28 PART ONE: INTRODUCTION reinforcing the basic attitude of conversion as expressed in Cardinal Kasper’s spiritual ecumenism: Receptive Ecumenism both resonates with Cardinal Kasper’s and Archbishop RowanWilliams’s joint advocacy of the need for ‘spiritual ecumenism’ and expands upon this by explicitly drawing out the interpersonal and structural-institutional dimensions alongside the more obviously personal that is the focus of spiritual ecumenism.63 Receptive ecumenism thus integrates the heart of spiritual ecumenism into theological exchange, complementing consensus ecumenism. In the words of Cardinal Kasper: “This enterprise is thus a part of an ‘ecumenism of life’ which needs to accompany the ‘ecumenism of truth’ reflected in the dialogues.”64 As a result: [T]he fundamental principle of Receptive Ecumenism can be viewed as going to the very core of what is required for any real effective progress to occur at all. That is, Receptive Ecumenism is here being understood not simply as a compensatory secondary-best suited to the present interim situation, but as the essential way forwards towards the anticipated goal of organic structural unity.65 Murray proposes prioritizing the receptive attitude and employing it intentionally in the current phase of the ecumenical process. Both in the lead up to the Council, as well as in the dialogues initiated afterwards, the essentials of Murray’s receptive ecumenism have already been put into practice, as demonstrated, for example, by the influence of Orthodox theology on the ecclesiological thinking of the Council. The focus on the local church, the rediscovery of the intimate relation between the Eucharist and the church, and the Trinitarian renaissance, which has played an important role in the current understanding of the church as communio, are fine examples of this influence. Therefore, the strategy of receptive ecumenism is not new in itself. However, the way in whichMurray advocates for it to be prioritized and used intentionally is innovative. He considers the question: ‘what is to be learned from the other?’ This is a question that could bring ecumenism beyond the current impasse: 63 Murray, 15. 64 Walter Kasper, “Foreword,” in Receptive Ecumenism and the Call to Catholic Learning : Exploring a Way for Contemporary Ecumenism, ed. Paul D. Murray and Luca Badini Confalonieri (Oxford/New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2008), viii. 65 Murray, “Receptive Ecumenism - Establishing the Agenda,” 15.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw