The celebration in Christ Church Cathedral in which the President, Mrs McAleese, received Communion at a Church of Ireland service has exposed some of the sincerely-held differences between Catholics and Church of Ireland members. The Catholic position on inter-communion rests on the belief that, when a unity of faith and understanding is not there, the Eucharist cannot be a true expression of unity and community. Furthermore, it holds that the painful divisions between churches can be healed only by being aware of them, studying them, attending to them, working at them, praying about them.
As Catholics, when we say "Amen" to the priest or extraordinary minister of the Eucharist as we receive the body and blood of Christ, we are also saying "Yes" to the church worldwide as body of Christ and to its teachings. Receiving Holy Communion is one of the deepest expressions of our faith and so receiving Communion in a church whose faith I do not fully share has an inherent contradiction. On one level, I am saying, "I am in communion with you." On another level, I know I am not in that kind of communion.
The pain of such disunity underlies much of the debate and discussion that have arisen over the past few weeks. And inevitably there is pressure for the rules to change and for a widening of the situations where inter-communion can take place and even for indiscriminate inter-communion.
At stake, however, is not only the nature of the Eucharist but also the future of ecumenism and the ecumenical movement. Were the rules to be changed and the situations where inter-communion is allowed to be broadened, there could be a blurring of the boundaries about what we believe about the Eucharist and about who we are. Real ecumenism is about each church renewing itself, findings the depths of its own spiritual heritage and contribution, and from that richness, reaching across and building bridges with other churches and indeed with people of no faith.
On an issue such as this, it is essential from all the churches' viewpoints to avoid denigration of beliefs sincerely and deeply held on any side. All of us have certainly tried to do this. A week had gone by before any official Catholic spokesman went on the record to talk about this issue. I discussed it only because it arose in the context of a wide-ranging discussion on Radio Ireland's Last Word with Eamon Dunphy, previously arranged.
The nub of the question is that, as a Catholic, when I receive Communion I am expressing the deepest part of my faith. I am saying who I am. I am saying "Yes" to my membership of my church as well as to my God incarnate in Jesus and present in the Eucharist. If I receive in another church, I am saying: "I am part of your church. I am in communion with you." This is manifestly not true. Despite the fact that we share many aspects of faith there are still large areas of difference.
In this context, I am very concerned that my use of the word "sham" in the radio interview was interpreted to mean cheap or shoddy. This is not so. What I meant was the dictionary definition of the word, "anything that is not what it appears to be", since this is the problem when Catholics take Communion in other churches with which they are not fully united.
Many Catholics have been uncomfortable with and even confused by the practice in other churches of inviting them to Communion and this could be a matter for fruitful discussion between the churches. In this regard, it may be of interest that this is not just an issue between the Catholic Church and the Church of Ireland but also one between the Catholic Church and all the churches of the East. We are open to inter-communion with the Orthodox churches but the Orthodox churches do not have the same practice.
The Catholic bishops spoke on this issue earlier this week in order to clarify for Catholics where their church stands. As bishops, we were concerned that the impression would be left that inter-communion was now allowed for Catholics. The reality is that disunity still exists between the churches on core differences in belief and these differences create a fundamental barrier to inter-communion. It is not simply a question of a church prohibition or of a rule in Canon Law but about the very meaning of Communion. The Eucharist effects or brings about unity but within a shared understanding of what is happening, within the parameters of beliefs already held.
Archbishop Robin Eames is right to highlight the issue of Anglican orders in his statement of yesterday. There is a fundamental difference between Anglicans and Catholics concerning orders and this is also a serious obstacle to inter-communion. Until this question can be dealt with through further prayer, reflection and a careful listening to the Spirit active in all our churches, it is difficult to see how the painful question of inter-communion can be resolved.
May I add a word to Catholics and other Christians who are in interchurch marriages. It is they who on a weekly basis bear the pain of our disunity. It is they who struggle with their different and deep beliefs and try to pass on to their children the fundamentals of Christianity. More than anybody, they would wish to share the Eucharist together as families and can feel most strongly the pain of exclusion. I would say to them in encouragement that much progress has been made in the area of shared faith.
The most recent Catholic Directory on Ecumenism published in 1993 encourages those in interchurch marriages to learn more about the religious convictions of their partners and to respect the religious freedom and conviction of the other parent. These and other statements are encouraging signs that progress has been made and that the stony and sometimes lonely road of ecumenism is nonetheless heading towards a truly inclusive and Christian destination.
Disunity between the Christian churches is always difficult and a scandal. And not being able to share at the table of the Lord is painful. But this pain can stimulate us to search for unity. All Christians are called to fulfil the Lord's command and to work that they "may be one" (John 17:21-23). While we await this unity, we must work through our theological differences and we await the day when we can, with great joy, celebrate the Eucharist together truly one in mind and heart.
May I finish by saying something about my own ecumenical journey. From years sitting on committees with members of other churches, I have come to an ever-deepening respect of those churches and a deeper understanding. I have come to share at many levels with members of the Church of Ireland and other churches. We have prayed together, we have discussed theology together, we have celebrated, we have together felt the pain of victims of violence in Northern Ireland, we have tried to tease out arguments and disagreements. All this has been done with courtesy and respect, the hallmarks of the Christian in the world.
Much more remains to be done. There are still points of difference. But I am hopeful that what has been begun will be brought to completion by God. Through these discussions, I have also come to a deeper understanding of my own faith and its riches, of what we have to offer, of its own distinctiveness. The ecumenical movement has played a part in my own spiritual and theological formation and I am exceedingly grateful for this.
