mankind with Christ and in him with the Father and the Holy Spirit” (22). Evangelicals can also appreciate the pope’s desire to give the laity – the entire people of God – their rightful place in the Church, which the pope applies in this encyclical to the opportunity to reflect together on the meaning of the Eucharist for the whole of life (cf. 30, 42).

The Lutheran and Reformed traditions, too, may find a word in season for finding meaning in the Eucharist as applied to what is primary in their respective traditions, even if it begins with a mutual – as well as a fresh – consideration of the Reformation maxim of “faith alone”. In this regard, the pope underlines the value and necessity of faith in the Church and in relation to the Eucharist. For one thing, he wants to strengthen the faith of the Church (59). At another level, he relates the experience and calling of faith to the humanly inexplicable interpretation of the transformation of the elements: “A great and transcendent mystery, indeed, and one that taxes our mind’s ability to pass beyond appearances. Here our senses fail us; yet faith alone, rooted in the word of Christ handed down to us by the Apostles, is sufficient for us” (59). A new take, indeed, on the notion of “faith alone” for the Protestant communities on the issue of the Eucharist!

For Methodists, they may take courage in the encyclical’s discussion of social holiness and societal integrity in faith and life. We should appreciate the manner in which the pope emphasises the outward, social thrust of the Eucharist. It is no private matter. In fact,

it spurs us on our journey through history and plants a seed of living hope in our daily commitment to the work before us. Certainly the Christian vision leads to the expectation of “new heavens” and a “new earth” (Rev 21:1), but this increases, rather than lessens, our sense of responsibility for the world today. I wish to reaffirm this forcefully at the beginning of the new millennium, so that Christians will feel more obliged than ever not to neglect their duties as citizens in this world. Theirs is the task of contributing with the light of the Gospel to the building of a more human world, a world fully in harmony with God’s plan (20).

Finally, in the sixth place, the encyclical confronts the notion and possibility of intercommunion or Eucharistic hospitality (or sharing), and these remarks (34-46) have generated a vast array of reactions from the ecumenical community. The pope has stated categorically that the Eucharistic celebration “cannot be the starting-point for communion; it presupposes that communion already exists, a communion which it seeks to consolidate and bring to perfection” (35). Continuing,

This sacrament is an expression of this bond of communion both in its invisible dimension, which, in Christ and through the working of the Holy Spirit, unites us to the Father and among ourselves, and in its visible dimension, which entails communion in the teaching of the Apostles, in the sacraments and in the Church’s hierarchical order (35).

“Only in this context,” the biting words emerge, “can there be a legitimate celebration of the Eucharist and true participation in it. Consequently it is an intrinsic requirement of the Eucharist that it should be celebrated in communion, and specifically maintaining the various bonds of that communion intact” (35). These bonds of communion – “the profession of faith, the sacraments and ecclesiastical governance” (44; cf. 38) – are primary beliefs in Roman Catholicism, are non-negotiable foundations for communion, but are lacking (in fullness) in the differing Protestant traditions. As such, it poses a significant ecumenical dilemma on the matter of intercommunion from the Roman Catholic vantage point.

Initial reactions5 to Ecclesia de Eucharistia by different Protestant and Anglican leaders and representatives in the wake of its release revolve primarily around this aspect, which thus provides a seemingly doubtful or cynical picture of the encyclical’s ecumenical contribution. On April 23, the

5 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

Ecumenical News International agency in Rome and Geneva informed the ecumenical churches of the obvious: “Pope John Paul II’s firm message at Easter restating Roman Catholic teaching that rules out inter-communion with other churches has evoked responses from leaders in other denominations ranging from resigned acceptance to disappointment.”6

On the release date of the papal letter, the Office of Communications for the U.S. Catholic lauded the encyclical for its “rich meditation on the Eucharist,” but was also cognisant of its ecumenical ramifications in the light of the pope’s statements on intercommunion:

Because the sacrament both presupposes and creates unity, the Pope acknowledges the painful but inevitable reality that there can be no Eucharistic sharing between the Catholic Church and those communities without the same or without a valid priesthood which is necessary for the Eucharist to be celebrated.7

The premier Roman Catholic newspaper in South Africa, The Southern Cross, was more to the point in stinging frankness: “The most Marian of is arguably also the most ecumenical. Ecclesia de Eucharistia, however, will not open new doors in ecumenical relations (arguably not its function in first place).”8 Christopher Epting, the Episcopal Church’s deputy for ecumenical and interfaith relations retorted: “I must say I fail to see how Ecclesia de Eucharistia takes notice of the enormous progress made by the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) or our Anglican- Roman Catholic dialogue here in the United States (ARC-USA). That is particularly disappointing, given all the years of work by these bodies since the Second Vatican Council.”9

This notwithstanding, Gregory Cameron, Director of Ecumenical Affairs for the Anglican Communion Office released a brief initial response, in which he expressed his church’s hope “that this encyclical will be adopted for study by the instruments of dialogue set up mutually by the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church.”10 “From this study,” he continued, “we will hope to understand more fully the way in which the ecumenical commitment expressed in this encyclical, and by both our churches, may be carried forward to the point where a fuller Eucharistic sharing may be initiated between Roman Catholics and Anglicans.”11 The ecumenical expression of the encyclical vis- à-vis the intercommunion issue remains to be seen over time.

In the light of this brief overview of the encyclical’s ecumenical import, a few concluding observations may be offered:

1. Ecumenism is a time-consuming and laborious activity of the Church. The fact that conversations between Roman Catholics and other Christian communities have transpired over four decades on the subject of the Eucharist, with no full convergence attained as yet, is an apt case in point. This calls for churches to remain patient, but confidently committed to the ardent desire for Christian unity, especially around the issue of the Eucharist.

2. Ecumenism remains an enterprise of integrity. The encyclical – although disappointing in its reluctance to support Eucharistic hospitality at this present time – aptly and nobly highlights the necessity of not compromising one’s dearest theological beliefs for the sake of mere unity. Unity should never be sought for unity’s sake; that is a false irenicism. Ecumenical endeavours must always be pursued with respect for the ideals of other faith traditions and without compromising one’s dearest ideals. The encyclical reminds the ecumenical community of this, employing the matter of a lack of Eucharistic convergence as an able case.

3. Ecumenism between the Roman Catholic Church and other churches is unattainable and unimaginable apart from some kind of communion being pursued with the Bishop of Rome. Ut Unum Sint inaugurated a new way of thinking about the Petrine ministry in relation to its future exercise, as

6 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic well as its relationship to other churches. Communion with the pope – whether a communion under the pope or with the pope – must, in the light of current ecumenical conversations, be placed on the ecumenical agenda as a matter of relevancy and urgency for the broader community of Christians, if intercommunion is to be achieved some day (cf. 39).

4. While by no means compromising one’s distinctive theological ideals, ecumenism must seek to foster theological consistency among the churches. One reservation I have with the present encyclical is the apparent inconsistency around the relation between unity and intercommunion. The pope asserts that intercommunion proceeds from the bonds of community – profession of faith, sacraments, and ecclesiastical governance – yet these then become secondary beliefs that are elevated to a primary level. Is not one’s baptism (especially for Roman Catholics and some Protestant traditions) (cf. 61) or one’s personal encounter with Christ (especially for evangelical Protestants) the primary unifying factor in Christianity? If so, is it ecumenically credible to identify one’s doctrine of the Eucharist as a bond of communion par excellence? I suggest that this is not as primary a belief as a personal encounter with Christ or baptism (as the gateway to Christian fellowship). In this regard, therefore, intercommunion would be more realistically imagined and attained in ecumenical discourse, as opposed to being the outcome of unity. In fact, on this point, the encyclical declares: “The Eucharist creates communion and fosters communion” (40; cf. 23, 24). What about the inherent catholicity of the Eucharist? (cf. 26).

5. Ecumenism is a high calling. The pope, notwithstanding his ecumenical reservations on Eucharistic sharing, reiterates the Roman Catholic Church’s irreversible decision to pursue with vigour the quest for Christian unity. He therefore gives careful consideration to “the relationship of the Eucharist to ecumenical activity” (43; cf. 61). John Paul II declares with a deep sense of gratitude and anticipation:

Our longing for the goal of unity prompts us to turn to the Eucharist, which is the supreme sacrament of the unity of the People of God, in as much as it is the apt expression and the unsurpassable source of that unity. In the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice the Church prays that God, the Father of mercies, will grant his children the fullness of the Holy Spirit so that they may become one body and one spirit in Christ. In raising this prayer to the Father of lights, from whom comes every good endowment and every perfect gift (cf. Jas 1:17), the Church believes that she will be heard, for she prays in union with Christ her Head and Spouse, who takes up this plea of his bride and joins it to that of his own redemptive sacrifice (43).

Notes:

1. Available from World Wide Web: (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father//hf_jpii_enc_20030417_ecclesia_ eucharistia_en.htm).

2. A vast number of discussions between Roman Catholics and other ecclesial bodies feature prominently in the ecumenical terrain in recent decades, which include those between Roman Catholics and Anglicans (1971, 1979), Lutherans (1968, 1970, 1978), Methodists (1971, 1976, 1981), Disciples of Christ (1968), the Reformed (1977) and the Oriental Orthodox (1983). The subject of the Eucharist continues to be part and parcel of current ecumenical discourse.

7 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

3. John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint: On Commitment to Ecumenism, Origins, 25:4, June 8, 1995, 79.

4. I was reminded of this reality by the revered Roman Catholic ecumenist Kilian McDonnell on a recent research sabbatical at the Institute for Ecumenical and Cultural Research, Fall 2002, in a discussion about and the negative ecumenical reaction it generated by virtue of its tone.

5. I intentionally refer to these statements as “reactions” rather than “responses” by virtue that these are initial reactionary remarks at present, as opposed to these remarks being the product of a more comprehensive, well-reasoned, and thoughtful process of reflective engagement with the encyclical from the various faith tradition perspectives.

6. See “No surprise but some regret at Pope’s message on Eucharist”. Available as electronic news service: ([email protected]), April 23, 2003.

7. See “USCCB President Greets New Encyclical on the Eucharist”. Available from World Wide Web: (http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2003/03-090.htm).

8. See Gunther Simmermacher, “The Eucharist at the centre” in The Southern Cross (April 30 to May 6, 2003), p.8.

9. See James Solheim, “Episcopalians: Church leaders express disappointment with papal encyclical on Eucharist”. Available as electronic news service: ([email protected]), April 30, 2003.

10. See Gregory Cameron, “Initial Response to the Papal Encyclical, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, issued on Maundy Thursday, 17 April 2003". Available as electronic news service: ([email protected]), April 23, 2003.

11. Ibid.

8 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

PULLOUTS:

The fact that John Paul II now in Ecclesia de Eucharistia addresses the Church on the Eucharist is itself an ecumenically significant sign that he is indeed in tune with the concerns and ideals of the modern ecumenical movement. His ecumenical consciousness has not ceased or waned since Ut Unum Sint.

For example, while there are various Protestant reservations with the Roman Mass, the pope does not adopt a “shock-and-awe” approach by attempting to counter Protestant assertions with Roman Catholic forceful argumentation. He does not resist the Protestant resistors by resisting more forcefully. Instead, the pope chooses to overemphasise the glorious nature of the Eucharist in Roman Catholicism. He talks with wonderment and enthusiasm about “this most holy Sacrament” (2), anticipating a rekindling of “this Eucharistic ‘amazement’” (6).

Evangelical Protestants may question the high profile of the Eucharist for the Church, but how much more digestible does this logic not become when we read the following: “The Eucharistappears as both the source and the summit of all evangelisation, since its goal is the communion of mankind with Christ and in him with the Father and the Holy Spirit.”

...and these remarks (34-46) have generated a vast array of reactions from the ecumenical community. The pope has stated categorically that the Eucharistic celebration “cannot be the starting-point for communion; it presupposes that communion already exists, a communion which it seeks to consolidate and bring to perfection” (35).

9 Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission: www.melbourne.catholic.org.au/eic

Ecumenism remains an enterprise of integrity. The encyclical – although disappointing in its reluctance to support Eucharistic hospitality at this present time – aptly and nobly highlights the necessity of not compromising one’s dearest theological beliefs for the sake of mere unity. Unity should never be sought for unity’s sake; that is a false irenicism.

10