homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Eccles: Receiving or taking Communion (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Eccles: Receiving or taking Communion
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
And, again, personally I'm happy for those risks to exist, for the sake of the everyone-sharing-together symbolism.

So now your position is that we receive God, not directly, but mediated through the community?
Hmm, am I being theologically inconsistent? Sorry! Let me try again to express my view [Smile]

I think always having the same person preside over the distribution might teach people that this person is some kind of intermediary between them and God. If one believes this then fine, do Communion like this (and I know in some denominations it has to be this way).

But if one rejects such a view and favours the priesthood of all believers concept (as I do, obviously), then I think there are better ways of doing Communion. Have a different person preside over the distribution each time or invite people to take some bread and pass it around among those they are sitting near.

I guess the fact that we each take bread and wine shows we all experience God directly for ourselves. But the sharing of the elements with one another illustrates that we are a community, mediating God's blessing and grace to each other, rather than it all coming through the priest.

Hope this is a bit more theologically consistent...

--------------------
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
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433

 - Posted      Profile for Zappa   Email Zappa   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
Vulpior, I really don't know whether it was wine or tomato sauce - I left the building and went elsewhere so that I could receive what I would call proper Holy Communion.

I confess I did the same recently in That Diocese™. I communed with a colleague at a nearby pub instead. We had to purchase the wine and wafers.

--------------------
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
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444

 - Posted      Profile for Latchkey Kid   Author's homepage   Email Latchkey Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Suppose, for example, that someone presents themself for communion and decides for whatever reason that they want all the bread? Or decides that the best thing to do with this bread is to take a handful of it and throw it all over the church? Risks like these are surely maximised when the event is in the control, not of one professional, but of many amateurs.

Yes, these risks are increased by having the church as a whole group involved in passing the bread and wine around. I think it's a risk worth taking, though, for the symbolism of having everyone involved, rather than one person presiding.
If these risks are maximised then they are still vanishingly small. I have never heard of this happening in 60 years.

And the distinction between professional and amateur is also a red herring. I am happy to believe that the amateur is doing it out of love.

--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner

Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
womanspeak
Shipmate
# 15394

 - Posted      Profile for womanspeak   Email womanspeak   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I have experienced communion by passing the elements around a table as part of provincial Anglican commission meetings.

For me it was always a most sacred and spiritual experience as the plate of cubed bread ( not our normal wafers) was then passed on and we placed the bread in the outstretched hand of our neighbour in turn using the words "The body of Christ..." The wine was passed to each as we offered the cup to our neighbour in turn with "The blood of Christ ... "

It was made even more amazing for me in that around the table was at least one Bishop, including my own to whom I offered the bread and wine. This was a very moving experience for me and created a true sense of communion and community focused around the saving grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.

--------------------
from the bush

Posts: 62 | From: rural australia | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by womanspeak:
I have experienced communion by passing the elements around a table as part of provincial Anglican commission meetings.

For me it was always a most sacred and spiritual experience as the plate of cubed bread ( not our normal wafers) was then passed on and we placed the bread in the outstretched hand of our neighbour in turn using the words "The body of Christ..." The wine was passed to each as we offered the cup to our neighbour in turn with "The blood of Christ ... "

It was made even more amazing for me in that around the table was at least one Bishop, including my own to whom I offered the bread and wine. This was a very moving experience for me and created a true sense of communion and community focused around the saving grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.

That sounds very moving. I once experienced something nearly like that on a retreat, where we finished the day with communion in the roundel of the oast house which had become the home of a community of nuns. A priest consecrated the elements, which were then passed round the small group, standing, each person administering to the person on their left. Except me, as I was standing to the right of the priest, and he took the bread (can't remember what sort of bread or wafer) and wine from me and administered to himself. I didn't know if it was because I was a lay person or a woman. (Most of us were women.) How wonderful that your bishop received from you.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

I think always having the same person preside over the distribution might teach people that this person is some kind of intermediary between them and God. If one believes this then fine, do Communion like this (and I know in some denominations it has to be this way).

But if one rejects such a view and favours the priesthood of all believers concept (as I do, obviously), then I think there are better ways of doing Communion. Have a different person preside over the distribution each time or invite people to take some bread and pass it around among those they are sitting near.

Not really inconsistent; we just have such different ecclesiologies that I'm not sure there's any way to put our praxes into dialogue on this. If you every want to know how have a both-and valuing of both the ordained priesthood and the baptismal priesthood, enriching each other, check Catholicism (in the broadest sense) out!

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by ArachnidinElmet:
From a purely practical standpoint, I'm not sure about the passing the bread from one person to another. For those who have experienced it, does this method (this is a genuine question) have an upper limit of people where it would be awkward to perform?

Gets a bit slow above 20 or so, and downright tedious if more than about 30. For smaller numbers its fine.
Which is something I don't understand. IME, for larger groups distribution to the congregation is far quicker than having the congregation come to the front. About the same amount of time for <30 people, plus by having everyone receive in their pews you avoid having a second category of those who are unable to come to the front either not receiving or getting special treatment with the minister and/or assistants coming to them.

Perhaps it's just experience from doing things differently. I'm sure if our congregation were invited forwards it would take a lot longer to serve than for a similar sized congregation where that was the norm, and vice versa. Simply down to people not quite sure what to expect.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hart

That discourse will only work if you acknowledge there may be something you are not getting about what South Coast Kevin means by "The priesthood of all believers". He seems to me to be taking a strong form even within English non-conformity.

Conversation is not just that you inform us and expect us to adapt but that you allow yourself to be informed and changed by that information.

Jengie

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Suppose, for example, that someone presents themself for communion and decides for whatever reason that they want all the bread? Or decides that the best thing to do with this bread is to take a handful of it and throw it all over the church? Risks like these are surely maximised when the event is in the control, not of one professional, but of many amateurs.

Yes, these risks are increased by having the church as a whole group involved in passing the bread and wine around. I think it's a risk worth taking, though, for the symbolism of having everyone involved, rather than one person presiding.
If these risks are maximised then they are still vanishingly small. I have never heard of this happening in 60 years.

And the distinction between professional and amateur is also a red herring. I am happy to believe that the amateur is doing it out of love.

You people must go to some awfully nice churches. In 20 years of ministry there've probably been about a dozen times when I've been very glad I didn't give "control" of the consecrated elements to the communicant. Admittedly the issue has never been the Host; on every occasion the communicant attempted to force my hand in an attempt to drain the chalice. None of them was a regular communicant at the chuches where the incident happened.

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444

 - Posted      Profile for Latchkey Kid   Author's homepage   Email Latchkey Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Do you know why they did this?

--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner

Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
Do you know why they did this?

I imagine one tries to drain the chalice because one has a liking or a craving for what's in it. Or because one is deliberately trying to disrupt the liturgy. Either way, one isn't going to get away with it if one comes to a church where I'm presiding.

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
South Coast Kevin... seems to me to be taking a strong form even within English non-conformity.

Yes, I suppose I am. My ecclesiology is very 'low' indeed so Catholicism feels pretty alien to me, with the strong respect for and submission towards the institution. Likewise, some of the strongly leader-driven evangelical churches (it's not just Catholicism!).

Oh, and I've just realised the fact that my church doesn't actually use wine might have something to do with the lack of trouble at Communion! We certainly have a few people among our number who struggle with alcohol addiction.

--------------------
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
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
Do you know why they did this?

I imagine one tries to drain the chalice because one has a liking or a craving for what's in it. Or because one is deliberately trying to disrupt the liturgy. Either way, one isn't going to get away with it if one comes to a church where I'm presiding.
I once prepared an elderly lady for confirmation who asked me with some trepidation whether she would have to drink the whole chalice, because she didn't actually like wine very much.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444

 - Posted      Profile for Latchkey Kid   Author's homepage   Email Latchkey Kid   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
Do you know why they did this?

I imagine one tries to drain the chalice because one has a liking or a craving for what's in it. Or because one is deliberately trying to disrupt the liturgy. Either way, one isn't going to get away with it if one comes to a church where I'm presiding.
Which leaves me pondering on the balance between the protection of the body and blood of Christ and the pastoral care of another member of the body of Christ.

Maybe it is not because the people are nice that it has not occurred, but because they know one another.

--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner

Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Latchkey Kid:
Which leaves me pondering on the balance between the protection of the body and blood of Christ and the pastoral care of another member of the body of Christ.

Maybe it is not because the people are nice that it has not occurred, but because they know one another.

Very likely. But churches have open doors. Strangers are welcome. And if a stranger presents themself at the altar for communion, I assume their goodwill right up to the point they demonstrate otherwise.

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Heavenly Anarchist
Shipmate
# 13313

 - Posted      Profile for Heavenly Anarchist   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
South Coast Kevin... seems to me to be taking a strong form even within English non-conformity.

Yes, I suppose I am. My ecclesiology is very 'low' indeed so Catholicism feels pretty alien to me, with the strong respect for and submission towards the institution. Likewise, some of the strongly leader-driven evangelical churches (it's not just Catholicism!).

Oh, and I've just realised the fact that my church doesn't actually use wine might have something to do with the lack of trouble at Communion! We certainly have a few people among our number who struggle with alcohol addiction.

Slightly an aside as my church is NF not Anglican but we started using grape juice instead of wine about a year ago because we have several recovering alcoholics in the congregation for whom it was a difficulty. We felt it was important that they were neither tempted by alcohol nor excluded from communion. Grape juice had previously been available for children but to ask for it would have drawn unnecessary attention to themselves (we administer to each other in small groups using a piece of bread and a small chalice).
When I was at St Helen's Bishopsgate nearly 20 years ago we passed a chalice and slice of bread along the row to each other. The movement of the bread and wine was supervised by whichever members were stewarding that day.

--------------------
'I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.' Douglas Adams
Dog Activity Monitor
My shop

Posts: 2831 | From: Trumpington | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I find it peculiar how much higher church people do not trusr the average Joe in thhe congregation. To me where I stand I feel that is anti-incarnational. As Christ said he did not come for the well but the sick. He quite clearly is pointing out there that he is not here for us litugical experts (who are the recipients of that remark), but for those who need the body of Christ. God walks over the divide between us and him, it seems as if the Church often wants to rebuild the divide*.

Firstly such behaviour dis-ables congregants, they come to believe they can't be trusted to behave properly in front of God. They are infantilised. Needless to say if it does they are more likely to behave like infants, so far from protecting the elements you increase the chances of abuse.

Secondly and this is important it ignores the strong corporate conformity that is in operation within a congregation. Newer members look to older members to see how to behave. Try standing when everyone else is kneeling if you do not believe me. This actually means those who are least expert are likely to be most cautious about doing things right. I have never known someone in my home congregation ask if a visitor should receive communion, I have known visitors ask if they may. Basically I believe the chances of someone grabbing everything when people serve them selves is less than 1 in a million services, I also think the chances of someone dropping on the floor except by accident are equally rare especially if you treat the congregation as responsible people. Actually with a single loaf the problem is not people taking so much but it is so rare for people to take anything beyond the most miniscule amount that a small roll will satisfy a hundred people. If you consume it immediately afterwards you end up with rather a lot to eat!

Thirdly in such circumstance it is us liturgical experts who are offended, not God. It is us who are put out, have to find the extra bread and wine, deal respectfully with what is spilt and so on. God already knew the shit if human life when he came, and even once he had lived it, he still came back. Due to the communal pressure to socially conform I am likely to see such behaviours as that of someone who can't conform. I do not think when that is the case God is that annoyed. I am pretty sure God is more offended by the unnecessarily pointed exclusion from communion of individuals, that we specialists are guilty of, than these behaviours.

Jengie

*I am well aware that upto a hundred and fifty years ago many in my tradition made modern Roman Catholicism look positively liberal so carefully was the table guarded to make sure nobody ate unworthily.

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not the least bit offended if, by reason of mental or physical illness, someone behaves in an unexpected way at Communion time. I don't think God is offended either. And in my experience I think illness has usually been the cause of any potential problems. As president in the assembly, I'm not God's policeman, but I am his steward. I'm not there to pander to the more or less refined liturgical tastes of myself or anybody else, but part of my job is to try and ensure good order - about which St Paul makes some rather pointed remarks. And a significant part of "good order" means making sure that the Sacrament is distributed fairly and in a dignified way to everyone who wants to receive it. It's my responsibility to have running through my mind, "Mrs A needs a gluten-free host. Mr B's Parkinson's looks quite bad this morning. Mrs C always wants to receive the host on her tongue. Mr D is unwell and needs me to go to him, rather than him come to the altar ...". It's not that I don't trust the congregation to get these things right if they administer Communion between themselves - but why should they have to be thinking about that sort of thing at the very moment they're making their own Communion?

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Because the congregation are taking Communion together. If the members of your congregation are not aware of the needs and problems of those around them such that they can provide extra help to someone with Parkinsons then there is a much bigger problem than whether the bread is given or taken. Communion is not something done by individuals, even individuals receiving at one time. It is something for the congregation, together.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Because the congregation are taking Communion together. If the members of your congregation are not aware of the needs and problems of those around them such that they can provide extra help to someone with Parkinsons then there is a much bigger problem than whether the bread is given or taken. Communion is not something done by individuals, even individuals receiving at one time. It is something for the congregation, together.

Conversely, Mrs A, Mr B, Mrs C and Mr D might be of the opinion that it's nobody's business but theirs and mine what their "special needs" might be at Communion time. And they'd be right - it isn't.

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If they don't want it to be any business of others in the congregation, why should it be your business? What makes one person so special that they need to take on all the cares of the congregation all on their own? We are called to be the Body of Christ - about which St Paul makes some rather pointed remarks (just to borrow your phrase). We should all be caring about each other, especially at Communion where we place prominance to "we are one body, sharing one bread".

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Hart

That discourse will only work if you acknowledge there may be something you are not getting about what South Coast Kevin means by "The priesthood of all believers". He seems to me to be taking a strong form even within English non-conformity.

Conversation is not just that you inform us and expect us to adapt but that you allow yourself to be informed and changed by that information.

Jengie

Look, I'm a big believer in praxis being where we discover, develop and enact our theologies. But, Kevin and I have now had enough of a conversation (both being honest and listening to the other attentively) to discover that we have fundamentally different understandings of how God self-reveals and pours out grace.

These very different understandings undergird our preferred (/actual) praxes for how to administer communion. So, the goal of mutual understanding has been reached. The holy grail of complete agreement was never really on the cards. Continuing to talk about whether or not a priest should administer communion when we don't agree on what a priest is seems like the wrong conversation to be having.

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992

 - Posted      Profile for Adeodatus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Alan, my point was that if someone is perhaps embarrassed by their illness or infirmity - and many people are - then the fewer people they have to take into their confidence, the better. If there's a single president controlling the administration, then they only have to share their need with that one person. And that should be a person whose trust and confidence can be taken for granted. If the congregation are ministering to each other, then it's whoever happens to be sitting next to them who needs to be told, "I'm sorry, but would you mind...".

It was a more serious version of the same argument that led to the clergy being tasked with hearing confessions. In the early Church, people seem to have done what the Bible said and confessed their sins to each other - right up to the point where I discovered my brother in Christ, Bilious Maximus, had been gossipping my sins all round the Forum on a Monday morning. So the burden was handed to the clergy, with strict sanctions to ensure confidentiality.

And then again, there's the question of newcomers. How would a newcomer know what help I might need? And wouldn't that be an opportunity for embarrassment that might lead to that newcomer never coming back? (In this respect, it's not unrelated to that dismal practice of the congregation all joining hands to say the Lord's Prayer - a more eloquent message of the exclusion of the uninitiated, it would be difficult to imagine.)

I'm not saying there aren't arguments on both sides. I'm not even saying I'm arguing for what I want to do as president - though I confess I'm more than happy to abide by CofE canon law on this. I'm actually describing what I want the president to do for me when I'm sitting in the congregation as a member of the laity.

--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."

Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Which is something I don't understand. IME, for larger groups distribution to the congregation is far quicker than having the congregation come to the front.

I was thinking of the common practice of having one plate and one cup passed from person to person, each of them serving the next one, and each saying the liturgical words to the next one. So everyone drinks from the same cup, one after the other, and everyone both hears and says "The body of Christ" and "The blood of Christ" or whatever words are used in that church. As described by womanspeak and Penny S above. Its a very usual way of doing things at small meetings and retreats and so on, and not rare in churches with very small congregations.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Liturgylover
Shipmate
# 15711

 - Posted      Profile for Liturgylover   Email Liturgylover   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I find the sense of communality best expressed when communion is received kneeling at a communion rail and after everyone in line has received the next group come forward. Perhaps that is because the tradition I was brought up in. I find it worst when there is simply one or two (or more lines) of everyone coming forward standing to receive and then returning individually. Some churches of course now offer both ways of receiving which I think is nice.

A couple of years ago I enjoyed the way communion was distributed in St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh. We came forward in small numbers, formed a cicle and the bread and the wine were circulated and then we shared the peace and returned to our seats, followed by the next group, etc. It felt reverential and special.

On the other hand I once visited All Souls Langham Place with a friend when Communion was brought out to the pews and passed along the line - just felt wrong but I can't articulate why (but of course it didn't help that the priest wore no robes, and as far as I remember didn't recite the full EP).

Posts: 452 | From: North London | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Which is something I don't understand. IME, for larger groups distribution to the congregation is far quicker than having the congregation come to the front.

I was thinking of the common practice of having one plate and one cup passed from person to person, each of them serving the next one, and each saying the liturgical words to the next one. So everyone drinks from the same cup, one after the other, and everyone both hears and says "The body of Christ" and "The blood of Christ" or whatever words are used in that church. As described by womanspeak and Penny S above. Its a very usual way of doing things at small meetings and retreats and so on, and not rare in churches with very small congregations.
And, my point was that (timewise) it's not that different to each person going forward to a rail and having one person with a plate of bread and another with a cup/tray of glasses, receiving and hearing the same words.

IME, at larger churches when people come forward there are several people serving to speed up the distribution. And, in larger churches where people stay in pews there are several people serving. Even in our church with a congregation of about 20 we have two plates and two cups/trays (we use both shot glasses and common cup, though not at the same time!). Having 4, 8 however many are needed is the norm in larger gatherings. It's been a few years since I got to Greenbelt - how many plates and cups are used there?

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
Alan, my point was that if someone is perhaps embarrassed by their illness or infirmity - and many people are - then the fewer people they have to take into their confidence, the better. ... If the congregation are ministering to each other, then it's whoever happens to be sitting next to them who needs to be told, "I'm sorry, but would you mind...".

Though, of course, in the vast majority of cases people sit in the same place, next to the same people, every week. Usually with someone who's a relative or considered a close friend in the congregation. So, they wouldn't need to make their needs known.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
From a purely practical angle, one possible question here is, who should be in control of an event that is a profound and intense moment in many people's spiritual lives; but at the same time has the potential to go messily wrong?

Suppose, for example, that someone presents themself for communion and decides for whatever reason that they want all the bread? Or decides that the best thing to do with this bread is to take a handful of it and throw it all over the church? Risks like these are surely maximised when the event is in the control, not of one professional, but of many amateurs.

I've never seen this in 37 years of weekly church attendance. Is what you describe really "wrong" anyway?

One thing about your reply does concern me - and that's your choice of language. It may be accidental or tongue in cheek but the dualism of your division into "amateurs" and "professionals" is really disquieting. Is that how priests actually see the rest of the fellowship gathering for the most intimate and profound meal we'll ever eat together? If it is, then it's no wonder people struggle with church.

If that is how you do view the whole experience then I'd respectfully refer you to read the whole of 1 Corinthians 11.

[ 22. February 2013, 13:35: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Basilica:
It is worth noting that the practice of sharing communion from person to person is often illegal. Certainly it is not permitted under Church of England rules (unless the entire congregation happen to be licensed Eucharistic ministers!), and I doubt it's allowed in the Roman Catholic Church either.

I know a lot of churches don't pay attention to that kind of thing, but some may think it important.

Often? In what context? Either it is or it isn't.

There's a lot of things that are illegal in human eyes but licit in God's especially where compassion, justice and inclusion trump legalism.

[ 22. February 2013, 13:38: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I always thought that withinmore catholic churches the requirement was for an ordained minister to preside over Communion. But, once the minister has said the appropriate words then restrictions on who actually assists with the distribution were much less severe. Whether that would extend to anyone at all doing the distribution is another matter, but certainly I've been to lots of Anglican services where there has been a priest saying the words, and usually offering the bread, with one or more other people (rarely ordained ministers) with either a cup or another plate of bread (if the congregation is large enough to warrant two plates).

But, then I'm from a denomination that believes that any Christian can preside at Communion, and only restricts those who do for ecumenical reasons in recognition that other churches would disagree with that position. So, I may have completely the wrong end of the stick.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
And, my point was that (timewise) it's not that different to each person going forward to a rail and having one person with a plate of bread and another with a cup/tray of glasses, receiving and hearing the same words.

IME, at larger churches when people come forward there are several people serving to speed up the distribution.

Yes, exactly. We're not a large church, but at our main Sunday services we usually have four people serving at the rail. Even at small services there will be two, one with the bread and one with the wine. So, other things being equal, it would be four times faster than the "pass it on" method.

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Basilica:
It is worth noting that the practice of sharing communion from person to person is often illegal. Certainly it is not permitted under Church of England rules (unless the entire congregation happen to be licensed Eucharistic ministers!), and I doubt it's allowed in the Roman Catholic Church either.

There's a lot of things that are illegal in human eyes but licit in God's especially where compassion, justice and inclusion trump legalism.
It may well be "illegal" in the CofE, but its not uncommon. I must have seen it dozens of times. Maybe, after all these years, even hundreds. Though in my experience its very unusual at the main service of public worship on a Sunday morning. Nearly all CofE churches that I know of have people going up to the front to take Communion at those services, and some sort of authorised ministers distributing it.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965

 - Posted      Profile for Basilica   Email Basilica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Basilica:
It is worth noting that the practice of sharing communion from person to person is often illegal. Certainly it is not permitted under Church of England rules (unless the entire congregation happen to be licensed Eucharistic ministers!), and I doubt it's allowed in the Roman Catholic Church either.

I know a lot of churches don't pay attention to that kind of thing, but some may think it important.

Often? In what context? Either it is or it isn't.

There's a lot of things that are illegal in human eyes but licit in God's especially where compassion, justice and inclusion trump legalism.

What I mean is that it is illegal in the churches I'm familiar with (Church of England and Church in Wales) and I fancy it is probably illegal in some others.

And "legal" means "allowed under canon law". This matters to some people within those denominations and doesn't matter to some others.

Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I always thought that within more catholic churches the requirement was for an ordained minister to preside over Communion. But, once the minister has said the appropriate words then restrictions on who actually assists with the distribution were much less severe.

There is an important difference here, you're right. I'll give all my answers in modern Roman Catholic terms. For us it's a theological truth that only ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist. It's not so much a rule, as a fact about reality. If it's not a priest, it might be wonderfully fruitful prayer, but it's not communion.

Distributing is a different order of question. Communion is still communion no matter who distributes it. On this, though, we do have rules and they have theological rationale. The basic rule is this: unless impeded by illness, the priest distributes accompanied by as few laity as are needed for practical purposes. Ideally, these lay people should have undergone special formation for this role, but can be delegated for one occasion on an ad hoc basis.

For a typical Sunday Mass at the basilica, we'll have about 20 people giving out communion.

There are two principles at work here, I think. One is that it's better to administer in both kinds when possible. This needs at least one extra person. On the other hand, the priest's role at mass is to act in the person of Christ who took, blessed, broke and gave. Although the only part of that one four-fold action we regard as necessarily requiring the priest to do is blessing, it is best if he does as much of it as possible. The principle underlying both of these is that fuller symbolism makes clearer what's going on.

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517

 - Posted      Profile for Indifferently     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The priest is acting in persona Christi. You should take it from his hands. This attempt to atomize us makes the Church into a bunch of individuals, not the One Body we are meant to be.
Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Claiming the priest is persona christ does as well

Let me explain a bit further, within the Reformed tradition all public worship is essentially corporate, that means we see the body of Christ not in the minister at the front but shared in the congregation. Participating in the Eucharist is not something I do but is something I join in with. I need my fellow congregants there to do it.

To place this with the priest and make this solely about my interaction with the priest is as much to individualise as is taking it separately. Indeed if my supervisors account is true it does it far more effectively.

Jengie

[ 22. February 2013, 19:02: Message edited by: Jengie Jon ]

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adam.

Like as the
# 4991

 - Posted      Profile for Adam.   Author's homepage   Email Adam.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Claiming the priest is persona christ does as well

Well, I certainly disagree with that. It's interesting, though, to note how slight the basic ecclesiological differences are that can result in big disagreements like over this statement.

quote:

Let me explain a bit further, within the Reformed tradition all public worship is essentially corporate,


And Catholics* would agree.

quote:

that means we see the body of Christ not in the minister at the front but shared in the congregation.

No and yes! It's a both-and, not an either/or for us. To be more precise, Catholics actually see four ways in which Christ is present in Eucharistic liturgy: in the person of the priest, in the Word proclaimed, in the consecrated elements, and in the gathered assembly. In Reformed thought, would it be just the middle two?

quote:

Participating in the Eucharist is not something I do but is something I join in with.

Agree! (I feel like Calvin writing his antidote to Trent, half of which he seems to agree with and hence talk very little about). We are participating in the heavenly liturgy.

quote:

I need my fellow congregants there to do it.

Well, this is true for you and me as neither of us are (yet) ordained priests. For those who are, we would agree that it is very much preferable for a congregation to be physically present, but for just cause a Mass can be said physically alone. This would be an instance in what you raise as a necessity, we would agree upon only as a desideratum.

quote:

To place this with the priest and make this solely about my interaction with the priest is as much to individualise as is taking it separately.

This so totally fails to capture the phenomenology of going to Mass for me that I'm struggling with how to respond to it. In two minutes, I'll walk over to go to Mass. I'll sit surrounded by my fellow believers, one of whom has been consecrated for priestly service. Three others will proclaim scripture to us, I'll exchange the peace with all present, and I'll join my voices to theirs in song and verbal response throughout. Ultimately, it will be an encounter with Christ. At some moments, that will be mediated by the priest, at others through the assembly as a whole. Both-and (plus some!).

--
*To the extent I can speak for anyone, I can only speak for Roman Catholics. I suspect there are others who would take similar positions, though, some of whom also claim the title 'Catholic.'

--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130

 - Posted      Profile for South Coast Kevin   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
The priest is acting in persona Christi. You should take it from his hands. This attempt to atomize us makes the Church into a bunch of individuals, not the One Body we are meant to be.

I'd love to sit down with you or Hart and have a good chat about all this, because at the moment I really don't understand the basis of your position!

The statement I've quoted above seems so far away from how I view these things - IMO all Christians are called to be 'in persona Christi' in everything we do, bringing God's presence into the world through His Spirit that resides in us.

And ISTM that, far from atomising us into a bunch of individuals, it brings us together because we're sharing together as equals, on the same terms. I don't understand how the removal of the special role of the priest brings about more atomisation.

--------------------
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
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
And, my point was that (timewise) it's not that different to each person going forward to a rail and having one person with a plate of bread and another with a cup/tray of glasses, receiving and hearing the same words.

IME, at larger churches when people come forward there are several people serving to speed up the distribution.

Yes, exactly. We're not a large church, but at our main Sunday services we usually have four people serving at the rail. Even at small services there will be two, one with the bread and one with the wine. So, other things being equal, it would be four times faster than the "pass it on" method.
And, my point is that at our small church we have two people serving, a larger church would easily have four. It takes the same time to pass a plate of bread along a pew as it would take for those people to receive up front, all things being equal (ie: you have the same number of people serving).

If you have a congregation of 100 and four people serving the time taken to receive coming up front is the time taken for 50 people to receive (half go to each pair of servers to get bread and wine).
If you have a congregation of 100 and four people serving the time taken to receive in their pews is the time for 25 people to take bread and then 25 people to get wine (each server would take out the bread to 1/4 of the congregation, then repeat with the wine). Give or take a few secondary factors (eg: time taken to bring elements to members unable to come forward, or as is the practice at one church I've known for one server to take elements through to the creche in a back room) I can't see how the time requirements would be significantly different.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sir Kevin
Ship's Gaffer
# 3492

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Kevin   Author's homepage   Email Sir Kevin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I always thought that withinmore catholic churches the requirement was for an ordained minister to preside over Communion. But, once the minister has said the appropriate words then restrictions on who actually assists with the distribution were much less severe.

I am RC and not a priest: I occasionally serve as an EM: Extraordinary Minister of communion where I distribute the host to my fellow parishioners.

--------------------
If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Writing is currently my hobby, not yet my profession.

Posts: 30517 | From: White Hart Lane | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hart:

quote:

that means we see the body of Christ not in the minister at the front but shared in the congregation.

No and yes! It's a both-and, not an either/or for us. To be more precise, Catholics actually see four ways in which Christ is present in Eucharistic liturgy: in the person of the priest, in the Word proclaimed, in the consecrated elements, and in the gathered assembly. In Reformed thought, would it be just the middle two?

Primarily the gathered assembly. Then the Word Proclaimed. Often in Reformed thought Communion would be part of worship on special occasions, and we wuould not claim Christ is less present if there's no Communion. And, when there is Communion his presence is primarily in the people gathered, not the bread and wine. As for the person of the minister, Christ is no more present in him or her than any other member of the congregation.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jengie jon

Semper Reformanda
# 273

 - Posted      Profile for Jengie jon   Author's homepage   Email Jengie jon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hart

That may be the theory but it does not work empirically.

Evidence:

Read Martin Stringer's chapter of Roman Catholic Worship "On the perception of Worship". The individual character of the Roman Catholic worship is very clear. Martin would class himself as Catholic although of the Anglican variety!

Secondly take the evidence of these boards. Who are the ones who want to go to church talk to nobody but the pries, go through the ceremony and then leave. It is not the Protestants.

You know the old practice of women saying the rosary during mass and just stopping for the elevation and to receive. Well I know it is frowned upon, but in actual fact apart from not saying the rosary, that is what you average Mass attender is doing. They are getting on with private devotions in a public space. They are not sharing in a communal act of worship.

The me,the priest and God is very strong in Catholicism and its worship although people are gathered, does not have the same communal elements.

Our worship may be like a concert audience where everyone takes home their own private experience and interpretation of the concert, but they still go through the same act. Most people go to a concert at least to be with other fans of the music. There is an assumption of communality of interest with those around. Yours is more like people in a busy shop, where each is going about their own business, and it is not seen as relating to the others there. Provided they get the good they want then they are satisfied customers.

Jengie

--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge

Back to my blog

Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965

 - Posted      Profile for Basilica   Email Basilica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
You know the old practice of women saying the rosary during mass and just stopping for the elevation and to receive. Well I know it is frowned upon, but in actual fact apart from not saying the rosary, that is what you average Mass attender is doing. They are getting on with private devotions in a public space. They are not sharing in a communal act of worship.

The me,the priest and God is very strong in Catholicism and its worship although people are gathered, does not have the same communal elements.

Our worship may be like a concert audience where everyone takes home their own private experience and interpretation of the concert, but they still go through the same act. Most people go to a concert at least to be with other fans of the music. There is an assumption of communality of interest with those around. Yours is more like people in a busy shop, where each is going about their own business, and it is not seen as relating to the others there. Provided they get the good they want then they are satisfied customers.

Maybe these are things that are less true of the tradition I come from---a fairly modern Anglo-Catholicism, but I recognise very little of what you are saying about Catholic patterns of worship.

I find the beauty of the mass in that it doesn't limit itself to a corporate or individual understanding. It is the nexus of both. It is both an act where the community is vitally important and also an act where each individual is vitally important.

Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Jengie sorry to interject in the conversation with Hart but he is probably asleep just now what with the time difference.
What you say about 'me, the priest and Catholicism' has a certain truth,of course,but I like your phrase about the 'communality of interest'.I would say that all Catholics are aware of the others who with them make up that part of the Body of Christ.We are saved not simply as individuals,but as part of the Body of Christ.The Church is that mystical Body of Christ.Catholics know that and that is why it is so important to be a living limb of that body.

Whilst it may be true that Catholics in general seem to pay less attention to fellow worshippers than some Reformed christians do it is simply a slightly different way of looking at things.Catholics know that they are surrounded by fellow worshippers who are there in the church with them for the same reasons that they themselves are there.They are aware that not only those who are present in the church but a huge company down through the ages have participated in that same worship.
The priest,who acts in persona Christi is the guarantee of the authenticity of the Church's worship but we do all have a priestly role to fulfil.
I heard an interesting story a few days ago. A Catholic priest,probably not dressed in clericals was present in the body of the church at a Mass celebrated in a large and traditionally minded Catholic church in central London.It came to the moment of the Sign of Peace (when some very traditionalist Catholics will bury their heads in their missal).The priest turned round to offer his hand to a neighbour who said:,Oh,we don't do that sort of thing here'.The priest said'Well I'm Jesus Christ in disguise and I'd like to shake hands with you.

Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
...
I heard an interesting story a few days ago. A Catholic priest,probably not dressed in clericals was present in the body of the church at a Mass celebrated in a large and traditionally minded Catholic church in central London.It came to the moment of the Sign of Peace (when some very traditionalist Catholics will bury their heads in their missal).The priest turned round to offer his hand to a neighbour who said:,Oh,we don't do that sort of thing here'.The priest said 'Well I'm Jesus Christ in disguise and I'd like to shake hands with you.

Lovely story. I hope it's true. Do we know what happened next?

I hope it was at least 'Oh, all right then', and not 'well if he comes here, he's got to do things our way'.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Basilica:
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
You know the old practice of women saying the rosary during mass and just stopping for the elevation and to receive. Well I know it is frowned upon, but in actual fact apart from not saying the rosary, that is what you average Mass attender is doing. They are getting on with private devotions in a public space. They are not sharing in a communal act of worship.

The me,the priest and God is very strong in Catholicism and its worship although people are gathered, does not have the same communal elements.

Our worship may be like a concert audience where everyone takes home their own private experience and interpretation of the concert, but they still go through the same act. Most people go to a concert at least to be with other fans of the music. There is an assumption of communality of interest with those around. Yours is more like people in a busy shop, where each is going about their own business, and it is not seen as relating to the others there. Provided they get the good they want then they are satisfied customers.

Maybe these are things that are less true of the tradition I come from---a fairly modern Anglo-Catholicism, but I recognise very little of what you are saying about Catholic patterns of worship.

I find the beauty of the mass in that it doesn't limit itself to a corporate or individual understanding. It is the nexus of both. It is both an act where the community is vitally important and also an act where each individual is vitally important.

Indeed. I suppose that I (also a fairly modern A-C of an affcath kind) am one of those who might appear to an observer like Jengie to be engaging in individual worship when I go to Mass. But one of the very special things about it is that I am not doing it on my own- I'm surrounded by a various and indeed sometimes apparently random group of other worshippers, some of whom I know and others of whom I don't. That context is very important precisely because, as Basilica says, it puts me at the nexus of the collective and the individual.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I can't see how the time requirements would be significantly different.

Because one cup is being passed from hand to hand around a circle of people all standing or sitting round the table. No-one is sitting in the pews (if indeed there are any pews)

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I can't see how the time requirements would be significantly different.

Because one cup is being passed from hand to hand around a circle of people all standing or sitting round the table. No-one is sitting in the pews (if indeed there are any pews)
I'm either totally failing to understand what you are saying, or neither of us have experienced Communion administered in the way we seem to be talking about.

Broadly, within the context of a main service (ie: ignoring special occasions, retreats etc) I have experienced Communion administered in two groups of ways.

1) In Anglican and Methodist churches where I've shared Communion, and in Catholic churches where I have observed, the pattern is for people to come forward. A minister/priest and one or more people assist in distribution. In large congregations there will be more than one plate of bread and cups/trays of wine.

2) In the URC, where I currently find my home, and other places the congregation stay in their pews/seats. One or more plates of bread are passed round (usually at least two as the standard layout would be two groups of pews either side of a central aisle), followed by the same number of cups or trays. There is only usually one cup used in very small contexts (congregations/groups less than 15).

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Indifferently
Shipmate
# 17517

 - Posted      Profile for Indifferently     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
The priest is acting in persona Christi. You should take it from his hands. This attempt to atomize us makes the Church into a bunch of individuals, not the One Body we are meant to be.

I'd love to sit down with you or Hart and have a good chat about all this, because at the moment I really don't understand the basis of your position!

The statement I've quoted above seems so far away from how I view these things - IMO all Christians are called to be 'in persona Christi' in everything we do, bringing God's presence into the world through His Spirit that resides in us.

And ISTM that, far from atomising us into a bunch of individuals, it brings us together because we're sharing together as equals, on the same terms. I don't understand how the removal of the special role of the priest brings about more atomisation.

Yes,we are all called to live the Gospel, but you appear to have missed the nuance. When the priest presides at Communion,he is acting in the person of Jesus Christ in a very peculiar way, and a way in which Christ specifically designated to the Apostles (and their successors, the Bishops and Presbyters). I am not making this up - it has been the understanding since the Early Church. He acts out this role during Confession, too.

I am not an Anglo Catholic, I am merely asserting the orthodox catholic faith asserted by the Church from the very beginning, which forms the doctrine of the Church of England, properly understood.

Posts: 288 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I can't see how the time requirements would be significantly different.

Because one cup is being passed from hand to hand around a circle of people all standing or sitting round the table. No-one is sitting in the pews (if indeed there are any pews)
I'm either totally failing to understand what you are saying, or neither of us have experienced Communion administered in the way we seem to be talking about.

Broadly, within the context of a main service (ie: ignoring special occasions, retreats etc) I have experienced Communion administered in two groups of ways.

1) In Anglican and Methodist churches where I've shared Communion, and in Catholic churches where I have observed, the pattern is for people to come forward. A minister/priest and one or more people assist in distribution. In large congregations there will be more than one plate of bread and cups/trays of wine.

2) In the URC, where I currently find my home, and other places the congregation stay in their pews/seats. One or more plates of bread are passed round (usually at least two as the standard layout would be two groups of pews either side of a central aisle), followed by the same number of cups or trays. There is only usually one cup used in very small contexts (congregations/groups less than 15).

Yes, those are the normal ways of doing it. But we were talking about a third way (sorry!) as described by womanspeak and Penny S above, different from both of those.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Indifferently:
I am not an Anglo Catholic, I am merely asserting the orthodox catholic faith asserted by the Church from the very beginning, which forms the doctrine of the Church of England, properly understood.

What, in your view, differentiates you from Anglo-Catholics? Your interpretation of the doctrine of the Church of England is very Catholic. I think you'd struggle to find support in the BCP for sacramental confession, which you seem to take for granted. I mean, I broadly agree with you about these matters, but I do consider myself somewhat Anglo-Catholic.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools