"Your Faith Has Made You Well"

21st Sunday after Pentecost (Ordinary Time/UM Kingdomtide), C
October 13, 2013
Luke 17:11-19

Introduction


Today’s Gospel reading is the Healing of the Ten Lepers. It has the characteristics of a typical miracle story. It begins with showing us a particular human need: There were ten lepers who are in need of healing. It also shows us the act of Jesus: Jesus hears their prayer and heals the lepers. The usual miracle story concludes with the person healed or the people around expressing their amazement (or fear) of the power of Jesus. But in this miracle story, one of the lepers who had been healed returned to Jesus and gave glory to God. This tells us the one of the fittest responses when one experiences the miracle of God is thanksgiving.

I. The human need: Leprosy. (Luke 17:11-12)

While Jesus was on his went to Jerusalem, “he passed thro’ the confines of Samaria and Galilee” (John Wesley New Testament) and as he was entering into a certain village, he met ten lepers “who stood afar off”.

In the Torah, the way lepers were treated was very severe. Leviticus 13 and 14 contains the laws regarding leprosy (or “infectious skin disease” as the New International Version translates the Hebrew phrase נגע צרעת  nega’ tsara’at, ‘the plague of leprosy’).

He is a leprous man, he is unclean; the priest shall surely pronounce him unclean: his plague is in his head. And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and the hair of his head shall go loose, and he shall cover his upper lip, and shall cry: 'Unclean, unclean.' All the days wherein the plague is in him he shall be unclean; he is unclean; he shall dwell alone; without the camp shall his dwelling be. (Leviticus 13:44-46, Jewish Publication Society, 1917)

There is a whole book in the Talmud on the laws concerning leprosy, called Tractate Nega'im.

This explains why the ten lepers were outside of the village (“without”—or outside—“the camp” as the Torah says) that Jesus was about to enter and that they had to stand “afar off”.

It is in this condition that the lepers “lifted up their voice” and cried out to Jesus: “Jesus, master, have mercy on us.” (v. 13)

II. The act of Jesus: The cleansing of leprosy. (Luke 17:13-14)

The lepers said, ιεσους επιστατα ελεησον ημας, Iesous, epistata, eleison imas. The word epistata (translated as ‘master’, in the sense of ‘one who stands over’) is a word only used in the Gospel of Luke. (It is used six times: 5:5, 8:24, 8:45; 9:33, 9:49, and here in 17:13). Meanwhile, the other words translated (the most common) as “master” is διδασκλος, didaskalos, ‘teacher’ and κυριος, kurios, ‘lord’. While Luke also uses didaskalos, he alone uses the title epistatēs. This means that the lepers recognize Jesus as “master” who alone can heal them of their leprosy. They use a formula that has since been used as a prayer: eleison imas, ‘have mercy on us’. In the Greek Orthodox Church, there is a prayer called the Trisagion (the ‘Thrice-Holy’):

Ἅγιος ὁ Θεός, Ἅγιος Ἰσχυρός, Ἅγιος Ἀθάνατος, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς.
Agios ho Theos, agios eschuros, agios athanatos, eleison imas.
Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy on us.

--They did not directly ask to be healed or to be cleansed, but they asked for him to have mercy on them.

Jesus hears their prayer and gives them an instruction: “Go, shew yourselves to the priests.” In the Torah, a person who has been healed of their leprosy to go and show themselves to the priests, who examine them and declare that they have been healed. Leviticus 14 contains the regulations regarding those who have been healed of leprosy:

And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying: This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing: he shall be brought unto the priest. And the priest shall go forth out of the camp; and the priest shall look, and, behold, if the plague of leprosy be healed in the leper… (Leviticus 14:1-3)

…the priest will now prescribe rituals for the healed lepers to undergo in order to be finally declared “clean”. This includes animal sacrifices and the setting free of a dove (probably to symbolize that the leper has finally been ‘set free’).

Jesus did not instantly heal the ten lepers and tell them, “Go, you are now healed”; he said “Go, shew yourselves to the priests.” And as they were walking, the Bible says, “they were cleansed” (v. 14). Here, once more, Jesus is seen to have power over disease, even over one as terrifying as leprosy.

III. The human response: Giving glory to God (Luke 17:15-19)

A. Giving glory to God. As human beings, one of our responses when we experience the power of God is giving him glory. As the lepers were going to show themselves to the priests, one of them, when he saw that he was healed (or more precisely, ‘cleansed’; Greek καθαριζω katharidzō) he turned back and “with a loud voice glorified God” (v. 15, 18). The word used here is δοξαζω, doxazō, which is where we get the word “Doxology” (literally, ‘word of praise’). Among us Protestants, the Doxology is the Trinitarian stanza sung after the offering. There are actually two Doxologies: The “lesser” Doxology is the Gloria Patri:

Greek:
Δόξα Πατρὶ καί Υιώ καί Αγίω Πνεύματι,
Καὶ νῦν καί αεί καί εις τους αιώνας των αιώνων. Αμην.
Doxa Patri kai Huiō kai Pneumati,
kai nun kai aei kai eis touc aiōnas aiōnōn. Amēn.

Latin:
Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto.
Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper,
et in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

English:
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost;
as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be;
world without end, Amen. Amen.

...and the “greater” Doxology, which is called the "Glory to God in the Highest". It based on the angels' song at the birth of Christ, is often used as the opening hymn in Roman Catholic masses:

Latin:
Gloria in excelsis Deo. Et in terra pax hominibus bonæ voluntatis.
Laudamus te; benedicimus te; adoramus te; glorificamus te.
Gratias agimus tibi propter magnam gloriam tuam.
Domine Deus, Rex coelestis, Deus Pater omnipotens.
Domine Fili unigenite Jesu Christe.
Domine Deus, Agnus Dei, Filius Patris.
Qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis.
Qui tollis peccata mundi, suscipe deprecationem nostram.
Qui sedes ad dextram Patris, O miserere nobis.
Quoniam tu solus Sanctus, tu solus Dominus,
tu solus Altissimus, Jesu Christe.
Cum Sancto Spiritu in gloria Dei Patris. Amen.

English:
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will.
We praise You, we bless You, we adore You, we glorify You,
We give thanks to You for your great glory,
Lord God, Heavenly King, God the Almighty Father. Lord Only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father,
You Who take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us.
You Who take away the sins of the world, hear our prayer.
You Who sit at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us.
For You alone are holy, you alone are the Lord, You alone are the Most High, Jesus Christ,
With the Holy Spirit in the glory of God the Father. Amen.

Among Protestants, the stanza sung to “Old Hundredth” is commonly called "the" Doxology.

Praise God from whom all blessings flow,
praise him all creatures he below;
Praise him above, ye heavenly hosts,
praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen.

The reason that we sing the (greater) Doxology after the offering is that we are praising God “from whom all blessings flow”, from which we get our offerings. We are offering only what God himself has given us.

B. Giving thanks to God. Another response that we can give when we experience the power of God is thanksgiving. One of the lepers, when he noticed that he was healed, returned to Jesus, “fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks” (v. 16). And this one was a Samaritan. The word used here is ευχαριστεω, eucharisteō, where we get the word “Eucharist”. During the liturgical renewal in The United Methodist Church in the late 80’s and 90’s (as expressed in our denomination’s official rituals, The United Methodist Hymnal, 1989 and The United Methodist Book of Worship, 1992), it was recognized that Holy Communion should be an integral part of worship. It is encouraging that more and more United Methodist local churches are now practicing weekly Eucharist. (Here in the Philippines, the practice is spreading in the Ilocos region after pastors there have studied This Holy Mystery.) I pray that this practice spreads to more and more of our local churches. Above all acts of worship, I believe that Holy Communion is the grandest way we can show our thanksgiving to God.

Conclusion

One of the ten lepers who cried out to Jesus for healing, only one returned to give thanks to Jesus: and he was a “stranger”, a Samaritan. (We can presume that the other lepers were Jews.) He receives and additional blessing: “Arise and go, thy faith hath saved thee”. In other translations, “thy faith hath made thee whole (KJV)” or “your faith has you well (NIV)” or “your faith has healed you (Recovery Version, 1985). The Greek word used here is σωζω, sōzō, which is can be translated as ‘to be saved’ is also the same word for ‘to be healed’. Not only has the Samaritan recognized Jesus as “Master”, in fall down before him, he recognizes Jesus as God. So in this story, all ten were “healed” but only one was “saved”.

Play Review – Der Kaufmann

“Der Kaufmann” is Tanghalang Pilipino’s third offering for their 27^th theater season, after the children’s musical “Sandosenang Sapatos” and the epic musical “Ibalong”. “Der Kaufmann” is an adaptation of “The Merchant of Venice” by William Shakespeare based on the Tagalog translation “Ang Negosyante ng Venecia” by National Artist Rolando Tinio and set in a Nazi concentration camp during World War II.

Shakespeare’s “Merchant of Venice” is mind-blowing in itself; but to have it translated in Tagalog? When I shared this experience to my friends, they were incredulous:  How can one translate the famous speeches in the play, like Shylock’s “Hath not a Jew eyes?” (Act 3, Scene 1) and Portia’s “The quality of mercy” (Act 3, Scene 5)? Furthermore, “Merchant” deals with themes of anti-Semitism and homophobia, and ends with legalistic maneuvering in a courtroom. Shakespeare’s play itself is tough going already, but “Der Kaufmann” dares to add the additional layers of rendering it in Tagalog and setting it in a Nazi concentration camp.

In preparing to watch and to review this play, I read a lot—perhaps the most that I had to do with any of the plays I’ve reviewed so far. I downloaded Shakespeare’s original play (courtesy of ManyBooks.Net and downloadable here) and read books on Judaism, anti-Semitism, and the Holocaust (HaShoah in Hebrew). My references are listed below at the end of the review.

I watched the play (once more ticket courtesy of my former student Lhorvie Ann—bless her heart!) last October 5. In this play she plays Jessica, the daughter of the Jewish moneylender, Shylock. Since the play had been running since September 27, I had to resist the temptation of reading other online reviews and perusing TP’s Facebook group page. (Lhorvie insisted that I watch this showing because last week it was her alternate playing the role.) It had been worth the wait.

Summary

The play is a “play within a play” where the Jews were forced by the Nazis to stage Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice". (For a summary of the story, see the version of this review in Instructional Minutes.) Culminating with the reunion of Antonio and Portia, the Jews, together with the homosexuals and the Gypsies, were gassed to death.

After the curtain call, it was announced that they will be an open forum to answer any questions that the audience may have. The director and playwright, Rody Vera, and dramaturge Giselle Garcia also joined the cast. I was seated on the upper balcony but Regina saw me when I raised my hand. I commended that cast and crew for a job well done and extended my hand in the Birkat Kohanim (Priestly Blessing) gesture and gave them a form of a Jewish blessing: “Live long and prosper!”

I taught Trixie how to make the Birkat Kohanim gesture.

Technical Notes: Stage, Lights, Sounds

The play was staged at the Bulwagang Huseng Batute, the “studio theater”. The stage is arranged in an inverted “V” shape. There is an upper level which where scenes in Belmont were usually played. The lower level is composed of sliding frames with “cyclone wire” which represents cages. There is a square open area at the center where most of the action happens. In the middle of the play, during the wedding or Portia and Bassiano, Bassiano and his friends were revealed to be Nazis. They strapped the Nazi insignia on their left arms. To complete the effect, the red banner emblazoned with that hateful symbol, the swastika, was hoisted up from the sides. Portia and the rest give the one-armed Nazi salute. (It has been said that Hitler got the idea from Mussolini.) The transformation has been completed: The set is now a concentration camp.

Huseng Batute is a smallish venue so the cast did not need to use microphones. Also, only recorded music was used. There was only one musical number: a comical piece by Launcelot announcing his intend to depart from his Jewish master.

The set gave me the creeps.

The sounds are the work of TJ Ramos and the lights were by John Batalla (who also did “Sandosenang Sapatos” and “Ibalong”) .

Acting

(Photo courtesy of Tanghalang Pilipino)

Regina de Vera gave an excellent performance as the wealthy heiress of Belmont. Previously she played the sweet older sister in “Sandosenang Sapatos” (albeit a static character). But in “Kaufmann” Regina was perfect in her haughty, upturned-nosed portrayal of Portia. One by one she deprecated her suitors, but melted like wax at the sight of Bassanio. She was also able to portray Portia’s alter-ego, the doctor of law, as a legal eagle, trapping Shylock in a web of legal technicalities. Overall, Regina gave a strong performance portraying a strong woman. There is no question “Kaufmann” is Regina’s play. Kudos, Miss de Vera!

(Photo courtesy of Tanghalang Pilipino)

The play guest-stars comedian par excellance Mr. Lou Veloso, who played Gobo, the bumbling father of Launcelot, Shylock’s friend Tubal, and the Duke of Venice. As he was presiding over the trial of Antonio, high upon the upper level and dressed in a Nazi uniform, Lou Veloso looked every inch the Füehrer. Great work, sir!

Too bad “Kaufmann” was not a musical so we were not regaled with the rich baritone of Jonathan “Tad” Tadionan (the father in “Sandosena” and Aswang in “Ibalong”), but he ably played the role of Shylock, complete with a grimace on his face and a limp in his gait. Tad is a good actor but infinitely better as a singer.

(Photo courtesy of Tanghalang Pilipino)

One of the surprises of the play is that Shylock is played not by one but three actors. Miss Raquel Pareño displayed great acting cred by portraying Shylock the mother. Her scenes were especially memorable: the “Hath not the Jew eyes?” speech and the scene where she was schizophrenically distressed over Jessica’s elopement while rejoicing over the loss of Antonio’s ships. Another memorable scene is when she rushed over to the fallen Shylock the father during the trial and delivered some of Shylock’s lines.

I also found it too bad that my favorite child stage actress, Trixie Esteban, only had a few lines in the play. (“Pahinga nga po ako ngayon eh,” she chirped as we talked after the play.) She played Shylock the daughter, who delivered the final lines assigned to Shylock in the play. While we were not treated to her sweet singing voice, her clear, innocent voice seems to hang in the air as she delivered her lament.

The comedic foils were also very effective in the play (“Merchant” is a comedy, after all): Kristofer Kliatchko as the Prince of Morocco, Aldo Vencilao as Launcelot and the Prince of Aragon.

Antonio and Bassanio. (Photo courtesy of Tanghalang Pilipino)

Hands down the most controversial roles went to Marco Viaña as Antonio and Ricardo Magno as Bassanio, friends and lovers in the play.

Theological Reflections

Anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is hatred towards the Jewish people (who descended from Shem, son of Noah). The Jews here were not depicted as “Christ-killers” but as usurious moneylenders. The Catholic Church used to forbid its members from engaging in moneylending. But the Jews follow Deuteronomy 28:20-21:

Thou shalt not lend upon interest to thy brother: interest of money, interest of victuals [food], interest of any thing that is lent upon interest. Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon interest; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon interest; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thy hand unto, in the land whither thou goest in to possess it. (Jewish Publication Society, 1917)

--which means Jews may lend money without interest to fellow Jews (“thy brother”) but may charge interest to non-Jews, i.e., “foreigners”. Hence that there is a conspiracy theory that Jews are “international bankers” and that they control the international banks, the press, etc.

In my observation, Jews are perceived in this country either as fairies or Christ-killers. A lot of Filipinos thought that Jews only existed in the Bible. A lot of people I talked to were surprised when I told them that there is actually a Jewish synagogue in Makati. (A Jewish doctor I talked to related a story of a nun who told him, “I’ve never met a Jew before!” He then pointed to Jesus on a Cross and said, “He’s Jewish.”)

But the more sinister perception is that Filipinos (and a lot of other misinformed people) think that the Jews are Christ-killers. One member from one of my former church assignments described the ugly features of “Jews” who are whipping Jesus in a tableau that Catholics parade around during Holy Week. I would like to point out that while Jesus was indeed condemned by Jewish religious leaders (the Sanhedrin), the execution was authorized by a Roman governor and carried out by Roman soldiers!  If one asks who is guilty of killing Jesus, both Jews and Gentiles (non-Jews) are guilty! But it doesn’t matter: Jesus died for the forgiven of everyone’s sins, Jew or Gentile (Romans 1:16)!

Let me highlight a little-known chapter in Philippine history. In the story, Shylock is forced to convert to Christianity. For centuries European Jews had been forced to convert to Christianity but they still secretly observed Jewish religious customs. One little-known part of Philippine history is that these so-called nuevos cristianos (‘New Christians’) or Marranos (secret Jews) fled here to the Philippines to be able to escape persecution from in Spain and to be able to practice their religion freely. In World War II, President Manuel L. Quezon granted sanctuary to the Jews escaping the Holocaust in Europe. After the War, most of these Jews immigrated to the US or made aliyah to Israel. The remaining Jews compose the Jewish community in the Philippines. Most of us Filipinos are unaware that the Philippines was responsible for saving the lives about 1,200 Jews from the horrors of the Holocaust!

Homosexuality and homophobia. One of the questions posed by the audience is the homosexual relationship of Antonio and Bassanio (“My Husband’s Lover,” as many in the audience commented, referring to a local television program where a husband has an affair with another man.) According to the all-knowing Wikipedia, the homosexual angle between Antonio and Bassanio has been long a topic of scholarly debate. The play also pointed out that the Nazis not only committed genocide against the Jews but they also mass murdered homosexuals.

The issue on homosexuality is currently a hot issue of debate even within religious circles. I don’t wish to write at length on this topic now. Suffice it to say that I wholeheartedly subscribe to the official position of my denomination, The United Methodist Church as stated in the Social Principles:

Homosexual persons no less than heterosexual persons are individuals of sacred worth. All persons need the ministry and guidance of the church in their struggles for human fulfillment, as well as the spiritual and emotional care of a fellowship that enables reconciling relationships with God, with others, and with self. The United Methodist Church does not condone the practice of homosexuality and considers this practice incompatible with Christian teaching. We affirm that God's grace is available to all, and we will seek to live together in Christian community. We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.

As people of “sacred worth” “no less than heterosexual people”, homophobia has no place in the Church. However, the Church is currently against the ordination of “self-avowed” homosexuals and forbids its pastors to conduct same-sex marriages and the use of our churches for such ceremonies. I do not see the end of the homosexuality debate anywhere in sight. Suffice it for me to say for now that I believe that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin; and that such people, just like all of us common sinners, need the ministry of the Church. Jesus died on the Cross for them as much as he died for us “ordinary” sinners.

Excursus: Feminism. Perhaps what is not much discussed is the portrayal of Portia as a powerful woman. She is shown as a woman in charge; even if the choice for her husband is left to a game of chance. When the news of Antonio’s trouble reached Belmont, it was Portia who give Antonio the money—double of the amount owed—to Bassanio. Then, disguised as a man, she managed to outmaneuver Shylock in an example of courtroom cunning—the sort of judicial jujitsu that would make any defense lawyer proud. I have always wondered: How did Portia become so well versed in law?

For me, the play would have ended at the trial of Antonio where Shylock was defeated. I’m wondering why it had to end with the Portia tricking her husband. Bassanio, grateful for the help of the doctor of law but Portia instead asks for his ring. Likewise, Nerissa, disguised as the doctor of law’s secretary, asks for his husband Gratiano’s ring. In Belmont, Portia and Nerissa confronted their husbands for losing their rings and accuse them of lying and infidelity, only to reveal that the rings were in their possession all along. Is it just female nature to put men to the test? (If you have any insights on this, please drop a comment below!)

Personal Notes

After the play, we had a “meet and greet” and picture-taking with the cast in the cramped lobby just outside Batute. I wanted to have my picture taken with Regina de Vera and Mr. Lou Veloso, but alas, too much competition for me. Even my student Lhorvie had her share of attention for a “daring” scene as Jessica. (I could not bring myself to write about it!)

Lhorvie Ann, I (wearing an amice-tallit) and Trixie.

Trixie had already gone back in but Lhorvie went to fetch her for me. I presented her a gift: since she was playing the role of a little Jewish girl I gave her mezuzah, a Jewish scroll case. “Totoo po iyan?” she said, eyes wide in amazement. Of course, I told her; and showed her the one I was wearing on a chain. I showed her the symbols on the mezuzah:  the Star of David (which she was wearing on her chest), the letter shin and the tablets of the Ten Commandments.  I also asked if it’s ok to pray for her so Lhorvie, Trixie, and I prayed right there at the lobby.

R E F E R E N C E S

“Der Kaufmann” (playbill). (2013). Philippines: Tanghalang Pilipino/Cultural Center of the Philippines.

Einstein S. J. & Kukoff, L. (1983). Introduction to Judaism: A course outline. New York: United American Hebrew Congregations. An excellent textbook on Judaism; includes the topics of anti-Semitism, the Holocaust, and Yom HaShoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Harlow, J. (ed.) (1989). Siddur Sim Shalom. New York: The Rabbinical Assembly, The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism. A Jewish prayer book “for Shabbat, festivals, and weekdays”; includes readings for Yom HaShoah from accounts of Holocaust victims.

Michener, J. A. (1965). The source. New York: Fawcett Crest. A fictional novel on the history of the Jewish people through “the wonders of archeology” (Einstein & Kukoff, 1983). I perused the section on the same time period “Merchant” is set, where the Jews were shown as unscrupulous moneylenders and ultimately as international bankers.

Shakespeare, William. “The Merchant of Venice” (Craig, Oxford edition) (e-book). Illinois: Project Gutenberg. (Downloaded from ManyBooks.Net).

Wouk, H. (1978). War and remembrance. New York: Pocket Books. A grand World War II novel, it depicts life in the concentration camps and the systematic execution of the Jews. Made into a television miniseries.

---------. (2000). The will to live on: This is our heritage.. New York: HarperCollins. A non-fiction book, from the author of the novel War and Remembrance; it is an update on of the non-fictional This is our God.

Is it possible to receive Communion online?

 (Image from the United Methodist News Service [UMNS] on Facebook.)

As this entry is being written, leaders from across The United Methodist Church (UMC) are meeting to discuss the possibly of Online Communion. Bishops, pastors, theologians, and other leaders are in Nashville, Tennessee in a meeting sponsored by the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry (GBHEM), the General Board of Discipleship (GBOD), and United Methodist Communications.

Perhaps from near the beginning of the advent of the Worldwide Web, churches and other ministries have started setting up webpages, publishing sermons online (through text, audio, video, live streaming, etc.) and doing other forms of online ministry. The Internet has also spawned “online churches” where participants “gather” wherever they are on the globe, in front of their computer monitors. Typically these Internet churches concentrate on the preaching and the teaching of the Word. Could it be that the next evolution of online ministry will involve administering the Sacraments over the Net?

I have never experienced “going to church” over the Internet. I remember in the 90’s when I visited an amateur-looking "Internet church" website where the liturgy is printed in full: hymns, responses, Scripture, homily, etc. To my surprise, the liturgy included the rite of Holy Communion! If I remember correctly, it involves reading the Eucharistic Prayer (which has been said…er, typed, by a priest) and then partaking of the elements by yourself.

I have also never participated in online Communion. But from what I’ve read so far, it seems to involve you having a piece of bread and a cup of grape wine (or juice), watching a pastor prays the Great Thanksgiving (I guess through live streaming;). As the minister invokes the power of the Holy Spirit in the epiclesis, he/she not only consecrates the elements immediately present with him/her, but also “zaps” yours as well, making your bread and wine “valid” elements for Holy Communion.

Ostensibly, the idea of online Communion is being supported by those who for one reason or another cannot come to church regularly. The Rev. Gregory S. Neal, who offers communion online, says that his ministry is for those who use it as a supplement to receiving the Sacrament from the local church.

But from the very beginning, the Church has extended Communion to those who are not able to receive it at the local church: those who are sick or homebound. The Articles of Religion of the UMC (ArticleXVIII) specifically forbids the Sacrament to be “reserved, carried about, and worshiped”. This refers to the Roman Catholic practice of “reserving” some of the hosts consecrated at the Mass for the veneration of the faithful. Instead, the UMC practices extension, where consecrated elements pastors (or trained laypersons) delivered to those who are not able to go to church.

The 2008 General Conference passed an amendment to a paragraph in The Book of Discipline (¶1117.9) which provides for the consecration of “nonperishable” elements in places where the distribution of the elements is “affected distance and time constraints”. The Judicial Council (in Decision 1109) overturned this amendment because this “creates a doctrine of the ‘reserved sacrament’” for the Church—something which forbidden by the above-mentioned Article of Religion.

It has been argued that online Communion is valid because the local church is also part of the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church”. If the local church is part of the “invisible” Body of Christ, thus Christians may partake of Communion wherever they are. But this mystical Body of Christ (by this I mean the Church), has its tangible expression as a visible congregation of believers.  

Let me put it this way: A person cannot claim to be a member of the universal Church without membership to a local church. In the same way a person cannot be claim to be a member of the UMC is general without first being a member of a local UM congregation. Thus, the universal Church is not an abstract thought; it is a mystical reality which is manifested through the local congregations.

If we offer online Communion, would this mean we ought to offer online Baptism as well? This would mean that the pastor pronounces the baptismal formula (“Name, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”) online; then you will administer the water to yourself: either by immersion, pouring, or sprinkling. Wouldn’t “online Sacraments” make communal acts into private, individual activities? Would not these be more contradictory to the idea of the universal Church than being agreeable to it? (By the way, we wouldn’t be the first to offer online ordination.)

The UMC has always celebrated Holy Communion in the context of the local congregation. Jesus said, “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them (Matthew 18:20). It is entirely appropriate: the local church is gathered around the Real Presence of Christ as seen in the Holy Eucharist. (The UMC believes that Holy Communion is NOT a mere “symbol” or “memorial”, but as the Real Presence of Christ himself—This Holy Mystery, p. 38.)

Instead of having online Communion, our local churches should make it accessible to the people: by having it celebrated every Sunday and bringing it to the sick and the homebound—on the same day. Or better yet, have pastors celebrate Communion in homes and in hospitals when visiting the sick and the elderly.

Real Presence is better that virtual presence.

* * *

At present, United Methodist congregations in my locality do NOT offer Communion every Sunday. This is in spite of the teachings of our founder, the Rev. John Wesley (for example, in his sermon The Duty of Constant Communion, which the Book of Discipline says is part of the official doctrine of the Church!) and of the denomination itself (as contained in the official teaching document This Holy Mystery, which is approved by the General Conference!). And I cannot understand the hardheartedness and the close-mindedness of some people I talk to on the idea of constant Communion. 

I used to celebrate Communion every Sunday in my last local church appointment, a small church in the boondocks. The church had its high and lows (mostly lows) but I think it would have disintegrated had it not for the grace imparted by the Sacrament. But since this year I opted not to have a church appointment, so now I attend a local church. So now, I receive Communion only once a month, as per custom (and not by biblical mandate or Church law).

I miss having Communion every Sunday.

Perhaps having online Communion would not be so bad after all.

Maybe it’s better than heading to nearest Catholic church.