Perspectief 2016-34

2016-34 The de-cognition of recognition 23 Com ment responsibility of the church but also a challenge in ecumenical relations. It would be in the line of de-cognition of recognition if ecumenical relations were not only object of theoretical agreements but if the churches and the believers were the hermeneutic of ecumenism. Hospitality and otherness My third point is that the de-cognition of recognition brings hospitality at the front of the process. In the episode of the pilgrim of Emmaus, hospitality is the evident continuation of the discussion. However, we have to notice that the pilgrims invite Jesus to share the meal even though they still don’t know who he is. Recognition occurs after hospitality; it is not a prerequisite. Hospitality is not disconnected to reason and intellectual exchange. We most often don’t invite in our homes people with whom we have major rational divergences, but sharing a meal together does not necessitate to agree on everything, on the contrary. I find here interesting to mention the double sense of the word host. A host is, according to the context, both the one who invites and the one who is invited, the one who receives and the one who is received. Also interesting is the etymological proximity between hospitality and hostility. The Latin word “hospes”, from which “hospitality” originates, is a derivative of the word “hostis”, which induced “hostility”. Both have designated at first “host” in the double sense of the term (the received and the receiver) and then in a second step “the foreigner” and finally “the enemy”. For Benveniste, this semantic shift from “host” to “the enemy” is linked to the evolution of Roman law and the increasing role of the state in ancient Rome. Anyway, this brings us to the fact that hospitality is necessarily open to otherness, may it be harsh (hostility) or more friendly. In fact, being host to one another, either as inviting or invited, implies a process in which the other, who was foreigner at first, answer, the only hermeneutic of the gospel, is a congregation of men and women who believe it and live by it. I am, of course, not denying the importance of the many activities by which we seek to challenge public life with the gospel– evangelistic campaigns, distribution of Bibles and Christian literature, conferences, and even books such as this one. But I am saying that these are all secondary, and that they have power to accomplish their purpose only as they are rooted in and lead back to a believing community”.