tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5634436676431388916.post7144194678434080309..comments2023-06-09T09:04:48.116-04:00Comments on Lord, open thou our lips: Communion Without BaptismAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09607139004376162759noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5634436676431388916.post-38531794088777354222012-03-29T16:35:20.797-04:002012-03-29T16:35:20.797-04:00So, I've commented on this issue before and in...So, I've commented on this issue before and in a few places. Today, I wrote this over at a Facebook group's post on the matter:<br /><br /> I've been thinking about this a lot over the years, but even more intently the past few days since I've learned about this resolution. I came to VTS (the Virginia Theological Seminary) as an advocate of CWOB and am now not, for various reasons. But my issue with the resolution isn't so much that I'm against CWOB as it is with our current trend of making decisions and then waiting for the theology to catch up. Like we did with both the ordinations and marriages of gay persons in the church.<br /><br />I would be okay with a resolution being brought forward that says, in effect: "we, the Church of Jesus Christ in the Episcopal Diocese of Eastern Oregon, have discerned that a new work of the Holy Spirit is being done in the wider Church in opening up the sacrament of Holy Communion to persons who have not received the sacrament of Holy Baptism. To wit, we resolve that a discerning body be formed in the Episcopal Church to gather in prayer and study, to either confirm or deny this new work as being that of the Holy Spirit. Further, we resolve that the conclusion reached by this same body be considered for implementation in the wider Episcopal Church" (you'll have to forgive me if this isn't accurate wording; I'm not clear on the language of a resolution).<br /><br />In short, I feel that we should treat this as something akin to the extension of salvation to the Gentiles as discussed at the Council of Jerusalem as recorded in Acts 15. If we are discerning that the Holy Spirit may be directing the Church to shift its understanding of the Eucharist so that it be offered to those who have not received Baptism, then we should be further exploring that. Let those on each side of the issue have their voice, offer their experiences (places like St. Gregory of Nyssa in San Francisco can speak to what they've experienced with CWOB, Anglo-Catholic parishes can speak to why the tradition should remain unchanged, etc.). And, like that great council, after much prayer and "no small dissension and debate" we might be able to come to a consensus--either recognizing that the Holy Spirit is doing some new thing among us, or that we are serving the interests of mortals rather than God. Either way, we should hopefully be able to make a statement that carries "the consent of the whole church."<br /><br />Again, I am personally against CWOB. But if this really is a new movement of the Holy Spirit, then I can't really argue with that (indeed I'd be guilty of committing the unpardonable sin). Something of this magnitude needs to be brought up humbly and with great prayer and trepidation. Currently, we're not doing either.<br /><br />--Fr. CharlesFr. Charles Browninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12912383115760538344noreply@blogger.com