Communion by Extension and How It Differs from Holy Communion - Essay Example

COMMUNION BY EXTENSION AND HOW IT DIFFERS FROM HOLY COMMUNION Introduction ‘Communion’ is commonly understood as a practice that s observed repeatedly over an entire life of any Christian believer. All Christians come together in worship and perceive the time as holy while they share ‘communion elements’ and in unity celebrate Christ’s death on the cross for all. Among other basis of observing the communion is the reason that Christ commanded all to practice it, as a sign of honor of Christ’s death on the cross for mankind and as a sign of revering and remembering Christ. Besides, Christians perceive the time of communion as most appropriate time for personal reflection and it is through the time that an individual re-evaluates own commitment to the course of Christianity. The basis of sharing the communion elements is that the believers conceptualize the elements becoming actual Christ’s body and blood although through faith. They therefore take the elements symbolically for remembering Christ’s endurance and ultimate death through crucifixion for the sake of saving mankind from eternal condemnation. There is therefore all basis of the religious act in the teachings of bible and as such, all believers are expected to observe communion as an act of faith. Eucharist, holly communion as well as Lords supper have all the spiritual connotation of the communion and are used interchangeably to refer to the same thing. Therefore, all people partaking of the communion elements are said to ‘receive Eucharist’ or better ‘celebrating Eucharist’. The gospel by Mark, Mathew as well as Luke illustrate the relevance of observing communion as Christ himself presided over the last supper commonly referred to as Lords table and demanded that Christians does likewise in remembrance of him. Discussion England church has however enacted rather new ideology through ‘communion by extension’ in view of increased need for pastoral reach to people on the ground. The rather ‘new’ service has become part of regular or common worship as has been practiced in the doctrine of Christianity and has the main feature as being as regularizing this practice across all church (within all dioceses) in England. A difference should however be drawn between Holy Communion and the communion by extension as the ideologies over the two vary absolutely. When the ‘house of bishops’ in England conceive the idea of communion by extension, people at the ground were in mind where they perceived that there is the need to have holy communion shared at common places where normal holy communion is not shared. Under such circumstance, Holy Communion by extension is shared away from normal church set-up although with a disclaimer that caution is to be observed to ensure the Holy Communion is observed as rationally as has been the case before in the history of church. The elements in use within the communion by extension are consecrated earlier within a church and administration of the same brings together various groups over a common cause like illnesses. The bishop holds absolute power to nominate a person who would preside over the communion by extension and as such, no one person would claim the responsibility of presiding over the service (Dallen, 1994, p. 1-59). These differences point out that communion by extension is by itself very distinct as against the common ‘holy communion’ and does not in itself override the essence of holy c communion as have been observed previously. Holy Communion is presided over by the priest but under such exceptions and through written permission, another person from the congregation is allowed to preside over and hence regarded as provisional or exceptional. Particular vesture must be won while administering the communion by extension with a special training being accorded to the person to preside over the service as authorized by the Bishop. Besides, the right to conduct the communion by extension is periodic and this explains why the Bishop keeps revisiting the rights accorded to the person overseeing the communion by extension. This paper also notes that granting of the permission to preside over the communion by the Bishop is done sparingly hence specific reasons is involved before permission is granted. Such reasons as would often lead to according of the right to observe the rites are emergencies like sicknesses and specific congregational needs that warrant specialized pastoral care. Besides, the consecrated elements are highly regarded and great care is accorded to the elements as they are transferred from the church where Holy Communion where the Holy Communion takes place. The general criteria in use in dictating such persons as would partake the communion by extension is that the person(s) must be from a church which equally believes in the holy trinity doctrine. It is also however worth noting that prior preparation for the individuals and congregations at large are required before sharing in the communion by extension (Tovey, 2001, p. 1-33). The history in the ideology of having communion by extension emanated from having many people deprived of the opportunity and right to share in holy communion in the normal church set-up especially through early church persecution. In fact, the communion by extension practice is a rather new phenomenon in the history of Christian faith with a critical difference identified between the communion and the Eucharist’ (or the common holy communion). While Holy Communion has been observed over the years ever since Christ’s crucifixion ‘’communion by extension’ is a new version of sharing communion elements in the modern times (Dallen, 1994, p. 1-59). While in the past Holy Communion would never be presided over by any other person apart from the priest (meaning the Bishop or the archdeacon) changing times have seen the church empower other lay leaders to administer the elements over communion (the communion by extension). Continued reduction in the number of priest who is allowed to preside over the communion and increase in believers, there has therefore been the need to have communion restructured in order to have many people have the opportunity and more frequently. However, the communion referred to here is by extension as against Holy Communion which is still a hard topic on who to preside over and the main difference from the ‘normal’ communion. Conclusion The discussion above shows a clear disparity between the concept of Holy Communion as have been observed and the rather new ideology of communion by extension as have been adopted by the England church. The Holy Communion has been, ever since, observed as a right in honor of Christ’s death for mankind sake. At the ‘last supper’ Christ symbolically broke the bread and shared it among the disciples commanding them to take it as it represented his body as was given for ransom to all sinners. Moreover, he shared wine in the representation of his blood that was to be shed for mankind and equally commanded them to drink it. After the symbolic act, Christ commanded that such be practiced ever by all believers in his remembrance. Whenever congregations therefore converge and share communion elements, this is what basically defines and characterizes the ‘holy communion’ or ‘Eucharist’ as other would call it. The basis of the faith has been derived from the gospels by Mathew, Mark and Luke and has symbolic importance to all Christians. Some observe it in times of personal reflection, as a sign of adoring and obeying Christ as well as others believe that they are ‘taking Christ in’. it must also be noted that Christ commanded that the practice be observed as frequent as possible. However, increase in believers and relatively few priests have been associated with few people participating. Besides, some events like emergencies and special occasion require sharing of communion by believers even if they are from different denominations. This has necessitated the England church bishops formulate and allow special instances when communion is observed and accorded it the title ‘communion by extension’ (Tovey, 2001, p. 1-33). The main feature with the kind of communion is that it targets people at the ground and who does not in often times share in Holy Communion. However, one point remains clear that communion by extension cannot outdo Holy Communion and therefore, the frequency observed with Holy Communion must not be compromised for the communion by extension. Bibliography Dallen J. 1994. The dilemma of priestless Sundays. Chicago: Liturgy training publications Tovey P. 2001. Public Worship with communion by extension: A commentary. Cambridge: Grove books Read More