I posted the following thoughts about the United Methodist Church study of On-Line Eucharist

The Issues raised by Online Eucharist

·       What is essential for community, online or face-to-face, to be authentic?

·       Can we worship online?

·       Does even speaking of these questions damage ecumenical relationships, and would serious consideration of online communion precipitate a global crisis in these relationships between United Methodists and other faith partners?

·       If the church is not present in the media, which are influential in people's lives and shaping culture today, is it relevant to them?

·       Is the subject of online communion a first world affectation, a sign of our media-rich affluence?

·       Is it crazy to discuss conducting this most historic act of faithfulness through a mediated form that is foreign to our historic understanding?

·       Can a local church institute a practice that affects the entire denomination?

1.         What is essential for community, online or face-to-face, to be authentic?

The Gospels feature Jesus telling his disciples that “I am the vine, your are the branches.”

“I am the way, the truth, and the light.”  “When your pray, say ‘Our Father.’ ”

Obviously Jesus was referring to a spiritual community of believers.  The Epistles would have been emails if that technology had existed in those days.  Our Creator saw fit to insert the Lord Jesus into human society as it was two thousand one hundred years ago.  These facts are basic to Christian belief, but Jesus repeatedly insisted that union with God depends upon the grace of God and one’s open hearted desire to accept God into one’s life.  Keep this in mind in this discussion.

2.       Can we worship on line?  Think about it.  Jesus looked at the Good Thief, and declared that they would be together in heaven.  Ask yourself, “Can you worship on a cross as you hang there in agony?”  Ask about Jesus riding in a fishing boat, in a storm, and what’s the answer?  Think of men walking to Damascus or the Holy Family fleeing to Egypt, as ask “Can you worship on the road?”  Then decide whether you can worship while one a subway or in the SkyLab, or anhwhere else.  Does it matter whether you are holding and using a digital device, or simply in quiet mental prayer?  What’s your answer?

3.       Would an attempt to participate in Holy Communion, Baptism, or Marriage while united with other Methodists (or humans belonging to any community) questions “damage ecumenical relationships” or possibly “ precipitate a global crisis in these relationships between United Methodists and other faith partners?”  The answer is “Yes” and “No,” depending upon the disposition of the participants.  People locked into the status quo and adamant about the dangers and perils of accepting changes in technology or society’s preferred style of communication will feel threatened and balk at such questions.  That’s not because scrolls and clay or stone tablets or paper books are vital to union with Jesus or our Father or the Holy
Spirit, but because the individuals or groups are confused and hesitate to venture out of their comfort zone.  There is little or no guilt involved in being “traditional” though it can mean groups may opt out of a digital community.  Jesus lamented the Apostle’s dozing while he was undergoing the Agony in the Garden, but he did not break with them.  He is patient and compassionate.

Once his disciples received the Holy Spirit (had their minds enlightened), they became steadfast followers of Jesus, even unto death.

4.       If the church is not present in the media, which are influential in people's lives and shaping culture today, is it relevant to them?  This question is confjusing, because “the media” is an ambiguous term  The church cannot ever be “not present in the media,” if  “the media” means “communicatgions” in general (print, spoken words, Internet postings, etc.) 

If the means “If people of faith don’t employ digital technology, will they be irrelevant to the public,”  it is obvious that the people of faith are not taking advantage of the resources our God-given ingenuity has provided.  The Apostles were gifted with the ability to communicate in foreign tongues.  Our digital media provide instant translations from voice to type, English to Khmer, and so on.  No need for reliance on miracles in this regard.  So it would be foolish to turn down the gift of multi-lingual, instant communication because it is unfamiliar to traditionalists.  

5.       Is the subject of online communion a first world affectation, a sign of our media-rich affluence?

In St. Paul’s time, aborigines in what is now Australia may not have been able to receive his Epistles or interpret them if the somehow arrived there.  Was an Epistle of St. Paul, or the Gospel of John, for example, be a mere “first world affectation, a sign of our media-rich affluence?”  Hardly.  The Old and New Testament were written on stone, clay, paprus or parchment, or pressed into copper sheets, and handed down by oral tradition.  People have always used whatever means they had to record and transmit knowledge and beliefs.  So let’s not hesitate to use the new media.  It is is a hallowed tradition.

6.       Is it crazy to discuss conducting this most historic act of faithfulness through a mediated form that is foreign to our historic understanding?  This is a loaded question, and “crazy” is an intensely pejorative term unworthy of a serious and sensitive discussion.  At the heart of the question is xenophobia, or the fear of anything new.  Catholics have long been encouraged to receive “Spiritual Communion,” when actual Communion is not available or inconvenient.  Intent is important.  If a person intends to unite with the Creator, but dies before missionaries arrive, or is martyred before Baptism, tradition maintains that he or she is saved by virtue of his or her good intention.  Let us put aside our innate xenophobic bias and consider the possibilities Providence is offering us.

7.       Can a local church institute a practice that affects the entire denomination?

This is a “should” question, not a can question.  In order to maintain continuity and peace, each local community must consider whether it is wise, appropriate and timely for them to institute something dramatic and new in their locality.  Questions like this are best decided by leaders from across the spectrum of the organization. 

Those local groups that decide to move ahead independently must not insist on inclusion in the larger group, but be clear about severing themselves from the established order.  The name and trappings of the main body of the church has the right to insist on such a separation for the sake of unity and internal peace.

Jesus came to bring “Good news” (Gospel) to humanity.  Love, understanding and peace should be our hallmarks.  A look at German history before the “Diet of Worms” (not a menu, but a meeting of Protestant and Catholic factions that stopped the bloodshed  in post-Reformation German states) and after the agreement will illustrate the dangers inherent in religious bickering.

James P Louviere, the ’AstralMonkJames”