2009/07/26

hatched and matched

The big church news of the week has been the Church of England publishing a liturgy for a combined wedding-and-baptism service. And it's not the couple getting married who are to be baptised, it is their children.

Now, my own prejudice is to think that baptism is best reserved for those able to answer for themselves, but let us leave that on one side for now.

Reactions to the news have been mixed: some have said that it is yet another nail in the coffin of the church's teaching; that it is one thing to marry those who have been "living in sin", it is quite another to endorse their lifestyle by enshrining in liturgy a mis-ordered family where the birth of the children precedes the wedding. Others have said that it is a good pragmatic response to modern realities: that given the Church of England's role as the established church, open to all comers, it is better to welcome people in all conditions of life, rather than to turn them away. Still others have said that it is in fact a great celebration of God's grace: that it is never too late to regularize one's family relationships, and that it is most excellent to celebrate and affirm those who wish to do so.

I confess sympathy for all of these positions. Pragmatism gets you a very long way - and so does grace. And yet, you have to look at the message being given, as well as the impact on individuals. There is, surely, value in bringing children into the world in a stable relationship, rather than stabilizing it later: and if you preach that, but make plans for other patterns of family life, you surely seem to present a mixed message.

But life is mixed and messy. I don't doubt that this liturgy has arisen from genuine pastoral need. And so I must assume that it will be a significant and valuable part of a faith journey for some families. The promises made at an Anglican baptism involve the sponsors answering for themselves and for the children (whatever that means :-) ) and saying that they turn to Christ, and renounce evil. That's something to celebrate, however it comes about.

2009/07/11

just when I thought life was wierd enough

Our church uses a common cup for communion. Each person wipes it before passing it to the next person. The alcohol in the wine is said to act as a mild antiseptic: I have no idea if that is true.

With the spectre of swine flu sweeping the nation, government advice is to avoid common cups and plates. So we have to think about 'going Baptist' and using individual cups. I think we may be using miniature medicine cups tomorrow: but I've been googling around to see what else might be on offer at a reasonable price.

Some of the more bizarre offers I've found include:
  • Portable communion sets. Would you like yours in silver or Pewter? In a leather case? Old English style, or Georgian?
  • Or perhaps you'd like pre-filled cups with wafers. "Our prefilled communion cups and wafers include both the wafer and grape juice in one sanitary, single-serving sanitary container." I confess that this one has me giggling uncontrollably. The word "incongruous" is just insufficient to cover it.
  • A helpful Time article explains some of the trials of military chaplains, overcome with paper communion cups (enough to make a real presence adherent shudder a great deal, I wager).
It all seems a far cry from
On the night before he died,
he came to supper with his friends
and, taking bread, he gave you thanks.
The Eucharist is a mystery. Looking too closely at it makes it mundane, to be sure. I guess we have to, from time to time. But let us worship with thankfulness, too.
Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?