The posts that I’ve made on this blog which have attracted by far the most comment in recent months have been those connected with whether baptism must necessarily happen to a person before the Eucharist.
I think we’ve established that a lot of people care very much about this question. It is my view that baptism should normally precede the Eucharist. It is the view of some people that baptism must essentially precede receiving the Eucharist. I’m quite untroubled by this. Some people are quite troubled by assertions in this area.
The US-based Episcopal Church is due to have a conversation about this at its General Convention very soon. General Convention only takes place every three years for them, unlike General Synod over here which happens each year. That means they do a lot of stuff when they do meet. My guess is that the communion-baptism question is likely to be one of those things that we will hear quite a lot about. I’d be surprised if they changed their polity on this, but I expect quite a loud attempt to try to shift it. Unlike in Scotland, their canons explicitly ban anyone from receiving communion before being baptised.
Now, I’ve said most of what I want to say about this before (here and here). I just want to add one thing to that at this juncture.
It is that there those who want change in this area can draw quite a lot of comfort from most modern baptism rites, including those in both Scotland and the USA.
The “Baptismal Covenant” – so beloved of American Episcopalians and so glossed over by Scottish Episcopalians is pretty much the same in both countries on this issue, I think.
In it, we find the following question which is addressed to baptismal candidates and either answered by them directly or on their behalf by parents/godparents:
Will you continue in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in the prayers?
Continue!
Right?
Leave a Reply