http___www.taize.fr_hr_article7193.html_chooselang_1_1.xml
1.1 1.2 2.1 3.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 5.1 5.2 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 10.1 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 11.10 11.11 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 14.1 14.2 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1
Mgr Gérard Daucourt, Bishop of Nanterre, France, and member of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, knew Brother Roger well. One year after his death, in an article published in “La Croix” on 16 August 2006, he evokes the founder of Taizé’s endeavour for reconciliation. “The Prior of Taizé was filled with a desire for reconciliation that touched the depths of his soul and impelled him to create breaches.” On 16 August 2005, when Brother Roger, at prayer with his brothers and with thousands of young adults, was struck by absurd violence, Taizé was struck at the heart of its vocation, in this church whose very name recalls that vocation: the Church of Reconciliation. “In my youth,” writes Brother Roger, “I was astonished to see how Christians - who nevertheless live from a God of love – use so much energy to justify their separations. So I said to myself that it was essential to create a community where people search to understand one another and to be reconciled with one another always, and through this, to render visible a little parable of communion.” What followed is well known: attracted by the simplicity of the prayer and the life of the community, touched by the trust of the Brothers, tens of thousands of young adults come to Taizé every year, to ask their questions, to cry out their suffering, share their hopes, discover that Christ loves them, learn to live in the communion of the Church and to become makers of peace. Thus the community and the young people seek to manifest the reconciliation to which Christ calls us, between Christians and with all our fellow human beings. The Brothers are not unaware of the laborious theological dialogues or of the meetings – official and often significant – between Church leaders, but they have first of all to propose the Good News to the young people and means for them to experience it. Brother Roger was filled with a desire for reconciliation that touched the depths of his soul and impelled him to open up breaches. Setting out on a way that was both discreet and personal, he humbly shared this experience and this conviction. “I have found my identity as a Christian in reconciling within myself the faith of my origins with the mystery of the Catholic faith, without a breakdown of communion with anyone.” Certain theologians knitted their brows at this; others said that Brother Roger was no theologian. Some Church leaders demanded an ecclesial identity that was official and, according to them, more precise. Brother Roger loved all of the Body of Christ and he said so with all of his life. Without disowning his background, without confronting anyone, he wished to integrate and reconcile in himself all that the one Lord gives in Churches that are nevertheless still separated. Recognising the necessity of the ministry of universal communion of the Pope, he also adhered to the Eucharistic faith and practise of the Catholic Church and at the same time lived from the riches with which the Lord has gratified the Orthodox and Protestant Churches. Neither without tension nor without suffering, he lived the reconciliation of the Churches in all his being. Does it suffice for us to take note without judging and to say that what we have here is an exception, and to look for reasons to show that it can not be adapted? Do we agree at least to let ourselves be questioned? Do we agree at least to wonder whether this “exception” is not called one day to become less exceptional, and to open up the way for many others? Listening to Brother Roger, we can remind ourselves that our separations are in conflict with the will of Christ, that ecumenism is an exchange of gifts, that we need one another, that reconciliation is not just peaceful coexistence, but trust, mutual enrichment and collaboration. Then perhaps we will know how to help our Churches to be less caught up than they are at present in drawing back into their own identities. I am speaking personally, because the Brothers of Taizé have never wished to give lessons to anyone and still less to be “spiritual masters”, even of ecumenism. When John Paul II visited them in 1986, he said to them that the vocation of their community is “in a certain sense, provisional”. In his fine book on Taizé, Professor Olivier Clément spoke of a “state of continual foundation”. The brutal death of Brother Roger one year ago, at the heart of Taizé’s vocation, is part of this “dynamic of the provisional”. Through the voice of their new prior, the Brothers of Taizé are saying to us that they do not consider themselves to be the only actors of that dynamic. “We are poor men who need the communion of the Church in order to go forward in faith.” Brother Alois and his brothers continue to go forward on the way marked out by Brother Roger. They are already living something of the Church that is visibly one and they are leading young people to go to the sources of faith together. Following an article published in Le Monde on 6 September 2006, Mgr Daucourt responds to the affirmation that Brother Roger had converted to Catholicism. So Brother Roger became a convert to Catholicism? The popes and the bishops of Autun supposedly knew all about it and yet said nothing (Le Monde of September 6th, 2006). In its official documents, in the case of already baptized persons, the Catholic Church speaks not of conversion to Catholicism but rather to being admitted to full communion in the Catholic Church. This step can be undertaken in several ways, but all of them involve a written and signed document. No document of this kind exists in Brother Roger’s case. He and all his brothers recognized the Pope’s ministry of universal communion. He shared the Catholic faith concerning the ministry and in the Eucharist. He had a devotion to the Virgin Mary. But he wanted to live without breaking with anyone. That was the position he tried to maintain—not without inner tensions—in the hope of an imminent restoration of visible unity among all Christians. You may appreciate or dispute this position, but how can you imply that Brother Roger deceived people by concealing a conversion to Catholicism as this is generally understood? So he received communion at the hands of John Paul II and of Cardinal Ratzinger? More than thirty years ago, he received it from Cardinal Wojtyla in Krakow and from the bishop of Autun. There is nothing unusual about this. The law of the Catholic Church confers upon every bishop the responsibility of admitting someone to the Eucharist, regularly or exceptionally, a newly baptized person or a baptized person from another Church. As a close friend of Taizé for the past forty years, someone who was in contact with Bishop Le Bourgeois regarding ecumenical questions from the beginning of his episcopacy and someone who, in the Pontifical Council for Unity, for seven years had the responsibility of following relations between the Vatican and Taizé, I was well placed to note that Bishop Le Bourgeois, Popes Paul VI and John Paul II, Cardinals Ratzinger and Kasper recognized an objective and public character in the communion of faith that Brother Roger lived with the Catholic Church. Respecting his spiritual journey, they did not ask anything more of him, while continuing contacts and a regular dialogue with him and his community. How can one speak of an “enigma” (Le Monde of September 6th, 2006) and in addition claim to resolve it by relying on the evidence of Yves Chiron (cf. his letter of information Aletheia no. 95 of August 1, 2006), an historian who puts forward hypotheses? He is unable to interpret the information he received, being unfamiliar both with the personality of Brother Roger and with the history of Taizé and its relationship with the Churches. Bishop Séguy, for his part, speaks of “ambiguity”, because Brother Roger’s personal journey raises questions for him. During his time as bishop of Autun, he respected this journey, just as it was respected in Rome. Brother Roger pointed out a way and opened doors for millions of people, young and old, so that ecumenism might be seen first and foremost as an exchange of gifts. Some may refuse to let themselves be questioned by his original position, so demanding and unsettling, or they may dispute it, but we are at least entitled to expect them to understand it correctly. 7 September 2006 +Gérard Daucourt Bishop of Nanterre Member of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity
1.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 9.1 9.2 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 13.1 13.2 14.1 15.1 16.1 17.1
«Prior Taizéa bio je ispunjen čežnjom za pomirenjem koja ga je duboko dirnula i potaknula ga da stvara mostove.» 16. kolovoza 2005., dok je brat Roger, tijekom molitve sa svojom braćom i tisućama mladih, pogođen besmislenim nasiljem, Taizé je pogođen u srcu svojeg poziva, u ovoj crkvi čije samo ime podsjeća na taj poziv: Crkvi Pomirenja. «U mladosti», piše brat Roger, «zaprepašćivalo me promatrati kako kršćani – koji svejedno žive od Boga ljubavi – troše toliko energije kako bi opravdali svoja razdvajanja. Zato sam sebi rekao da je nužno stvoriti zajednicu u kojoj ljudi tragaju za međusobnim razumijevanjem i stalnim pomirenjem te, na taj način, učiniti vidljivom malu prispodobu zajednice.» Ono što slijedi dobro je poznato: privučeni jednostavnošću molitve i životom zajednice, dirnuti povjerenjem braće, tisuće mladih svake godine dolaze u Taizé kako bi postavljali svoja pitanja, isplakali svoju patnju, podijelili svoje nade, otkrili kako ih Krist voli, učili živjeti u zajedništvu Crkve i postati tvorcima mira. Tako Zajednica i mladi žele pokazati pomirenje na koje nas Krist poziva, među kršćanima i svim našim bližnjima. Braća nisu nesvjesna zahtjevnih teoloških dijaloga i susreta – službenih i često značajnih – među crkvenim vođama, no prije svega moraju mladima prenijeti Dobru vijest i načine na koje je mogu iskusiti. Brat Roger bio je ispunjen željom za pomirenjem koja ga je duboko dirnula i potaknula ga da stvara mostove. Odlučivši se na put koji je bio i skrovit i osoban, skromno je dijelio ovo iskustvo i ovo uvjerenje. «Pronašao sam svoj kršćanski identitet pomirivši u sebi vjeru svojih korijena s otajstvom katoličke vjere, bez raskidanja zajedništva i s kim.» Neki su teolozi na ovo podigli obrve; drugi su rekli kako brat Roger nije bio teolog. Neki su crkveni vođe zahtijevali službeni crkveni identitet koji je, prema njima, precizniji. Brat Roger je volio cjelinu Tijela Kristovog i to je izricao cijelim svojim životom. Ne odbacujući svoje porijeklo, ne sukobljavajući se ni s kim, želio je integrirati i pomiriti u sebi sve što Gospodin daje u crkvama koje su, bez obzira na to, još uvijek razdvojene. Prepoznajući nužnost papine službe univerzalnog zajedništva, prihvatio je i Euharistiju te praksu katoličke Crkve, a istovremeno je živio od bogatstava kojima je Gospodin obdario pravoslavne i protestantske Crkve. Ne bez napetosti niti bez patnje, živio je pomirenje Crkava cijelim svojim bićem. Je li nam to dovoljno da bismo bez prosuđivanja primijetili da se ovdje radi o iznimci i da bismo tražili razloge koji će pokazati da ona ne može postati općeprihvaćena? Možemo li si barem dopustiti da se zapitamo? Možemo li makar razmisliti ne bi li ta «iznimka» jednoga dana trebala postati manje iznimna, te otvoriti put mnogim drugima? Slušajući brata Rogera, možemo se podsjetiti kako su naša razdvajanja u sukobu s Kristovom voljom, kako je ekumenizam razmjena darova, kako trebamo jedni druge, kako pomirenje nije samo miroljubiva koegzistencija, nego povjerenje, međusobno obogaćivanje i suradnja. Tada ćemo možda shvatiti kako pomoći našim crkvama da postanu manje zarobljene no što su danas, povlačeći se u svoje vlastite identitete. Govorim osobno, jer braća iz Taizéa nikada nisu željela nikome davati lekcije, a još manje biti «duhovnim učiteljima», čak ni kada se radi o ekumenizmu. Kada ih je Ivan Pavao II. posjetio 1986. godine, rekao im je da je poziv njihove zajednice «na stanovit način privremen». U svojoj knjizi o Taizéu, profesor Olivier Clément pisao je o «stanju kontinuiranog utemeljivanja». Brutalna smrt brata Rogera u samom srcu poziva Taizéa, dio je te «dinamike privremenog». Glasom svojega novog priora, braća iz Taizéa nam govore da ne smatraju sebe jedinim sudionicima te dinamike. “Mi smo siromašni ljudi koji trebaju zajedništvo Crkve kako bi napredovali u vjeri”. Brat Alois i njegova braća nastavljaju koračati naprijed putem koji je postavio brat Roger. Oni već žive nešto od vidljivog jedinstva Crkve i vode mlade ljude kako bi zajedno išli prema izvorima vjere. U vezi s člankom objavljenim u listu Le Monde 6. rujna 2006, Mons. Daucourt odgovara na tvrdnju da se brat Roger preobratio na katoličanstvo Brat Roger se, dakle, preobratio na katoličanstvo? Pape i biskupi Autuna su navodno znali sve o tome, a ipak ništa nisu rekli (Le Monde, 6. rujna 2006.). U svojim službenim dokumentima, u slučaju već krštenih osoba, Katolička Crkva ne govori o preobraćenju na katoličanstvo, nego o punom primanju u zajedništvo Katoličke Crkve. Ovaj korak može se napraviti na više načina, ali svaki od njih uključuje pisani i potpisani dokument. Ovakav dokument, u slučaju brata Rogera, ne postoji. On - i sva njegova braća – priznali su Papinu službu univerzalnog zajedništva. On je dijelio katoličku vjeru u ovu službu i u Euharistiju. Štovao je Djevicu Mariju. No, želio je živjeti bez prekidanja i s kim. To je položaj koji je pokušao zadržati – ne bez unutarnjih napetosti – u nadi za skorim ponovnim uspostavljanjem vidljivog jedinstva svih kršćana. Ovaj vam se stav može svidjeti ili ne, ali kako možete implicirati da je brat Roger prevario ljude zatajivši konverziju na katolicizam u općenitom smislu? Primio je, dakle, svetu pričest iz ruke Ivana Pavla II. i kardinala Ratzingera? Prije više od trideset godina primio ju je od kardinala Wojtyle u Krakovu i od biskupa Autuna. U tome nema ničeg neobičnog. Pravo Katoličke crkve svakom biskupu daje odgovornost za primanje nekoga u Euharistiju, redovito ili iznimno, novokrštenika ili krštenika iz neke druge Crkve. Kao blizak prijatelj Taizéa u posljednjih četrdeset godina, netko tko je u kontaktu s biskupom Le Bourgeoisom brinuo o ekumenskim pitanjima od početka njegove biskupske službe i netko tko je u Papinskom vijeću za jedinstvo kršćana sedam godina imao odgovornost pratiti odnose između Vatikana i Taizéa, mogao sam primijetiti da su biskup Le Bourgeois, Pape Pavao VI. i Ivan Pavao II., kardinali Ratzinger i Kasper prepoznali objektivan i javni karakter zajedništva vjere koje je brat Roger živio s Katoličkom crkvom. Poštujući njegov duhovni put, nisu od njega tražili ništa više, a s njim i njegovom zajednicom nastavili su održavati kontakte i redovne dijaloge. Kako netko može govoriti o «enigmi» (Le Monde, 6. rujna 2006.) i dodatno tvrditi da će je razriješiti oslanjajući se na dokaze Yvesa Chirona (njegovo obavještajno pismo Aletheia br. 95 od 1. kolovoza 2006.), povjesničara koji iznosi hipoteze? On nije u mogućnosti interpretirati informacije koje je primio, jer su mu osobnost brata Rogera i povijest Taizéa nepoznate, kao i njegovi odnosi s Crkvama. Biskup Seguy iz Autuna, sa svoje strane, govori o «dvosmislenosti», jer osobni put brata Rogera njemu nameće pitanja. Kao biskup Autuna poštovao je ovaj put, kao što je bio poštovan i u Rimu. Brat Roger pokazao je put i otvorio vrata milijunima ljudi, mladih i starih, tako da ekumenizam prije svega može biti promatran kao razmjena darova. Neki mogu odbiti dopustiti si da budu preispitani njegovim početnim stavom, tako zahtjevnim i neugodnim, ili ga mogu opovrgavati, ali mi barem imamo pravo očekivati da ga ispravno razumiju. 7. rujna 2006. godine +Gérard Daucourt Biskup Nanterrea Član Papinskog vijeća za promociju kršćanskog jedinstva