"Closed" or "Open" Communion

Cardinal John Henry Newman~"And this one thing at least is certain; whatever history teaches, whatever it omits, whatever it exaggerates or extenuates, whatever it says and unsays, at least the Christianity of history is not Protestantism."

Today, I went to an Orthodox worship service and was reminded how difficult it was not to be able to take the divine gifts at the Eucharist. This practice is in stark contrast to many other Christian denominations. If one were to walk into an Anglican or other Protestant worship service, the odds would be that any baptized Christian is allowed to fully participate in the Eucharist; in essence, the individual would decide whether their beliefs and spiritual state would allow them to participate in a meaningful way in the Eucharist (the heart of worship). For this reason, a Baptist (one of the least liturgical sects) can take Communion in a Lutheran or Episcopal service. It is easy to point to the practice of "open" communion as promoting the inclusiveness of the Christian faith and worship experience. Many will say it is indicative of unity in diversity.

However, faith is not merely an individual affair. While no denomination is a monolith, there are certain doctrines and beliefs that need to be consistently maintained in order for Christianity to retain its uniqueness. Orthodoxy is the oldest form of Christianity that exists. Thanks to both Catholicism and Orthodoxy, Christian traditions have been established and its integrity preserved. It is no wonder that the Orthodox Church takes such an active role in protecting and safeguarding the hard won truths of Christian doctrine and proper worship. When a denomination practices open communion, they are subjecting and identifying themselves with the beliefs of those participating, orthodox (correct) or not. As a result, Christianity's identity is jeopardized for the sake of "unity".