On Tuesday, November 9, The Aquila Report posted a story about actions taken the previous Saturday during a meeting of Ohio Presbytery during which they set up a Study Committee on the topic of the administration of communion by intinction.

In the story, we reported the events of a previous meeting of the Presbytery that were part of the motivating issues that brought the request for the study committee to the floor. In the article, we reported the following;

Next, on August 28, during an ordination examination in Ohio Presbytery, a candidate expressed that he practices intinction. At this point, a member of the Presbytery objected to that line of questioning as it was asking a candidate about a view that was not settled in the denomination.

The following day The Aquila Report received an email message from a member of the Presbytery calling our attention to what he considered to be an error in the article. He wrote:

The grounds upon which I objected were other than as stated in your article. My objection concerned the appropriate context for the nature of the questions being asked of the candidate, which after some time shifted from an examination of the candidate’s knowledge of sacrament theology, to his views concerning sacraments and as such belonged more appropriately in the context of a views exam rather than the sacraments exam, or so it seemed to me. My objection and interest was entirely concerning the preservation of an orderly, healthy and fair examination process for our presbytery’s ordinands, rather than anything at all concerning a theology or practice of the Lord’s Supper.

While The Aquila Report does not agree with the assumption expressed that questions concerning views are not appropriate in the examination of candidates for licensure and ordination (that is a discussion for a later date), we wanted to publically share this request for a correction.