• The Sacraments: Communion

    I’m currently writing a series of articles on the sacraments for the cathedral website. They are being posted here in case anyone wants to comment or ask any further questions.

    Communion vessels

    This article from the Provost will form part of a series on the sacraments.

    Lots of different churches have different names for the meal of bread and wine that is central to the lives of almost all Christian traditions. Holy Communion, Mass, the Lord’s Supper, Eucharist are all names which refer to Christians eating bread together and drinking wine as Jesus did with his disciples the night before he died.

    Here at St Mary’s the word we most often use is Eucharist. This comes from the Greek word that simply means Thanksgiving.

    In the Anglican/Episcopal tradition which we are a part of, the service of communion is celebrated by members of the clergy who have been ordained to the priesthood and must always take place in the context of a congregation, even if there is just a congregation of one person. A priest can’t celebrate communion on their own. There is something about sharing that is an intrinsic part of what communion is about.

    At St Mary’s Cathedral, everyone is welcome to receive communion. This includes young children who learn about the reverence and joy that are bound together in the sharing of the meal in the context of receiving the sacrament along with those who bring them to church. We believe that no-one should be able to remember being refused communion and that we learn what it all means by a lifelong engagement with God. Anyone who believes that they think they know exactly what communion means probably hasn’t realised that God has more to teach them yet.

    Christians speak of the bread that is shared as the Body of Christ and the wine that is drunk as the Blood of Christ. The simple bread and wine become in the course of the service powerful symbols that connect us with the life and death of Jesus Christ. As a sacrament it is an outward sign of inward grace. That means that the rich symbolism of communion speaks of something that is happening to our souls when we receive the bread and wine. The ritual or liturgy by which we receive the body and blood of Christ itself forms us and shapes our lives. By participating in this meal we come close to God. At St Mary’s we share communion every Sunday of the year and also on the major feast days – days on which we remember something special that happened to Jesus or the major saints who have witnessed to Christian life since Jesus was on earth.

    One of the ways to develop as a Christian is to take on the discipline of receiving communion at least once a week.

    The sharing of communion is a mysterious thing. It happens in our current time and place but connects us with Christians through the centuries and all around the world in our own time who are sharing the same meal.

    People often ask what actually happens to the bread and wine in the course of communion. People who come to St Mary’s from a Roman Catholic background sometimes want to know whether we believe in transubstantiation. There would be many ways that people in the congregation describe what happens at communion but probably the way of describing what happens that would unite most people would be to say that we believe in the real presence of Christ in the sacrament.

    At the moment in the service when the priest asks the Holy Spirit to come upon the bread and wine and upon the people (another Greek word: epiclesis – calling down the Holy Spirit from on high) many members of the congregation make the sign of the cross. This connects us as individuals with what is happening at the table and is a powerful reminder that this is all being done in the context of the love of God which took Jesus to the cross and that each of us are changed by God by our participation.

    One special use of communion in our tradition is that we sometimes share communion at funerals. This is a fitting and very beautiful way to give thanks for the live of someone who was themselves a communicant member of the church. We also have an annual service on or about All Souls Day – 2 November each year at which we remember those who have died in the context of a communion service. A communion service which has the intention of remember the dead is called a requiem.

    Communion is the central act of worship in a church like St Mary’s. The building is primarily designed for the celebration and sharing in this meal.

    We believe that God is present when we share bread and wine at the altar. This leads us to believe that God is present at every table everywhere and that when God’s people share food they are saying something about the way we believe that the world should be – a way of life which we sometimes refer to as the Kingdom of God and which we believe is close at hand.

    Frequently Asked Questions about Communion
    I can only eat gluten free bread – does that mean I can’t receive communion?
    No – gluten free wafers are available in St Mary’s. They are square rather than round so we know them from regular wafers. Please tell one of the stewards when you come in that you need a gluten free wafer and tell the priest at the altar if they are unaware that you need one.

    I can’t drink alcohol – does that mean I can’t have communion?
    No – if you receive just the bread (sometimes called receiving in ‘one kind’) then you have fully received communion. If you wish to acknowledge the chalice then you may wish to touch it or kiss it rather than take a sip of wine.

    I’m squeamish about drinking from a common cup – can I dip my wafer in the wine?

    Don’t be squeamish – we use fortified wine which kills off germs. If you have something infectious yourself, please don’t receive the wine but receive in one kind. Please don’t take your wafer in your hand and dip it in the chalice (sometimes called intinction) as it spreads more germs than simply taking a sip from the cup which is wiped after each person has received.

    Do you believe in transubstantiation?
    We believe in the real presence of Christ in the sacrament.

    But do you really believe in transubstantiation?
    We believe in the real presence of Christ in the sacrament.

    You don’t believe in transubstantiation do you?

    We believe in the real presence of Christ in the sacrament.

    What happens to the bread and wine that are not used up after communion?
    We reserve bread and wine in church in a tabernacle on the High Altar. They can be taken from there to those who are too sick to come to church.
    The bread and wine that are reserved remind us that Christ is here. Some people like to acknowledge the presence of Christ in the church in this way when they come into the building or approach the high altar by going down on one knee (called genuflecting) or bowing. The sacrament is not reserved between Maundy Thursday and Easter Day, a time when sacraments are not celebrated and so we don’t bow or genuflect at that time.

    Can I receive the wafer on my tongue?
    Yes – but most people receive the wafer in their hand and then eat it. There is nothing holier or more virtuous about receiving it directly on the tongue and it is much easier for the person giving communion to put it in your hand.

    I don’t want to receive communion – is it compulsory at St Mary’s?
    If you are at a communion service in St Mary’s and don’t want to receive communion you are welcome to approach the altar with everyone else carrying a service sheet in your hand. That will indicate to whoever is distributing communion that you’d prefer to receive a blessing than to receive the bread and wine.

    Do you really mean it when you say that everyone is welcome to receive communion.

    Yes. Unless the Scottish Episcopal Church has explicitly forbidden you to receive communion (very, very rare indeed) then you are welcome to receive communion here whoever you are and wherever you are from whether you have been here many times or whether this is your first time in the building.

    Any more comments or questions?

10 responses to “Where does the Church of Scotland stand?”

  1. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    I understand your sentiments, but both on this issue and on the ordination of women in the Church of England the weary words of Mrs Boyle in Sean O’Casey’s ‘Juno and the Paycock’ in reply to her son, who scorns the Irish Free State and wants an Irish Republic or nothing, are inclined to come to mind:

    “To be sure, to be sure — no bread’s a lot better than half a loaf.”

  2. Nick Brindley Avatar

    I think you’re right to think this is a disastrously wrong-headed attempt to avoid having to think the issue through, although we may not agree on what would be involved in such thinking (almost nobody agrees with me!)

    I think we need to revisit some pretty fundamental problems on the nature of the moral authority of the Bible, the meaning of “salvation” and what ministry is to make any real progress with this issue and there appears to be depressingly little appetite to do this in a spirit of mutual trust and of trust in the leading of the Spirit guiding our interpretation of scripture

    http://loveswork.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/failing-to-be-biblical-reflections-on-church-of-scotland-sexuality-debates/

  3. Frank keefe Avatar
    Frank keefe

    This is what happens when you water down Gods truth so the secular world will think what a progressive church you are.When a small secular wedge is pushed under a church door you can bet a larger one will be pushed under it in the not to distant future.I believe a liberal minded church like the Church of Scotland is more dangerous to the Christian faith than atheists like Richard Dawkins and his followers. Jesus found it hard to convince the Pharisees of their misguided beliefs if He walked our earth today He would find those modern day Pharisees in the Church of Scotland even harder to convince.

    1. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
      Rosemary Hannah

      Well, there you go – I think the exact opposite – that Jesus, who plucked corn, and healed, on the Sabbath, would be out partying tonight with all sorts of disreputable people. The Pharisees were the people who stuck rigidly to the law, breaking it even as they kept it. Jesus was the one who re-interpreted it.

      1. Frank keefe Avatar
        Frank keefe

        I find it amazing how those who look for sin to be accepted would try and use Jesus to back them up.First Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath.The Pharisees abused Gods law with their legalism.Its why He said about the rescue of a sheep on that day.He didnt re-interpret it He was showing them how it SHOULD BE KEPT as God ALWAYS intended it.Its the church who is doing the interpretation and Jesus certainly wouldnt be “out partying” such disrespect of our Lords holiness is often the way with liberal ” Christians” Instead of the church being a light to the world that worlds darkness is putting out that light.

        1. kelvin Avatar

          Bless you for your faith, Frank. May it bring you happiness and joy.

  4. Graeme Cowie Avatar

    It’s a fudge, no doubt. And one which, far from preserving the “traditional” Kirk actually serves to undermine it in a number of ways, particularly concerning the status of “doctrine” and who gets to determine what it is, or at least what practical meaning it is for something to be “doctrine” rather than merely a personal religious sentiment. Explicitly to permit complete deviation from “doctrine” by congregations is not very Presbyterian, and the “traditionalists” either didn’t seem to realise that, or they care about preserving substantial doctrines at the expense of, well, what makes the Kirk the Kirk.

    To an extent, though, you could see it coming. I think the traditionalist wing sensed they would lose if it was a straight choice (unfortunate phrase) between 2A and 2B, and so tried to push for something that retains a symbolic attachment to historical doctrine whilst letting liberals have the lion’s share of the cake they want, which is to be able to ordain those in committed same-sex relationships and to be done with it. I know for a fact that a fair whack of liberal commissioners were swayed by 2D (not including my parents, who are CofS ministers who voted with option 2A), many seeing it as a way of letting the traditionalists have some sort of phyric victory whilst in fact enabling ministers to be in civil partnerships without any lasting problems. It is much more likely that 2D will make it through Barrier Act procedure now that it’s got the traditionalists’ name on it, and notwithstanding the extra year it’s going to take to turn it into a proper overture, I think the consensus of the Kirk is that they really want to stop talking about this.

    The new system ought to be fairly robust once the Legal Questions Committee have had their teeth dug into it. The clear intention was conceded by the movers that they did not intend for Presbyteries to be able to discipline or annul decisions made by Kirk Sessions seeking to be allowed to appoint ministers in civil partnerships, and for a lot of liberals (and actually, a lot of those on the conservative wing too) this will be seen as a critical part of the compromise if it is to be laid to rest. My only real concern is that if the traditionalists are for any reason unhappy with the implementation by LQC it could lead to the whole debate re-opening in GA 2014.

    It’s clearly not enough for many liberal ministers, elders and members of the Church of Scotland, for whom this still presents a partial sense of “separate not equal” for congregation and minister alike, and it probably makes it more difficult for the theological position of the kirk formally to be moved away from same sex relationships being sinful, now that the “practical harms” are in a significant sense out of the way, but by Church of Scotland standards, it’s a major step forward for a very broad church, and one which has probably saved it from a major schism (though a handful of churches may still leave over and above The Tron and Gilc South). For those of us in the Kirk 5 years ago, this would have been virtually unthinkable, and momentum has picked up since the Rennie case 4 years ago. The good fight goes on, and hurdles remain, but if it gets through Barrier Act procedure I think the practical objectives, in a Kirk which already offers substantial liberty of personal opinion in matters of doctrine which do not enter into the substance of faith, have largely been met, albeit in a roundabout way.

    For more of my thoughts on this matter, see:

    http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2013/05/church-of-scotland-religious-progress.html

    and

    http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2013/05/presbyterianism-cracking-at-seems-cost.html

  5. Margaret of the Sea of Galilee Avatar
    Margaret of the Sea of Galilee

    And it still does not properly address how LGBTQ people (single or in civil partnerships) will be dealt with (dealt to?) when they offer themselves to Presbyteries as feeling called to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament. Will they be asked about their orientation? Questioned? Interrogated? What responses will allow them to or prevent them from pursuing that call?

    Who is this Albert Bogle anyway – is he about to become the first to be beatified by the Kirk and for what exactly? By-passing (even disregarding) Kirk “Order”, convincing his important friends to let him bulldoze ahead and his less important friends to print off 700 and something copies of a Deliverance which is incoherent and unimplementable.
    Off to read Revelation for other signs of The End Times…
    .

  6. Peter W Nimmo Avatar

    Kelvin, you make lots of good points in your post. But just to clarify- what is the doctrine and practice of the Scottish Episcopal Church on this issue? Does your doctrine approve of persons in civil partnerships being clergy, and is that put into practice?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Yes – there are quite a number of clergy in civil partnerships. In England, Anglican clergy in civil partnerships are supposed to declare that they are “celibate”. That isn’t the case in Scotland.

      The pension scheme in Scotland recognises Civil Partnerships by giving such partners the same benefits as wives or husbands in marriages. Civil Partners also are treated in the same way with regard to housing as a straight spouse if a relationship breaks down.

      Any candidate for ordination who is in a Civil Partnership is expected to be honest about that at selection.

      The bishops of the church announced a few years ago that they would not consecrate anyone as bishop who was in a Civil Partnership. They were clear at the time that this was a moratorium. However it is not clear to me whether that moratorium still stands. I do expect there to be questions about that at the coming Synod.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Crunch time for the Church of England

    It is make your mind up time for the Church of England this week on the question of whether to move to open the Episcopate to female candidates. Somehow or another the synodical process in England has reached what seems to be a very unfortunate place. After many compromises to ensure that those who are…

  • Web hosting recommendation

    Several people have been asking me for a recommendation for web-hosting. I’m very happy to recommend the company that I use myself. They have the unglamorous but reassuring name of EZPZ and I’ve found them to be very good. They are particularly strong at fast customer service. Anyone looking for web-hosting for a WordPress site…

  • Sermon preached on 1 July 2012

    The sermon this week seemed to interest people quite a lot – more so than anything I’ve preached in months, I think. Here’s what I said: Quite a number of years ago, I went to visit priest who had just begun working in one of our congregations – it was someone whom I had enjoyed…

  • Bloggers come and bloggers go

    It seems to me that the blogging world is changing at the moment. It seems as though there has been a slow down in the number of people starting new blogs and those who are keeping them may be keeping them slightly less often. Twitter and Facebook updates (which are a form of micro-blogging) have…