Why I don't take communion in a CofE Church

It's not a comfortable thing to say in an age where professing your particular faith and it's differences to someone else's is frequently seen as arrogant and intolerant. But there... I said it!

It's quite a sensitive issue and I've wrestled with it for quite some time. I am still not resolute on the subject and prone to constant doubt. Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? I flip from mountain to molehill frequently (Like someone who's not sure which end of the binoculars to look through.)

I am far from entirely resolved on the issue, but for now I cant seem to get past this main point:

I'm not comfortable receiving the bread & wine from someone who appears to represent an intermediary role between myself and Christ.

As you can hopefully see then, my beef is not with the Church of England specifically. It is just with a particular way of doing Holy Communion, which just happens to live quite happily within the CofE tradition. I have seen evidence of the same problematic practices in other other Churches too. Its just that the CofE seems to be where I am confronted with the dilemma the most.

The Deal-Breaker

The Church of England's Canon Law specifically states that "No person shall consecrate and administer the holy sacrament of the Lord's Supper unless he shall have been ordained priest by episcopal ordination in accordance with the provisions of Canon C 1". It also designates that only select people may distribute the elements. If the CofE church abides by the law as it stands; if the job of consecrating, administering and distributing the sacraments lie with an exclusively select few then it gives me two major concerns:

1) The offer to share in bread and wine has been given more pre-conditions then it should.
Now I know that the famous passage on communion 1 Cor 11:17-34 is clearly saturated with a very particular context, but I believe there are definite universal factors running through it. Firstly that the meal must be a supper of equals (17-21) and secondly that self-examination is the only thing that comes between you and the meal that Jesus offer (28). I believe therefore that when the Lord's Supper is done in any way which creates a specific role to one believer over and above another, then we are losing sight of the heart of the event. If one person has a specific role then participants are being asked to not only examine their own hearts, but also submit to an earthly authority, in order to receive the bread and wine.

2) The important element of closeness to Jesus has been lost.
The descriptions of the Lord's supper in the synoptic gospels are full of intimacy. Jesus himself really wanted to share the meal with them (Luke 22:15) and the language of reclining and sharing and singing hymns (Matt 26:30) all work together to create a picture of a very personal, family meal. The Lord's supper should always be done in a way that emphasises the closeness between Christ and his disciples. Because of Christ's sacrifice, we are not only brought closer to Jesus but also closer to each other. We are all equally feeding from Jesus directly when we come to His table. Whoever hands me the bread and says "take, eat...", I want to be able to hand the bread right back and say "take, eat..."! We are, essentially, all receiving it from Christ Himself. The distance that is created by introducing an intermediary who dispenses the elements from a position of entitlement entirely removes this important symbolism of closeness and mutually 'sharing' with Jesus. To a lesser extent this closeness is also lost by the table/altar being kept at a distance, the steps and fences often used in churches, and the method of lining up to receive the elements. 

In Summary

Now when all is boiled down here, there's no big surprise in this post really: A person from a non-conformist congregational (Baptist) tradition doesn't agree with Anglican practice. It's not exactly big news!

But making the decision to not partake when I see communion done in a certain way... that has proven to be a little controversial. Is it really that big a deal? Is unity not more important?

Well currently I'm of the opinion that it's not. The thought that so many are missing out on the joy and freedom that is available in coming to the Lord's table without any prerequisite other than a repentant heart, is enough to make me think I'm not happy to continue doing it. Perhaps I don't understand the full picture of Anglican Holy Communion, but from what I have experienced, I still see too higher a position given to Church Officials. And I pray that God will change things so that more people experience a deeper sense of the Father's welcome to his Children, and a stronger personal connection with the Lord Jesus.

But maybe it's just a molehill. I don't know.