Slu,

I had confused your response with Roo's.  That is the reason I referenced the Baptists. Thousand pardons.

Yes, these are man-made traditions.  The bible and all the accouterments of religion are man-made.  No traditions; no boundries; no religion.  Why not let it all go and label ourselves "spiritual but not religious" ?

 I believe we should observe our traditions, they define who we are, and alter them only for critical necessity.  To do otherwise, imho, violates holy space and sacramental sanctity.

Mar 31, 2012 -- 11:17AM, Jupiter6208 wrote:

Totally Agree Dutch.

Jupe,

My purpose and intent is not to be a restrictive curmudgeon but to maintain our Christian identity with regard to who we are, what we believe, and why we do what we do.  I also earnestly desire to maintain the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist by welcoming to the Lord's Table those who know what the H.E. is, rather than coming forward because everyone else is doing so.

If one wishes to participate in the H.E., we have an easily accessable process: instruction in the faith as a catechumen and then baptism.  This is not a heavy burden but a reasonable and reasoned and easily followed process.  This is the normative format followed by the Christian Church from our earliest period and should be altered only for due cause; for critical necessity, as evolving circumstances or new knowledge inpell.

As an aside, Bob criticized me for using the tern "custom"; his is a well-taken point.  I should have stayed with the term "tradition".  In reality, the 3-legged stool of tradition, reason and scripture all are reducable to man-made tradition.  All of the 3 legs are, if we are to analyze them, humanly contrived artifices develped to express and enhance the life of the church.

If G.C. votes to allow "free communion" instead of our current "open communion", I will accept this as "the Mind of the House", trusting that this is by the prompting of the Holy Spirit and therefore a good & proper development.  Until then, I have severe personal reservations of conscience concerning the practice.  If a specific  congregation allows free communion, I also accept this as local custom and don't raise an objection.

Mar 31, 2012 -- 2:50PM, Nino0814 wrote:

How do we know when any new movement in the Church is of the Holy Spririt?  Opening ordination to women was contrary to tradition, and scripture (as some read it).  

Bottom line; no bull$#!+   we really don't know.  It's actually a crapshoot, like so much of life.  I would rather have mistakes and stupidities committed out in the open by majority consent, in which I have my vote,  than foisted up me by a small band of old men, in purple robes, meeting secretly behind closed doors.  As is engraved over the courthouse steps: "vox populi est vox dei".

Maybe it's just a personal quirk.

Baptism is for everyone too,lol..so what exactly is the problem???