Abstract
Using the example of the Lord's Supper and the eucharist, this article seeks to show the conditions which make a common liturgical celebration a gift of God to the community of believers in Jesus Christ. The form chosen is a dialogue between two theologians, both members of the German “Ecumenical Study Group of Protestant and Catholic Theologians”: Friederike Nüssel (Protestant, Heidelberg) and Dorothea Sattler (Roman Catholic, Münster). The focus is the group’s study “Together at the Lord's Table.” Based on extensive research the study group has formulated the vote to be invited to join in the celebration of the eucharist and the Lord's Supper, trusting in the self-giving presence of Jesus Christ. Ecumenical sensitivity in the shaping of liturgies is an obvious consequence. Individual confessional traditions have preserved an asset that others today can experience as a gift in the form of a reminder of the common origin: the celebration with shared bread and the chalice offered to all (in the background is the controversy over the lay chalice), the binding lectionaries and the remembrance of the dead. The criticism of the vote of the Ecumenical Study Group, especially from the Roman Catholic doctrinal side, primarily relates to the topics of ministry and understanding of the church. The Ecumenical Study Group advocates that eucharistic celebrations be led by duly ordained persons. The contribution is framed by introductory remarks on basic questions of ecumenical hermeneutics and by an outlook on the great importance of interdisciplinary theological study work from an ecumenical perspective.
Dorothea Sattler
We stand before you today as siblings in ecumenism, concretely as two sisters who share the one Christian faith, who confess the one Lord Jesus Christ, who are baptized. We both have had much in common over several decades: at the same time in our younger years, we were active as minute-takers of the “Ecumenical Study Group of Protestant and Catholic Theologians” in Germany. We will say a little more about this because the study “Together at the Lord's Table” 1 from 2020 formulated a vote that is closely connected with the theme of our conference. We both espouse the following thesis: in sharing in the eucharistic liturgy of other confessions, we receive a gift that is not our human legacy, but moreover something that we all receive as a gift from God. It is the risen Christ Jesus himself who gives us his presence in the Holy Spirit in the gathered community, in the proclaimed Word of God, and in the celebration of the eucharistic meal.
The two of us are connected by more than just the few years we spent together first as minute-takers and then in Münster in Westphalia in the teaching of theology. Several times we worked together in Jerusalem during an Ecumenical Study Year at Dormition Abbey. In 2018, during our days together in Jerusalem, my mother died in Münsterland. I experienced the gift of consolation in the common faith in the resurrection of the dead at an ecumenical eucharistic celebration on Mount Zion.
Ecumenism of gifts: In my estimation, our topic is one that cannot be discussed only through arguments in academic discourse. Encounters and relationships are important. Personal, authentic openness to one another in ecumenical fellowship is needed, so that we can perceive one another as personal loci of God's gifts becoming effective. The ecumenism of gifts has a sister: the ecumenism of trust in the presence of Jesus Christ.
Friederike Nüssel
As Dorothea Sattler indicated, our ecumenical cooperation traces back a long way. It was and is not only ecumenical committee work. We also published an “Introduction to Ecumenical Theology” in 2008. Our background is the ecumenical situation in Germany, where since the schism in the sixteenth century, the Roman Church and the Reformation churches have roughly equalled each other in number, and where history has led to a persistent struggle and competition between the churches. In the areas of charitable work and education, this may not have been all negative. But the mutual exclusion has also brought suffering to many people. Here in Ireland, in an historically quite different constellation, the ecumenical situation is nevertheless no less precarious. In other regions of Europe, ecumenism has traditionally played a lesser role because of clear denominational majorities. The developments of globalization and secularization, however, are increasingly counteracting this. Ecumenism is needed everywhere to counteract divisions among Christian churches and their destructive power. For spiritual exclusion, slander and hostility, violence, quarrelling over resources instead of sharing, contradict the message of Jesus and the destiny of the church as the one body of Jesus Christ. That is why ecumenism, the advocacy of the communion of Christians and churches, is part of the advocacy of the Gospel.
Dorothea Sattler
We have prepared an exchange for you—divided into four parts: We begin with fundamental aspects of ecumenical hermeneutics that are relevant today in our confessional traditions. In doing so, we shall introduce a systematic-theological perspective (part 1). We then focus on the question of eucharistic communion and, using the study “Together at the Lord's Table” 2 as an example, present the options that can be associated with the hermeneutic of an “ecumenism of gifts” and the enduring challenges that arise precisely in view of the joy of the gifts received together in ecumenical communion (part 2). We then point to examples from the liturgical traditions of our respective confessions, which testify that we can mutually enrich each other through God's gifts (part 3). We conclude with a plea for interdisciplinary theological cooperation in ecumenism (part 4).
Ecumenical Hermeneutics from a Systematic-Theological Perspective
Dorothea Sattler
From a Roman Catholic perspective, the statements of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65) on ecumenical hermeneutics are of fundamental and lasting importance. I shall return to this in a moment. Before that, I would like to briefly remind you of the present of the Roman Catholic Church—precisely under the aspect of the “ecumenism of gifts.”
In June 2023, the “Instrumentum Laboris” for the World Synod of the Roman Catholic Church, which took place in October 2023, was published. 3 For the first time, lay people—women and men—were also gathered with bishops in the consultation on the future of the Roman Catholic Church under the sign of “synodality.” It is very striking that ecumenical aspects are addressed quite extensively in the “Instrumentum Laboris.” One of the worksheets that all delegates—bishops as well as laity—must deal with at the World Synod poses the following question—and I quote—“How can a dynamic relationship of gift exchange between the Churches grow?” (Worksheet on B 1.3). There is no mistaking that this Roman Catholic document focuses more on the Orthodox than on the Reformation churches as givers of gifts. Nevertheless, it keeps itself open to new aspects and asks at the end the question: “How can the exchange of experiences and gifts be made active and fruitful not only between the different local churches, but also between the different vocations, charisms, and spiritualities within the People of God (…)?” (Worksheet on B 1.3, Suggestions for prayer and preparatory reflection, 9). In regard to ecumenism of gifts, we are in learning processes within denominations as well.
I consider the apparent reference to the entire community of believers, even in recent Roman Catholic documents, to be very important when discussing the issue of gifts. The primary concern in encouraging appreciation of other people's gifts is to encourage all believers to continue their own search for an understanding faith. In this regard, testimonies from other Christian traditions that point to the center of the Christian confession are of very high importance. When the Easter message is proclaimed to us in a foreign language or in unfamiliar gestures, then we notice, we awaken.
The conviction that the confessions draw closer to each other, to the extent that they approach the already existing common center in faith in Christ Jesus from the positions they have taken, is a guiding principle of the ecumenical hermeneutics of the Second Vatican Council. From the Council's perspective, the sought-after unity of the churches is a spiritual gift of God, not human work alone (cf. Second Vatican Council, Unitatis Redintegratio [UR] 1–2). It is the one baptism, which is a sacramental bond that unites all to Christ Jesus. There is no true ecumenism without interior conversion (cf. UR 4). All churches are called to conversion. Spiritual ecumenism is of very high importance in the view of the Council Fathers, especially prayer for the unity of the Churches. To promote ecumenical movement is a task of all believers in Christ. Close cooperation in social-ethical actions is something for which we should strive (cf. UR 12). The above-mentioned aspects of the ecumenical hermeneutics of the Second Vatican Council have tilled the good earth for the fruits we are reaping in ecumenism today.
Friederike Nüssel
In the Augsburg Confession of 1530 (hereafter, AC), the followers of the Reformation clearly professed the unity of the church. Article 7 states: “It is also taught that there must always be and remain one holy, Christian church.” The unity of the church throughout the ages is thereby tied to “the gospel being preached purely and the holy sacraments being administered according the gospel.” (AC 7) For the true unity of the church, therefore, it is sufficient “that the gospel be preached with one accord in a pure understanding, and the sacraments administered according to the divine word.” However, uniformity of the orders that humans have instituted is not necessary. Today, it is true, we debate what place the office of ministry has in this context. For Melanchthon, however, it was clear that the church cannot be without an orderly office of preaching the gospel in word and sacrament. For Protestant ecumenism, AC 7 already had become fundamental in the nineteenth century among the Protestant church unions and then, in the twentieth century, in the Ecumenical Movement. When Protestant churches insist on unity in word and sacrament, they do not argue that there are no other marks of the church. Instead, they consider it possible that there may be differences in confessional statements and liturgical practice, as long as these do not affect agreement in the gospel and the celebration of the sacraments. The churches in the Lutheran World Federation form a worldwide communion based on their agreement in word and sacrament. This also applies to the Reformation churches in Europe, which have declared church fellowship based on the Leuenberg Agreement and are united in the Community of Protestant Churches in Europe (CPCE). The ecumenical model of unity of the Lutheran World Federation, the CPCE and many Protestant churches in other parts of the world (e.g., in the Middle East, see Amman Declaration) is unity in reconciled diversity. Here both parts of the title are constitutive. It is not only about reconciled diversity, but about unity in reconciled diversity.
The Churches united in the Fellowship of Protestant Churches see themselves as part of the Church of Jesus Christ. They form a communio in that they agree in their understanding of the gospel based on the Reformation doctrine of justification, by celebrating the sacraments according to the gospel, and by recognizing each other's office of ministry. Communion in word and sacrament is not an arbitrary communion but communion in what is the foundation of the church. Unity of churches in reconciled diversity has nothing to do with arbitrariness, for it lives out of an agreement on what establishes and sustains the church: God's gospel of Jesus Christ, proclaimed in word and sacrament. At the same time, according to Protestant understanding, uniformity is not necessary for such unity. Differences are legitimate where they do not call into question or obscure the agreement in the gospel.
An Example: The Study “Together at the Lord's Table”
Dorothea Sattler
One motivation for inviting Friederike Nüssel and me as systematic theologians to your “Societas Liturgica” is—as it has been communicated to us—the sustained interest in the study “Together at the Lord's Table,” 4 published in 2020. This study, which is the responsibility of the Ecumenical Working Group of Protestant and Catholic Theologians in the German-speaking world, pays close attention to the changing shape of liturgical practice in the one eucharistic memorial of God's redemptive action in Jesus Christ. Since biblically transmitted times, the divine gift of redemption in Jesus Christ has been celebrated in the sign act of meal fellowship. The practice of breaking God's bread and passing around the cup, as a sign of faithfulness of the community, became increasingly established in the early centuries. The liturgical forms have changed. The meaning has remained the same from the beginning until today: the readiness for reconciliation is God's gift, even if the incarnated image of God's being, Jesus Christ, suffers, his body broken in death and his blood shed. God remains faithful to the community—this is his gift to us, which Christianity celebrates in the meal of communion.
In the study “Together at the Lord's Table” we have been guided by a soteriological perspective which unites us and which I have been able only to hint at here. For those who know, hardly anything seems more difficult than to justify—and then to celebrate—the soteriological relevance of Jesus’ death. Therefore, all efforts for a human understanding of this event are a spiritual gift.
In the space offered here, I shall concisely present the central contents of the study “Together at the Lord's Table”: in this study, presented by about forty Protestant/Roman Catholic theologians on the basis of much preliminary work in other ecumenical writings, it has been shown that from the beginning of the formation of Christian communities, there was and is a variety of liturgical forms in which thanksgiving for the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is celebrated. The memorial of Jesus Christ, in his meaning for the people living today in his discipleship, is the meaning of the eucharistic celebration; 5 the form of celebration serves the expression of this meaning. In the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ becomes present with his gift of life for us in the broken bread and the shared cup. Reconciliation, communion, and eschatological hope are experienced in a sign act that has an effect beyond experience and is binding. In the knowledge of biblical-theological, historical, and pastoral insights, the Ecumenical Study Group has formulated the view to allow oneself to be invited to liturgical celebrations in trust in the presence of Jesus Christ, the shaping of which takes place in confessional responsibility. This view relates to the idea not to plan new liturgies together, but to meet each other trustingly in the forms of celebration as they have historically developed, to learn from each other, to talk with each other about perceptions, and to discover how great the community already is in its worship life today.
In the Ecumenical Movement, there have long been efforts to determine the common structural elements in the eucharistic liturgical commemoration of the death, resurrection, and life of Jesus Christ. The idea, embraced in the Lima liturgy, of seeking a form in which all confessional concerns are considered, is of lasting significance. The view of the Ecumenical Working Group, however, takes a different path: respecting the ecumenical convergences achieved in the understanding of the Lord's Supper and the eucharist, in the understanding of the church, and in the doctrines of ministry, it prefers the path of allowing oneself to be invited to the liturgical forms already having been lived for centuries in a given confessional community, trusting in the presence of Jesus Christ by himself for his effective memorial.
The Ecumenical Working Group understands the study “Together at the Lord's Table” as a collection of the yield of many studies that this ecumenical community has already produced in many prior years. Among the preceding studies are above all the following publications: (1) The study about the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and His presence in the church, 6 published in 1983, in which biblical-theological, historical, and systematic-theological insights into achieved, ecumenical convergences on a central theme of the doctrine of the eucharist and the Lord's Supper are presented and justified: wherever, in the wake of the Tridentine era, the eucharistic sacrifice is spoken of, it is a matter of the liturgical celebration of the real presence of Jesus Christ, whose once-for-all-life-giving death for us is the fully sufficient gift of salvation for all creation, which also from a Protestant point of view cannot be disputed. (2) The study “The Condemnations of the Reformation Era—Do They Still Divide?,” 7 published in German in 1986, gives space to all controversial theological aspects in the subject area of the Lord's Supper/eucharist in a very differentiated way. It addressed the question of whether the condemnations of the doctrine of the respective theological opponents pronounced in the sixteenth century are still church-dividing from today's perspective. This study also deals with questions of the doctrine of the office of ministry. (3) The multi-volume study “Binding Testimony: Holy Scripture and Tradition” 8 is of particular importance in the history of the Ecumenical Working Group in that it dealt with basic hermeneutical questions in an ecumenical perspective, which must be considered in every individual question. In particular, the relationship between scripture and tradition was reflected upon. The epistemological value of the practice of faith lived in community also received attention. (4) The Ecumenical Working Group worked for more than eight years on the study of the topic of the ecclesial ministry in apostolic succession. 9 In three volumes on the theological discussion of “apostolic succession,” historical developments are traced, biblical justifications are reasoned, and systematic-theological reflections are made. Differentiations are made which make it possible to distinguish between material aspects (proclamation of the gospel) and formal aspects (form of the conferral of a ministerial office) and to assign them to one another. (5) In the study “Reformation 1517–2017” 10 the Ecumenical Working Group has brought together many findings of earlier studies and raised the question of the consequences of the convergences so far achieved.
The study “Together at the Lord's Table” can be understood only in the context of the many ecumenical insights that preceded the formulated view. The efforts to reap the fruits of the ecumenical dialogues already conducted 11 have produced a new literary genre in ecumenical literature: the “In via - declarations,” which also exist on the subject area “Lord's Supper/Eucharist.” They describe the stages reached on the way to the goal of eucharistic communion. In this sense, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity has asked national ecumenical bodies to present studies on the theme of the Church, Eucharist, and Ministry. In addition to the study “Declaration on the Way: Church, Ministry, and Eucharist” (2015) in the USA 12 and the study “Communion in Growth: Declaration on the Church, Eucharist, and Ministry” (2017) in Finland, 13 “Together at the Lord's Table” is another ecumenical study, which is characterized by the concern to collect and continue the preceding ecumenical insights.
Friederike Nüssel
From the Protestant perspective, two considerations are decisive in order to make the case for mutual participation in the Lord's Supper and the eucharist in the context of the ecumenical understanding that has been reached. The first consideration results from the sense or meaning of the celebration itself. In the institution narrative, Jesus Christ promised his presence to the congregation gathered for the Lord's Supper. Under the elements of bread and wine, he is present to the communicants as the risen Crucified One, allowing them to share in his life and salvation. The presence of Jesus Christ signifies the forgiveness of sin, gives hope of eternal life in communion with him, and binds communicants into the unity of the Body of Christ. Remembering the gift of life in the words of institution, “given for you” and “poured out for you,” the Lord's Supper/eucharist is gift. In his explanation of the Lord's Supper, Luther criticized the sacrificial character of the Mass in reference to the fact that the Lord's Supper is essentially gift. In the Lord's Supper, bodily communion with the risen Crucified One is received as a gift. The Lord's Supper is therefore the most intense expression of the fact that Christ, in the gift of his presence, unites believers to himself and to one another in the Body of Christ. Thus, human boundaries between social classes, nations, ethnicities, etc. are overcome. Because the Lord's Supper is the gift of Christ (gen. subjectivus and objectivus) and bestows the gift of communion, the acceptance of the gift in the approach and access to the celebration is an expression of trust in Christ and his promise. It is not access to the Lord's Supper and the eucharist that requires justification; instead it is the limiting of participation in this communion that requires it.
The second consideration arises from the state of the ecumenical dialogues. Protestant-Catholic dialogues have succeeded in resolving the major controversies of the Reformation period concerning the real presence, the sacrifice of the Mass, and the lay chalice. From the perspective of “Together at the Lord's Table,” the differences in understanding are no longer church-dividing. What is still divisive, however, is the unresolved differences in the understanding of office of ministry. But important progress has also been made in the dialogue about ministry. There are common basic theological convictions about the office, which are listed in “Together at the Lord's Table.” Together, the office is understood as the office of public proclamation of the gospel in word and sacrament. The office, bound to ordination, is necessary for the being and remaining of the church in truth and is in service to unity. It is ordered by God. Ordination is the ordered calling and sending to the ministry of word and sacrament. Episkopé is necessary for the governance of the church, which includes personal, collegial, and communal dimensions. Where these principles are considered in the presiding at the Lord's Supper, there is no obstacle, from the Protestant point of view, to supporting the validity of the institution of the Lord's Supper. To be sure, for full church fellowship and inter-celebration, differentiated consensuses in the understanding of church, sacraments, and ministry are necessary, even according to Protestant understanding. But where Catholic and Protestant people hear the promise and self-offering of Christ in the celebration of the respective other denomination, they should be able to follow their hearts. “Together at the Lord's Table” provides theological reasons for this.
Dorothea Sattler
The reception of the study “Together at the Lord's Table” 14 has been very rich on various levels in the Roman Catholic context: many people within the parish context—especially people living in families with members of different denominations—have experienced the theologically based view as a relief for their consciences. For a long time, the local lived practice in parishes and families has been different from the Roman Catholic canonical guidelines. The argument for being able to participate in the eucharistic celebration and the Lord's Supper for a good spiritual reason, trusting in the promised presence of Jesus Christ, given by Himself, has strengthened many people in their actions. Since the view was discussed in the context of the Third Ecumenical Church Congress in Frankfurt 2021, on a national and international level, it has received considerable attention.
At the professional academic level, there were and are different voices—as is always the case in scientific discourse. It seems to me to be of great importance that it was possible to include the multilateral voices in the discussion early on—i.e., not to remain in the German Protestant/Roman Catholic dialogue. 15 The corresponding bodies in Germany have responded to the presented view and welcomed it. In the context of the Eleventh Assembly of the World Council of Churches 2022 in Karlsruhe, the eucharistic theme was also present. 16
A particular process at the official level of the Roman Catholic Church is worth recalling: in September 2020, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith informed the president of the German Bishops’ Conference that there were well-founded objections to the position in Roman Catholic Church doctrine that led to a contradiction of the presented view formulated in the study. The Ecumenical Working Group was then commissioned to draft a statement on the objections. The process is not yet officially completed—on a formal level, it is complicated in terms of detail. In terms of content, the question of the official authority of the people who act in the eucharistic celebration is being considered above all. In view of the lack of Apostolic Succession in the case of Protestant pastors—or even female pastors—the efficacy of their actions is called into question, and subsequently the presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Spirit as a gift, as a gift of self. The old wound is torn open again. Doubt is cast on whether what Protestant congregations have relied on for centuries in their liturgical celebrations is happening: the presence of Jesus Christ under the signs of the meal.
Friederike Nüssel
It is part of the state of ecumenical understanding that has been achieved that Protestant ecumenists have gained insight into the criteriology and theological concerns of the Roman Curia. Against this background, the critical Roman Catholic response to “Together at the Lord's Table” was not a complete surprise. But it paralyzed the inner-Protestant reception. Against the background of rapid secularization in Europe, it is difficult enough to convey to people the mystery of God and God's loving care at the place of our finitude. Common witness of the churches is needed. We need a change of direction here. Denominational profiling is no longer understood today. Therefore, the central task is to interpret each other ecumenically in the best sense. This is not a signal emanating from the reception process.
Dorothea Sattler
The ecumenical movement wants to gain commitment. Self-commitments are made in view of the certainty of being united in the one Christian faith. Willingness to listen, recognition of other positions—all this characterizes the current ecumenical mentality even at the academic level. In families and congregations as well as on special occasions such as church congresses, ecumenical togetherness is becoming more and more self-evident, and the absence of communion in the celebration of the Lord's Supper and the eucharist more and more palpable. This is especially true for those people who share their daily lives in an interconfessional marriage. These experiences also shape socially and biographically the people who are involved in the Ecumenical Working Group. The search for possibilities of unifying ecumenical spirituality has a sense of direction: it aims at fulfillment in the common eucharistic meal. Participation in the liturgical celebrations of other Christian traditions can strengthen the realization that we are already connected in the depth of Christian faith. Many Christians are still unfamiliar with liturgical practice in other church traditions. The experience of celebrating the one paschal mystery in the celebration of the Lord's Supper and the eucharist in the one faith with one another can strengthen the hope for the visible unity of the churches.
Liturgy and Ecumenism of the Gifts
Dorothea Sattler
Spiritual ecumenism is of very high importance in the future of the churches. After fruitful decades of understanding on theological issues, the ecumenical movement today faces new challenges: fundamental questions of faith, in which the churches have common options, are brought into the social conversation. Moreover, it seems to be of primary importance to take up together the geopolitical, socio-ethical, and individual-ethical challenges which beset the community of creation. All churches are challenged to face the questions of the present:
How do people find a safe place to live their lives? How is it possible to achieve reconciliation and peace among peoples? How can the foundations of life be secured for all? Why is it not possible to distribute paid work fairly? Who will satisfy the hunger and thirst of the needy in countries where it rarely rains? In what way can the entanglements that many people feel in their lives and within their relationships be resolved? Who stands by the despairing day and night? Who comforts the dying with the Easter message of the common Christian gospel?
True spiritual experiences in ecumenical encounters leave much to be desired—in a good sense: in them the grief over the continuing separation becomes palpable, and they convey a joyful sense of the great richness of the Christian faith. Still, much remains: the desire for a lasting, living Christian community, not threatened by separation, in listening to God's Word, in the sacramental remembrance of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and in the readiness to witness in deed and word. Spiritual experiences are events grasped with consciousness, in which people, in the power of the presence of God's Spirit, are brought to the depths of their questions of existence and can discern and grasp a trustworthy, faithful response. Spirituality is the path, in God's accompaniment, to the foundation of each person's very own course of life, which takes place in the community of fellow created beings. This spiritual journey can take different external forms: silent listening, urgent supplication, persistent singing, courageous action, sign-like gestures, open conversations. Anyone who has ever experienced that other people can give expression in a credible and appealing way to that answer which they themselves have found to the common questions of life, will no longer want to escape the attraction of spiritual togetherness. Life leaves much to be desired. Together, it is easier to enter into the darknesses of existence, to consider the inevitable death and the burdensome sin. Only in community can the light of trust in the God of life be guarded.
I would like to illustrate with an example how a practice preserved in confessional tradition can be a gift for the totality of Christians from today's perspective: the remembrance of the dead in the eucharist at a Requiem, after six weeks, after a year, and on special occasions. In the sixteenth century, it became evident that the controversy over the eschatological significance of the eucharistic sacrifice was closely connected with the theme of the reform of life. Given the closeness of this issue to indulgence, it is quite understandable that a theological effort is still needed today to justify in ecumenical discussions the remembrance of the dead and the naming of their names, which is well known and frequently practiced in the Roman Catholic eucharistic tradition and piety. This is not merely a remembrance of the deceased; it is also a spiritual process of reconciliation between the living and the dead, in which the eucharistically celebrated love of the crucified and risen Christ becomes effective. In the eucharistic memorial of the dead, a “foretaste” of the reconciled life of all with all in eschatological time occurs.
It corresponds to the common Christian life experience to be already reconciled with God as believers in Christ Jesus and yet to still suffer in many ways from the unfinished life. This insight proves to be valid beyond the boundary of death. When people who are familiar with each other die, all is not usually well. Very concrete scenes of strife can remain in memory, from which the bereaved suffer; the separation from a once beloved person or discord between parents and children often remain misunderstood in earthly time. Many people then look for a way to find reconciliation in an event of remembrance beyond the boundary of death. According to Roman Catholic tradition, the remembrance of the dead in the celebration of the eucharist is not only a place where the living express their hope that God has filled the deceased with life, which can never be lost. The eucharistic memorial of the dead is also thought of as effective in the event of reconciliation between the dead and the living. Precisely therein lies the ecumenical explosiveness of the question taken up here.
In the liturgical celebrations of Christian communities, remembering the dead by recalling their lives with their names is a bodily expression of the communion of all the baptized in the paschal hope of reconciled life in Jesus Christ, which can never be lost. Familiar names are mentioned in the eucharistic celebrations. With these names, the life story of the people gathered in the congregation, shaped in the flesh, comes before God: all that has been done, all that has been suffered, all that has been unreconciled, all readiness and all resistance. A new beginning is possible at any time in the bond of God's Spirit, for whom death is not a barrier that prevents him from creating reconciled community. In the local churches, the names of the deceased of other denominations are also known. To remember them in paschal hope is ecumenism of life. The remembrance of the dead of different denominations, who are well known to all parishioners by name, for example, because of their commitment to justice and peace, could be a sign-act that proves the solidarity in the paschal faith to be stronger than any earthly form of division and separation.
Briefly, I would like to add another thought which, from my point of view, could be of importance in reforms in the liturgical realm of churches of the Reformation: attention to the lectionary within the church year, and based on that, a decision for a canon within the canon of biblical texts. There is a worldwide lectionary in the Roman Catholic liturgy—and I consider this a blessing—a gift in ecumenism. We can certainly argue about the selection of scripture texts to be used. But what a blessing it would be if, as a gift of God—God's holy word being proclaimed—if we had a reading order in all churches that allowed us to feel at home everywhere!
Friederike Nüssel
Dorothea Sattler has mentioned the remembrance of the dead and a worldwide lectionary as examples of an ecumenism of gifts from a Catholic perspective. As we have seen in the common reflection on a theology of gift and of giving, it is part of the gift that it wants to be received. An ecumenism of gifts therefore takes both sides, the giving and the receiving, into consideration. From this point of view, it becomes clear that gifts release different dynamics. Thus—probably not surprising for anyone here—for a Protestant understanding, the remembrance of the dead is clearly more difficult to understand as a gift than a worldwide lectionary. How to think of the eucharistic celebration as reaching into the sphere of the deceased raises eschatological questions for Protestant understanding on which we need to work. A common lectionary, however, is a gift that can unite worldwide. But one can also ask whether different lectionaries do not represent a richness.
In general, Protestant Christians and churches find it somewhat more difficult than other denominations to present their traditions as a gift. This has to do with the Reformation doctrine of justification. But perhaps it can be said that the rediscovery of the gospel of God's pure grace in the Reformation era can be understood as a gift that has had a long-term ecumenical impact. In the twentieth century, the dialogue on the doctrine of justification between the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation led to the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JDDJ). With the JDDJ, a consensus was reached on the basic understanding of the gospel. In the meantime, the World Communion of Reformed Churches, the Anglican Communion, and the World Methodist Conference have agreed to the JDDJ. The result of the dialogue on the doctrine of justification has thus become an ecumenical gift.
Dorothea Sattler
From my point of view, a wealth of aspects can be named, which have been lost from view in the Roman Catholic tradition and which are coming back into consciousness through the ecumenical community. I can give only two examples:
Passing the chalice to the laity: As early as the sixteenth century, both Protestant and Roman Catholic theologians agreed on the understanding that in the celebration of the eucharist, through the sharing of the one broken bread and the one cup, there is sacramental proclamation, in a manner consecrated and manifest to the senses, of the reconciliation with God effected in Christ Jesus in time and history and constantly present in the Holy Spirit. Although, also according to the Protestant view, the entire body of Christ alone is present in the communion of bread, the symbolic representation of this redemptive communion in the communion of the cup reinforces the expressive power of the eucharistic meal in a way that respects the will of Jesus Christ. The sharing of the one eucharistic cup by the ministerial presiders as well as the entire congregation expresses the communion of all the baptized with Jesus Christ. The eucharistic celebration with bread and wine corresponds to the institution of Jesus Christ. The fact that the chalice is not given to lay people has become a painful symbol of division. There are no dogmatic obstacles, in the Roman Catholic liturgy as well, to observing—as in the regular form in the Protestant liturgies of the Lord's Supper—the instruction of Jesus Christ: “Drink from it, all of you!” Caution in speaking of the “sacrifice”: Reformation theology and liturgical practice is very sensitive when speaking of the eucharistic “sacrifice.” In terms of content, there is no longer any controversy in this regard: the worship assembly celebrates the sacrifice of praise for God's action in Jesus Christ, who suffered through his once and for all sacrifice of life as a demonstration of God's mercy with sinners on the cross. The church celebrates the memory of this life offering of Jesus Christ in the eucharist and accepts her own cross in following Jesus Christ on the paths to reconciliation. Not all eucharistic prayers in Roman Catholic tradition are free from the idea that the Church offers—to whom: God—whom: Jesus Christ—as a sacrifice. It is very helpful when dissent is raised here. The movement is another: God offers us his Son as an efficacious sign of his abiding readiness to reconcile us in all the repulsiveness of our human actions. God offers himself to us—not we offer him a sacrifice.
Friederike Nüssel
From the Protestant perspective, the ecumenical dialogue on the Lord's Supper and the eucharist has contributed to rethinking the meaning and significance of the real presence of Jesus Christ. The subtlety of Thomas Aquinas’s position deserves new attention from the Protestant side as well. For while Thomas, with his doctrine of transubstantiation, represents a realist understanding of Christ's presence under the elements, he subtly takes up in his doctrine of the change of substance the concern of symbolic interpretations that seek to avoid the rational imposition of teaching a change that cannot be perceived with the senses. Going beyond Thomas, the modern translations of the doctrine of transubstantiation in the doctrine of transignification and the doctrine of trans-finalization are of great importance for ecumenical dialogue and for inner-Protestant understanding. In dealing with these positions, the overall context of the liturgical celebration comes into view as opposed to a narrowing of the view to the elements, which was or is partly given in the Lutheran tradition.
Dorothea Sattler
I am convinced: we need the interdisciplinary theological and philosophical, and also sociological and psychological cooperation in ecumenism. Left alone, in systematic-theological reflection, we are in danger of referring to controversies that did not exist originally in the biblical tradition. In the beginning, Paul experienced the leadership of the churches by charismatically gifted persons—why not today? Historical findings are instructive; so are references to practice. In the Ecumenical Working Group, especially in view of the diversity of professional perspectives—biblical, historical, systematic, practical—it has been possible to formulate a view that considers the limitations of each perspective. Everything in theology is reconstruction through the means of the human intellect, using established methods. There is so much we do not know—especially about the beginnings of liturgical traditions. Every present time has sought to celebrate God's gifts in praise.
Friederike Nüssel
The results of ecumenical dialogue owe much to interdisciplinary cooperation among the various theological disciplines in Catholic and Protestant faculties. The discourse between academic Catholic and Protestant theology has never ceased since the Reformation. They have consistently followed and received each other's theological developments. Theologians such as Robert Bellarmine and Johann Gerhard have argued with each other at the highest academic level. While they advanced confessional polarization, they also significantly deepened theological reflection and contributed to the formation of theology as a scholarly discipline. The permanent academic debate has been an essential prerequisite for the theological rapprochements even before the Second Vatican Council and has been a great enrichment ever since.
Dorothea Sattler
I will conclude with a memory of an incident on the eve of the lecture I gave for my application on a Monday in Münster. I wanted to become the director of the Ecumenical Institute. I am used to celebrating the eucharist on Sunday. On this Sunday, on the manageably small village square in Vendersheim in Rheinhessen, the Protestant parishioners gathered outside and rehearsed the chorale “Großer Gott wir loben Dich” (Holy God, We Praise Thy Name) in the choir on the occasion of the confirmation celebration. I would have liked to have sung along. Rather ashamed, I crept into the small Roman Catholic house of worship. Ecumenism of gifts in the places of life of Christian communities that are becoming smaller and smaller in many places, at least in Europe: why—I ask, why do we not trust more in the gifts of God's Spirit in all churches? God be lamented—from my point of view it was not intended that in one place of life in a small wine village the baptized go to different stone buildings to praise God for his gifts. Together we are more convincing—so let us become “one” so that the world may believe that God sent Jesus Christ—so that we find faith in the merciful God who gives life even in death.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
