I’m currently on holiday and so spending quite a lot of time going in and out of churches. (What else do you think I would do on holiday?)
In one of the many churches I’ve visited, I caught sight of this.
Thoughts?
The Blog of the Provost of St Mary's Cathedral, Glasgow
I’m currently on holiday and so spending quite a lot of time going in and out of churches. (What else do you think I would do on holiday?)
In one of the many churches I’ve visited, I caught sight of this.
Thoughts?
An encouraging 8.5/10 for meaning well.
(The missing score is partly a double-negative feeling, partly the gap where one wonders on what grounds they will discriminate, partly a wondering if the small-print couldn’t be redacted further.)
1. Nice font. Is it used throughout the church’s signage, publications etc, or do they pic’n’mix?
2. I’m with Stew on the gulf between what’s claimed and the actual offering.
I love it. It would definitely make me feel at ease going into a new church with a sign like that prominently displayed.
I think it a right fine message. I would hope that the welcome to communion is not interpreted as communion for any and all, unbaptized or not.
Or perhaps that should read baptized or not.
No-one asked for baptismal certificates on the way in.
“No-one asked for baptismal certificates on the way in.”
No, but I think that the sign should make it explicit that the invitation to communion expects that one is a baptized person. I believe that it could be worded properly to extend the invitation, state the expectation, but also not offend. The open invitation is to baptism, not communion.
I like it.
“Jesus bids you welcome” – a warm homecoming indeed.
Is there a way in which it could be seen as a warning for prospective worshippers? Sort of setting out a stall firmly? Just asking …
Having too just been on holiday I am less convinced than ever that signs and statements have any meaning.
In a congregation of 20 where I stood out like a sore thumb not only was I not welcomed by the priest, I was actively ignored. I had to undergo the priest-in-charge deciding it was appropriate to tell both the congregation and the unknown visitor why the bishop was wrong, why stuff from the diocese should just be ignored, as part of the announcements at the start of the service. While during the sermon I was inflicted with the SEC being side swiped for not being the CoE. Not to mention the fact that I think you would probably have had to be either a cleric or a member of the congregation to follow just what was going on with the liturgy.
It said all welcome, but had I been visiting with a view to joining rather than just passing through I wouldn’t have returned.
On the other hand the congregation; who had arrived between my arrival and the start of the service; where warm and genuinely pleased to see me and hoped I might visit again – that is highly unlikely.
It begs the question, just what is welcome in a church context. Had it been a social gathering I would have felt welcome enough, but for a service I didn’t.
> In the Scottish Episcopal Church there is no requirement that you have to be confirmed in order to receive communion. Baptism is regarded as full sacramental initiation into the life of the church.
That’s not what the Scottish Book of Common Prayer (1929) says. I quote:
Question. What is Confirmation?
Answer. Confirmation is an apostolic and sacramental rite by which the Holy Spirit is given to complete our Baptism, so that we may be strengthened in our Christian life.
Does anyone know when this important doctrinal change was passed by General Synod?
Yes, at the synod that was held in Glasgow about 9 years ago.
Change was made to canon law.
(I opposed it, incidently, but probably not for reasons that you’d approve of, Robin).
It is Canon 25 and it was amended in 2005 – it reads thus:
1. The Sacrament of Baptism is the full rite of initiation into the Church, and
no further sacramental rite shall be required of any person seeking admission to Holy Communion. Subject to any Regulations issued by the College of Bishops concerning the preparation of candidates, the admission of any baptized person to Holy Communion shall be at the discretion of the cleric having charge of the congregation of which that person is a member, always providing that a person who has been admitted to Holy Communion in one congregation shall be accepted as a communicant in any other congregation of this Church.
2. The Scottish Episcopal Church recognizes as eligible to receive Holy Communion any baptized person who is a communicant of any Trinitarian Church.
3. Any person baptized and duly admitted as a communicant in another Trinitarian Church wishing to become a member of the Scottish Episcopal Church shall be accepted upon receipt of evidence of that baptism and admission in the said Church as a communicant-member of this Church.