Live Streamed Communion?

Messerve

Well-Known Member
Sep 30, 2018
1,381
1,064
hjkhjkh
✟25,910.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I guess having a background in immunology (that was my first degree) helps me to feel that I understand the situation fairly well, and can take from the various bits of information and advice what is helpful.

Perhaps part of what would be helpful for America - in the future, it's too late now for this situation - is making sure school students get a really robust science education? From what I understand at the moment that's often a weakness.
I'm not how much that would help... It's one thing for the citizens to understand the risk, but something else entirely if the politicians still don't. Of course, maybe we'd get more politicians voted in who have a better perspective on things like health crises.

Even on the personal level you have no control over what others do. My neighbors went to New York for Easter when New York was at the height of it's health crisis. I'm not sure if they made it in or not since the border was supposed to be closed, but I couldn't believe how thoughtless they were being! We live in an apartment building... And then my own family members were very reluctant to wear masks until it became mandatory. But they still don't see a point to it. I try to take a middle ground approach and everything I say is counteracted, so I don't even try any longer. I tried to talk to my brother about how I suspected I had it back in February before it was documented here yet, and he pretty much ridiculed the very idea and said it was just a cold or the flu. But it went on for two weeks. I never told them I almost called them to take me to the emergency room one night when I could barely breathe...

Anyway, it's all very complex. Some people adamantly deny the risk is even real and have charts and data to prove it. Others adamantly enforce mask wearing and social distancing on everyone and have charts and data to prove the risk is real. I just do my part and hope this passes by sooner than later, but if they claim it has returned full force come fall or winter I am probably going to have to rebel in the least harmful way possible.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟378,031.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I'm sure someone has asked this before, but... live streaming communion? Is that Biblical?
Well, the Internet isn't Biblical because it hadn't been invented yet. It is a medium that allows the church to get its message out and to meet together without physically being together, which is necessary in the time of a global pandemic of a deadly disease. We're meeting remotely to save lives. It is in this context that the churches that do remote communion do so.

Does Jesus understand? I believe he does. We can't meet together, so we can't take the elements in remembrance of him the way we have always done so. Does that mean we shouldn't try to do that anymore? That is where Christians will disagree. My church does remote communion. It's the best we can do in this aspect of remembrance of him under the circumstances. I believe Jesus understands that too.

I was taught that when we take communion Jesus is spiritually present with us at that time, but how would that work if we're all in our own homes? I mean, He is omnipresent but shouldn't there at least be two or three gathered together? I'm not clear on that topic.
I pray over the elements that he will be present. It's the most I can do, and I believe Jesus understands that.

Secondly, there is no way to regulate how people take communion and the Scriptures are clear that it is to be done in reverence, not to be treated as a meal and not served to unbelievers. So how can we possibly keep track of what people do in their own homes while watching on Facebook, YouTube, etc.
You can't keep track of what people are doing in their homes, but you can't really know if someone is taking it unworthily in a traditional service either. What you can do is lead the believers to take it worthily by emphasizing that this is a holy time, read some Scriptures about communion first, including 1 Corinthians 11:27-29, have a time of confession and prayer prior to taking the elements.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟378,031.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I guess having a background in immunology (that was my first degree) helps me to feel that I understand the situation fairly well, and can take from the various bits of information and advice what is helpful.

Perhaps part of what would be helpful for America - in the future, it's too late now for this situation - is making sure school students get a really robust science education? From what I understand at the moment that's often a weakness.
I don't think it's the lack of a science education that we have. It's the presence of both:

1) A strong subculture that is skeptical of what we are "officially" told, whether by the government or by scientists, or the news. This isn't all bad, but too many people take it to extreme levels.

2) Partisanship. There's going to be a pro and a con side to almost everything. If there's going to be a public policy or a public norm, there will be people who will push back against it. It feels normal to have that, so you can count on somebody to bring that opposite position in to create that public argument where one doesn't exist (though we thankfully have limits on that - I believe our Overton window is bigger than it is in countries that don't understand this).

Put that together, and you have people who will receive facts that were vetted in a lab or wherever, and not accept them, and construct reasons as to why those results should be roundly rejected. I think part of this is that there are people, generally on the left on social issues, that have been weaponizing news and science to advance their views. Not that the facts will necessarily lead people to those views, but incomplete reporting of the facts will, and when you have ideologues who are gatekeepers of those facts - i.e. a scientist with a strong bias, and a reporter or editor that may share some of that bias and not report all of the facts that may be relevant to avoiding the conclusion that all three want to push on society - then you have distrust of the gatekeepers as an institution. On news reporting in general, the accepted media has been caught with its pants down too many times, and many voices in the media have a tendency to counterattack rather than admit their mistakes or walk back their narrative. This is combined with schoolteachers that have their own biases and are often not adequately prepared teaching our children (I met a US history teacher almost fresh out of college who didn't know basic things about the Battle of Gettysburg - disgraceful how little someone can know about their supposed specialty and still get their degree). We've come to the point that distrusting the institution of gatekeepers of information has become an institution itself.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
27,813
13,119
72
✟362,419.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I don't think it's the lack of a science education that we have. It's the presence of both:

1) A strong subculture that is skeptical of what we are "officially" told, whether by the government or by scientists, or the news. This isn't all bad, but too many people take it to extreme levels.

2) Partisanship. There's going to be a pro and a con side to almost everything. If there's going to be a public policy or a public norm, there will be people who will push back against it. It feels normal to have that, so you can count on somebody to bring that opposite position in to create that public argument where one doesn't exist (though we thankfully have limits on that - I believe our Overton window is bigger than it is in countries that don't understand this).

Put that together, and you have people who will receive facts that were vetted in a lab or wherever, and not accept them, and construct reasons as to why those results should be roundly rejected. I think part of this is that there are people, generally on the left on social issues, that have been weaponizing news and science to advance their views. Not that the facts will necessarily lead people to those views, but incomplete reporting of the facts will, and when you have ideologues who are gatekeepers of those facts - i.e. a scientist with a strong bias, and a reporter or editor that may share some of that bias and not report all of the facts that may be relevant to avoiding the conclusion that all three want to push on society - then you have distrust of the gatekeepers as an institution. On news reporting in general, the accepted media has been caught with its pants down too many times, and many voices in the media have a tendency to counterattack rather than admit their mistakes or walk back their narrative. This is combined with schoolteachers that have their own biases and are often not adequately prepared teaching our children (I met a US history teacher almost fresh out of college who didn't know basic things about the Battle of Gettysburg - disgraceful how little someone can know about their supposed specialty and still get their degree). We've come to the point that distrusting the institution of gatekeepers of information has become an institution itself.

The state of education in the United States is absolutely appalling. I once met a fellow in his final year of university who did not know that a country called Italy even existed - until he went on spring break to visit his girlfriend in Venice.
 
Upvote 0