The Guide

The Guide contains how-to-do-it advice on starting, developing and sustaining fresh expressions of church based on shared experiences.
More about The Guide

Browse The Guide

Lay-led churches and communion (by George Lings)

This is a short extract from the latest edition of Encounters on the Edge (no. 41: Do network churches work?) in which George Lings looks at the wider subject of network churches.

George LingsAnother issue of ecclesial identity is provoked because the lay-led church is unhelpfully dependent on outside provision of clergy to give them communion. At worst, this is a return to Mass Priests. At best, it is a ceaseless reminder that such a congregation is in permanent dependency on those outside its life and is thereby somehow second class.

If Anglicans deem having a sacramental life essential to ecclesial life through dominical warrant, it is then tiresome, and probably damaging, that such communities are denied the fullness of this dimension. By this, they are made more fragile. Such scenarios have similarities to the nineteenth century overseas problems that bedevilled those works that were 'missions' but denied the status of 'churches'. They had problems of dependence on the professional missionary and on finally becoming designated churches promptly lost most missional desire or impact. Such patterns are not to be repeated.

In practice, members of both network churches in Deal and Sandwich spoke with restrained frustration at how difficult getting suitable 'cover' was and how it made them feel like 'the poor relation'. Understandably, those of a free church persuasion found this doubly irksome. They had no conviction that this priestly requirement was necessary and served only to demonstrate to them the ecclesial imperialism of Anglicanism.

Cover for Encounters on the Edge 41Eucharistic Presidency is an irenic and scholarly read of the Anglican Bishops' last published view of the topic and makes a good case that what is at issue is the catholicity of the church. However, this now exists in tension with the bottom up creation of churches who seek a fullness (or second century Ignatian catholicity) of their life and rightly sense their local oneness is impaired by this arrangement of a near stranger heading up the family meal.

There is also the vexing issue of whether the church is better defined by its overall ministerial arrangements or its localised congregational life. If the number of lay-led fresh expressions grows, the issue will grow sharper.

George Lings is the director of The Sheffield Centre, Church Army's Research Unit. He specialises in church planting and fresh expressions, and Anglican ecclesiology. He writes the quarterly publication, Encounters on the Edge, which can be ordered here.

There is a Share blog on a similar theme here. Share has offered some practical tips on the subject here - go to the brown heading, about halfway down the page, called 'What about the sacraments?'

If you have something burning to say and want to contribute to the Share weekly guest blog, please contact Beth Keith.

Comments

Lay led churches

Posted by Neil Walpole on 26 June 2009 - 10:05

The problem of Anglicanism and who can and can not do 'the magic bits' in communion is in my mind the main reason for Church Army Officers leaving to become Priests. But in some dioceses the problem is not just not being able to take communion, but also one of not being able to carry out Baptisms.

Evangelists who have made major contribution in leading people to Christ are often told that they are not ecclesiastically fit to Baptise.

One of my colleagues has been baptising new Christians for years and because of the diocese in which he works is now told that he has no authority to baptise. What then does this say about those he has baptised? That their baptism is not valid? If so - then the same applies for Ethiopian eunuch amongst many others were baptised in Acts.

Whinge over!

Neil

Posted by Pam Smith on 28 June 2009 - 11:17

I'm not clear how anyone can have been baptising unless ordained in a C of E church, but AFAIK It's God who decides if a sacrament is valid, so I don't think that an issue of church order being changed could retrospectively invalidate a baptism.

Many people prepare others for baptism and confirmation but do not have a strong sense of deprivation about not being able to baptise them or preside at communion. So it's arguable that if someone has that deep sense of a need around being able to baptise or preside that could be a clear indication of a calling to ordination. (Though probably not not in itself sufficient to convince a conference that you should be ordained.)

The idea of 'magic bits' in the Communion service is not how I see it, I see the whole service as the celebration. My specific part in it as a priest which no-one else can do is to pronounce absolution after confession, to say the Eucharistic prayer and to pronounce the blessing at the end. But it's God's forgiveness, God's grace and God's blessing that I am pronouncing, not my own.

I can understand - from first hand experience - the frustration and hurt of not being able to preside, bless and baptise, but on the other hand, the lists of gifts that St Paul gave us make our interdependence clear - 'some' are called to each area or given each gift. We are not meant to be able to do it all.

It was pointed out from the floor at the pioneer conference at Easter that Jesus sent people out in twos. There seemed to be an underlying, unconscious model of pioneer ministers being super ministers who are a 'package' of all the gifts, knowledge, skills and sacramental authority to set up a church in which everyone else will have been previously unchurched. I find this very troubling both in terms of the potential for burn out and also because it we are in danger of replicating a 'father/mother knows best' approach.

There is an interesting discussion going on about at the moment here:

http://brownblog.info/?p=886

the potential for communion in online churches which touches on the dilemma of how you can be church in a situation where sacraments are not possible.

Posted by Neil Walpole on 15 August 2009 - 21:10

"I'm not clear how anyone can have been baptising unless ordained in a C of E church"
Pam you will obviously therfore be shocked to know that some churches (sometimes encouraged by their forward thinking Bishops) allow mature lay Christians to say the Eucharistic prayer.

"My specific part in it as a priest which no-one else can do is to pronounce absolution after confession, to say the Eucharistic prayer and to pronounce the blessing at the end."

Pam this is nothing but in my opinion, a (flawed) tradition of the Church of England. If there was a neccesity for a 'priest' to 'say the words' surely Paul would have mentioned this when he talked about the manner in which we should take the Lord's supper. Indeed Paul's five fold ministry lists apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers - no mention of priests here!

Regarding Baptism: Was Philip a Priest or an Evangelist when he Baptised the Ethiopian eunuch? The best understanding of priesthood is surely that "of all believers".

Neil