1        Opening Prayer and Bible Reading

The meeting opened with a Bible reading and prayers.

2        Apologies

Revd T.Davies, E.Wallington, G.Fishwick, D.Woodward, J.Elsworth

3          Holy Communion by Extension

Tom Crotty opened the discussion on Holy Communion by Extension with a brief explanation.

Prior to the meeting the following had been circulated with the minutes of the last meeting:-

"Public Worship with Holy Communion by Extension: Guidelines issued by the House of Bishops" (approved in October 2000)".

Notes to the service of Public Worship with Holy Communion by Extension and Rules for Regulating Authorised Forms of Service.

Tom Crotty explained that a service of Holy Communion by extension is a service where communion is celebrated in one church and the elements are then taken to another church or to a sick person's house. There is a specific order of service.

Reserved sacrament is different – it is used within the church for later use of the bread and wine at another service.

Reasons why the Worship Committee is looking at this:-

The current pattern of worship means ministers are rushing about between Eucharistic services and therefore unable to stay afterwards to spend time with those who have attended.

There are two main options to counter this:-             (1)     fewer eucharistic services

                                                                                        (2)     more lay involvement.

The Worship Committee welcomes more lay involvement.

The Worship Committee is looking for limited permission for lay readers to lead services of Holy Communion by extension.

There are two forms of service of Holy Communion by Extension available in Common Worship.

            (1) Holy Communion by Extension

            (2) A Service for the Sick

The House of Bishops have given the above services their blessing.

Our own Bishop says such services should be used only on a one-off occasion or as a last resort. They require his specific agreement. The Worship Committee feels that it is unlikely we will secure his agreement to permit the use of the service on a more regular basis.

Despite the likelihood of rebuttal some of the Worship Committee (although they are not unanimous in this) would like to put the case to the Bishop because they feel that it is an important case and that through debate we might come to a better understanding of the issues.

This debate has triggered a lot of other discussion in the Worship Committee about eucharistic worship in general. A lot of those issues are in an area at the heart of our faith. It was thought appropriate to use the season of Advent to look at the Eucharist in the preaching to develop understanding.

Following the above introduction there was a discussion.

A representative on the Deanery Synod said that it was clear that the number of incumbents is bound to decrease and multi-parishes will increase. There is a problem with negative cash flow. It was his view that the more lay involvement the easier it is for a reduction in number of priests and the services they provide in the community.  Interregnums will get longer.

If what was proposed was to ask the Bishop's permission to use Holy Communion by Extension as part of our regular pattern of worship, there were several members who were opposed to this (at least one of whom was not present for this meeting).

One of the Readers said that he struggles with Bishop's view that services of Holy Communion by Extension should only be held in extremis when the House of Bishops supports Holy Communion by extension.

Someone else felt that if the House of Bishops says Holy Communion by Extension is acceptable in exceptional circumstances this seems like a fudge – either it is or is not acceptable.

The subject has been debated in the Church of England for a long time – the issue was raised during the war in 1917 and afterwards when there was a shortage of priests.  What are views of the other Churches? Revd Gates said that the Church of Scotland allows reserved sacrament – it is incorporated in their canons. The Episcopal Church also allows Holy Communion by Extension. The Roman Catholic Church has the concept of lay Eucharistic ministers who assist at the service and use reserved sacrament with the sick.

The question of what training would be given to those responsible for leading a service of Holy Communion by Extension was raised. There was a concern from some members present that the dignity of the service could be affected and it might all become too casual. Someone suggested that Sunday was like that – we are losing some of the aura and dignity. There should be reasonable conduct, behaviour, proper attire.

Revd Gates asked the question, what is the communion about – what is going on in peoples' hearts? In his view the simplicity of the meal and the necessary state of repentance is what we should hang on to and should not worry about what we wear. The ordinariness is important. Revd Gates would be happy to wear a suit. One view was that if we can lose the outward signs the church can be more appealing to others. Someone said that there was important symbolism in the garments worn. Revd Gates said that an example of this was the stole which is symbolic of servanthood. He felt that if he is robed and Lay Readers dressed in ordinary clothes come up to assist this gives a good balance. It is good that the celebrant has help. The question was raised whether too much significance was being placed in clothing? Why was it so wrong for someone to be in their "21st Century" Sunday best. It shouldn't matter what you wear. The other view was expressed that the priests and other leaders of the worship in the church had these symbolic robes and we should not talk about throwing them away. If we get to the point of attendance not being meaningful, people will not come. For many, "meaningful" is communion by the priests.

One of the Lay Readers apologised because he would not wish the fact that he was not properly dressed on a couple of occasions to derail the debate. On those occasions he had not known in advance that he would be asked to assist, he had been asked simply because he was there.

One member pointed out that other organisations have "uniforms" – for example the police, and nursing staff in hospitals – because it is important that we know who they are.  In our church you might not notice if the leaders of the worship are not robed if you know them, but if you were a visitor or new to the Church you would not know who was a priest/lay reader unless they wore the robes.

One member thought it might not be appropriate if we were the first parish in the Diocese to push for Holy Communion by Extension as a regular part of our pattern of worship when we are a parish with only three churches and two priests.  In areas where one priest served five churches such a request might be more understandable.  Revd Gates said that we would be raising the matter for all churches – as when we were the first Church of England parish in the Diocese to push for confirmation at age of 8.

One of the Lay Readers said that if he was not at the front assisting, what he needs when going forward for communion is time to remember his dependency on Jesus' death and whether the person at the front is an ordained minister does not make any difference. He has worked in other Anglican churches where the presentation is different from St. Boniface but just as reverent. He remembered a couple from 2 different church traditions but united by a common belief in Jesus. He was nervous of believing that what was done yesterday is necessarily right for today. In business this is seen as a recipe for disaster.

Another PCC member read out a statement by Roman Catholic theologian who thought that it was theologically inconceivable that a community would not celebrate the Eucharist if no priest was available.

Someone else said that it is a very personal decision.  He was more concerned about his personal relationship with Christ than with the identity of the man who happens to be passing the bread across – for him it has no impact on the value of the sacrament.

The question was raised whether there are there no other guidelines from the Diocese?  Revd Gates said that there were not but the Diocese is moving to more lay involvement.  God works in a collaborative way (through the Trinity) and it was important that the church works in that way.  It would be helpful in that if lay people could help in the distribution.

One member was uncomfortable with the practical approach – either it is right or it is not. There are occasions when it is moving that a priest is wonderfully dressed. What is really moving for him normally is the informality – such as the  use of his own name.

Someone else said that there are more Holy Communion services now than there used to be. Common Worship has addressed this.  What is the end of the road – should lay people consecrate? – Should they give the absolution? Are we approving home churches?

Revd Gates said that it does not matter whether he is in church or in a home - if he can bring people to God he will do it anywhere. The Alpraham house church has now outgrown its  building and has to have two services. Making ministry collaborative would enable the ministers to pastor more accurately because they would have less pressure on them to rush between different churches.

In Alpraham they have opened up the Scriptures – for example 1 Corinthians Chapter 11 – this is what it is like to gather around and break bread. There needs to be a balance between what church history says and what the scriptures say. Can trained people be a part of this church's ministry?

It was acknowledged that in Revd Gates' time in Bunbury there has been better participation in the different aspects. The young people who had brought up the offertory on Sunday found it awe inspiring. It was agreed this works well.

One member who had to leave the meeting early said that he was against extension – he supports the Bishop, and believes in a certain amount of dignity. He would not be in favour of Holy Communion by Extension taking place on a regular basis – only in extremis – such as sickness/accident – other eventualities such as holidays/interregnum can be planned.

It was clear that there were two views and on this sort of question it was felt that unity is required. It would be difficult to end tonight with a vote which went either way.  If the Worship Committee is out of kilter with the church we need to look at that.

Another member said that he would hope both not to have a vote tonight and not to go to Bishop.

It was suggested that we perhaps need to go out and see what the body of the church wants. We are elected as representatives of our church. We ought to try to break it out wider – just to get a sense of the feeling of the church.

It was pointed out that this subject will be debated at the Diocesan Synod to be held on Saturday this week.

It was agreed that this was a fundamental issue – and as such it was essential to develop a unity of purpose.

The current rubrics provide for private masses – they talk about celebration in homes.

It was suggested that if we leave the issue for 12 months it means the status quo prevails. Is there any reason why the Worship Committee should not talk to the Bishop on basis that there is open debate on this in our Church – whilst no consensus?

Another view was that if we wait 12 months many of us will have opportunities to discuss this with Archdeacons and Bishops. It was suggested that maybe not everyone present would have that opportunity.

It was pointed out that most churches in this Deanery have Holy Communion by extension and also that our Cathedral has reserved sacrament.

There was a wish by some present to carry on the healthy debate experienced this evening with the Bishop.  Our church is divided on this issue and there could be opportunities to debate it at Diocesan level. The Bishop is jointly our leader with the incumbent – it was not unreasonable to ask for help on a matter that was fairly fundamental. Some thought it would be appropriate if Revd Gates were to seek guidance in light of these discussions within the church.

It was felt that we should take time out to seek views – but to give opinions we need to have a debate and be informed.

The question was raised by one of the lay readers whether we could deepen our understanding of how Holy Communion should be celebrated? There was perhaps a need to pick up some of the wealth of theology in that. If we are to have a debate he would prefer to have that debate.

It was suggested that there would be no harm in the Parish Link publishing a two page article setting out the guidelines for Communion by Extension in the same way as the plans for alterations to the church building were published and would be published again.

It was suggested that Chris Birkett who does all the groundwork behind the Bishop might be invited to talk about the issue to the Worship Committee/PCC.

Given that there is not unanimity within the Worship Committee, it was felt that there was a danger of some of the Worship Committee going to the Bishop and being seen as giving the church view. It was perhaps better to invite an expert to assist with debate.

There was no objection to inviting him to present the Bishop's case to the PCC or Worship committee.

Revd Gates asked whether he had the PCC's approval to recommend that certain lay people assist with distributing communion? This might include the lay readers and former lay readers. What about other spiritual people who we respect? We should perhaps pray and think about it as a church. It was agreed that this should be led by Revd Gates from the front.

It was reported that the list of intercessors has grown by 3.

4          Other PCC business

It was reported that the free-standing notice boards in the Church were dangerous. The Churchwardens had looked at replacing them but the cost would be over £300 for some new boards which would be on casters. It was noted that the old stone shed was now being put in order which will help deal with clutter in West End. It was proposed by Peter Crump and seconded by Nigel Mulliss that new boards as described above be purchased without delay. Motion carried.

5          Date for next meeting

Monday 3rd December 7.30pm.

6          Closing Prayer

The meeting closed in prayer.