I thought that there was still discussion going on regarding Communion.

THe deliverers would, technically, I suppose not be officiating but rather delivering pre-blessed elements.  WHich logically works great if we had a custom of the Reserved Sacrament (as Anglicans and Catholics do).  But we don't.  It might be an interesting discussion about the logic behind that announcement....

I will see if I can find out.

Interesting. I would expect at the very least that it would be elders taking the elements to the sick or shut-in. Of course, we really don't have a clearly defined understanding of eldership either.

\You might go back and the red covered worshiop bood, "A Sunday Table", the primer on all things worship from the 1980's in the United Church. The logic is all there. the late Dr. David Newman developed it.

 

First, let me say I think it's wonderful that people who cannot attend service are being sent the elements at all. That's not something that we do.

 

At my church, anyone, as chosen by the pastor (or other presider if the pastor is away), can distribute the ordinance's elements to the congregation. Normally, though, it is the role of the deacons to serve in this way.

 

 

 

But the UCCAN did at one time, did it not? We certainly did at my family church in the seventies and eighties. What happened?

 

Mendalla

It's clearly defined who the "elders" are and how they become elders. Most elders that I know, however, simply think it's "being a member of Session" or "Council." In other words, it's a mere title with no expectations beyond attending a meeting maybe once a month. And a lot refuse to think of themselves as elders because they equate the word with "old." I know of one younger (30's) person who couldn;t be an elder because she wasn't "old" enough - no issue about her level of spiritual maturity. That, I think, is where we've fallen down - on the theological understanding of "eldership" and the role of the elder within a congregation.

Here is the official stance - Only the Ordained can bless and celebrate the eucharist.  Now in the UCC we have exceptions..... other paid accountable ministers can get permission from conference and it is only good where they serve.

Once the act of blessing is done the elements can be given to those who want it, and thus it can be taken to homes after communion.

I am a fan of the reserved sacrament which I have done for lay ministers.  Blessed the elments and gave it to them to take to their charge.

 

Makes sense. Back in the day, IIRC, our elders actually had a segment of the congregation that they visited semi-regularly (esp. during the time when we still used Communion cards) so there was a responsibility beyond merely sitting on boards and committees. Even there, I'm not sure there was so much a "theological" understanding as a broader social one. I was never one myself (closest I came was serving on what is now called a JSC) but Dad did several stints in the role.

 

Mendalla

 

I've never attended a church that has a group of elders so, until I met a young adult from another congregation who was an elder, I always thought that the term referred to the elderly members of the congregation. 

 

The way our church council is set up, I can say that there are definitely a set of expectations for those who are on it which go beyond meeting once a month. Most of us are both representatives of church teams and many of us are also on ad-hoc committees. I'm on council and my job is to act as a liaison with three teams - one of which I sit on - and I am also one of the presbytery reps.

I don't understand how an ordained (God forgive me) blessing the elements is any different than anyone blessing the elements. Also. why do the elements have to be blessed to be given to someone. It seems a very elitist stance in the United Church.

At the church I was Staff Ass. the church still had the Unified Board and the Elders. The elders did visiting, pastoral care and helped with the distribution of the communion. But as they became older and young folk were not invited to be elders, the Governance of the church changed  to Board and then Council. Elders remained but their function changed to helping serve communion if they were physically able.

 

It was a great loss to the church.

 

The ordained person is authorized by the wider church, and thus symbolizes that "Communion" is not simply Communion with the folks gathered in that particular sanctuary at that particular time, which is the basic problem with "we should have whoever we want" or "it means so much more if we know the person." Those views make Communion about that particular group of people. It becomes "us" in a micro sense, as opposed to "us" in a macro sense. Actually, symbolically, it means more when it's someone from outside, because it symbolizes that, in fact, there are no outsiders in Communion. Communion is Communion with the entire Christian community of all times and places. 

 

Technically, elements are not blessed; they're consecrated. To consecrate something is not to bless it. Consecration is also symbolic, in that it sets the thing consecrated apart for a particular service and associates that service with God. Blessing and consecration are similar but not identical. The idea of "consecration" also explains why that role of consecrating the elements is normally reserved for the ordained, who are also, according to our own polity, set apart for a particular (not higher or better) purpose.

 

To see this as elitist is to misunderstand the nature of both consecration and ordination.

At my church the only Elder we have is the Pastor. He does Pastor-type stuff.

 

We also have two Deacons. They do stuff like cleaning the building, visiting, bringing baked goods, and serving the elements during the ordinance of communion.

Thanks RevSteven. As long as we are on this topic (Thank you for you information,) can you tell me this.

 

If some Minister type folk ( Lay Pastoral Ministers, I believe), must be licenced by the Conference to  preside over the Sacrament of Communion and can concecrate the elements. If this is correct, then how can folk from the congregation who go into the community to take the communion to sick and shut-ins, not have a licence as well.

 

I hope this isn't confusing.

Ideally, what they're doing in traditional terms is using the "reserved sacrament" as it's known in some traditions - mostly Catholic and Anglican. In other words, elements already consecrated, usually during a service. There have been suggestions for similar arrangements in the UCC for isolated Charges - so, in a central location an ordained person presides at a consecration of the elements that are then taken to various locations by lay people. What we settled on was the office of Sacraments Elder - again, an office acknowledged and recognized by the wider church.

 

And given that the Sacraments are an act of the congregation that was a much better solution for isolated charges than having the elements brought from another service.  For communion to shut-ins or care centers and hospitals usage of the reserved sacrament principle works well if the clergy person is not serving.  But ideally it would either be Elders or people with some type of "training" as Sacramental visitors (which I think is a term used in some circles) who do the delivering, explicitly on behalf of the congregation.

Hi crazyheart,

 

 

I am doubtful that this reflects a new rule.  It is not a new rule nor is it an old one that the Church (most likely us jealous clergy types) have kept hidden.

 

Without seeing the liturgy to know for certain I expect that it is an extension of the congregational celebration and that the elements folk are invited to bring along are those reserved from the most recent celebration in the congregation.

 

It is a long practice in the Christian tradition that Elders would take Holy Communion to the sick and shut-in since they were unable to be present when the sacrament was celebrated.  At first blush this appears to be more of the same.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

But, revjohn, the invitation was in the bulletin to ALL who wanted to - not just Elders.

Hi crazyheart,

 

 

The United Church of Canada, save for some remote corners of the Church has all but abandoned the role of Elder and that, IMO, is probably one of the more glaring mistakes that we have made in our ecclesiology.

 

Just because many congregations have taken a pass on the role and responsibility of the Elder that doesn't mean that the needs that the Elders met disappear.

 

It apparently is easier for most congregations to ask for volunteers rather than reinstate and office nobody much cares about.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

yes,I agree with you. The Elders are missed.

We do not have elders in our church - we do have a Pastoral Care team, who I think distribute the elements as needed/requested.  Some training is of course provided to all members of this team - I would assume regarding communion and the other important aspects of their ministry.

 

We also have several "Over 80's lunches"  each year.  'Younger'  folk (often retired themselves!) organize this, arrange transportation, food, decorating etc. and it is usually attended by a good number of folks for whom getting to weekly services is not possible.  The luncheon includes a short worship and communion service.  It's extremely well attended.

 

I'd like to thank all those who posted above to explain the roots & 'policies' around the consecration & serving etc. of communion.

Wheen our congregation was short-staffed, I was asked to lead worship at several nursing homes - our turn came up about bi-monthly.  Often the nursing home and residents expected communion to be served.   I'm not ordained - how could we manage to ensure that these people had communion?

 

At my home church I was an elder and on the Session.  I regularly served communion when the minister presided.  Large church - six communion stations - twelve people serving.  The following week I would take communion to the nursing home and serve.  I was authorized by my Session.  The staff at the nursing home was aware of my lay status.  No questions ever came up.

 

Using the same reasoning, our Session authorized the visiting elders to take communion to any shut-ins under their care.

 

We now have more ordained staff so I no longer am responsible for the nursing homes.  We've changed from Board and Session to a unified Church Council.  I don't hear the term Elder used any more, so I guess I'm no longer an Elder - though I tend to think of myself that way.  I don't know what is being done about communion for shut-ins.  Perhaps our second (parttime) minister looks after it.

 

 

Nicely said Steven.  One addition is the tradition of many churches were are in communion with is the consecration is reserved to the ordained.  As you said it is not elitist but who we are.  Ofcourse we can change that and that change may take us out of the world wide communion.  Tradition is just that and the symbolism is deep in our habits.  It does not make it better but just describes us.  It is like in hockey you can be a forward or defense or goalie, different roles that come with the team - this may not be the best metaphor but that is why in one sense the consecration is done by the ordained.  As I said we can change that tradiition but we need to ask what is gained or lost?

As many  have said, the consecration is done at eurcharistic service, and then those elements are taken to others. It is simple logic - not different in kind from what was done at the service, it is just an expansion of taking the elements to all. he church at large decides who shall preside.  Ordination is one way that is done.

 

Theres also embedded in these discussions - the efficacious nature of the eucharist. Is it a memorial meal or real presence?  Ones view of this then informs the role of the presider.

Much debate has happened on the meaning.  With a revised metaphysics, rejecting subsance thinking, then real presence is possible and thus even a memorial is a real presence.

Historicl the church decided some have magic fingers   Thus ordination.  Again that is transformative.