Comments on: Communion and the Broken Body

By: Daphne Reiley

Daphne Reiley — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:49:18 +0000

Zoe,
Thank you. I agree that “worthiness” is not something I’d like to have to decide on whether someone else could partake. Nope.

I have a question, one that I’ve not asked anyone else yet . . . how do we know it was Jesus’ intent that this meal continue from the 12 (or so) out to the community of believers. There’s something about that which keeps flitting around my head like a bothersome moth. Just thinkin’ out loud . . . any ideas?

By: zoecarnate

zoecarnate — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:11:26 +0000

Hi Daphne, I appreciate these reflections. Unlike you, I don’t find any particular reason to doubt that it was only the 12 (or some proximate number of initiates) who were present at the Last Supper. However, I think that those who use this narrative example to hold up the ‘purity’ of the Eucharist are barking up the wrong tree. After all, at this meal was present (at the very least) someone who would deny Jesus three times over the next day and someone who would betray him to be crucified! Jesus knew that those at the table weren’t ‘worthy,’ and he included them anyway in the most intimate of fellowship.

By: Daphne Reiley

Daphne Reiley — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:56:39 +0000

I realize that I’m jumping in on this wonderful diverse conversation late in the “day”; however, I’d like to contribute my beliefs. I am a Disciples of Christ — new to the denomination, a former Missouri Synod Lutheran, raised Presbyterian . . . okay so you see the progression here? Ufdah!

I believe that communion is and should be open to all who desire to partake for the Holy Spirit is present around that table and who am I to limit to whom the Holy Spirit has this miraculous access? As to participation of non-believers, it has been my experience that those who aren’t sure can receive just the Spiritual sustenance they require from this partaking to be made sure. My own experience with taking communion with my DOC community took some getting used to. . .EVERY SUNDAY?! What’s that about? However, now (almost 3 years later), I suffer when I am deprived of that communal approach to Christ and the celebration of the presence of the Holy Spirit among us. I believe my feelings on this express the feelings of many. . .it was the exploration, it was the repetitive nature of the event that brought me to my knees. My spiritual connection with those of my community (members and non alike) is strengthened each time we serve each other. Community friends, neighbors — strangers and known — are all welcome at Christ’s table (not “our” table) where we can all receive the Holy Spirit to feed and sustain us on our spiritual journeys.

On a very basic level, I understand and appreciate the desire for only those who truly believe in what they’re doing to receive communion. However, I do feel like it is humanity’s ego that has polluted Jesus’ intention on that last night with his Disciples. I realize in scripture that only the Disciples are spoken of as being in attendance. However, I have my own doubts about that. That last evening, the entire evening in my book, was reflective of what Jesus intended. Breaking bread with fellow, faithful and imperfect workers. Learning to love one another as we are loved by Christ. Learning to serve others. . . .all cycling back to the food for this work. Taken, blessed, and given.

So many times Jesus did this for so many people. People who were imperfect and questioning and searching. Breaking bread together, remembering the sacrifice Jesus made, the example Jesus gave us of perfect obedience to the Love of God, all embued with the Holy Spirit the great Sustainer, Comforter, and Healer.

So, in a nutshell, I believe that the elements of communion are food for our spiritual journeys. Who are we to limit the recipients of such miraculous, clarifying, uplifting, healing food?

By: zoecarnate

zoecarnate — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:08:53 +0000

As you can see, above, I’ve posted about this myself – it’s largely my comment earlier in this post, but refined, polished, and linked a bit. I’d love your feedback there, if you’re so inclined.

By: Open or Closed Table Eucharist/Communion – WWJD? « zoecarnate

Open or Closed Table Eucharist/Communion – WWJD? « zoecarnate — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:57:20 +0000

[...] I know, his first name!) Carl McColman blogs about feeling this ambivalence firsthand in his post Communion and the Broken Body. What follows is a response to Carl, and the others who have interacted in the comments. I [...]

By: Carl McColman

Carl McColman — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:22:53 +0000

Not another smiley face!

Everything you say is golden. I just think we need another word than “Pharisee” or “Pharisaical” to say it. It’s like saying, “Jesus was killed by the Jews.” Just because John said it, don’t make it a good thing to say. “Pharisaical” may be more respectful than “demonic” to Christians (or to demons), but not to Jews.

Back in my Lutheran days, we had a vicar who shocked us all by saying that us, nice, mainstream church-going American Christians were, in many ways, quite similar to the Pharisees in Jesus’ day. Everything I’ve learned about both Christian and Jewish history ever since leads me to believe she was right. So, since we are not Jewish, but Christian, perhaps we should own our exclusionary stuff not as “Pharisaical” but as “Christianaical”?

By: phil foster

phil foster — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:16:23 +0000

Carl, sorry, but I stick by the Pharisee comment. There’s a Pharisee piece in all of us, as individuals and as collectives (e.g., church). It is the part of us that wants to justify hiding our hearts behind “the rules,” or the more politically correct term you have chosen, “boundaries.” As a minister and therapist you know I’m most concerned about appropriate boundaries. The implication of the word is “to fence or mark people out.” Anywho, “Pharisee” seemed more respectful somehow than “demonic.” My tongue was partially in my cheek (note the dreaded smiley face at the end of the post). In short, none of us like when the inevitable inconsistencies or shadow aspects of our particular faith communities surface. To me, that is almost always an “ick” experience. Or, as we say down South, “A hit dog barks loudest.” To be continued…

By: Carl McColman

Carl McColman — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:24:59 +0000

Yes.

By: Darrell Grizzle

Darrell Grizzle — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:33:00 +0000

Does the Holy Spirit move slowly, or do WE (myself included) move slowly in following the Holy Spirit’s promptings? )

By: Carl McColman

Carl McColman — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:40:52 +0000

No, Jan, I don’t feel discouraged. I think it’s an enormous issue, especially since both “sides” have strong arguments and reason for believing they’re (we’re?) “right.” Conflict resolution is a tricky business indeed. I understand that the Holy Spirit moves slowly — and as I’ve said elsewhere in this blog, patience is not exactly my long suit. But I think if we all keep breathing, then we can relax and let God do God’s work, and try to love each other as best we can in the meantime.