anglomedved

I have read attentively the draft document ‘On Preparing for Holy Communion’ (О подготовке ко Святому Причащению) posted on the ‘Inter-synodal presence site’ http://mpr.livejournal.com/, drafted with a view to it becoming an official document of the Russian Orthodox Church. (For non-Russian speakers, it comes out fairly clean on Google translate)

I am not a canon lawyer, I speak simply from what I have observed over the past 15 years in an ROC diaspora parish (Brussels, Belgium), what works, what does not.

I am not happy with the document, neither with its basic outlook, its practicalities, nor, probably most importantly, with the mindset that underlies it.

The document is too restrictive in its outlook. For me preparing for and taking communion, should be seen within the broader scope of preparing a people of God, adult and mature (Ephesians 4.13, 1 Peter 2.9), with regular communion and confession as an essential part of this process. There is no real accent on Christian growth and maturity in the document.[1]

For me the correct norm remains to take communion at every liturgy, unless in a state of sinfulness where one would be taking communion to one’s own detriment (I Corinthians 11.29). Indeed, I can see no reason for going to church unless I do. I go to Church on a Sunday take communion, to have, if I am lucky, some serious spiritual intercourse with one or more fellow Christians, and frankly, little more. Unlike a 4th century workman in St John Chrysostom’s day, I do not need the Bible read to me, I can read it myself, and I can find much better sermons on the internet than I will ever hear in church.

While I am strongly in favour of sacramental confession, the ‘doormat’ approach, this is, every time before communion, seems pretty pointless. First of all, assuming the priest is available for 40 minutes before the service, than an average confession takes 2 minutes, and the priest does not confess between the priests’ and the people’s communion, we are talking of max. 20 people.

More importantly I do not believe that this form of confession is really conducive to the process of deep repentance, which is key to Christian maturity. The latter involves things come up from the depth, and confessing them when you have a sufficient grip of them, or need help from someone spiritually wiser in order to get a grip on them. And then you need more time than 2 minutes: 10 to 15 minutes once a month, not necessarily just before a service. This applies in particular for older people. For me, people with a certain degree of maturity should be left the choice, at their own adult responsibility, of how often, with, say, a recommended minimum of once a month.

I am a married man and have at least some idea of how women work. I cannot see any fundamental reason to forbid communion to woman who is having a period. Would Christ have refused to touch a woman who was? The expression used “в состоянии женской нечистоты’ (in a state of woman’s uncleanness) is, in this day and age, disgraceful. To me this is a personal matter between a women and God, and it is not for the Church to intervene.

I do not like the way the midnight rule (no food or drink after midnight before taking communion) is couched. As I understand it, the underlying idea is to arrive at communion mentally alert, and with a certain slight ‘void’ or hunger, if you like, spiritual hunger expressed by a certain physical emptiness, or ‘room for food’. But I would also say it is important to do so in a way that is not detrimental to your health and your and other people’s safety. If you need a coffee in order to drive safely to church, you should have one. Nor should you leave church, after or more three hours on your feet, in a physical state that it takes the rest of the day to recover from, in particular from lack of sugar or dehydration. More fundamentally, I would like to be considered adult enough to be able to police this myself, that the midnight rule be a recommendation and not an absolute law. A case in point is the evening Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts. It starts at 18.00. Most people who work in companies cannot have lunch before 12.00. So, no lunch or no taking communion. A much more ‘adult’ approach would be to say: eat as early as you can, lightly, no desert and certainly no alcohol.

I note that the new text does not mention confession for priests. This ought to be included.

There is one concept which exists in the Roman Church, and which I believe to be vital, is the right of choice of confessor. It is not every priest that one feels comfortable baring one’s soul to. In most cases there is de facto an alternative. But this should be made into a right, with an insistence that a person has the right to say ‘if have confessed to Fr X within the last Y weeks’ or ‘my spiritual director has told me to take communion every week and go to confession every Z weeks’ and have it accepted by the serving priest.

More generally, I do not believe that Eucharistic behaviour should be legislated by canons, i.e. by ‘law’. I believe we need to move from ‘law’ to ‘recommendation’ and ‘good practice’. As a Christian I am a son of God and not a slave, and as a son of God I hope I need law in my heavenly Father’s house no more than I did when an adult visiting my earthly parents. ‘Law’ also inevitably divides society between those who are entitled to lay it down and police it (bishops and clergy) and those expected to follow (laity). An invidious distinction, which works to the maturity of neither side. And maturity, coming to the fullness of our humanity in Christ, is what Christianity is all about.

[1] There is rather talk of consecration, when in the para 1 the document states that “Partaking of the Holy Body and Blood of Christ , believers are mysteriously united with Christ the Saviour, form His one body - the Church, and receive the consecration (освящение) of body and soul. But dare I suggest that that this high -sounding term can act as an excuse for maintaining structures which prevent Christians coming to individual maturity?