Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!uunet!bellcore!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: lhccjeh@lure.latrobe.edu.au (James Hale) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: doctrinal standards Message-ID: Date: 27 Jun 91 06:59:41 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: VAX Cluster, Computer Centre, La Trobe University Lines: 45 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu writes: > [intro deleted] > > What particularly angers me (as most readers surely know by now) is > closed communion. (I'm speaking of closing communion for doctrinal > reasons. I don't want to get into church discipline here.) Communion > is the symbol of our unity in Christ. It is *his* table. It is the > last place we should be trying to do doctrinal quality control. I do > understand about "discerning the body". Certainly anyone who > participates in communion should understand that they are > participating in an act where Christ is expected to be present. But I > can't accept requiring a specific theory of Christ's presence. > Fortunately God is presumably willing to forgive offenses here. But > it's hard for me to conceive of a more offensive action than trying to > keep a fellow Christian from Christ's table. But no action can! To see an action of another (be it an individual, group or organisation) as offensive and leave it at that is to accept that they are what they do. But we know that they are our brothers in Christ, and, regardless of their actions or perceived ideas, will remain our brothers in Christ. The action you have described, does indeed seem sad. And it is easy for us to rise up in anger, but what would Christ have us do? Jesus was excluded by the mob but he did not share that view. He saw them as his brothers and asked their forgiveness. Let us not share the perception that one can be excluded from communion with Christ, for we know that this is not possible UNLESS we choose it. Let us not culture our anger, which only serves to maintain that exclusion and make it real in our mind as well as theirs. No matter how beautiful or otherwise a doctrine is, it is still just a doctrine still just something that we have created. While its use brings us closer to the Father's Will, it is used in Love. While its use denies the Father by denying the oneness of His Children, it is an instrument of fear. His response to fear is to to dispel it with His Love. We need to recognise that that fear is a call for love. It is not just the *victim* that needs our help, it is the *victimiser*. To deny one is to deny both. -- _____________________________________________________________________________ James Hale Lincoln School of Health Sciences Computing Unit La Trobe University,Bundoora, AUSTRALIA ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- My sinless brother is my guide to peace. | Lesson 351 My sinful brother is my guide to pain. | Workbook P470 And which I choose to see I will behold. | _____________________________________________________________________________