|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Magazine - Online sacraments
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
You may have noticed a Ship article by me about this. Online sacraments have been the subject of passionate debate since at least the Church of Fools experiment. It would be interesting to know what potential and pitfalls people see, and also what interest there would be in trying some experiments using various online technology.
[ 15. June 2016, 18:55: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
Agreeing about what a sacrament actually is is a big hurdle to overcome.
If we cant overcome this obstacle in the non-virtual world, what chance have we in an on-line environment? (Yes I know this was covered in the article.)
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
Whether or not you consider online Communion a brilliant or hideous probably depends on what particular kind of church you belong to and your beliefs about what makes Communion valid. (No value judgement intended btw).
It may be that Communion will feel less real when it’s me and my computer, a glass of wine and some bread along with a virtual congregation … But part of me feels there’s only one way to find out! ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Simon
Editor
# 1
|
Posted
That historic logjam in agreeing on what sacraments are is why we're going for a practical experiment. The idea is to try different forms of online communion and ask people to report back on how the experience was for them.
We took the same sort of practical approach when we launched Church of Fools, and that experiment showed us that online church was spiritually and pastorally meaningful. Since the institutional churches are still basically stuck on the issue of online church (after all these years), we thought we'd cut to the chase and do the thing they're all so nervous about – sacraments – and see what happens.
Ship of Fools is probably one of the best places to do this, since no institutional church has a stake in us.
--------------------
Eternal memory
Posts: 3787 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
There are some features of the two or three sacraments that, say, the CofE regularly recognises that are more difficult to define if you stretch your number of sacraments to six, seven, or whatever. So in what I'm about to say I'd like to make it clear that when I say 'sacrament', I'm thinking of rituals such as baptism, communion, and anointing.
If you're going to attempt to translate these into online forms, there are a number of problems. The most obvious, I think, has to do with physicality in two aspects. The first is the 'matter' of the sacrament: water, bread, wine, oil. Yes, you can have these beside you as you sit at your computer desk, but is there a qualitative difference between this and having them in the midst of an assembly of people? My response to this is conditioned by the seconds aspect of physicality: the physical presence, and often the touch, of the person ministering the sacrament. Certainly in the work I've done on the idea of the sacrament of anointing, person-to-person touch is a vital element, and it's difficult to see how this might be replicated in an online form.
Another problem, related to this last point, is the idea of the 'assembly' - the fact that in a 'real-life' church, you're part of a crowd. Even if it's a very small crowd, I think there's something essential in the idea of having 'two or three gathered'. What is this like - what does it become - when it's translated into an online form?
A third problem is the idea of the journey or pilgrimage. It's not for nothing that (normally) you go to church. There is an effort involved, and not only an effort but a kind of ritual around the ritual: the ritual of travelling and returning, if only to the end of the street. In the 1970s John Berger began his documentaries Ways of Seeing by wondering what, say, the Mona Lisa becomes when you no longer have to travel to the Louvre to see it, but can pin a postacrd reproduction of it to your bedroom wall. If all you have is the postcard, what does it mean to say that you've seen the Mona Lisa? I think there is something analogous in going to church.
Finally, but not least, there is the ascetic of worship. Being part of an assembly requires having a sort of mindset, and a kind of behaviour, that it would be tempting to forego in an online version. Few people attend communion in their dressing gowns and slippers. Fewer still keep one eye on the goings-on while they relax with a coffee and a newspaper. Partly this is because of the peer pressure of the crowd: that pressure is absent online.
I'm not putting forward these issues as an attempt at a knock-down rejection of the idea (though you can probably guess my own preferences from them). But I think they are things to think about.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
It seems quite a courageous thing you're trying to do here, good luck.
(And the joke about the British and red wine made me ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) )
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
Rather than doing an online version of what we do in a building - eating bread and drinking wine, say - wouldn't it be possible to think up something that would be specially suited to the internet?
For instance, at a certain point everyone could post an appropriate photograph - of the room where they are sitting, say, or of their smile or hands or bible. Or everyone could download and play a piece of music. Or, at a certain point, pairs of people could speak on the phone, or exchange text messages.
Not very good examples, I'm afraid, but does the point make sense? Rather than each having a glass of wine from a different bottle, it might make more sense to share communion by all downloading the same picture and using it as our desktop background for the next week. Or something.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
Hatless, something like that has long been my preferred way forward. The tricky bit is finding the appropriate thing to do, which I suspect probably depends on the bit of Internet subculture you are in at the time.
(We are hoping to try several different things, and most of them won't involve popping open a bottle of plonk in splendid isolation in front of a laptop.)
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
I don't believe in sacraments, so in many senses this is none of my business - but does the blessing of the bread and wine have to be of 'this' particular bread and wine? Could there not be a global blessing of bread and wine?
And if that is possible, would it not also be possible to bless all bread and all wine?
Similarly could not water be blessed to perform distance rituals?
Help me out here, I'm really not understanding.
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
I really hope (and am quite confident) that you'll be able to steer clear of "Bring the bread close to your computer screen, so that our priest can bless it".
![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
Why? What is wrong with that? what am I missing?
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Simon:
we thought we'd cut to the chase and do the thing they're all so nervous about – sacraments – and see what happens.
Ship of Fools is probably one of the best places to do this, since no institutional church has a stake in us.
I'm up for having a go.
But can't get onto Church of Fools. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
(Notwithstanding downloading the required software plugins a number of times).
Thought perhaps it was dead.....?
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
We're not planning to use Church of Fools for any experiments, although at least one of them may arouse a bit of CoF nostalgia.
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
The 3D Church of Fools experiment closed in September 2004. It has continued in a modified chatroom used for services format since then, changing name in 2006 to St Pixels.
Good idea to just go ahead with it, Simon and Melon. Disagreeing about what a sacrament is does not prevent us from sharing it.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
Disagreeing about what a sacrament is does not prevent us from sharing it.
Hey, are you an anglican? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
We're not planning to use Church of Fools for any experiments, although at least one of them may arouse a bit of CoF nostalgia.
Dear oh dear....misread Simon's post....thought he said Church of fools. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
The tricky bit is finding the appropriate thing to do ...
... Jesus was overheard saying to himself on a certain Thursday afternoon.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoyfulNoise & Parrot OKief
Ship's pirate
# 2049
|
Posted
Responding to Adeodatus:
Adeodatus mentions quality being more meaningfull if we are present with each other physically, I think that physical is an observance only of the outward body. We can equally display our inward selves, emotions, scars, love, delight, faith etc on as offline.
In joining this conversation online you are entertaining that this conversation is real.
You suggest eliminating physical touch takes way a vital-element, would you not give communion to a dying person in issolation whom you could not touch? Touch is just one of our senses which feed our reactions to those around us. Removing one sense, you see this in blind or deaf folk, will often heighten use of other avaiable senses.
I certainly perceive online church to be as 'real' as offline, when assembling in online church I am assembling as much with my friends as when I move my body from my house to a church building. In some ways more so, because I can join in with all the conversation and fellowship, not just that heard by and spoken to those close around me. The feeling of being 'gathered' with people worldwide is awesome, in the same way as sharing a meal with someone the otherside of the world via Skype. I will sit down in the UK to eat breakfast in front of my camera and microphone whilst my freinds in Japan eat supper. Our sharing is very real, I hear about their day and their news - they hear about my yesterday.
You have referred to the effort, the pilgrimage, of getting to church, the journey in getting there. So is the church meeting less valid for a vicar who needs only move from the vicarage into the church? Maybe there is more effort involved in preparing ourselves spiritually and mentally for worship, which could be undertaken on the walk to church, way home from work, walking in the park, sitting in the armchair, reading the bible, praying... Surely it is how we approach God, unseen but ever present, than the physical journey.
The original Mona Lisa is able to be in only one place, therefore deserving a trip to see the orriginal, God is present everywhere. By the Mona Lisa argument we would all of us in the world have to go to the same church building.
The mindset of 'dressing up' for church has been crumbling for longer than the internet church. Some churches folk still dress in their Sunday Best - which I think is brilliant. Others find T'Shirt and Jeans equally acceptable. What is to stop though, people going online dressed up or down. Ther are times when I stay in all day, but dress in a colar and tie, honouring some special memory; likewise I may dress up to worship and recieve communion - or not, but surely it is how I present my heart to God, not how I dress the Lion as a Lamb, or the Lion as a Lion...
Is peer pressure really important? Is it not peer pressure that gets us into trouble in the first place, acting as we perceive others think we should act, presenting ourselves to look perfect, rather than the grubby urchins we are, cleansed only in Gods amazing grace.
In an online community you can hide your persona, many people try. But you can only do it for so long, after a while people see the more honest and grubby you.
Exactly the same can be said for an offline community.
But in either place, it is impossible to hide from God.
For me online church holds equal importance as offline, to me they are BOTH important.
I so look forward to being able to share Communion with an online community as I look forward to meals with my friends in Japan, or Communion with fellow believers in my or any other church I may physically be in.
(I have taken a while to type this post, so appologies if I cross post)
--------------------
Written from my alternative universe.
Posts: 1101 | From: East Anglia in the UK | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
monkeylizard
Ship's scurvy
# 952
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by the long ranger:
Why? What is wrong with that? what am I missing?
I believe the LeRoc was making a reference to the common practice of early con-artist televangelists to have the viewer "come closer to your TV set and lay your hands on the screen so that we can heal you and pick your pockets at the same time" or something like that. Some may still do that stuff.
--------------------
The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. ~ Herbert Spencer (1820 - 1903)
Posts: 2201 | From: Music City, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
Online sacraments have been the subject of passionate debate since at least the Church of Fools experiment. It would be interesting to know what potential and pitfalls people see, and also what interest there would be in trying some experiments using various online technology.
I see no particular pitfalls in extending Protestant "sacraments" to the virtual sphere. In fact, I would be hard pressed to find a better symbol for their purely mental value than abstracting them further into bits and pixels. These "sacraments" have always been worth just whatever motivation to holiness they have provided to the observer, as now becomes obvious also in their very making.
I wonder though, if one screen-captures such a "sacrament" (I recommend Fraps), would it be "valid" upon replay? Or is the concurrent presence of a virtual community essential?
Meanwhile, actual sacraments remain available at your nearest RC church. True, you will have to suffer the proximity of real human beings in order to access these Divine channels of grace. But then God always had this strange fetish for "embodiment". I mean here He is, pure Spirit in zero-lag communication with Himself and He does not only create nature, but actually incarnates into that mess as well, with human bandwidth. His first technical officer Lucifer had a right fit about that one. And I hear He plans to resurrect us in the body. I mean, come on, what better place for cloud computing than heaven? Yeah, OK, we are going to get an upgrade, but why don't we just abstract away from the bioware layer, like, all the way? Because when we Christians talk about meeting God face to face - what we mean is on Facebook!
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Simon
Editor
# 1
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I'm sure it's Ok for making a spiritual communion but the word was made flesh, not digital.
By a similar logic, the word was made flesh, not Hovis.
--------------------
Eternal memory
Posts: 3787 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
@IngoB - that seems an odd thing to say.
If a man is alone in a prison cell, can he not be left properly consecrated bread and wine? Are not RC ever allowed to bless and eat consecrated bread and wine on their own?
It seems to me this whole concept of proximity and human contact is humbug.
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Simon:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I'm sure it's Ok for making a spiritual communion but the word was made flesh, not digital.
By a similar logic, the word was made flesh, not Hovis.
We have it on good Authority that bread and wine will do. Please demonstrate your "I Am Who Is"-ness, and we will take Your Word for what the pixels in question Are to us.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Great Gumby
Ship's Brain Surgeon
# 10989
|
Posted
quote:
Originally written by Melon:
This, I suggest, is the real reason why Twitter communion is such an inflammatory notion; why theologians hesitate to take a serious look at online church in general and online sacraments in particular. Today's sacramental edifice depends on no one asking too many questions
Yes, undoubtedly. What this reminds me of more than anything else is a thought experiment, and thought experiments have nasty ways of showing up gaping holes in reasoning.
--------------------
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. - Richard Feynman
A letter to my son about death
Posts: 5382 | From: Home for shot clergy spouses | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
tessaB
Shipmate
# 8533
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Few people attend communion in their dressing gowns and slippers. Fewer still keep one eye on the goings-on while they relax with a coffee and a newspaper. Partly this is because of the peer pressure of the crowd: that pressure is absent online.
How many people however do not go to church because they can't be bothered to dress up for it (or indeed can't dress 'respectably' due to mobility or money issues)?
How many parents spend their time with one eye on what their children are doing?
How many gossips spend their time with one eye on what Mrs. Thing from Down the Road is doing?
Amd so on and so forth.
I think the assumption that everyone in a physical church is concentrating soley on the eucharist is false.
This may be a more spiritual time because other distractions are absent.
Willing to give it a go anyway.
--------------------
tessaB
eating chocolate to the glory of God
Holiday cottage near Rye
Posts: 1068 | From: U.K. | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Please demonstrate your "I Am Who Is"-ness, and we will take Your Word for what the pixels in question Are to us.
Please demonstrate your definition of bread and wine (and, maybe, how a wafer of almost zero humidity can be both).
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
For instance, at a certain point everyone could post an appropriate photograph - of the room where they are sitting, say, or of their smile or hands or bible. Or everyone could download and play a piece of music. Or, at a certain point, pairs of people could speak on the phone, or exchange text messages. Not very good examples, I'm afraid, but does the point make sense?
Totally! That way there would be no pretence. Heck, I would even join something like that.
quote:
Originally posted by the long ranger:
It seems to me this whole concept of proximity and human contact is humbug.
Well, you have read that into my post and dismissed it. So perhaps you could now read my post again to see that it was actually about embodiment...
(Not that I think your conclusion is compelling. It certainly is against Catholic practice to leave the Eucharist for private consumption, see paragraphs 131-133. But anyhow, that was not my point.)
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
AberVicar
Mornington Star
# 16451
|
Posted
I thought the whole point of sacraments is about being physically present. Whether you hold IngoB's view of sacramental presence and action (which I do, although I would not restrict it to the RCC in the way he appears to) or have a more 'spiritualised' take on it, there are things that physically go on in the physical presence of the partakers.
It is perfectly possible to pray for others, and to be a channel of grace for others, remotely - which I would argue includes virtually. I suspect this is why Church of Fools was helpful to some.
To take the argument further, there has been a strand of discussion here, in various threads, that raised questions about anonymity - how it can free people up both to express needful things and also (not always exclusively) hurtful things - or even to be a troll or WUM without the consequences that follow in RL. There will always be some sort of distance in virtual engagement that is different from the very intimate reality of what formal sacraments are about.
--------------------
Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, make sure you are not, in fact, just surrounded by assholes.
Posts: 742 | From: Abertillery | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Please demonstrate your "I Am Who Is"-ness, and we will take Your Word for what the pixels in question Are to us.
Please demonstrate your definition of bread and wine (and, maybe, how a wafer of almost zero humidity can be both).
Sure, here, with the limits of accommodation clarified here, as Divinely Authorized here, with future clarifications Divinely Authorized here and here (among other places).
[ 11. June 2012, 15:48: Message edited by: IngoB ]
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Sure, here
So is "with bread and with wine in which a little water must be mixed" from your link what the congregation at your church consumed yesterday? Or did they consume something simplified and abstracted to the point where it was quasi-two-dimensional?
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
So is "with bread and with wine in which a little water must be mixed" from your link what the congregation at your church consumed yesterday? Or did they consume something simplified and abstracted to the point where it was quasi-two-dimensional?
What I ate came from wheat, and what I drank came from vines - living plants providing their fruits. I had this food and drink in my mouth and on my tongue, and consumed them as usual with (a little) chewing, salivating and swallowing, and part of this matter has now become part of my body (whereas other parts I have excreted).
What is simplified and abstracted does not concern the sacramental symbolism of making the body and blood of Christ part of my own body and blood, of sustaining my life by consuming the fruits of life. Much less is it of relevance that the bread consumed is of a rather special variety. What one could discuss is the simplification and abstraction from a meal containing some ritual acts to ritual acts containing a meal. That sure is interesting, but the liturgy is not the sacrament in the end.
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I think it does come down to churchmanship. If you don't see the sacraments as having real presence, but understand communion as a memorial, something done in memory as given in the words of the Gospels, then on-line sacraments could be exciting and an interesting idea. If you see the Eucharistic feast as meaning the real presence, then the way people who can't attend church participate is by being taken home communion, in person.
This same divide is why a Eucharist at an ecumenical service opens a can of worms and is better not done. Sharing in the Word, music, praise and prayer is not so divisive and can be offered as service in which all can participate - and you all know what the Crappy Choruses and Horrible Hymn thread looks like!
Now the people who can't understand the problem tend to have a memorialist understanding and cannot comprehend the visceral consciousness of the real presence and why their simple solution makes others throw up their hands in horror. And having tried to explain this when I was heavily involved in the local churches together and to others on the Ship (in the café) I'm not sure there's any way of helping people who don't see an issue that there is one. All I could do is persuade the real life people that they needed to accept that some churches would have a problem with their suggested joint communion service and that the RC church would not be able to participate, for starters. I'm in the real presence camp and would prefer to find a eucharistic service elsewhere - e.g. said 8am BCP - if there's not one on offer where I normally attend.
Secondly, I was reflecting on the differences between on-line and real life interactions generally. Having moved to being far more involved on-line than in real life for socialising when my daughter was ill and I was housebound, it's both more distant and more intimate at once. I don't hide behind another persona, as people who've met me will know, but when I've had enough, I switch off and walk away - and that's a whole lot harder to do in real life, when the irritating neighbour will be demanding support at 2am. And I think an online church allows that detachment too which may not be the way we want our community. But, it also allows interaction to the housebound, so has advantages in those terms.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
Personally, I don't think that some sort of "real presence" is excluded by different expressions of existing sacraments, or by different sacraments for that matter, unless "real presence" means that the rest of the universe is in some sense "real non-presence". This, to me, is a fundamental problem with all conservative sacramentalism - to have genuine "thin places" the rest of the world has to be a "thick place".
God isn't with us because we summon him up like a gini (sp?). I don't think that God created vines and then inspired people to produce bread inherently just so Jesus could perform the Last Supper. It seems to me that Jesus takes a human culture and its products and says "You'll find me in the midst of this". And, in that case, insisting that God can only be present when we pretend we are in a 2000 year-old culture looks arbitrary going-on perverse to me.
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
My denomination does not regard Presidency at the Sacrament as a matter of Faith but of Order,
So its a question of who authorises the celebration of the Sacrament.
And I suspect that the proposal of on line sacraments is being pushed by those who in RL would not be authorised as a matter of Order.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
There are other ways of understanding sacraments, and other ways of understanding real presence. It's not only about imagining that God is mysteriously mixed in with the molecules of the bread. You can believe that God is present in the actions of serving and eating, and that a sacrament is made valid by the intention of those who come together around it. These would easily translate to an online sacrament.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
Djinn, Jinn, Jinni or Genie.
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I'm not RC. I'm CofE, and the lower side of middle at that. But I'd find this idea shocking.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
For reasons already mentioned by others, I don't believe online sacraments would be valid nor would I want Episcopal churches to offer such a thing or recommend it to others. Still, not everybody shares my admittedly high view of the sacraments. Why shouldn't those with a low view of the sacraments make them available online? Obviously, some Shipmates find that sort of thing meaningful. It's unlikely that all the people in the world who would find that sort of thing meaningful are Shipmates. Give it a go. What can it hurt?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
Beeswax Alter
You dont have to distinguish between those of a low or high view of the sacraments.
All views, whether of the Faith ( as yours) or Order (as mine) are at one on this.
On line sacraments are not valid. Period. Full stop.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Melon:
Personally, I don't think that some sort of "real presence" is excluded by different expressions of existing sacraments, or by different sacraments for that matter, unless "real presence" means that the rest of the universe is in some sense "real non-presence". This, to me, is a fundamental problem with all conservative sacramentalism - to have genuine "thin places" the rest of the world has to be a "thick place".
QED
quote:
God isn't with us because we summon him up like a gini (sp?). I don't think that God created vines and then inspired people to produce bread inherently just so Jesus could perform the Last Supper. It seems to me that Jesus takes a human culture and its products and says "You'll find me in the midst of this". And, in that case, insisting that God can only be present when we pretend we are in a 2000 year-old culture looks arbitrary going-on perverse to me.
And I would say I feel as if people who pray to Jesus in a certain way sound as if they have Jesus in his pocket. I sit in prayer meetings where God is told what to do, fighting the response "not our will, but Yours, Oh Lord"
And this has just demonstrated why it will be something only some Christians are comfortable with.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
Beeswax Alter
On line sacraments are not valid. Period. Full stop.
Isn't it up to God whether or not a sacrament is valid?
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
Wait, I think all sacraments are invalid.
But why should anyone who thinks they are valid listen to me? Why should anyone who thinks they can - or may be - some spiritual benefit from online sacraments be held back because someone else thinks they're not valid, period, full stop.
I don't understand this reasoning. Fair enough if you don't believe it and want to discuss the reasons why you think what you think.
On the other hand, I can't really explain adequately why I don't believe in sacraments. Gah, this stuff is such a headache.
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psmith
Shipmate
# 15311
|
Posted
I don't like the idea of online Church, in large part because I don't consider an online gathering to be same as a real, in person gathering or a substitute for it. The addition of Sacraments only aggravates this. One can hardly share the cup over the net, or baptize.
The case of prisoners has been mentioned; I would hope that they would have access to a priest/ minister as appropriate. It seems unlikely that they would have internet access if they didn't.
Posts: 81 | From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I see no particular pitfalls in extending Protestant "sacraments" to the virtual sphere. In fact, I would be hard pressed to find a better symbol for their purely mental value than abstracting them further into bits and pixels.
Meanwhile, actual sacraments remain available at your nearest RC church.
Lord have mercy IngoB. You're so cute sometimes.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Online communion seems to me sort of like trying to consummate a marriage online. With the best will in the world, it's still not the same. Pity.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
the long ranger: Why? What is wrong with that? what am I missing?
Monkeylizard answered it perfectly for me here.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mary LA
Shipmate
# 17040
|
Posted
When I first began attending the Catholic Church as a would-be convert, the priest told me to make a 'spiritual communion' at Mass since I had not yet been baptised, confirmed or received into the Church.
So I just sat at the back of the church and prayed that I might participate in some sense in the communion taking place during the Mass. As I got to know others in the parish better, I felt more connected and looked forward to the spiritual communion.
Participation for me was about the connectedness and intention of believers, the longing and sincere desire to be united with Christ, rather than the actual physical drinking of wine and swallowing bread, taking the Host.
The woman next to me had divorced and remarried so she couldn't take communion either and we both sat praying together. She remains one of my closest friends. The man in front of me was a recovering alcoholic and could not receive communion under both species, never touched the wine in the chalice but united himself in spirit with those who did and felt he received the fullness of communion by bread/the Host alone.
I felt that I was able to receive the fullness of communion and the Presence of Christ in that spiritual communion. Which is why I would be interested in joining a faith community celebrating online communion.
--------------------
“I often wonder if we were all characters in one of God's dreams.”
― Muriel Spark
Posts: 499 | From: Africa | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
IngoB: quote:
Meanwhile, actual sacraments remain available at your nearest RC church. True, you will have to suffer the proximity of real human beings in order to access these Divine channels of grace. But then God always had this strange fetish for "embodiment". I mean here He is, pure Spirit in zero-lag communication with Himself and He does not only create nature, but actually incarnates into that mess as well, with human bandwidth. His first technical officer Lucifer had a right fit about that one. And I hear He plans to resurrect us in the body. I mean, come on, what better place for cloud computing than heaven? Yeah, OK, we are going to get an upgrade, but why don't we just abstract away from the bioware layer, like, all the way? Because when we Christians talk about meeting God face to face - what we mean is on Facebook!
Now also showing at your local Ship's Quotes File.
Excellent, IngoB! ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
the long ranger: Why? What is wrong with that? what am I missing?
Monkeylizard answered it perfectly for me here.
Oh I see - the fact that some people abuse it means the whole idea is wrong. Or not.
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
