By lowering the standards for membership. Of course, by doing so, everyone will catch on to the obvious fact that by requiring little from its followers, the church has little of value to offer: the lower the cost, the lower the value, the less the desirability of the merchandise, the fewer people interested.
In its ceaseless striving to become worthless, the Anglican Church of Canada is considering offering Communion to those who don’t believe in it. From here:
Should we invite persons who are not baptized to receive Holy Communion? The church is discussing this question today. Anglicans traditionally have believed that the eucharist is a family meal, reserved for members of the church through baptism. Those who are not baptized are not members of the church; therefore, they cannot participate in the family meal.
This exclusive view of the eucharist has a long history. St. Paul warns against eating and drinking in an “unworthy manner” (I Cor. 11:27), though he seems to leave the decision whether to partake in the meal to each person’s conscience (I Cor. 11:28). Closed communion is standard practice in some Christian churches, including the Roman Catholic and Orthodox. However, many Anglican churches throughout the world now practice open communion. There are good reasons, both missional and theological, for doing so.
But since the ACoC is now quite open about not believing in sin and the need for a Saviour (and therefore – no need of His death on the cross), or in the resurrection, haven’t they already taken the whole meaning of the eucharist away?
I didn’t even notice this article on the Anglican Journal website. I see this as the “we are an inclusive church” gone too far. The concept of “inclusion” is an odd concept. If it means, accepting a person where he is at, and not forcing him to have certain beliefs before he can come to church, well okay. But,surely, when a person participates in church worship, there is a possibility of change, or transformation???? But liberal clergy, when they start believing the Anglican Chuch is a Holy Inclusive Church, are misinterpreting the traits of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church as the Early Church figured it out.
The sadness here, is the decline in theology. Liberal clergy are ignorant of the Early Church accomplishments, and fail to appreciate the accomplishments of historical Christainity.
This could be an issue the Anglican Bishops might address. Perhaps the Bishops could realize they still have a teaching role to carry out.
I’m joining the Catholic Church for obvious reasons and I will say that it would be easier to join Mossad.
“Let all catechumens depart! Let no catechumens remain!” – Orthodox liturgy
Hey – maybe there could be raisin cakes instead of plain wafers (cross-referencing other thread) 😉
Meanwhile, flying under the radar…www.cranmer.ca
If a person does not believe in the central tenets of Christianity, s/he is making a hypocrite of him/herself by partaking in Holy Communion. As I understand it, the concept of “open communion” allows any believing Christian to join in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper in fellowship with the rest of the congregation of the church he/she is visiting.