jump to navigation

Canadian ‘no’ to communion without baptism: The Church of England Newspaper, April 29, 2011 p 7. May 4, 2011

Posted by geoconger in Anglican Church of Canada, Church of England Newspaper, Hymnody/Liturgy.
trackback

First published in The Church of England Newspaper.

The House of Bishops of the Anglican Church of Canada has rejected calls to permit those not baptized to be allowed to receive the “sacrament of the holy Eucharist.”

At the close of their April 11-15 meeting in Niagara Falls, Ontario the bishops reaffirmed the church’s canons and traditional practice stating only those baptized would be permitted to receive.  “We do not see this as changing for the foreseeable future,” the bishops said.

The bishops’ debate follows a March 7 “Guest Reflection” published in Canada’s Anglican Journal by Dr. Gary Nicolosi who argued for a relaxation in the church’s Eucharistic discipline as a way of attracting more people to church.

“How, in our multicultural and pluralistic society, can our churches be places of hospitality if we exclude table fellowship with the non-baptized,” Dr. Nicolosi asked.

“Open communion increasingly is seen as a way to build a bridge between the church and the unchurched. If people are ‘spiritual but not religious’ as several sociological studies indicate, then the desire for transcendence experienced in sacramental worship may well draw them to church,” he argued.

He added that “open communion played a major part in the rapid growth of my parish in Southern California. I saw the same scenario repeated many times—non-Christians receiving Holy Communion and experiencing God in a powerful way, leading to a desire to be baptized. Therefore, I ask: might we not see the experience of receiving communion as a way of drawing people to faith in Jesus?”

The bishops were not convinced by this argument, however, but acknowledged that an “open table” or “open communion” was practised in some parts of the Canadian church.  This deviation from canons and customs “arises out of a deep concern to express Christian hospitality,” they noted.  However guidance on “Christian hospitality and mission and how these relate to the Table of Christ” would be given to the church following the bishop’s October meeting in Halifax.

In an interview with the Anglican Journal, Archbishop Fred Hiltz stated the bishops were cognizant of the potential of the sacrament of Eucharist for leading some unchurched people to baptism. “No one is dismissing that, but at the same time, a good pastoral coach can help people understand how baptism and the Eucharist complement each other.”

In the Episcopal Church the practise of open communion is more widespread, though it is also forbidden by canon law.  A study conducted released in 2005 by the Diocese of Northern California, which had advocated allowing open communion, estimated that a majority of dioceses had congregations that permitted open communion.

Of the church’s 110 dioceses, 48 responded to the Northern California survey.  Of those 24, reported they had parishes who practice open communion, or communion without baptism (CWOB) while a further 7 dioceses were reported to “probably allow CWOB.”

Comments

1. Nickie Goomba - May 4, 2011

Why don’t we just celebrate the Eucharist through tasteful vending machines?

2. Uri Brito - May 4, 2011

This trivialization of the Eucharist is the sign of the trivialization of the church in the world. We become a laughing stock to the world. The principle is simple: Be washed and eat. One must be born of water before he can taste of the heavenly food.

3. The Anglican Church of Canada says “no” to communion without baptism | Resurrectio et Vita - May 4, 2011

[…] In a rare moment of sobriety, the Anglican Church of Canada has rejected a call to give non-baptized…e. From what the article expresses, many churches already allow the non-baptized to partake. The logic is that by opening the table, the Church is expressing hospitality to those outside, thus leading and encouraging themto pursue baptism. However logical it may appear–and it does not in my estimation–biblically, this pattern is reversed. One needs to be washed before partaking. Ushering non-Christians to heaven (ascension) to receive Christ in bread and wine is an impossible journey. Heaven’s gates are shut for who have not crossed the Red Sea in their baptisms. Tasting of the heavenly gift demands prior tasting of heavenly grace. […]

4. Peter Swan - May 5, 2011

there does not seem to be any unanimous feeling in the Church. Hoefully the house Of Bishops will not try to “stifle” the open invitation to the Lord’s table.Being tough on theological rules may have already hurt our church as the ACiC go their own way.
Perhaps we can cosider going back to principles expressed by Jesus Christ.

5. Barbara Schipke - May 6, 2011

I do pray that this is approved. Two of my grand children are not baptised due to their parents wanting them to wait until they are older and can decide for themselved. Currently they are 11 and 14 – both want to be baptised so they can receive the Eucharist – but there parents are blocking the way. Please remove the barrier of requiring baptism.

6. David Eckman - May 7, 2011

It is pathetic that Dr. Gary Nicolosi is so naive and ignorant as to think that relaxing the church’s Eucharistic discipline would attracting more people to church. What brings people into churches is first hoping to receive, then receiving, the abundant and everlasting life of Jesus Christ. If you want more people in your church Dr. Nicolosi, preach Jesus Christ, savior, lord, healer and baptiser into the Holy Spirit.

7. Evans Clements - May 11, 2011

I have to agree with the Bishops. Simply being spiritual does not mean that the person is a Christian believer, which is the point of Baptism, giving yourself over to Christ. Prior to the 1979 Book of Common Prayer’s release only confirmed members of the Church could receive the sacraments. This has opened up children receiving communion with no idea what it represents. Not allowing communion to non-baptized persons does not make them any less welcome in the church. They are very welcome to explore Christianity and if they find that it is a journey they wish to embark on, they can then make the committment to be baptised and may receive the sacrament. To just offer the sacrament to anyone, without any committment just trivializes it


Sorry comments are closed for this entry