Scotch-Irish-L ArchivesArchiver > Scotch-Irish > 1998-03 > 0889818349
From: "Virginia W. Beck" <>
Subject: Re: resonating etc.
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 11:45:49 -0800
Well said, and absolutely logical. My parents were not church-goers. Dad
was an atheist, but never tried to persuade others to his view. Mother's
only childhood experience with church was when her nearly destitute mother
(abandoned, and too busy providing for her nine girls by doing other
people's washing & ironing 7 days a week to have time for church) would
take them on Christmas Eve to accept a packet of "gifts" provided for the
poor children. Church members also brought wrapped gifts to be passed out
to their own children on these festive occasions. The memory of that
humiliating experience, when she and her sisters opened gifts containing an
orange, a few nuts & candies , and an item or two of clothing (the only
gifts they would receive), while she watched the members' children open
packages containing (to her eyes) beautiful dolls, or other lovely toys,
could still bring tears to her eyes when she was an old lady. I am sure the
church members viewed themselves as generous and charitable (they didn't
HAVE to give anything!), but my mother (about 10) saw only
self-righteousness and hypocrisy. Though she always professed a belief in a
"higher power", she could never bring herself to trust or believe in any
organized religion. I did all my spiritual investigation in the various
churches of friends, both Christian & non-Christian, and, in the end, have
been unable to suspend logic sufficiently to come to an unquestioning belief
in any of them. I appreciate and respect all those who sincerely and
honestly follow theirs. My husband's Baptist parents were a veritable model
for born-again Christians, and led exemplary lives. I leave to your
imagination the only conversation my Dad and my father-in-law ever had on
the subject of unquestioning belief and acceptance of every word in the
Bible! but both were polite, and they remained good friends. Ginia.
From: Edward Andrews <>
To: JRose10700 <>
Date: Friday, March 13, 1998 3:11 AM
Subject: Re: resonating etc.
>> In a message dated 98-03-12 20:46:30 EST, you write:
>> << 'll never forget the look
>> of hurt and uncomprehension on my 11 year old daughter's face when she
>> was refused communion at St. Patrick's in NYC. We're Christians, who
>> worship in a Methodist congregation and are used to the celebration of
>> an open communion table. >>
>> "Closed communion" - which Catholics as well as many Protestant churches
>> practice, can be a complexity to explain.
>> I am of the belief that anyone who shares the samve views about the
>> Eucharist should be able to partake.
> I find this view - which of course is the official teaching of the
>Roman Church, and justification for closed Communion somewhat at odds
>syncratic views in the post which began this discussion.
> For some years the Iona Community have been arguing that when Mass is
>celebrated in Iona or at events like the Haddington Pilgrimage, there
>should be an open Communion. The reply has always been that unless you
>believe what we believe then you cannot receive. It is as much a
>matter of discipline as doctrine.
> As one who was at both what was alleged to be the first Mass said in
>the Abbey grounds, and then in the Abbey itself since the Reformation,
>I have watched this discussion with keen interest.
> Back in 1966 the Abbey in Iona was under an interdict, It was against
>Church law for a priest to say mass there. However two priests, who
>were not from the Diocese decided that they would do it, and as the
>terms of the deed under which the Abbey is held makes it necessary for
>the premises to be made available for the exercise of Worship of any
>branch of Christ's Church, we facilitated their service.
> At that time the Communion celebrated regularly in Iona was
>according to the rite of the Church of Scotland. It was an open table,
>and on occasions I either served Roman Catholic Priests, who were
>receiving, or were aware of Roman Catholic Priests being present who
> In my present charge, I make a point in using the formula
>"This is the Table of the Lord, not the Table of any one Church, we
>therefore invite those baptized into Christ in any tradition to join
>with us in this Christ's gift to His Church".
> It is not however for us to criticize those who for whatever reason
>do not feel able either to join with other people at a Eucharistic
>celebration, or who do not feel able to extend eucharistic hospitality
>to others. These issues are between them and God.
> At the same time, I would have little sympathy for those who seek to
>intrude into the rites of any other faith without making enquiries as
>to whether or not they are welcome. We do not walk into other people's
>houses and expect to be able to sit down for a meal with them. If they
>invite us in, that is fine, but we are guests.
>The fact that my Theology would claim that I am part of the one family
>of Christ, does not entitle me to intrude into the domestic
>arrangements of those who do not have the same view.
> The parents of the child who was refused communion must accept
>responsibility for not only the event, but also the consequences.
> In the Temple in Jerusalem, at the boundary between the Court of the
>Gentiles and the Court of the Women there were notices which said
>words to this effect (I can't be bothered looking up the reference)
>Gentiles who are found past this point will be responsible for their
>own death which they will have caused.
> It may not be an attitude which we resonate with. It is however one
>that we have to accept historically happened.
>St Nicholas Buccleuch Parish Church Dalkeith
>Visit our Web site
|Re: resonating etc. by "Virginia W. Beck" <>|