Years ago when Off the Beaten track was first published I did a training session, and described a street based communion (coke and crisps style) and asked participants – Is this church? Oli was present and has been thinking and working on his eccelesiological position in response to the question. He has published an interesting short read exploring the need for orthodoxy around the issue of eccelesiology and communion that is well worth the read and download. Find it here.
I really like the fence model he proposes and it presents a good challenge, but before I post my responses i would be interested to hear others views.
I wonder if there is a third model not represented here – that through the act of communion God is present with us in a very tangible way. This goes beyond symbolism, but does not suggest that the bread and wine actually become Christ’s body and blood.
I’m also not sure about the argument that because symbolism is not mentioned, it should be taken literally. Could it not also be argued that we only explain things that are not obvious to those we are communicating with? If you were handed bread and wine, and Jesus said ‘take, eat; this is my body’, why would you not think it was a metaphor? If it still looks, smells and tastes like bread and wine, surely you would think it was still that?
The key question for me would be, do we treat this as something through which God is present and meets us in a way perhaps beyond our understanding; yet also grounded in the ‘everydayness’ of life?