Below is a conversation that began with a Facebook status I posted quoting from "By Water & The Spirit," The United Methodist Church's official statement on baptism/sacraments (along with "This Holy Mystery" and of course our articles of Religion and John Wesley's Sermons and Notes...)
Tommy Thompson
the following is official United Methodist statement on sacrament, not Roman Catholic, (though, thankfully, we have a lot in common): "The ritual action of a sacrament does not merely point to God's presence in the world, but also participates in it and becomes a vehicle for conveying that reality." ... why are we not running to the table every opportunity we get?
February 15 at 1:57pm · · Like ·
Leah DeLong and Stan Thompson like this.
Chad Harvey Because Folk Theology has much persuasion in the churchFebruary 15 at 2:04pm · Like
Tommy Thompson you are right Chad, but that's not a plausible answer for our neglect of such gracious opportunity. Knowing full well Rev. Harvey is doing something about it, i wonder what are "we" gonna do about it?February 15 at 2:06pm · Like
Chad Harvey I'm guessing "we" means Methodists...but as a Nazarene constant lay theological teaching and re-instructing is essential.February 15 at 2:08pm · Like
Tommy Thompson It is an inclusive"we" brother as we sit at the same table. Thanks for your hard work and passion toward eucharistic formation.February 15 at 2:10pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Because we read "a vehicle" and think that just means it could be if I decide it is, want it to be, find it personally meaningful, etc., in which case just puts the Sacraments as no more important than my personal devotions.February 15 at 2:13pm · Unlike · 1 person
Tommy Thompson i like what one UM theologian and pastor is teaching right now...the rediscovery of mystagogical preaching...so we're not simply teaching abstractly on holy mysteries that must be undergone, but proclaiming the Gospel that sacrament is in and through sacrament...beautiful stuff coming from the patristics here...a gold mine worth rediscovering!February 15 at 2:13pm · Like
Tommy Thompson http://www.amazon.com/Crea
tive-Preaching-Sacraments-
Craig-Satterlee/dp/0881773
557February 15 at 2:18pm · Like
Nathan Napier Because we're good Zwinglians!...and we've been colonized by what Martin Marty called the "baptistification" of America (and I do love my Baptist brother and sisters). Ordinances is the utilitarian way in which sacraments are understood.February 15 at 2:25pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Yes; exactly, Nathan. We understand it not as eucharist -- making thanksgiving in response to God's mighty acts of salvation that becomes communion, but as law (in the Lutheran sense of the word)...or at the very least something else we have to do.... I pray the Holy Spirit brings revival and reformation within the protestant churches to embrace the resurrected Lord in and through the sacrament so that we might more faithfully be sacrament for the world!February 15 at 2:35pm · Like
Stan Thompson There are 3 UMC churches in the Roanoke District that serve Holy Communion every Sunday. It is transformational.February 15 at 3:04pm · Like · 1 person
Tommy Thompson Amen brother Stan! And i know of one in Charlottesville District that does as well -- out in the middle of a cow field! They agree ;-)February 15 at 3:05pm · Like · 1 person
Jeremy Sullivan It's more than transformational. It's just Christian.February 15 at 3:12pm · Like · 1 person
Tommy Thompson Amen brother Jeremy!February 15 at 3:14pm · Like
Tammy Estep I agree, the main reason congregations don't run to the table is because we have not taught our people the significance of the table with love and grace.February 15 at 3:16pm · Like · 2 people
Tommy Thompson Amen Tammy; come Holy Spirit, its time for a new season of sacramental love and grace in the protestant and particularly the UM communities of faith.February 15 at 3:24pm · Like · 2 people
Carl Perez Et Al; I agree and it time for RENEWAL!February 15 at 4:11pm · Unlike · 1 person
Jason Honeycutt I agree with Nathan. Many are Zwinglian and only participate in the Sacraments because Jesus said so.
Participating because it is just Christian is also too circular, especially in a culture that is confused about what it means to be Christian.
Transformation is key. People can understand that God wants to turn our lives around and make us new.
God's vision is new creation, and we participate in that vision as we experience the Sacraments. Being transformed from old to new creation -- that's Christian.
Aah, I love new creation.February 15 at 4:43pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Jason, thank you so much for bringing eschatological orientation into this discussion...i think this is the larger over-arching framework for sacramental theology and practice that is often neglected. What a joy to see through the veil a bit more clearly as we make eucharist to be sent by the Spirit to make that vision reality for God's world!February 15 at 4:47pm · Like
Carl Perez Our problem I feel is we focus more of Christ's action in Communion and not on the work of the TRIUNE God in the Sacrament Changing us into a new Creation for the transformation of the world.February 15 at 4:54pm · Like
Jennifer Page pleads the 5th.February 15 at 4:55pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt No problem. I am telling everyone I can about God's new creation. I've told methodists, baptists, lutherans, presbyterians, nazarenes, and non-Christians.
I am leading my small group this Sunday and the topic is "converting grace". The class book mentions John 3:5 and 2 Cor 5:17. I will tell them about new creation in the story of Nicodemus who is "old". I am very excited.February 15 at 5:01pm · Unlike · 1 person
Tommy Thompson Carl-if i hear what you're saying, i agree with you...we tend to focus more on what happened thousands of years ago as revealed in the institution narratives themselves and not so much on the living reality of what that lived institution reveals/empowers to become via liturgical practice.February 15 at 5:01pm · Like
Samuel Simoes There is a mystery as well in serving monthly. Weekly eucharist can lead to a routine and legalist ritual, rather than a significant sacrament. Preparing our heart for communion may not be so much a matter of frequency, but relevance and mostly important; significance.February 15 at 5:02pm · Like
Tommy Thompson well, hundreds of years ago is better put...February 15 at 5:02pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Wesley called us to constant Eucharist. If it becomes legalistic ritual its our problem revealed..
Not the sacrament's problem..February 15 at 5:07pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan The sacrament is meaningful and significant because God says so. Grace is on God's terms. Whether we find that meaningful or significant is not the issue.February 15 at 5:09pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Didn't we die to this individualistic, I decide what is meaningful and important in baptism?February 15 at 5:10pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Sam, i appreciate that perspective. However, I think it is spoken through a lens that understands Christian worship's primary center to be the sermon and not a movement to the climax of the Gospel revealed most clearly in the broken body and spilt blood of our Savior. I think this is where the late protestant/evangelical movement has led us...away from the church's tradition of worship as Eucharistically centered...of course the reason we ever communicated quarterly in the first place was due to the unavailability of ordained clergy as Methodism spread like wildfire across the U.S. You know how we are -- we develop habits ("we've always done it that way!"). Once we had more than enough ordained leadership we continued to celebrate quarterly until those like Thomas O. Summers and others called our habits into question and led us closer to the goal by advocating monthly communion. I think its time for the next step...
John Wesley was adamant about us being constant communicants rather than frequent communicants...primarily because of the grace available to us for healing and transformation. Surely we are not always prepared appropriately or receive adequately, but even then we are being formed into eucharistic community--easter people. Not to mention this is one of those sermons that Wesley preached in his early ministry and later ministry with the emphatic line, "The following discourse was written above five and fifty years ago, for the use of my pupils at Oxford. I have added very little, but retrenched much; as I then used more words than I do now. But I thank God I have not yet seen cause to alter my sentiments in any point which is therein delivered."
Here is a link to that wonderful sermon:
http://www.mathewsumc.org/
html/worship/constant1.htmFebruary 15 at 5:14pm · Like
Carl Perez ~ Tommy your right
~ Samuel but if we view the sacraments in such a way that the mysterion is the presence of our God living and moving with in us constantly then the sacrments can never get legalistic or ritual because everytime we part take we are seeing a revelation of self being made into the imagine of God... There more to this but gotta get dinner done :)February 15 at 5:16pm · Like
Tommy Thompson I also want to say paraphrase Marva Dawn (i think): some of the most important discoveries in life happen out of boredom and habit...(though i'm never bored with the holy habit of making eucharist)
Also some of the most life-giving activities of life are habitual (not to mention the preaching of a sermon)...I will not revert to telling my wife i love her monthly...
Also, experience has not demonstrated that those who are celebrating less frequently find the eucharist more meaningful...just some thoughts.February 15 at 5:19pm · Like
Tommy Thompson also, we intercede/confess weekly, we read scripture weekly (i hope!), we preach weekly, we sing weekly, we even offer money weekly...why single out the climax of all these things using the logic that doing something routinely is reason enough for not doing it?
i mean going to the bathroom, brushing my teeth, eating, drinking...all routine and sometimes not so exciting...but without these constantly, i'm not gonna be too healthy...
the most important action i do is make eucharist, for Christ has made me a priest (and he has made us all a priest in our baptism--to receive the world as sacrament, offer it to him in thanksgiving, and experience triune communion for the healing of our beings and for the sake of God's world).February 15 at 5:29pm · Like
Tommy Thompson with all that said, I think you rock, Sam, for leading a Nazarene congregation from celebrating a few times a year to monthly when you are not required to do so... :-)February 15 at 5:35pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan It really is life.February 15 at 5:36pm · Unlike · 2 people
Tommy Thompson Jeremy: your concise yet profound statement reminds me of John's gospel: "unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you." ... and most everyone turned their backs and walked away...but don't you just love what Peter said when Jesus asked, "Do you also wish to go away?" :-)February 15 at 5:40pm · Like · 1 person
Jeremy Sullivan Well without trying to be too circular I think that it is just Christian. That's not circular....that's pretty specific revelation if you ask me.February 15 at 6:43pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt To people who either grew up in the Church or are theologically trained, no it is not too circular; however, to those who did not grow up in the Church (like me) and people such as my neo-pagan relatives, it is far too circular.
I have visited at least 8 churches in the last two months and they all have been in decline for years. They are literally dying off and not reaching the younger generation (to their credit, most of them are trying).
Non-Christians are not going to know what makes the Sacraments Christian. More than likely, they are not going to simply participate because someone (even Jesus) commanded. This is precisely why many people see the Eucharist as too ritualistic and legalistic. They do not know why we should other than we are suppose to or it is something good (or scary) to do. The reason why we have the Sacraments is so that God can transform us from old to new. New creation is essential.
Speaking of the Gospel of John, it is all about God's new creation. The (new) beginning is obviously a parallel to Genesis, new birth in ch 3, people are transformed when they encounter Christ, in ch 15-17 Jesus and His Kingdom do not belong to this "world" which is part of the old creation. The disciples now belong to an everlasting reality that impacts us here and now. Everything Jesus said and did (also says and does) prepares us for this new world -- the New Creation/New Jerusalem/Kingdom or City of God. We should see the Sacraments in this context.Wednesday at 3:46pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan I totally affirm the eschatological orientation of the sacraments. It is central to them.
We are not forming disciples well if they can conceive of Christianity apart from the sacraments. They are means of grace....primary ones. They are the sign acts through which God fashions this new creation of which you are so joyfully speaking.
The heart of the witness of scripture is testimony to the ongoing new creation work God is doing in this world... Powerfully inaugurated in the resurrection of Jesus and moving us forward to the consummation of all things. It's not just John's thought.... It's all over scripture.Wednesday at 4:03pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan All this talk Has me hungry now. It's a good thing sumbody will let me eat tonight.Wednesday at 4:56pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt Well, joy is part of the new creation. :)
Yes, exactly. And the same goes if we participate in the Sacraments apart from new creation. If we so, of course they will seem legalistic and ritualistic. From a new creation perspective, our old selfs are dead and forgiven and God transforms our selfs new. This means the Sacraments are evangelical as well because we profess them publicly as God calls others to participate.
New creation is my passion. It is also my lense/bias as I interpret Scripture. You're right on about it being all over. I understand the Bible as creation, uncreation and new creation. It's a wonderful blessing that I am very thankful to God for.Wednesday at 5:27pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Jason, if I hear you right, you are claiming that Jeremy's claim that the Holy Eucharist is Christian is something he's simply assuming as a premise...but something that cannot truly be proved if carefully thought out..or that he is simply dodging the real issue by going around it? Am I wrong here? If so, what do you mean by calling his assertion "circular?"
I think what brother Jeremy is saying when he says, "It's just Christian," is that we who even have this debate are an anomaly within CHRISTIAN tradition. From the first century, to be Christian meant to be Eucharistic--to be Eucharistic is to be Christian. I do not find this to be circular reasoning...i find it to be reasoning that demonstrates dramatic coherence/narrative continuity with the one, holy catholic and apostolic church.
If there is a better lens than new creation (which is inherently Christian) through which to see life, it is the ethos of the new creation--the Eucharist. I like when Wainwright says that most everything the church does will pass with resurrection, but praise & Eucharist will not.
I hope we can unashamedly reclaim the Eucharist as the core ethos of what it means to be a Christian (a new creation on the way to new creation in new creation--the Paschal Lamb). Of course it is not relevant to the world's deadly ethoses--which is why we practice most especially when it is strange, inviting the world not to hear explanation but resounding the words of our Savior who says, "Come and See" or maybe even "Taste and See."Thursday at 8:51am · Like
Jason Honeycutt I agree w/Jeremy but wanted more specifics. If we participate in a ritual simply because we are suppose to (that's circular), then the Eucharist could easily become legalistic. New creation keeps it fresh. When we are changed, even pagans begin to understand.
I don't see a better lens than new creation. New creation is much larger than what the Church does here and now. God's new creation is the everlasting reality which the Eucharist is a part but not the totality. The Sacraments are ways which God uses so we become new.
Also I do not see the Eucharist in every passage like I do new creation. John 6 may have the strongest passage for the Eucharist yet it is only a piece (a large and important piece) of John's new creation story. Same w/the rest of the Bible.
What exactly do you mean by Eucharistic? Obviously it's broader than just the Sacraments but how we should live, right?Thursday at 11:25am · Like
Tommy Thompson new creation is the new world wherein we live eucharistically...which is what i mean by eucharist being ethos of the Kingdom of God. The baptized live in new creation as people who see the world shot-through with the glory of God (as the water covers the seas), receive the new creation as gift, offer that gift back to the Father through the Son and in the Spirit where that offering is transformed into triune communion. The sacrament forms us to be this way always, healing our sin-diseased nature and forming us as eucharistic people who are sacrament and experience the world as such.
New creation is the full realization of the priesthood of all believers who are eternally making eucharist. Since eucharist is the ethos of the new creation, it is the most proper way to see all of life...it is the content of the new creation!Thursday at 11:36am · Like
Tommy Thompson Oh, and since the eucharist is the rehearsal of God's mighty acts of salvation climaxing in the pascal mysteries of Jesus Christ (that which is new creation and makes new creation reality for us), I'd have to say that it is indeed ALL OVER the biblical narrative...though it is also important for us to be reminded that it was indeed the eucharistic community who received and nurtured the biblical text in the first place...Thursday at 12:51pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt I have not thought of it that way. I talk about worship in the same way as you speak about eucharistic. Worship and new creation go hand in hand. When we choose to worship the only One who is not created, we participate in the new creation. Old creation worships created gods/idols.
So basically, you are saying that new creation is the reality we now belong and Eucharist is the participation we experience in that reality. What passages are most meaningful for the latter? Some of Hebrews and Revelation come to mind.
It seems like there is little difference between worshiping God and choosing new creation in all we think, say, and do -- and living eucharistically.
We are talking about the same thing but you are using sacramental language, right?Thursday at 1:01pm · Like
Tommy Thompson I think part of what makes Christian worship inherently eucharistic is the realization that we individuals cannot simply choose to worship the one God or even know God is Trinity. All worship in Spirit and Truth is eucharistic in that it comes from a deep sense of thanksgiving offered in, through, and to the triune God for even healing our sin-diseased faculties so that we might then be able to choose to respond to such gracious initiative in Jesus Christ offered through the eucharistic community that is the church! And it is through constant participation in eucharistic community that the new creation is revealed to us as such...not something "I" just choose as antithesis of "old creation."Thursday at 1:12pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Lastly, I want to question your statement: "New creation is much larger than what the Church does here and now. God's new creation is the everlasting reality which the Eucharist is a part but not the totality." Is the chief sacrament of the church simply what the church is doing here and now? (If so, doesn't it cease to be sacrament)? Or is the eucharist participation in what God has done, is doing, and will do...even participation in the future world so that that world might become reality in the world through the church's faithful mission?
The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is the primary portal into the eternal reality of the eucharist. When with Christ's re-appearing, the dead are raised and sacrament fades into full, glorified reality, that reality will be nothing short of eucharistic, as it is the ethos of the new creation.
We must be careful elevating the blessing above the one from whom all blessings flow. Eucharist precedes our participation in new creation and is it's reason for existence and is that which defines it most thoroughly. Those who undergo eucharist are most obviously new creation.Thursday at 1:49pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt I am assuming that God enables us by His grace to make choices to follow Him or the world. That doesn't mean we can't sing "I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back" or "The world behind me, the Cross before me" which I sang this Sunday (the 'world' of course being part of the old creation). John 3 and Col 3 (among many more passages) both have the eschatogically dualistic contrast of old and new creation which N T Wright describes so well in Surprised By Hope.
I am trying to figure out how you can move from participating in a specific sacramental ritual (the Eucharist) to life in its entirety. New creation is easier because it is both God's vision for us personally (2 Cor 5:17) and universally (Rev 21:1-5).Thursday at 1:54pm · Like
Tommy Thompson because "The ritual action of a sacrament does not merely point to God's presence in the world, but also participates in it and becomes a vehicle for conveying that reality."
Again, new creation is that which sacrament reveals. The content of Eucharist, The work of the Paschal Lamb in triune perichorsis, makes it possible. Eucharist is the lens through which to understand all things new.Thursday at 2:00pm · Like
Tommy Thompson And i have to say too, in response to what you said about just assuming that God's grace is there for you (a bit circular): How does God enable us? that's the question. The Apostles' answer to that question (the faithfulness of Jesus Christ) is revealed for us most precisely in the sacrament which our Lord instituted...Apart from this Spirit-filled community of grace centered around Jesus' life-giving death and resurrection, i cannot "decide to follow Jesus."
Also, I encourage you to go and listen to some of Bishop Wright's lectures on that wonderful book; you will find the eucharist is his primary lens for understanding resurrection/new creation. He's very close to the late Fr. Alexander Schmemann (+) with his liturgically shaped eschatology.Thursday at 2:17pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt About being careful not to elevate a blessing, I was thinking the same thing about the Eucharist. God is life and the Eucharist is a vehicle but not the reality itself. The Sacraments from make so much more sense from a new creation pov. Perhaps that really is a back and forth dialogue.Thursday at 2:20pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Yes. Bishop Wright would applaud Jason's passion for new creation and yet kindly remind him of the Eucharistic context from which comes his reflection.Thursday at 2:20pm · Like
Tommy Thompson the names of those lectures: "Space, Time, Matter, and New Creation" and "Sacraments and New Creation" in his lectures at calvin institute for christian worship. and also, "Surprised by Hope" lecture given at West End UMC in Nashville more recently.Thursday at 2:22pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Jason, again, the reason Eucharist is the center of Christian worship throughout Christian history is because it is the content and participation in paschal mystery itself. We must be careful speaking of it as "a" vehicle but not the reality. Eucharist is larger than even sacrament...but even sacrament in the most general sense is means to participating in divine reality.Thursday at 2:26pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt Or is it that we understand the Eucharist in its new creation context? It seems to me that new creation is the larger reality that the Eucharist participates.Thursday at 2:27pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt So does that mean the Eucharist is the Trinity who I know is suppose to be the center of worship? The answer I am sure is no, so what makes it different?Thursday at 2:32pm · Like
Tommy Thompson The Eucharist is synonymous with the real presence of the Risen Lord and His saving activity visa-vis resurrection and resurrection of the Risen Lord is always connected via triune perichoresis, so i would say yes; it just may be a deeper reality than you are making it...
Eucharist is the baptized participation in triune perichoresis--into the new creation which Christ's resurrection has opened! :-)Thursday at 2:36pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt Okay, now we getting somewhere. I see what you are saying. I am not sure if I would go that far.
So when we are in a Sun morning worship service and Holy Communion is not being served but God's presence is there, do we still experience Eucharist?Thursday at 2:45pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt Of course, you could say that the service is less than what God intends for us to experience because He wants us to participate in the SacramentsThursday at 3:01pm · Like
Tommy Thompson I would go that far because i stand in the Wesleyan tradition that affirms that sacrament conveys the divine reality. We believe this is actually very orthodox and in line with Christian tradition. If you don't want to go that far, you do not have to.
The church is gathered by the Spirit to make Eucharist. There are six other days where she has prayer services. If I were okay with our response to the Spirit's gathering stopping short of making Eucharist, i would've never posted in the first place.Thursday at 3:05pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Exactly brother Jason; God desires for us to commune with him so let's cooperate with grace and do it and in that communion experience and become new creation...without the Eucharist along with the other means of grace, the new creation is bogus and cannot be realized (since God provided the means for this end)Thursday at 3:09pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt I do see the Eucharist as well as all of Christ's efforts and grace preparing us to become new and enter the New Jerusalem.
The only possible concerns I have would be worshiping the Eucharist (similar to how some Christians worship the Bible or adding Mary to the Trinity), and I do not see the Eucharist that explicitly elevated in Scripture, although I see why theologically.Thursday at 3:42pm · Like
Tommy Thompson The Eucharist is the church's way of life...much more than what we experience n monthly communion when it's an addendum to the preaching service...Thursday at 4:33pm · Like
Tommy Thompson again, the Eucharist is synonymous for the Real presence of the Risen Lord and His saving activity via His glorious resurrection. We worship Christ Eucharistically! He is the means and the end--the victim and victor--the priest and the offering--the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, the bread of heaven and cup of salvation: that's what we say/hear when we communicate, not "Receive this bread and wine that is not really Jesus"...well that wouldn't be communion at all would it.Thursday at 4:41pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Silent is the Spirit's whooing
drawing us to dance, to be.
God's own heart to us revealing
manifest is grace and truth!
Oh to dwell in sweet communion
with the Lover of mankind.Thursday at 4:45pm · Unlike · 1 person
Tommy Thompson Aamen! There's a reason our orthodox brothers and sisters hit the floor when the Spirit is invoked over the gifts! They believe in the holy mystery! Christ is present!Thursday at 4:49pm · Like
Tommy Thompson This just came to mind: "What was conspicuous in the Redeemer has passed over into the sacraments." -- Leo the GreatThursday at 4:54pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Pretty good stuff.Thursday at 5:01pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Christ is in our midst!Thursday at 5:12pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan The response is.... He is and ever shall be.Thursday at 7:51pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Amen; He is and ever shall be.Thursday at 7:53pm · Like
Tommy Thompson next discussion is on your facebook, Jeremy. The follow up discussion from the "ontological existence of the devil" conversation...post it and we'll chime inThursday at 7:54pm · Like
Tommy Thompson Jeremy, who wrote that hymn? ;-)Thursday at 9:11pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan oh dear.Thursday at 9:35pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan the stanza from the above hymn was the first one I have written ;)Thursday at 9:36pm · Like
Tommy Thompson That's some good stuff brotherThursday at 10:22pm · Like
Jason Honeycutt Ok, I thought through this last night while working. I do believe in the real presence during the Eucharist but quite extend the language as far as you suggest. To be fair, I will try to put on a Eucharistic lens while studying Scripture.
I wrote earlier that Scripture does not explicitly state this higher meaning of Eucharist. What other passages besides John 6 states it? I read John 6 but it does not necessarily go that far; I have to read into the text to some degree to come to that conclusion.
Some passages/thoughts I see that may help your case is Jesus as the new Moses with the new Passover and new Exodus, Jesus as the High Priest/Melchizedek in Hebrews, and Jesus as the Lamb in Revelation (Heb too). Those tie into new creation and probably bridges it with your broad conviction of Eucharist.
Any thoughts on Jesus being the new Moses and how it relates to Eucharist and new creation?
Thank you both for sharing; I have enjoyed this.Yesterday at 12:14pm · Like
Stan Thompson I have led two churches in the past 5 years to weekly Communion and the most often heard argument against was that it would become ritualistic and lose its meaning. My common response was, "We recite the Lord's prayer, the doxology, and the Apostle's Creed every Sunday, which of these 3 or are all 3 ritualistic with lost meaning?" I think it is the attitude of the one coming to worship that is the determining factor. I was also amazed to find Hoyt Hickman write concerning the Basic Pattern of Worship for United Methodists, “The climax of the service is giving the bread and the cup to the people and their partaking in Holy Communion with God in Christ and with the whole family of Christ in every time and place.”1 If the climax of worship is the receiving of Communion, then it seems to me, it is imperative that it be offered every Sunday in worship.
1 Worship Matters, 35.Yesterday at 3:12pm · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Certainly so. The classic order of worship, however it is inculcated, is very much with the climax of the service in mind. It is an intentional movement from gathering to Word to Thanksgiving (Eucharist) to sending forth. We were created, an in turn redeemed, to offer our praise and thanks to God continually through the offering of the Eucharist for the sake of the world.Yesterday at 4:34pm · Like
Stan Thompson Luke 24 and the Emmaus account are used to explain the four fold pattern of Worship and in this account Jesus is made known to them in the breaking of bread. In other words the real presence of Christ. This may be why John Wesley considered Communion to also be a converting ordinance as well as a sacrament.18 hours ago · Like
Jeremy Sullivan Not sure here. I might be more apt to say that Luke 24 represents the event retold through the eyes of the early Christian community... Which was Eucharistic to the core? I think the passage is very revelatory of both the mind and heart of our forebears in faith. I believe that text is clearly shaped by that community who lived in communion with the risen lord.10 hours ago · Like
Stan Thompson The UMC Book of Worship gives a detailed explanation of the Luke 24 account and its relation to the basic pattern of worship.9 hours ago · Like
Tommy Thompson It's too bad the majority of our church's aren't using that flow :-( Even some of our parishes who are communing at least weekly are simply tacking it on to the end of their preaching service (in a very Zwinglian fashion) that has some of the liturgical pieces, but they're jumbled up like a puzzle that's been dismantled. When it comes to worship we seem more like a network of independent churches doing it our own way...we've elevated "that's the way we've always done it" above "this is the way the church has received it (with deep meaning and formational value). There really is a flow...a flow that comes more from the liturgical communities of the early church than Luke 24--a beautiful flow that leads us to the climax of the service and then out to mission...
Though I see how we use Luke 24 to give biblical credence to our flow of worship, i think the most plausible answer is in the ancient liturgical tradition of the church that is simply assumed in our Scriptures.9 hours ago · Like
Tommy Thompson Jason, thank you; i, too, enjoy virtual holy conferencing. haha. :-)
I wonder if rather than trying to proof text something as far-reaching as the Eucharistic meta-narrative of the early church, it would be best to go back and study the church's liturgy from which the Scriptures were born (better yet experience them..because i'm convinced that liturgy cannot be taught without first being a present reality in our lives)?
The church has not taught me to see the Scriptures as our exhaustive reference book for all things spiritual but the story of God's mighty acts of salvation climaxing in the life death resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ, which of course is the core of Eucharistic celebration and life.9 hours ago · Like
Stan Thompson The reason for the standardization of worship as contained in the Book of Worship is to help churches worship together in the same way at the same time without each church left to decide what it thinks is worship on its own. The basic pattern is what the UMC thinks is the worship pattern of the early church.9 hours ago · Like
Tommy Thompson Stan; good point. I agree and believe the UMC is right on...as she has received this discovery in ecumenical dialog (as we all went back together to the early church for the sake of liturgical reformation).
The UMC liturgy is faithful to the historic flow of worship yet it is much freer than, say, the Book of Common Prayer and other liturgies. That's where the freedom is located--in the fact that even though we have a liturgy with logical and meaningful flow, we are free to be creative with the content of that flow. This is the beautiful potential of United Methodist liturgy! We can pull from the rich well of Christian tradition within the pattern of worship that has been handed to us...it can be very dynamic within the bounds of orthodoxy week in and week out! :-)
However, I do not believe the UMC suggests that we dismantle the flow into something entirely different with no logical or meaningful direction. Though in most every case this is not what is happening. What is happening is that all the various local liturgies that preceded and that gave way to liturgical renewal/reformation are still the basis of our worship with the church's liturgy being worked in where we see fit.
I do not deny this is a difficult road that must be traversed graciously, but it is a road we need to traverse. My critique is that we continue to do nothing in the name of patience and grace and our churches continue to decline primarily spiritually and consequently numerically (though, in my mind, these are hardly ever directly correlated).8 hours ago · Like
Stan Thompson Good points Tommy. Although there is much freedom within the BP, the transition to the BP is difficult for churches. This is the place for pastoral leadership. However, if the pastor's themselves don't believe in Communion every Sunday as a part of the BP, then the churches can hardly be faulted for following a different pattern of worship.8 hours ago · Like
Tommy Thompson Amen Stan. In the words of a favorite band of mine, we clergy must learn to confess, "the fault lies clearly with me.". --The Avett Brothers
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.