tag : bright yellow-green apples: bread and wine continued

"I see little point in persisting in a discussion with one so obstinate as you" Martin White

Thursday, July 22, 2004

bread and wine continued

Well this is fun, I'm currently in a bit of a dialogue with Ruth Ann the erstwhile guru who has shown at last an area where we differ in some notable way. Continuing from the earlier 24-7 dicussions. You might cal this the fuzzy sacrament wars.

After setting her thoughts to verse, here's my personal responce of sorts. As ever, less articulate and more fragmented, but I couldn't leave it without comment. Of course.  

more than just

of course the
pilgrimage of food was simple
material and spiritual sharing
for meaning, in
person is invited. by meeting other
they had begun trust among
are involved in discover that roads
with many others, among peoples on the other.
demarcation lines rubbed out
well. create a community
encourages to build. welcoming people.
a life together to unity can be opened up
bread and wine in themselves
 , always important, & them as well
a concrete sign of reconciliation
in a climate of openness and listening,
seeking from divided and separated.
participants amidst the
known and unknown foretaste
accept gift, give in a common
complete in you what he has begun
thus take part in their lives

they say the table is redundent?

3 Comments:

Blogger Ruthie said...

Hey you! I never said the "table" was redundant merely the communion service :P A girl's gotta eat you know! :P

Anyway, its certainly interesting to see that we have very different perspectives on this - although I'm not sure they're entirely incompatable. Afterall, I'd probably still feel comfortable sharing communion with you...I'd just find more meaning in a glass of wine and a good cheesecake.

BTW - how do you feel about sharing communion within an exclusivist setting - as in, in a setting where someone is excluded from the servcie or at least from taking bread and drinking wine on the basis that they're not a member, not baptised, not "Christian" etc.?

6:43 PM  
Blogger postliberal said...

(1) “Hey you! I never said the "table" was redundant merely the communion service :P A girl's gotta eat you know! :P”

(2) “Anyway, its certainly interesting to see that we have very different perspectives on this - although I'm not sure they're entirely incompatable. Afterall, I'd probably still feel comfortable sharing communion with you...I'd just find more meaning in a glass of wine and a good cheesecake.”

(3) “BTW - how do you feel about sharing communion within an exclusivist setting - as in, in a setting where someone is excluded from the servcie or at least from taking bread and drinking wine on the basis that they're not a member, not baptised, not "Christian" etc.?” ”

(2) And you’re being equally naughty in conveniently forgetting how I have said the elements of most communion services are quite pale and insufficient for their purpose ;P Methodist thimble servings of ‘wine’ and Anglo-Catholic wafers, ah! the shame.

(3) In the chapel I still go to back here, we once had a debate to sort out whether Children could take communion along with the rest of us. I spoke up for the view that later became our policy, that they could take it regardless of any official status.

This has developed more with consideration and I’ve been a consistent advocate of open table, for example on the 24-7 forums. To me, the idea of physically or metaphorically fencing the table is a scandal and quite undermining the very approach of Jesus Christ. Radical inclusivism means, in my view, that we cannot hold onto any control but be totally open to all joining with us in eating together and with Jesus. He welcomed people without asking whether they were baptised, to do so on our part turns the body and blood, our living Lord into a living oxymoron that denies his willing acceptance of all.

(1) And hence I think there is a place for ‘the service’, as you put it. In a Church where we see division and exclusion. Here we have the one situation where radical inclusivism can be shown and enacted in an institutional manner, more than any other, in a concrete manifestation. It’s a tangible and self-conscious witness to what the Church can ideally be like, at it’s best, in good community.

If we all run off and leave it to its own devices, how is it going to reform? ;)

2:15 PM  
Blogger postliberal said...

An example of my allready public opinion:

here

2:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home