INTRODUCTION
There is no question, life has changed. The global pandemic has sheltered us in our homes unable to continue life as it was before. The Church, the Body of Christ, in the world must respond.
Thrust upon us has been the need to rapidly adapt our corporate worship, meetings, and all manner of gatherings. With these adaptations has arisen questions about our theology. Now is the time not to just change because the world is changing, but clearly lay out what our practice means, how it can and cannot be adapted because of what it means. While some practices have easily been transported to online setting; service of the word, prayer groups, bible studies, holy communion has not been so easily moved—for good reason.
FASTING
Since I have become a Lutheran in 2001, there has been a movement within the church to move to weekly celebration of the Eucharist. I agree with this movement and practice it in my own congregation. Weekly celebration of the Eucharist is an important thing for the Body of Christ. The whole Church of Christ seems to be moving in that direction with celebrity preachers like Rob Bell and Francis Chan remarking that they would have done weekly communion had they done it all over again.
Because of this movement, I find the direction given by the presiding bishop’s office wanting in their desire for us to explore other traditions such as Eucharistic Fasting. While this is a good and important discipline, a discipline that is forced is not a discipline.
EMOTIONAL REASONING What needs to be done in this circumstance is have a well reasoned theology that holds up to the scrutiny of Christian History and can carry us forward into the future.
So far, with only a few exceptions have I heard arguments for virtual communion that didn’t really on some form of cognitive distortion, primarily that of emotional reasoning.
“Emotional reasoning is a cognitive process by which a person concludes that his/her emotional reaction proves something is true.” 1
If you balk at wikipedia then the founder of Cognitive Therapy, Aaron Beck defines emotional reasoning in this way,
“whenever someone concludes that their emotional reaction to something thereby defines its reality, they’re engaged in emotional reasoning.” 2
For communion emotional reasoning looks like this,
“Because I felt God’s presence in the ‘communion meal’ I had with cookies and milk, means it was just as valid as it is during Sunday morning worship.”
Or
“Because I felt God’s presence in the ‘eucharist’ when I did it by myself, means it was just as valid as it is during Sunday morning worship.”
The problem with the above is obvious. It defines the validness of the Eucharist on our feelings. This is not helpful when thinking theologically about communion. Our emotional response cannot be the determining factor to whether or not communion is truly the body and blood of Christ.
The other argument that seems to be prominent is pastoral concern. I am hearing from pastor’s, (but not lay people, specifically from my congregation) “the people are starving for communion.” While I don’t doubt that people miss the central part of the worship service, I question the desire to run to meet the need just because it’s perceived there without any education about it being transported to online spaces and the implications of such a move.
THE MAIN QUESTION
The main question that must be asked with online communion, or any other communion meal is this:
Is the bread and wine that people are receiving the body and blood of Christ?
For Lutherans this is not just a memorial meal of remembering Jesus and his sacrifice, it is his body and blood distributed to the people.
“Concerning the Lord’s Supper it is taught that the true body and blood of Christ are truly present and are distributed to those who ear the Lord’s supper.”
Augsburg Confession, Article 10.
It’s important for us to know that it is the body and blood of Christ, because there are certain promises that happen to those who receive communion.
First, the sacraments were instituted because of what they do to us on God’s behalf. They arouse and strengthen faith.
“..the sacraments were instituted not only “to be marks of profession among human beings but much more to be signs and testimony of God’s will towards us, intended to arouse and strength and faith in those who use them. Accordingly, sacraments and be used to that faith, which believes the promises offered and displayed through the sacraments, may increase.” Augsburg Confession, Article 13.
Additionally the eucharist consoles the anxious conscience.
“…was instituted so that the faith of those who use the sacrament should recall benefits are received through Christ and should encourage and consoled the anxious conscience. Four to remember Christ is to remember his benefits and realize that they are truly offered to us. It is not enough to remember the history, because the Judeans and the ungodly can also remember that. The mass is to be used for the purpose of offering the sacrament to those who need consolation, just as Ambrose says: ‘because I always send, I always ought to take the medicine.’” Augsburg Confession, Article 13.
Luther sums up the benefits to the Christian who receive the Eucharist in the small Catechism.
“The words ‘given for you’ and ‘shed for you for the forgiveness of sins’ show us that forgiveness of sin, life, and salvation are given to us in the sacrament through these words, because where there is forgiveness of sin, there is also life and salvation.” Small Catechism
The Eucharist arouses and strengthens faith, consoles the anxious conscious, forgives sin, gives life, and salvation. There is no more important action that Christians do during worship than receive The Body and Blood of Christ.
So is what people receive in their homes during online communion the body and blood of Christ which imparts all of the above?
ONLINE COMMUNION
Before I go any further, I think it would be good to explain what online communion might look like.
Online Communion would look something like this.
The presider would go through the normal activities of the liturgy with bread and wine in front of the camera. People at home would have bread and wine in their home. The presider would consecrate the bread and wine, and the bread and wine of the people at home. Those who have more than one person would then distribute it and others would receive it.
BOUNDARIES
Holy communion has always has had some boundaries. While a meal with friends, where bread and wine is shared, or coffee and donuts, or fruit and water can be very meaningful, the question remains: Is that meal one where the body of christ is given and imparts all the benefits mentioned above?
I would argue that it is not because not all of the appropriate components for the Eucharist are in place.
The boundaries in the Lutheran confession around what actions constitutes communion is five fold.
1. There must be a gathered community
2. The Words of Institution must be given.
3. Bread and wine must be used.
4. The elements must be distributed.
5. The elements must be consumed.
“…Christ’s command, “Do this,” must be observed without division or confusion. For it includes the entire action or administration of this sacrament: that in a Christian assembly bread and wine are taken, consecrated, distributed, received, eaten, and drunk, and that thereby the Lord’s death is proclaimed, as St. Paul presents the entire action of the breaking of the bread or its distribution and reception in 1 Corinthians 10:16.” Solid Declaration, Article 7.
In order for the meal to constitutes The Lord’s supper the meal must contain all of the above components.
Conclusion
My argument against online communion in the Lutheran church is based on the fact that the necessary components for communion cannot be met in an online setting.
First, online gathering is inferior to gathering in person.
Some will make the argument that online relationships are as valid as in person relationships. And to that point I agree. But, there is always an urge to move from virtual to in person. If this were not the case than we would be fine keeping all relationships mediated through our computer screens. This is clearly no the reality. Even the one who will argue with one breath that their online contact is valid, will in another buy plane tickets to go visit the person who they have had much communication online. Online is an excellent means for us to keep in contact but it is not equal to be together. Therefore, while we can assemble in online spaces. It is not an assembly proper for the celebration of the Eucharist.
Second, I am not sure if the Words of Institution are said over the elements mediated through technology into people’s homes.
I am willing to concede this point, but need further thought on it. Would a telephone call be enough? Or does it have to be video?
Nevertheless, the imagery of Christ single table given out the body is lost when each has their own table and bread and wine.
Lastly, there may be no distribution
For those who live alone, there can be no distribution because one cannot distribute it to themselves.
While these meals be very meaningful, I do not believe they have the necessary components for them to be the Body and Blood of Jesus that arouses and strengthens faith, consoles the anxious conscious, forgives sin, gives life, and salvation.
Therefore, in my congregation we will not be celebrating any kind of online communion.
Many more words can be said about this, but meeting the fivefold criteria for the Communion meal is the first hurdle that must be overcome before online communion is an option.
Peace,
Rev Jeremy Serrano
Rebuttal by Rev. Joshua Serrano
So, Pastor Serrano, if I have a congregational member in an isolation ward in the hospital who has requested communion, in part because of a desperate craving to feel a part of the larger Body, and can see them through the window of their door but cannot physically touch them, can we not share in the real presence of the risen Christ?
That doesn’t sound online to me.