I don't have a link for it, but it was on a FR thread sometime back in the fall, I think.
This is the proof of the authenticity of my love for Christ. If I am united with Christ, I am together with my neighbour, and this unity is not limited to the moment of communion, but only begins here. It becomes life, becomes flesh and blood, in the everyday experience of sharing life with my neighbour. Thus, the individual realities of my communicating and being part of the life of the Church are inseparably linked to one another.
Isn't this derivative though of what he believes to be proper or authentic reception of the Eucharist? I'm not arguing against the principle, I'm arguing against what he believes to be the telling factor of authenticity. In other words, if a Christian is in struggle with his neighbor, does this mean his love of Christ is not authentic? Is it an end or a process?
And if this properly understood love of Christ results from us being subsumed into his Body and Being by reception of the Eucharist, then he or she who is not at one with their neighbor has received the Eucharist in a futile way. Is that what he's saying?
Where does the First Commandment fit in to all of this? It would seem to me that reception of the Eucharist provides a means of understanding and keeping the first, and that stuggle should be borne before the Second is even possible.
As I said in my first post, I may not understand what he's really getting at. I just might not have the capacity.
Actually, Albion, I think your excellent questions indicate you do understand. I think what John Paul the Great and Card Ratzinger are speaking about is the correct idea of Eucharist and how our reception of it, if it is authentic, is expressed in our comunion and solidarity with all the brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ who similarly receive. I think the correct ideas about Eucharist are radical and far more encompassing that what I first learned as a young Catholic. I think I am blessed to live during a this time.