Sunday, April 11, 2010
So Very Sad
What a surprise! To juxtapose the problems of administering the Lord's Supper faithfully against the Eucharist on Easter and to choose to forgo the Eucharist. I continue to be amazed. Now I would grant you that this individual probably rides the door to the rail more than I do. I welcome those absent members who show up on Easter and commune. Being so close to a large military installation, I routinely have families from out of town here and Easter only magnifies this so I do speak with a great number of folks prior to their communion and I always find strangers whom I do not know at the rail on the festival Sundays. I speak with them following the service. Sure I have winced a few times and prayed a mea culpa over situations which are less than I hoped them to be. What faithful Pastor has not? But to choose to forgo the Eucharist because of this? Well, I am not ready to go there. Not by a long shot.
It would seem that when the anticipated problems of having the Eucharist at a service where there are a high number of visitors cause you to skip the Supper then it is time to rethink things a bit. Close(d) communion and its rightful concerns about those communing being able to receive to their benefit the Supper and to reflect an honest unity of faith cannot be allowed to shut down the Eucharist for the Queen of Feasts. It just cannot be so.
I hope what I heard was an anomaly and not a prevalent practice for it would be a sad state of affairs in the Church when our concern about who communes makes us omit the Communion altogether. Such a perspective of fear sounds like part of that which caused the Church to wrongfully withhold the chalice and to discourage frequent communion in the first place -- and unless I am wrong (and I am never wrong - to quote Humperdink in one of my favorite movies), part of the very concern which brought about the Reformation...
What do YOU think?