|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Two questions on communion
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
I'm wrestling with two questions at the moment and would appreciate hearing some different opinions/practices on these issues:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not? (i.e. do you make it personal or non-personal?)
On one hand I think it's not about the bearer of the chalice or the bearer of the patten, it's about the communion of the receiver with the risen Christ in the bread and wine so eye contact is best avoided. On the other hand, some people seem to expect it and perhaps its nicer to be more personal?
What do you do and why?
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Thanks. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. Rob
Shipmate
# 5823
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
I'm wrestling with two questions at the moment and would appreciate hearing some different opinions/practices on these issues:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not? (i.e. do you make it personal or non-personal?)
On one hand I think it's not about the bearer of the chalice or the bearer of the patten, it's about the communion of the receiver with the risen Christ in the bread and wine so eye contact is best avoided. On the other hand, some people seem to expect it and perhaps its nicer to be more personal?
What do you do and why?
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Thanks.
1. Make administration of the elements of Holy Communion as personal as possible. Look at the person whether eye contact is possible or not. That's because the action and words accompanying the the administration of bread or wine are personal, one to another. Not make the act sappy and sentimental, but direct and personal. On the other hand, don't make the acts distant or cold and without feeling.
2. If you are any kind of decently trained, Christian performing this ministry, you should know that the remaining elements of Holy Communion, after general administration, are eaten and drunk up at the time or after the service in the sacristy. They are sacred, and they should not be disposed of in any other way. If you must, reserve the elements in a safe place to be eaten and drunk at a later date. There doesn't need to be heavy duty theology of the real presence for the minister to treat the blessed elements of Holy Communion with respect in this way.
*
Posts: 862 | From: USA | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not? (i.e. do you make it personal or non-personal?)
I often administer the chalice; when I do, I mainly look at the person's mouth so I can see when they've taken a sip. I don't put the chalice rim against their mouth but try to guide it to a point where they'll use the base to tip the chalice just enough to sip. But I'm not looking them in the eyes. I'm being basically anonymous and just carrying out a role (server or subdeacon).
quote:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
Hasn't happened in my experience, but I believe we would pour it into the piscina either under the credence table or the one in the sacristy (locked sink). Or maybe recruit other licensed chalice-bearers/subdeacons to come and help reverently consume what remains, in the sacristy.
We believe in the Real Presence, but I don't see our practice as one of protecting that Presence...it's more of a "due diligence" to see that the Sacrament is reverently consumed or disposed of. Surely every molecular crumb of the hosts isn't accounted for, and every atom of the Precious Blood, but the traditional practices of ablutions and use of the piscina if needed are the acceptable ways of doing these things and preventing irreverence. The Lord won't be mad if something's missed, but like a formal dinner party, the details are worth taking pains with.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
The nonconformist Minister Martyn Lloyd-Jones mentions in one of his books a Deacon in his church who always looked him in the eye and said "thank you" when receiving the elements. ML-J thought this was wrong as the focus should be on Christ as the giver, not the Minister. But I don't really think it matters much!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
I agree with Mr Rob - eye contact is good! Drawing lessons from the (probably - is this contested at all?) origin of communion as the 'agape' fellowship meal, I think it should be a communal commemoration of Christ's death and a celebration of his resurrection.
We commemorate and celebrate together as a gathered section of the body of Christ, so we should absolutely make eye contact and speak with one another as we give each other the bread and wine. IMO it's emphatically not just between the receiver and God.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
Not sure about first. Don't deliberately seek or avoid eye-contact. Second I can't envisage. Why can no one consume it? Only reason I can think of is everyone is driving, but this seems unlikely as usually there would be couples who have come in the same car even if no-one is walking. Wouldn't happen with us as vergers consume and we all live in walking distance and in fact I'm the only one with a driving license & I don't own a car!
Carys
[missing n't added]
[ 29. September 2013, 08:36: Message edited by: Carys ]
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Offeiriad
Ship's Arboriculturalist
# 14031
|
Posted
Speaking as someone on the autistic spectrum, I have to tell you that for me and for many others eye contact is not just unnecessary but actually deeply uncomfortable, to the point of almost physical pain. Please don't insist on it: this only makes Communion even more difficult for some of us.
(On a related tangent, please would somebody find the person who started the practice of looking into each other's eyes while saying the Grace at the end of the service, and poke them in the eye from me? This practice too is uncomfortable, I feel bullied by the verbal insistence every time that 'this is what Christians so', and the sentimentality of it evokes a deep emotional response in me, but possibly not the one intended by the officiant ... ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif) )
Posts: 1426 | From: La France profonde | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
When I give them the Wine, I look at them, their eye, as I speak, and then hold the Wine as I give it to their mouth, which is where I'm looking then.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oferyas:
On a related tangent, please would somebody find the person who started the practice of looking into each other's eyes while saying the Grace at the end of the service, and poke them in the eye from me? This practice too is uncomfortable, I feel bullied by the verbal insistence every time that 'this is what Christians so', and the sentimentality of it evokes a deep emotional response in me, but possibly not the one intended by the officiant ...
I get around that one by keeping my head firmly bowed and my eyes shut if I think it's the sort of church where there's any risk of eyeballing.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
pererin
Shipmate
# 16956
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
This is why having a server who doesn't drive is useful.
--------------------
"They go to and fro in the evening, they grin like a dog, and run about through the city." (Psalm 59.6)
Posts: 446 | From: Llantrisant | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not?
I take a cue from the communicants themselves. A lot of people in my congo look directly at me, even with big smiles, so I will look back at them with what I hope is a balance of pleasant/welcome without being overly grinny. But others come with eyes focused downward, clearly having a private or interior moment, and I want to respect that. So in those cases I look at them enough to see what I'm doing (obviously) without being too intense in my focus. I see people bringing all of themselves to the altar (and in some cases, a lot of pain). It's a very intimate moment and I always feel humbled to be part of it.
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not?
I take a cue from the communicants themselves. A lot of people in my congo look directly at me, even with big smiles, so I will look back at them with what I hope is a balance of pleasant/welcome without being overly grinny. But others come with eyes focused downward, clearly having a private or interior moment, and I want to respect that. So in those cases I look at them enough to see what I'm doing (obviously) without being too intense in my focus. I see people bringing all of themselves to the altar (and in some cases, a lot of pain). It's a very intimate moment and I always feel humbled to be part of it.
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
As a communicant, I'm not looking at the face of the minister administering the Host and Chalice. I'm looking at their fingers which are grasping the Host to place it on my tongue or into my hands, or at the Chalice as it is moving toward my mouth so that I can use my right hand to guide it toward me. I would not like to look at the minister of the Sacrament during these extraordinarily personal moments.
Just saying.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
I don't like eye-contact - I come from the time when anglo-catholic priests, deacons etc. always looked into the middle distance - the liturgy is objective.
Communion is between the communicant and Christ. The administrant is merely an administrant.
Also, as has already been said, many people find eye-contact difficult, even obtrusive.
However, fashions have changed and many look me in the eye so I look at them back as i hold up the host before putting it on their hand/tongue.
The chalice is a different matter. I look at their mouths to ensure nothing is spilled.
I am a stickler for the ablutions being take immediately after communion. It is a public statement about the real presence. If there is too much consecrated wine - well there shouldn't be and the priest should take care to put only sufficient wine into the chalice(s).
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwalchmai
Shipmate
# 17802
|
Posted
As a communicant (never a giver) I do not make eye contact - for one thing if you receive kneeling down as we tend to do in the Anglican church, you would get a crick in the neck trying to make eye contact, especially if the giver is particularly tall.
I do, however, like our parish priest's custom of giving the bread to us by name, as in "The body of Christ, Gwalchmai".
Posts: 133 | From: England | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
Many in our church stand up, not being down as they all used to be.
Children always are given "bread" as they come to the communion, not "wine". They get blessed too.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
Children always are given "bread" as they come to the communion, not "wine". They get blessed too.
I assume from this that your church has a policy of admitting children to communion before confirmation. I have no problem with that, but if they are receiving communion, why are they also receiving a blessing? Seems pretty pointless to me as they receive God's blessing through the sacrament.
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
R.A.M.
Shipmate
# 7390
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
Children always are given "bread" as they come to the communion, not "wine". They get blessed too.
I assume from this that your church has a policy of admitting children to communion before confirmation. I have no problem with that, but if they are receiving communion, why are they also receiving a blessing? Seems pretty pointless to me as they receive God's blessing through the sacrament.
Daisymay's experience was mine when I was a child, at a Yorkshire, Methodist outfit. (mother's pride, wee cups)
As a child it seemed entirely natural that the "wine" was for the grown ups, but as an adult, considering that the "wine" was in fact some non alcoholic alternative, this seems a bit odd. Does anyone know the logic behind this?
Receiving the blessing gave some continuity with the very young children who recieved that, but no bread. I don't know if there is a more advanced theological reason for this...
--------------------
Formerly Real Ale Methodist
Back after prolonged absence...
Posts: 1584 | From: (Sunshine on) Leith | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
pererin: This is why having a server who doesn't drive is useful.
I wonder, if the police officer asks you "have you had any alcohol?" and you reply "no" because you believe that it has been transsubstantiated into the blood of Christ, does it count as a lie?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
(1) No eye contact. The degree to which a communicant acknowledges my presence is the degree to which I've failed to be as transparent as a eucharistic president should be.
(2) You make sure there is.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
The responses so far seem to assume that the issue has to do with drinking/driving. More common, I would think, are the special concerns of priests and servers who are recovering alcoholics.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
1) seems to depend on the clergy person
2) in the rubrics of Angligan Church of Canada both bread & wine can be either consumed after communion by clergy or reserved, for sick call etc.
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
1) I look at the person when I'm addressing them, then at the host / cup as I'm directing it towards their hand / mouth. What the person looks at is up to them. I think (though act more on instinct here), that when receiving, I look at the person speaking to me when they're speaking, and then to whatever they're giving. I never overlap the naming and the giving.
2) I've never been in that position, so I don't know what I'd do. It's hard for me to really imagine it coming up, as in at a small Mass you can estimate how much wine is needed pretty easily and even if I get it wrong, that's at most a glass worth of stuff-with-accidents-of-wine to drink. At a large mass, I'd be surprised not to be able to find people that could help if I couldn't consume it all myself.
I can think of one large Mass I was at where I (and a few others) had to consume about the equivalent of two glasses of wine each. I don't think any of us had to drive (I know I didn't), but in retrospect, we should probably have pulled a few more people into consuming (and/or been more careful when pouring and not over-consecrated so much). That's the only time I've been involved in anything anywhere near as excessive as that, so, in my experience, it's pretty easily avoidable.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
NatDogg
Shipmate
# 14347
|
Posted
In terms of 2, I could think of only one situation where this might be a problem -- I'm thinking Christmas or Easter at Grace Cathedral, St. John the Divine, the National Cathedral, or some similar situation. That would be A LOT of left overs.
[ 30. September 2013, 04:43: Message edited by: NatDogg ]
Posts: 139 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emendator Liturgia
Shipmate
# 17245
|
Posted
When I was in theological college, the parish to which I was attached in my first year had a priest who just could not accurately calculate the amount of wine needed for a service. One day (when we had to go to out-lying centres following the service) between us we had to consume a very large chalice full. Made for an interesting morning ...
--------------------
Don't judge all Anglicans in Sydney by prevailing Diocesan standards!
Posts: 401 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
I'm wrestling with two questions at the moment and would appreciate hearing some different opinions/practices on these issues:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not? (i.e. do you make it personal or non-personal?)
On one hand I think it's not about the bearer of the chalice or the bearer of the patten, it's about the communion of the receiver with the risen Christ in the bread and wine so eye contact is best avoided. On the other hand, some people seem to expect it and perhaps its nicer to be more personal?
What do you do and why?
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)Thanks.
A UK Baptist POV
1. The bread and wine are passed around the congregation.People don't come forward to receive - they receive where they are.
I suppose some will look in the eyes of others, others wont. I usually go round the church to pray for any babies/children in the building.
I leave the church during distribution to go to the rooms next door where I pray for the children and teachers in their classes. Every so often they rejoin or stay with the adults. When they are all in, the children are all prayed for individually where they sit.
2. We drink/eat it up. It's no fermented wine so no problem as regards drink driving. Non fermented wine reflects the fact that we have a number of known recovering alcoholics and probably several unknowns as well.
The theology of it all? Well, we serve one another as we reckon that's how Jesus and his friends did it. We believe it emphasises the kind of service and community that Jesus taught.
The elements, bread and wine, are less important to us than the act of communion itself - we believe the "do this ..." of Jesus refers specifically to the act itself.
We affirm the real presence, though not in the bread and wine, nor in the specifics of communion. The real presence is the presence of Christ when we are gathered in His name: Christ is in the midst of us. Communion enables us to communicate with God (as per Calvin's understanding of the eucharist) and we are taken up to God as we receive and share together.
To a certain extent we're not fussed about the bread or the wine: the Passover was a festival meal but also an everyday meal. It's enough in our view to use everyday symbols to point to the deeper reality of Christ's presence, power and saving grace.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Thanks.
Nobody? In the entire congregation? Assuming that the answer to both those questions was in the affirmative I took you to mean that something horrible had happened to the wine - a communicant sneezed in it or something. ISTM that the more common problem of having consecrated too much can be dealt with by asking a handful of lay people to assist with the consumption. But what does one do if the problem is with the wine itself rather than merely the quantity?
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sipech
Shipmate
# 16870
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
The practice that I've witnessed (whilst dating the vicar's daughter - hence spending a lot of time around the vicarage) is that that in the anglican church, the wine is consumed by the vicar and his family. I would add, in moderation. There was no sloshing about after lunch on a Sunday afternoon.
In my years at a baptist church, we didn't use alcoholic wine on account of being sensitive to a number of former alcoholics in the church. Rather than segregate them by having alcoholic and non-alcoholic choices, the decision was made to go all for unfermented grape juice. Any left overs from this were stored in the fridge and consumed at various intervals throughout the week at various meetings & ministries that the church hosted.
--------------------
I try to be self-deprecating; I'm just not very good at it.
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheAlethiophile
Posts: 3791 | From: On the corporate ladder | Registered: Jan 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by daisymay:
Children always are given "bread" as they come to the communion, not "wine". They get blessed too.
I assume from this that your church has a policy of admitting children to communion before confirmation. I have no problem with that, but if they are receiving communion, why are they also receiving a blessing? Seems pretty pointless to me as they receive God's blessing through the sacrament.
It's very small children, who are baptised, and up to about 7 year olds. they are blessed and then given the little bread, smaller than adults are given. They usually are with their parents as the place for communion, and have been learning about God in the other part of the church and come in to the communion.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
pererin: This is why having a server who doesn't drive is useful.
I wonder, if the police officer asks you "have you had any alcohol?" and you reply "no" because you believe that it has been transsubstantiated into the blood of Christ, does it count as a lie?
The alcohol is a part of the accident of wine that remains, not the substance that is changed. Much like the gluten in bread. Nobody claims consecrated wine won't get you drunk or consecrated bread cause trouble for a celiac.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TheAlethiophile:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
The practice that I've witnessed (whilst dating the vicar's daughter - hence spending a lot of time around the vicarage) is that that in the anglican church, the wine is consumed by the vicar and his family. I would add, in moderation.
That I have never encountered, and would be livid if I did.
--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/
Posts: 18917 | From: "Central" is all they call it | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
S. Bacchus
Shipmate
# 17778
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Please. At our place, the celebrant not only drinks the MPB, but rinses the chalice in unconsecrated wine and drinks that. At low masses, he also washes his hands in a mixture of wine and water and the vessels (a second time), and drinks that as well. Nobody has ever toppled over drunk out of this simple act of piety. Perhaps clergymen in our area are simply more used to strong drink? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
'It's not that simple. I won't have it to be that simple'.
Posts: 260 | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Francophile
Shipmate
# 17838
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Please. At our place, the celebrant not only drinks the MPB, but rinses the chalice in unconsecrated wine and drinks that. At low masses, he also washes his hands in a mixture of wine and water and the vessels (a second time), and drinks that as well. Nobody has ever toppled over drunk out of this simple act of piety. Perhaps clergymen in our area are simply more used to strong drink?
Can you explain MPB?
I don't understand the procedure about low masses. What wine/water mixture are the hands washed in? Are the vessels (what are they?) washed in the mixture which the hands have been washed in?
Thanks for explaining
Posts: 243 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
S. Bacchus
Shipmate
# 17778
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Francophile:
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Please. At our place, the celebrant not only drinks the MPB, but rinses the chalice in unconsecrated wine and drinks that. At low masses, he also washes his hands in a mixture of wine and water and the vessels (a second time), and drinks that as well. Nobody has ever toppled over drunk out of this simple act of piety. Perhaps clergymen in our area are simply more used to strong drink?
Can you explain MPB?
I don't understand the procedure about low masses. What wine/water mixture are the hands washed in? Are the vessels (what are they?) washed in the mixture which the hands have been washed in?
Thanks for explaining
MPB = 'Most Precious Blood' = Normal term used by Anglophone Roman Catholics and High Anglicans for the contents of the chalice after the consecration.
The procedure at low mass is this: the celebrant holds out the chalice to the server, who puts in a small amount of wine, which the celebrant swirls around the chalice and then drinks; having done this, the celebrant places his fingers above the chalice, and the server pours over his fingers and into the chalice first wine and then water, the mixture of which the celebrant then also drinks. Finally, in the sacristy after mass, the chalice is washed for a third, this time only in water. The water used for this purpose is not drunk (although I suppose it could be), but is instead poured onto consecrated ground via a piscina or special drain (it is never poured down the normal drain).
--------------------
'It's not that simple. I won't have it to be that simple'.
Posts: 260 | Registered: Jul 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Francophile
Shipmate
# 17838
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
quote:
Originally posted by Francophile:
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
What is the theology behind your decision to dispose of it in such a way? (Assuming a doctrine of real presence)
Please. At our place, the celebrant not only drinks the MPB, but rinses the chalice in unconsecrated wine and drinks that. At low masses, he also washes his hands in a mixture of wine and water and the vessels (a second time), and drinks that as well. Nobody has ever toppled over drunk out of this simple act of piety. Perhaps clergymen in our area are simply more used to strong drink?
Can you explain MPB?
I don't understand the procedure about low masses. What wine/water mixture are the hands washed in? Are the vessels (what are they?) washed in the mixture which the hands have been washed in?
Thanks for explaining
MPB = 'Most Precious Blood' = Normal term used by Anglophone Roman Catholics and High Anglicans for the contents of the chalice after the consecration.
The procedure at low mass is this: the celebrant holds out the chalice to the server, who puts in a small amount of wine, which the celebrant swirls around the chalice and then drinks; having done this, the celebrant places his fingers above the chalice, and the server pours over his fingers and into the chalice first wine and then water, the mixture of which the celebrant then also drinks. Finally, in the sacristy after mass, the chalice is washed for a third, this time only in water. The water used for this purpose is not drunk (although I suppose it could be), but is instead poured onto consecrated ground via a piscina or special drain (it is never poured down the normal drain).
Thanks SB.
Posts: 243 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
1) When distributing communion (either bread or wine) do you look the person in the eye or not? Why or why not?
...
2) If there is unconsumed wine after the service and nobody can drink it, what do you do with it?
1) I usually bear the chalice. I keep a steady eye on what I'm doing, concentrating on the lip of the cup and the lips of the communicant, with due respect to what the communicant proposes to do with his hands.
2) You drink It. You've been drinking It during the service; so surely, there is someone around who can finish It off. Otherwise, It gets poured down the piscina.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ldjjd
Shipmate
# 17390
|
Posted
On the receiving end, I always look diectly at the chalice (just as my focus is always on the Host) so there is no liklihood of eye contact.
I'm wondering why people would be looking elsewhere. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, but I do wonder why this happens especially since the words of administration would seem to call for focus on the Host and chalice.
Posts: 294 | Registered: Oct 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ldjjd:
I'm wondering why people would be looking elsewhere. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, but I do wonder why this happens especially since the words of administration would seem to call for focus on the Host and chalice.
Well, not all churches use a chalice. Some use individual small cups, so each communicant has their own vessel; other churches use a cup or glass that people take for themselves or pass from one to another; and still other churches probably have other methods.
Also, some churches don't have people going up and kneeling at a rail. At my church, for example, communion usually happens one of two ways; either there are two or three servers who will hand people the bread (on a plate) and cup, or we are invited to take a cup and a large piece of bread to pass around in small groups. I think with either of these arrangements, eye contact is both easy and natural (noting that some people find eye contact difficult, of course).
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
And in the Kirk I was in, (from being a child), we had sitting as we were given bread which we broke, and small cups for each person. And we sat as we had all this. We only had this about twice a year, and also at the time we remembered Jesus killed and died, we had another communion. We could also have it outside in the biggish place belonging to the Kirk where there was green and flowers and trees there and where people were berried. that was where seats were put for us.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
The procedure at low mass is this: the celebrant holds out the chalice to the server, who puts in a small amount of wine, which the celebrant swirls around the chalice and then drinks;
Pre-Vatican2.
The norm is NOT to use more wine but to do the ablutions with water only.
Since adding a small amount of wine to wine that is already consecrated makes it consecrated as well, there is no point in doing so.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
I took you to mean that something horrible had happened to the wine - a communicant sneezed in it or something.
If that was the case, the procedure is to pour the consecrated wine into a bucket and dilute heavily with waster until it ceases to be wine and then pour it on to clean earth/consecrated ground.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oferyas:
(On a related tangent, please would somebody find the person who started the practice of looking into each other's eyes while saying the Grace at the end of the service, and poke them in the eye from me? This practice too is uncomfortable, I feel bullied by the verbal insistence every time that 'this is what Christians so', and the sentimentality of it evokes a deep emotional response in me, but possibly not the one intended by the officiant ... )
I'm too busy making the sign of the cross during the Grace to creep-eye my fellow Christians. And on the rare occasions when I'm present at RC parishes for Mass, I don't hold hands during the Our Father either.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
I took you to mean that something horrible had happened to the wine - a communicant sneezed in it or something.
If that was the case, the procedure is to pour the consecrated wine into a bucket and dilute heavily with waster until it ceases to be wine and then pour it on to clean earth/consecrated ground.
This must fill any homeopathists involved in such practices with horror!
/Irreverent tangent
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
And in the Wesley Churches, we are given not alcohol, but still with the Bread and the "Wine". I like that, special different taste.
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynnk
Apprentice
# 16132
|
Posted
In churches I have frequented the bread was bread sometimes bought at the local shop on the way to church and the wine was wine dispensed out of the bottle it was purchased in just before the service.
After all didn't Jesus say to eat the bread and drink the wine in remembrance of him?
And do we think the attendees of the gathering took left over bread and wine and ate and drank it all themselves?Or that the left over bread and wine was disposed of in a special sacred place?
It seems to me that the bread and wine were symbols Jesus used to help us remember his eternal life saving work.
Posts: 22 | From: Tasmania | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
HenryT
Canadian Anglican
# 3722
|
Posted
I saw an altar guild member making use of the informal piscina: open the door and a quick flick onto the grass outside. Very simple and effective.
--------------------
"Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old-fashioned" P. Henry, 1788
Posts: 7231 | From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
churchgeek
Have candles, will pray
# 5557
|
Posted
I'm Episcopalian with Catholic/Anglo-Catholic sensibilities about a lot of things.
1) Sharing Communion is a communal act. It's not just between the communicant and Christ. When we share the elements with each other, I think it's best done naturally. When I'm serving chalice, I look in the person's eyes as I say, "The Blood of Christ, the cup of salvation," and then I watch what I'm doing as I serve it. I try to be clear that I'm helping them guide and drink the chalice, not dispensing the Blood of Christ to them. "Freely you have received; freely give" seems like a good way to look at it, IMO. Within the bounds of reverence, just act natural.
2) In my tradition, which does believe in Real Presence, extra consecrated elements may be reverently consumed, or disposed of in consecrated ground (e.g., a garden on the church property), or, in the case of wine, poured into the piscina, which goes straight into the ground. For me, theologically, it's because those elements have been consecrated "to be for [God's] people the Body and Blood of Christ." It's about intent - gratitude and respect - rather than worrying that a crumb or drop of wine might hit the floor. (On earth, Jesus' blood certainly hit the ground, and the wood of the Cross; and all his life, he left skin cells & hair and what not all over the place as we all do.) Christ is meek and humble of heart, after all. BUT, from our standpoint, we want to be respectful, reverent, and grateful for such a great gift. Tossing it where it might be trampled underfoot, or into the trash, or into the sewer system, is contrary those attitudes.
If possible, consecrated Bread and Wine can be reserved; but home-baked bread won't keep, and the wine in the chalices you don't really want to pour back into a flagon to store. I've heard of people putting extra consecrated elements back in with unconsecrated, to use again later. That may not be the worst thing in the world, but it also seems theologically wrong. Like a friend of mine once put it, "With God there are no takesy-backsies." Once those elements have been consecrated, there is no need to re-consecrate them. Why would you present them to God again and ask for them to be re-consecrated? Seems rude at the very least. For those who believe in transubstantiation as an explanation for the Real Presence, doing so might even be blasphemous. Certainly putting the Body or Blood of Christ back in with the regular bread or wine would be insulting from that perspective!
--------------------
I reserve the right to change my mind.
My article on the Virgin of Vladimir
Posts: 7773 | From: Detroit | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
I've heard of people putting extra consecrated elements back in with unconsecrated, to use again later. That may not be the worst thing in the world, but it also seems theologically wrong. Like a friend of mine once put it, "With God there are no takesy-backsies." Once those elements have been consecrated, there is no need to re-consecrate them. Why would you present them to God again and ask for them to be re-consecrated? Seems rude at the very least. For those who believe in transubstantiation as an explanation for the Real Presence, doing so might even be blasphemous. Certainly putting the Body or Blood of Christ back in with the regular bread or wine would be insulting from that perspective!
More than rude - if you have a mass where the wine has already been consecrated, then it is invalid because both bread and wine have to be consecrated in any one mass.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
