the singularity of being and nothingness
A New Communion Experience
Growing up in the Wesleyan Church, I've not had tremendously moving experiences with the celebration of communion. In the Wesleyan Church–as in many others–communion is served (by Discipline requirements) once a quarter. The logic of this, I suppose, is to avoid the celebration of communion becoming a dead, lifeless ritual that is performed every week simply because "that is what we do" (makes you wonder about worship music and preaching, if routinization is the criterion for "lifeless ritual"…). My experience has been pretty standard: the pastor rises, speaks a few words (perhaps from the Discipline) concerning the supper, and then ushers distribute the elements to the parishoners. Generally, this happens at the immediate end of the service, and the rush is on to get the elements to everyone, imbibe them, and get everyone on the road.
While I have grown accustomed to this "routine" (funny how that happens anyway…), I have not been seriously impacted by the actual ritual on very many occasions. In my own critique, I think the lack of impact stems mainly from the fact that the practice of communion–though done in a corporate setting–is mostly structured to be an individual response to God's grace in Christ. I have heard all my life that I am to examine "my own" heart before partaking, that I should make sure that there is nothing in "my own" heart that is kept from God, etc. And because the focus is often on the individual, so too is the pace of the ritual based on the individual: once you are finished eating and drinking, communion–for all intents and purposes–is over.
This weekend, however, I experienced and participated within a deeply moving practice of communion.
After a more than two-year hiatus, my wife and I have returned to Stonewall Wesleyan Church where we originally attended when we first moved to the Bluegrass area. Our pastor spoke of the necessity of what he called a "tri-polar spirituality," a life of devotion and practice that has not only self and God as the focus, but also those who God loves and whom God has called each of us to love.
What was amazing to me about this was that the pastor spoke for only about 15 minutes. Upon conclusion, he invited us to partake of communion, but this time, with a twist. Rather than each of us filing to the front to receive the elements, or waiting in our seats to be served, the elements were themselves passed between members of the church, each being served and serving others the means and instritutions of grace given by Christ.
Now to those used to more "exotic" forms of Eucharistic practice, this might seem anti-climactic. However, for me, it was revolutionary.
First, I was deeply moved by the amount of time that was devoted to the practice. Although our church is not big, it takes a significant amount of time to pass a loaf of bread and chalice between 50+ people. The entire ritual lasted at least 12 minutes, a marathon compared to what I am used to. What struck me about this was the incredible lack of hurry. Here, in this deliberate devotion of time, communion was not an afterthought, nor something that we just "do". Rather, sacred space was created wherein God's Spirit could be manifest in the midst of God's people as they shared the body and blood of Christ amongst themselves in a holy act of worship.
Secondly, it was intensely powerful for me to be served and to serve in the same act of ritual. Again, I am used to assembly-line communion, so the extreme community-orientation of this practice was quite extraordinary. What I discovered in this practice is that rather than the ritual focusing exclusively on myself and God, my neighbor–quite literally the person sitting next to me–was inextricably engaged in this act of worship. Although used as somewhat of a misnomer at times, the practice really did feel like "communion" as all were focused on the primacy of the celebration of Christ' sacrifice, rather than upon the idiosyncrecies of each individual psychology.
In previous posts, I have written at length about my experiences in the course I took on the celebration of the sacraments in Christian history, as well as what I thought were the main theological implications these considerations had for modern expressions of the same. To now, much of his was incurably academic. However, I have to say that my experience on Sunday closely imaged some of the deepest, inexpressable convictions that I hold concerning the sacraments, and I feel myself renewed within because of the manifestation of God's spirit within the ritual. I am reaffirmed in my belief that the sacraments are no mere psychologizing about the presence of God in the midst of God's people; rather, when we participate within these holy institutions as the people-of-God-in-communion, the sacraments do indeed become the presence of Christ in our hearts and lives, the powerful means of grace by which we are sustained.
| Print article | This entry was posted by existdissolve on September 26, 2007 at 10:32 am, and is filed under Theology. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about -1917 years ago
I love communion talk. I enjoyed the post. It’s great to hear of others that have similar – although not always the same perspectives on the Eucharist. If it really is a mystery we should expect a breadth of experience and understanding. I too have been discouraged by the “assembly line” nature and holding off communion until the very end before we send you home. I have experienced it too many times as an addition to the service. It’s strange, both of us coming from a Wesleyan tradition, in light of Wesley’s views on communion, that our denominations practice is so many times lacking.
It’s interesting that you note the practice of communion as bringing an understanding that the academics did not. Who taught the worship class you took? I had Dr. Ruth and it was terrific. Along with class though I was going to the Wed. at noon communion service in one of the little chapels on campus. The group was fairly consistent, and there was something about taking communion weekly with people in a circle, where the focus of the worship time was upon communion that had a changing affect on me. It was like a cumulative affect – no lightning bolts, but it sunk in.
I was also interested in your description of the time it took. This is one of the biggest problems I have with the “performance” paradigm of worship – whether it is a guitar band or choir, hymns or choruses, skit or children’s sermon – sit and watch then leave. Life and relationship take time. I think you are right about creating a sacred space. I wonder how others took it.
Anyway, I enjoyed the post. This stuff is probably my first love – worship stuff.
about -1917 years ago
How long am I a squire? I’m only one vowel change away from a square. To be honest, I don’t even know what a squire is, besides using the term “sire” a lot, and possibly, “mylady.”
about -1917 years ago
I love communion talk. I enjoyed the post. It’s great to hear of others that have similar – although not always the same perspectives on the Eucharist. If it really is a mystery we should expect a breadth of experience and understanding. I too have been discouraged by the “assembly line” nature and holding off communion until the very end before we send you home. I have experienced it too many times as an addition to the service. It’s strange, both of us coming from a Wesleyan tradition, in light of Wesley’s views on communion, that our denominations practice is so many times lacking.
Yeah, didn’t Wesley at one point speak of the Eucharist as a “converting ordinance?” I really think at least one of the roots of the problem is the time issue. As we’ve both experienced, communion (heck, even baptism) is often an afterthought to the service, something done as quickly and informally as possible. While I understand the trepidation of some about communion becoming too “Catholicised” or “Orthodoxized,” I think the practice has been diminished too near non-meaning in the often utter lack of reverence and holy space that is afforded it. As many of our generation is finding out, there can be deep meaning in the ritual and formality of the practice.
It’s interesting that you note the practice of communion as bringing an understanding that the academics did not. Who taught the worship class you took?
Mine was with Dr. O’Malley. In fact, the class itself was quite transformative for me in that it opened my eyes to the incredibly rich history of sacramental practice in Christian theology. What was particularly special about the service I wrote about is that it was something of a fusion between the idealism I took from the class and the “ordinariness” of actual practice.
I was also interested in your description of the time it took. This is one of the biggest problems I have with the “performance” paradigm of worship – whether it is a guitar band or choir, hymns or choruses, skit or children’s sermon – sit and watch then leave. Life and relationship take time. I think you are right about creating a sacred space. I wonder how others took it.
It’s interesting; part of the reason I returned to Stonewall is that I am going to resume leadership of the worship music. The great part about what I will be doing is that intentional space and time has been created for the music. While still participatory, the focus is going to be on simply creating an atmosphere of worship where there are no strict time limits, song number expectations, etc. I think it is going to be quite exciting, and I am looking forward to seeing what the response of the worshipping community will be.
Anyway, I enjoyed the post. This stuff is probably my first love – worship stuff.
about -1917 years ago
How long am I a squire? I’m only one vowel change away from a square. To be honest, I don’t even know what a squire is, besides using the term “sire” a lot, and possibly, “mylady.”
You are one vowel and one comment away from the next level…
about -1917 years ago
It’s interesting; part of the reason I returned to Stonewall is that I am going to resume leadership of the worship music. The great part about what I will be doing is that intentional space and time has been created for the music. While still participatory, the focus is going to be on simply creating an atmosphere of worship where there are no strict time limits, song number expectations, etc. I think it is going to be quite exciting, and I am looking forward to seeing what the response of the worshipping community will be.
Now I wish you were closer. I would like someone to connect with around here to discuss doing worship music for a new worship time. I would love to do some more ancient/future stuff, simple stripped down music, and explore ways to create sacred space. It’s important though to find someone on the same page with that stuff. So many people are used to the performance aspect of worship.
My opinion is, if I can ever get a new service going the way I am visioning it, that even if there are only like 8 people there it is worth while. If the worship is truly a sacred time and a time to encounter God, then even just a handful of people being transformed is worth it.
As far as Wesley thinking of communion as a “converting ordinance”, yeah, that’s why we have the open communion table. He believed that since you could be converted by the grace of God through communion he shouldn’t keep anyone who was earnestly seeking Christ away from the table. He also strongly encouraged all methodists to have communion as often as you can.
While I understand the trepidation of some about communion becoming too “Catholicised” or “Orthodoxized,”
Yeah, I don’t even understand people’s fear of this. Whenever I’ve heard people talk of why they want it less all I have heard is ignorance in regards to any serious theological thought about communion and vast knowledge about their own experience “growing up” in some church. While i am diplomatic about this in my present appointment, I have little to no sympathy for the “less communion” point of view.
about -1917 years ago
Hey man, how are you? Haven’t talked to you in a while..I have been busy. Although I disagree with your view on the Lord’s Supper, I appreciated this post. I have definitely seen this deadness in the Lord’s Supper present in the baptist church. While personally the Lord’s Supper is of great significance to me, I wonder what the typical person in the baptist church thinks of it. Perhaps, they would rather do without, so they can make it to lunch on time. I haven’t really thought much about this, but I probably won’t do the Lord’s Supper at the end of the service, and I probably wont do the pass the cracker and shot of grape juice either.
Do you have a personal email or something? I would like to communicate with you a bit outside the blogosphere, seeing I don’t have a whole of time to blog at this point. My email is servindalord@hotmail.com. Send me an email sometime. Talk to you later!
about -1917 years ago
Now I wish you were closer.
Oh sure, “now” you wish you were closer. I’m hurt!
I would like someone to connect with around here to discuss doing worship music for a new worship time. I would love to do some more ancient/future stuff, simple stripped down music, and explore ways to create sacred space. It’s important though to find someone on the same page with that stuff. So many people are used to the performance aspect of worship.
It is definitely a challenge. So few people (including myself, primarily) are used to anything but the “follow the words on the projector” kind of worship service, and opening up the time and space to more meaningful practice and reflection is, well, uncomfortable. It is much easier to let the worship leaders do the engaging for you, instead of having to actually do something–or, perhaps more appropriately, NOT do something–with yourself for any meaningful period of time. Most are ADD worshippers.
My opinion is, if I can ever get a new service going the way I am visioning it, that even if there are only like 8 people there it is worth while. If the worship is truly a sacred time and a time to encounter God, then even just a handful of people being transformed is worth it.
I would love to be one of the 8.
As far as Wesley thinking of communion as a “converting ordinance”, yeah, that’s why we have the open communion table. He believed that since you could be converted by the grace of God through communion he shouldn’t keep anyone who was earnestly seeking Christ away from the table. He also strongly encouraged all methodists to have communion as often as you can.
While I appreciate Wesley’s view on this, I don’t think I am quite comfortable with the “open” communion table. While I also do not think it should become something of exclusion and division, I also think that there should be a measure of exclusivity to it. For example, in the early church, the Eucharist was often celebrated in another room from other areas of worship and fellowship, and obviously only the baptized were permitted to partake.
One of the most powerful experiences in finding a healthy balance was my visit to St. Athanasius in Nicholasville. Here, obviously, those not part of the communion are not to partake of the Eucharist. However, during the act of Eucharistic celebration, the partakers–after receiving the elements–distribute bread which has been blessed by the priest to those who do not partake. This was powerful to me, for although a very high exclusivity was maintained for the Eucharist, its celebration was by no means excluding for those who could not partake, for the partakers expressed a measure of solidarity by serving the blessed bread to those who did not partake.
Yeah, I don’t even understand people’s fear of this. Whenever I’ve heard people talk of why they want it less all I have heard is ignorance in regards to any serious theological thought about communion and vast knowledge about their own experience “growing up” in some church. While i am diplomatic about this in my present appointment, I have little to no sympathy for the “less communion” point of view.
Yes, I can think of very few instances in which a “higher” view of communion would be negative.
about -1917 years ago
While I appreciate Wesley’s view on this, I don’t think I am quite comfortable with the “open” communion table. While I also do not think it should become something of exclusion and division, I also think that there should be a measure of exclusivity to it. For example, in the early church, the Eucharist was often celebrated in another room from other areas of worship and fellowship, and obviously only the baptized were permitted to partake.
I wonder if this could be remedied with a paradigm shift in how we view worship? I wonder if “worship evangelism” is not just wrong – and therefore, if worship is worship and the church is the church – attracting people by how they live life and outreach, then perhaps the only people who would be at church are those who are seriously seeking Jesus. While I think the early church practices are powerful – another of which was to dismiss people prior to the Eucharist and the offering – I side with Wesley on not wanting to exclude a serious seeker from a means of grace.
Again, I wonder if our worship paradigm is just screwed up. I linked an article on Mofast Manna that is really challenging along the lines of rejecting “worship evangelism.”
I never made it to St. Athanasius, but I wish we had. My female life partner and I talked about it, but never made it there. You are the third friend I’ve heard from who did and appreciated it. Bummer that I missed that opportunity.
Oh sure, “now” you wish you were closer. I’m hurt!
Yes, I’m terribly pragmatic in my relationships. If you aren’t of use to me then I’m not interested. Jesus said something about this, but I can’t quite remember what. I’m sure we’re on the same page though.
about -1917 years ago
I wonder if this could be remedied with a paradigm shift in how we view worship? I wonder if “worship evangelism” is not just wrong – and therefore, if worship is worship and the church is the church – attracting people by how they live life and outreach, then perhaps the only people who would be at church are those who are seriously seeking Jesus.
I think you are on to something here. The problem in the modern era, I think, is that for both worship and evangelism, Sunday morning (and possibly evening) is the only time that many churches make for either, so of course both have to exist together…
While I think the early church practices are powerful – another of which was to dismiss people prior to the Eucharist and the offering – I side with Wesley on not wanting to exclude a serious seeker from a means of grace.
Given the paradigm you have noted in most Protestant churches, the exclusion of certain individuals would probably not work at all, for there would be no meaningful criteria by which to distinguish those who should and should not participate, at least on the terms used in the earlier centuries of the church. So from a pragmatic standpoint, trying to impose the requirements of the early church upon the contemporary paradigms would be outright disastrous. The only reason that Catholics and Orthodox do not self-destruct from it is because they have been doing it this way for 2000 years.
Again, I wonder if our worship paradigm is just screwed up. I linked an article on Mofast Manna that is really challenging along the lines of rejecting “worship evangelism.”
I will have to check it out.
I never made it to St. Athanasius, but I wish we had. My female life partner and I talked about it, but never made it there. You are the third friend I’ve heard from who did and appreciated it. Bummer that I missed that opportunity.
Well, perhaps “now” (hahaha) that you wish we lived closer to each other, you can visit and we can attend together!
Yes, I’m terribly pragmatic in my relationships. If you aren’t of use to me then I’m not interested. Jesus said something about this, but I can’t quite remember what. I’m sure we’re on the same page though.
Well, given your resemblance in hair and facial structure, I am certain of it.