Being Welcoming

In the Episcopal church today there is a lot of talk about being “welcoming” and “inclusive” but this talk usually has little result beyond the undermining of liturgical traditions. That is it is a mostly destructive rather than constructive force in the life of the church.

In my view, the idea of inclusion is meaningless without the equal idea of exclusion. To welcome all indiscriminately is to welcome none. Christ one can easily argue was radically exclusive. How often did he chastise those who fell short of his high standards of charity, condemning them to damnation unless they repented? Likewise the church militant must be exclusive in one sense, it must guard its holy mysteries from profanation by those who are unrepentant. It must guard its traditions and doctrine against unfamiliar innovation.

Never the less, the church’s fundamental mission is to be inclusive, to bring the good news to all. It must welcome those who come seeking God while preserving undefiled its sacraments, traditions and doctrine. How are these two goals two be reconciled?

Traditionally they have been reconciled by prosthelytization, education, and initiation. That is the preaching of the word and evangelism by deed spread the good news, the liturgy of the word, catachresis, and fellowship showed what the church believed and practiced and baptism included the new Christian fully into the community.

Is casting the Eucharist into the maw of every mouth human or otherwise that shows up inclusive and welcoming or is it casting pearls before swine, a confession of a lack of reverence and awe in the face of the Holy Mystery that turns away potential converts.

Though some will protest, I believe that those arguing for communion without baptism are in fact though not intention uninclusive and unwelcoming. They are a classic example of the frozen chosen syndrome.

What would it mean for a parish to be truly inclusive and welcoming?

First, it would not treat the work of the great commission as if it was embarrassing. It would eagerly seek converts. It would hold Eucharistic processions on Corpus Christi and beat the bounds of the parish on the Rogation days. It would use the little hours from the prayer book to worship God in the parks and fields of the community. It would combine street worship with acts of corporal charity. It would have an earned reputation for charity in general.

Second, it would enthusiastically worship God in beauty and dignity in such a way as to allow church members to bring friends and acquaintances to introduce them to the church and make them and those wondering in off the street to feel welcome and included in the worship. Thus it would have sung Evening Prayer so that parishioners can bring their friends who go to other churches to experience the beauty and dignity of our liturgy without missing their normal Sunday services. It would have sung Morning Prayer so that those who had started attending the parish, but were not yet baptized could attend a Sunday morning service in which they could be fully included.

Third, the parish would have a catechism class run by members of the parish welcoming committee during the Eucharist so that the unbaptized can learn what the church teaches and prepare for baptism. The same committee would help integrate the seekers into the community during the coffee hour or other fellowship that follows the Eucharist.

Fourth, a welcoming parish would have a deep community with real fellowship. Lunches and potlucks, regular worship and charity, and community activities, not just coffee hour would be part of the community which the convert would be entering. The parish would make an effort to welcome people and make them feel at ease.

Fifth, a welcoming parish would have many opportunities to include, it would have the daily office, daily, so that its members could be worshiping god and fellowshipping daily. It would include seekers in the daily prayer of the church. The exclusion from the Eucharist would not be so starkly exclusionary if it was only on one day in seven that the seeker was not fully participating in the worship services.

Sixth a welcoming parish would welcome, it would hold baptisms monthly outside of Advent and Lent. Yes, I know that the BCP encourages limiting baptisms to the feasts of All Saints, Baptism of Our Lord, Easter and Pentecost, but unlike say the rubrics that require ad orientem celebration of the Eucharist, the rubrics for baptism only recommend that baptism be held on those feasts. It seems to me infinitely preferable to ignore advice however well meant than to violate the teaching of the Prayer Book, the Bible, and the Universal Church.

Seventh, a church that wanted to be welcoming would make the process of being Baptized a huge deal. The front pews would be reserved for the soon to be baptized and their sponsors. The sponsors would be included by asking them to read the lessons at the sung Morning Prayer. The Altar would be censed at the Te Deum. After Morning Prayer, the clergy and choir would gather the soon to be baptized and their sponsors. The Gloria in Excelsis and the Litany of Thanksgiving would be sung as they processed to the font. The Baptismal covenant will be sung. The blessing of the water would be made as impressive as possible while staying within the rubrics. After the baptism, the remaining water in the font is used to fill a pail and the congregation is asperged during the procession back to the chancel while the choir sings the asperges me. It goes without saying that the mass following the baptism would be sung with all the smells and bells. The newly baptized would present the gifts at the offertory and be the first person(s) to receive the sacrament on the tongue while devoutly kneeling.

This would be being radically inclusive, it would make our new members feel truly welcomed, and into a real community, but it would also be a lot of work. It requires US to be welcoming. It requires OUR conversion of heart. It requires US to care about the salvation of those who might otherwise imperil their souls by unworthy reception of the Holy Mysteries. It is much easier to treat the body and blood our Lord shed for the remission of OUR SINS like a wine and cracker party where we wouldn’t be rude enough not to let strangers have a drink, but we surely wouldn’t talk to THEM to explain the faith.

It is not cheap grace that the advocates of communion without baptism advocate, but cheap and frankly unreal “welcome.”