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   »   » Oblivion   » Distribution of Communion within the Congregation (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Distribution of Communion within the Congregation
BokBok
Apprentice
# 18340

 - Posted      Profile for BokBok   Email BokBok   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi all, this is the first time I have posted here so please forgive me if I have put this in the wrong place.

At my church, at one of our Sunday services (the one I am most involved with) we take Communion once a month. While the consecration is performed by one of the priests, we distribute via each other - i.e. the priest gives bread and wine to one person, who gives it to the next, who gives it to the next and so on around a circle.

For reasons that I cannot quite explain, this makes me deeply uncomfortable and I would much prefer it if we were to go up and receive from one of the priests/readers as we do in the other services.

My understanding is that distribution of the elements of Communion are to be done by clergy or licensed Eucharistic ministers rather than by, well, all of us. (We are middle-of-the-road C of E, incidentally) That said, our Vicar does not seem troubled, so I'm not sure why I am.

I suppose this is a wandering way of saying that I could use some advice on figuring out why the practise makes me uncomfortable - because it makes me dislike taking Communion at that service and I generally force myself to do so, and sadly, in the process, do not take the sacrament as seriously as I would wish.

Help would be appreciated (as would a 'you're asking in the wrong place' comment!)

Posts: 1 | From: NE England | Registered: Feb 2015  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BokBok:
While the consecration is performed by one of the priests, we distribute via each other - i.e. the priest gives bread and wine to one person, who gives it to the next, who gives it to the next and so on around a circle.
[..]
(We are middle-of-the-road C of E, incidentally)

From Canon B 12 of the Church of England:

quote:

3. No person shall distribute the holy sacrament of the Lord's Supper to the people unless he shall have been ordained in accordance with the provisions of Canon C 1, or is otherwise authorized by Canon or unless he has been specially authorized to do so by the bishop acting under such regulations as the General Synod may make from time to time.

You are right to be concerned. Your priest is in breach of canon law.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
You are right to be concerned. Your priest is in breach of canon law.

That being said, this law is to do with the good order of the church. The consecrated sacraments do not somehow stop being Jesus as they are passed from person to person - the communion is not invalid - but it is a question of dignity and seemliness.

Some of the posters on this board would tell you that, in their view of church, each person serving his neighbour is a far better expression of community than everyone queueing at the altar to receive from people in special clothes. I won't speak any more for them, but I'm sure a representative of this kind of opinion will be along to speak for himself.

Quite apart from the fact that this practice is, as far as I can tell, not permitted in the C of E (and C of E priests should have the honesty not to go around ignoring bits of canon law just because they don't like them), I agree with you that it lacks dignity. I went to one or two such services in my youth, and had uneasy feelings similar to those that you describe.

Oh, and let me welcome you aboard the Ship, BokBok, and hope you have a pleasant voyage with us. You have found the correct spot for your question, and I hope you find some of the varied responses that you're about to get useful [Smile]

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As the post above hints, what you are describing (or a variant of it) would be very common in (British) Nonconformist churches, especially smaller ones. In Baptist churches and in at least most URC ones, the elements are served to people in their seats, they do not "go up" the front to receive. Methodist practice that I have seen is more akin to the CofE.

Of course (a) we have a different view of the priesthood to many Anglicans and (b) we are not bound by Canon Law.

I'm sorry you feel uncomfortable, though.

[ 07. February 2015, 08:34: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That circular distribution was how communion was distributed in St Giles Cathedral Edinburgh when I attended a service there last year. Several circles were required to accommodate all the congregation present.

I've experienced the same distribution method in small ecumenical chaplaincy meetings (maybe 6 of us), and at the start of church meetings (maybe 20) and not felt uncomfortable, but I agree with BokBok, I really don't feel comfortable with this method of distribution in an otherwise formal church service.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
seasick

...over the edge
# 48

 - Posted      Profile for seasick   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
C of E priests should have the honesty not to go around ignoring bits of canon law just because they don't like them

I thought that was a noble Anglican tradition? [Two face]

[ 07. February 2015, 11:21: Message edited by: seasick ]

--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley

Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Barefoot Friar

Ship's Shoeless Brother
# 13100

 - Posted      Profile for Barefoot Friar   Email Barefoot Friar   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Welcome, BokBok! This is exactly the right place to ask your question.

I'm sure you've already found the Ten Commandments and the UBB Practice Thread, but there's the links if you haven't.

Again, welcome to the Ship. I hope you enjoy your time here. If you have any questions, PM me or one of the other hosts and we'll get it sorted.

Barefoot Friar
Eccles. Host


--------------------
Do your little bit of good where you are; its those little bits of good put together that overwhelm the world. -- Desmond Tutu

Posts: 1621 | From: Warrior Mountains | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I went to a CofE/URC Communion service the other week and the elements were passed around the seats. I was surprised at this, because when worshipping there on previous occasions I had to queue up. Mind you, that was before they'd entered into their Local Ecumenical Partnership (LEP), so perhaps the practice had been influenced by the URC presence.

What I don't like about it is that lots of different people finger the loaf of bread as it's passed around. The practice of ripping off a piece for your neighbour seems especially unhygienic (but I think the same about the use of the single chalice too).

However, as I'm not much of a sacramentalist it doesn't bother me that the minister isn't handing out every single piece of bread, or personally offering every sip of wine. If he or she has asked for God's blessing on the elements at the start that should be enough.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  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 
Hang on, Hang on, its strange to me therefore it is wrong is not a good precedent.

The URC tradition almost certainly comes from the habit of having everyone around the central table as can still be seen in some churches in Scotland. Indeed the putting out of white cloths along the pews to represent the table is still the practice in some URCs (well up to 1990s and yes I know that is Crown Court). I have equally known URCs move the communion table into the nave precisely to symbolise this gathering around the table.

There is no slight here, the symbolic reasoning is different and therefore the implications. the focus is far more on the heavenly banquet and meal before the passion than on the idea of the communion as Sacrifice. We are there as guests not a supplicants. Oddly enough the theological idea is caught in George Herbert's poem Love bade me welcome. Note the last line is "sit and eat".

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
seasick

...over the edge
# 48

 - Posted      Profile for seasick   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Hang on, Hang on, its strange to me therefore it is wrong is not a good precedent.

I don't think anyone's said that. The only way it seems to have been said to be 'wrong' is in the legal sense that it appears to be prohibited by the Canon Law of the Church of England and the service in question took place in a Church of England church.

--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley

Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Utrecht Catholic
Shipmate
# 14285

 - Posted      Profile for Utrecht Catholic   Email Utrecht Catholic   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Passing the elements is a very Protestant Innovation and neither Anglican nor Catholic.
Furthermore, are Anglicans and United Reformed in communion with each other ?
I do not think so.
So it is right to have united communion services if the two churches are not in communion with each other ?
The ministry of the United Reformed is very different from the Church of Canterbury.

--------------------
Robert Kennedy

Posts: 220 | From: Dordrecht | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Utrecht Catholic:

Furthermore, are Anglicans and United Reformed in communion with each other ?

The URC is covered by canons B43 and B44, which permit various forms of joint worship and Local Ecumenical Partnerships.

The distribution of the elements from person to person, whilst not permitted by canon B12, is a matter of good order rather than essential doctrine, so my reading of B44 suggests that the Bishop has the authority to permit it in the context of an LEP. I'm no canon lawyer, though.

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 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 
If the URC minister is presiding then it is a Reformed Communion; if an CofE priest is presiding it is an Anglican Eucharist.

As both have open tables, this really does not affect the congregants. There are all sorts of rubrics that have to be followed so as not to scare the horses, but essentially that is how it works.

For instance from the URC perspective it is strongly recommended that any Anglican Eucharist held uses a Eucharistic prayer that contains the warrant (most do). URC would equally tend to use Great Thanksgiving prayers that have the epiclesis in them.

Jengie

[ 07. February 2015, 14:33: 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
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
If the URC minister is presiding then it is a Reformed Communion; if an CofE priest is presiding it is an Anglican Eucharist.

That's a good point. I had assumed from SvitlanaV2's post that this was a C of E priest presiding, in the context of the wider thread, but now I see she didn't actually say that.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In fact, the CofE vicar was preaching elsewhere that day, and the service was being led by the URC minister - although a Catholic deacon preached the sermon! (It was the week of the yearly pulpit exchange.)

I don't know if communion happens differently when the vicar is leading worship.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Polly Plummer
Shipmate
# 13354

 - Posted      Profile for Polly Plummer   Email Polly Plummer   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've been at C of E Communion services where there weren't many people (early morning or midweek) and this sort of distribution took place, and found it very moving. It hadn't occurred to me that it might not be legal.
Posts: 577 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965

 - Posted      Profile for Basilica   Email Basilica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not a fan of this method of distributing communion. First, because it's an almighty faff and takes far longer. Second, because once you receive you then have to worry about the mechanics of handing things over, rather than prayer. Third, because it assumes that everyone is happy to offer communion to people -- some don't want to. Fourth, because it assumes that everyone wants to receive communion, which isn't always true.

In a small, intimate situation (e.g. a PCC meeting or similar) I can see how it can make sense, especially if you can be sure that everyone wants to receive communion and is happy to distribute communion.

But it still doesn't seem like a sensible way to do things to my mind.

Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Oscar the Grouch

Adopted Cascadian
# 1916

 - Posted      Profile for Oscar the Grouch     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Like a lot of others, I have seen this done (in Anglican and non-Anglican contexts) but mainly in a more intimate and informal setting. I don't think I have ever encountered this practice in a main Sunday morning Eucharist.

I don't think it is contra to Canon law as such. It certainly isn't something where an archdeacon or bishop would ever tap the priest on the shoulder and say "don't do that again, chum". But I think that it DOES require a few things:
a) Relatively small numbers. If you can't stand in one circle, then don't do it.
b) Clear instructions on what to do. If the participants are all well-known and experienced in churchy things, then you can leave this out. But if there is any chance that someone present may not have done this before, then instructions should be gioven and it shouldn't be assumed that people will know what to do.
c) Space for people to NOT receive. Again, this comes down to who is present. If there is someone who does NOT want to receive (or even someone who is not well-known, and so cannot be assumed to be ready to receive communion), then they need to be allowed a way to decline without embarrassment.

In short, I would do this in a home group or with a Parish Council. I don't think it is good practice to do it in situations where there may be strangers or newcomers.

--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu

Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I don't think it is contra to Canon law as such.

I quoted canon B 12 part 3 above. Unless your entire congregation consists of those licensed by the bishop to dispense communion, this practice would seem to be excluded.

Can you explain why you think it is permitted?

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  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 Leorning Cniht:
C of E priests should have the honesty not to go around ignoring bits of canon law just because they don't like them)

Most (if not all) priests do it. It happens all the time. Why not on this matter?

The explanation always appears to be one of expediency and/or community inclusion. Why not in this case too?

[ 08. February 2015, 06:36: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  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 Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I don't think it is contra to Canon law as such.

I quoted canon B 12 part 3 above. Unless your entire congregation consists of those licensed by the bishop to dispense communion, this practice would seem to be excluded.

Can you explain why you think it is permitted?

Because sometimes common sense and context rules over legalism. The early communion in a church where few gather? Probably not, because early Mass gatherers tend in most places to be more passive in liturgical preference. A gathering of youth leaders in a paddock? Probably, and bugger the rubrics. Becuae in the end what narrative most effectively serves as a vehicle of Christ-love, Christ-hospitality in that context?

Solemn High Mass in a cathedral? No: order and common sense and chronos, the latter ironically, dictate that the rubrics rule. But let's not even Anglicans be anal and legalistic about this: what's the context dude, and what best communicates Christlove?

--------------------
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
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
I think that it DOES require a few things: ...
Space for people to NOT receive. Again, this comes down to who is present. If there is someone who does NOT want to receive (or even someone who is not well-known, and so cannot be assumed to be ready to receive communion), then they need to be allowed a way to decline without embarrassment.

Yes, this is something we have to provide for in our set-up, where people routinely receive Communion in their pews. We say something like, "If, for any reason, you do not wish to receive, simply pass the plate/cups to the next person".
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
What I don't like about it is that lots of different people finger the loaf of bread as it's passed around. The practice of ripping off a piece for your neighbour seems especially unhygienic

I experienced that one Maundy Thursday - by the end, the loaf smelt of and tasted like perfume

--------------------
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
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472

 - Posted      Profile for Augustine the Aleut     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
Like a lot of others, I have seen this done (in Anglican and non-Anglican contexts) but mainly in a more intimate and informal setting. I don't think I have ever encountered this practice in a main Sunday morning Eucharist.

*snip* But I think that it DOES require a few things:
*more snip*
c) Space for people to NOT receive. Again, this comes down to who is present. If there is someone who does NOT want to receive (or even someone who is not well-known, and so cannot be assumed to be ready to receive communion), then they need to be allowed a way to decline without embarrassment.

In short, I would do this in a home group or with a Parish Council. I don't think it is good practice to do it in situations where there may be strangers or newcomers.

One further consideration is that there are those who cannot receive one element or the other. I have one friend who receives in wine only on account of some wheat-related ailment and several who cannot receive the wine (often as they are in AA). While this can be done without much fuss coming up to the rail, it can be very awkward in a circle, especially for those who are self-conscious.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This passing and not taking has the closest analogue in my mind of the passing on of a joint and not taking circa 1974.

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  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 
Yeah and is that inappropriate or do I not need to take seriously all these high church types who talk of Eucharist very much as if it is a fix.

Actually the nearest analogy is passing the gravy, if you do not wish to partake, to the next person at a family meal.

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
Ecclesiastical Flip-flop
Shipmate
# 10745

 - Posted      Profile for Ecclesiastical Flip-flop   Email Ecclesiastical Flip-flop   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
IMHO passing the elements round from one communicant to the next, should be done, amongst experienced communicants only and not for every occasion.

I sympathise, with BokBok about feeling uncomfortable in passing the elements round, because at a certain church where I used to go, this informal practice has become the invariable use on every occasion and (join the club!) so am I uncomfortable! I must have made my communion at thousands of churches in my life, and that is the only church anywhere, where I feel uncomfortable about making my communion. I could go on, but it would take too long!

Last time I went there to make my communion, the process was so chaotic, that I declined to handle the pottery communion set, but left that to the communicants next to me on either side, receiving the Precious Blood by intinction. As far as I am concerned, this process is having the opposite effect to that intended - proving to be hellish rather than heavenly. Consequently, I am darkening the doors of the said church to receive communion, seldom to never. Some were people in the line whom I did not know whether communicant or non-communicant and so, I did not know what to do.

I should make it clear that the said church is an Anglican church in England. It is my experience that Canon B12 is not strictly adhered to all the time.

--------------------
Joyeuses Pâques! Frohe Ostern! Buona Pasqua! ¡Felices Pascuas! Happy Easter!

Posts: 1946 | From: Surrey UK | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Yeah and is that inappropriate or do I not need to take seriously all these high church types who talk of Eucharist very much as if it is a fix.

Actually the nearest analogy is passing the gravy, if you do not wish to partake, to the next person at a family meal.

Jengie

Yes, except, I seem to be inhaling the holy smoke these days because of God's refusal to shoot me up any more with his hero(in) son.

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
A question to BokBok and Ecclesiastical FlipFlop: What is it precisely that makes you so uncomfortable about this? Is it:

- that you'd prefer to receive it directly from a priest rather than the person next to you? And, if so, why?
- that you feel it is too informal and/or in some way "not very holy"(whatever that may mean)?
- that you are worried about dropping it?
- that interacting with the person next to you interrupts your personal worship?
- or simply because it "isn't what you've been accustomed to" and so feels "wrong"?
- or what?

No, I'm not being snidey: these are genuine questions from someone whose tradition has done something akin to this for centuries and really doesn't have any problems with it.

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Our practice we get away with because we're an FE. The children distribute. Yes, really. This is a practice that evolved organically. It just happened.

When we took the service to Greenbelt it was commented that this was on of the most moving aspects of the service.

We see the Eucharist very much in its context as coming together to share a meal; a social gathering if you will. It's significant that we follow the Eucharist with a bring and share lunch which has always been as much an essential part of our gathering as anything else.

My inner Anglo-Catholic struggled with this a little at first, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Interesting. Our Communion services are pretty formal traditional Nonconformist in the morning, more relaxed (smaller congregation) in the evening.

But at Easter morning we have Communion straight after Breakfast together, still seated at the table. We do some tidying-up (to make space) but not all of it - partly to maintain the "mealtime" atmosphere, and partly to stop folk disappearing into the kitchen to wash up.

We use a fairly formal, almost Anglican, liturgy which lasts about 20 minutes. The elements are passed round the table; any children may partake if they (and their parents) wish. As Karl says, this makes it a true family occasion: how could one think of them not taking part? (Mind you, having non-alcoholic wine makes it easier!)

We were discussing this service one year at our Church Meeting. One person said that she really didn't like it as it was too informal; what she particularly disliked was the idea of sitting at the meal table. One other member replied, "But that's the way Jesus did it, isn't it?" There wasn't much discussion after that.

Might some churches (not just Anglican or RC, by the way) be in danger of so "sacralising" the Eucharist that they have forgotten its simple and communal origins? Yes, it is a special and holy occasion; but I also remember reading something written by Michelle Guinness, Jewish convert to Christianity and wife of a CofE priest, who always wondered how the Church had so distorted her Passover meal by turning it into the Communion service.

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The problem with the circular distribution in a main service with 100+ communicants is that you can't put everyone in a circle to share, unlike at the start of a PCC meeting or a chaplaincy meeting. So you have to have several circles, which feels an unnecessary additional faff. When I've taken communion like this in large services it hasn't felt like sharing between the community but additional artifice that doesn't make sense.

In smaller groups when you can see the whole group, it does make sense.

But I've experienced a method where everyone still comes forward and stands in a circle around the communion table, not where people stay in their seats and the communion bread and wine comes around to the people in the pews.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gracious rebel

Rainbow warrior
# 3523

 - Posted      Profile for Gracious rebel     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Why is everyone so focused on the 'circle' thing? An actual circle is not strictly necessary for this form of communion, just the ability to pass the elements around from one to another. This can easily be done in rows, back and forth, and there is no reason why large numbers (within reason) should preclude this method.

I grew up amongst the Open Brethren and this was the only form of Communion I was aware of as a child. It happened weekly, an was the main focus of Sunday worship. There were no clergy, so it couldn't have been one differently for us anyway! The chairs were arranged in our blocks of rows, with the Table in the centre. When it was time for the elements to be distributed, somebody broke the bread (we used a cottage loaf) into four segments, placing a piece in each of the 4 wooden platters. One platter was then taken to the back row of each section of sating. It was passed back and forth, finishing up with the front row where the last person put it back on the table. Very simple. The process was then repeated for the wine - poured into 4 large goblets, then one distributed around each section of seating. Those who were not partaking just let it pass them by - which is much less obvious and embarrasing (in my opinion) than keeping your seat when others go forward to receive.

And yes Baptist Trainfan is right about our Easter Morning communions around the breakfast table - possibly the most meaningful and memorable that I have ever been part of - its the draw of this that will get me out of bed and out of the house an hour or two earlier than usual on Easter morning!

--------------------
Fancy a break beside the sea in Suffolk? Visit my website

Posts: 4413 | From: Suffolk UK | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453

 - Posted      Profile for Metapelagius   Email Metapelagius   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
But I've experienced a method where everyone still comes forward and stands in a circle around the communion table, not where people stay in their seats and the communion bread and wine comes around to the people in the pews.

quote:
"METHOD OF ADMINISTERING HOLY COMMUNION"
Until the Mastership of Dr Evans <elected 1864> it was the custom here, as still at St Mary's <the University Church> and the Cathedral <Christ Church> and formerly in several college chapels, to bring the Elements to the communicants kneeling in their places. It has been disputed whether this usage was a relic of Puritanism or a custom of Community life ... Shortly before Jeune <appointed Bp of Peterborough 1864> resigned the Mastership an undergraduate was accidentally passed over by the minister of one Species, and on November 20 1864, the custom was abandoned. In 1898, while hot-water pipes were being laid under the chapel floor, a skeleton was found.

College Histories of Oxford - Pembroke College, Douglas Macleane: 1900. The last sentence is something of a non-sequitur ...

[ 08. February 2015, 21:09: Message edited by: Metapelagius ]

--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.

Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005  |  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 
I've actually seen this at St. Mary's. I assume they don't do it for their main Sunday service, which I never attended, but they did it as recently as the early 0ies at at least one weekday service once.

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

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
At a church I attended nearly fifty years ago, as a special way of doing the Communion Service on the evening of Maundy Thursday, we used to be sat in alternate rows. The clergy then brought the bread and wine to serve us in our pews. It was very moving, a bit like a metaphorical foot-washing. I suppose it was their way of expressing 'why is this night different from all other nights?'

On your original question BokBok, I'm with Oscar the Grouch and Zappa. I'm also not quite as certain as Leorning Cniht is that this is actually in breach of Canon B12. I can see the argument, but I can also see quite a convincing argument that both elements here are really being distributed by the President.

BokBok, even if you decide you don't want to share your answers with us, Baptist Trainfan's questions are wise ones to ask of yourself.


Metaplegius, that might not be a non sequitur if it was the person who was missed whose bones ended up being found!

[ 08. February 2015, 22:05: Message edited by: Enoch ]

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

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  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 no prophet's flag is set so...:
This passing and not taking has the closest analogue in my mind of the passing on of a joint and not taking circa 1974.

I don't understand this "not taking" aspect of the context you describe ... [Biased]

--------------------
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
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
- that you'd prefer to receive it directly from a priest rather than the person next to you? And, if so, why?

No, not this. Our usual Sunday has a priest and three LEMs, and I have no preference as to who I receive from.

quote:
- that you feel it is too informal and/or in some way "not very holy"(whatever that may mean)?
This might get close, although there are elements of some of the others. But let me say first that all of this is more or less a matter of taste, and my tastes run to the formal. But here's a list of the things that I think make me uncomfortable:
  • Passing Jesus round like a plate of biscuits. On the rare occasion I have experienced this, it hasn't seemed very reverent, and I think this is why.
  • Risk of dropping etc. This is another reverence thing. Passing the plate seems to have a greater inherent risk of dropping.
  • Enforced interaction. Some people find personal interaction difficult. We here from some of these every time we discuss an "enthusiastic" passing of the peace.
  • I also dislike it when whoever is distributing presses a Host into my hand, gazes meaningfully into my face and uses my name.
  • And yes, probably an element of "it's weird, and not what I'm used to"

Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
no prophet's flag is set so...

Proceed to see sea
# 15560

 - Posted      Profile for no prophet's flag is set so...   Author's homepage   Email no prophet's flag is set so...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
This passing and not taking has the closest analogue in my mind of the passing on of a joint and not taking circa 1974.

I don't understand this "not taking" aspect of the context you describe ... [Biased]
It's just something I have observed. More for the rest of us sas my thought. Which wld be an interesting way of considering communion. Let us praise God together on our knees.

--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/

Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338

 - Posted      Profile for L'organist   Author's homepage   Email L'organist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, a motion concerning Canon B 12 was put to the GS in 2012, but that doesn't automatically change how things are or bring into being any change,

If you go to the Church of England website it is abundantly clear what the regulations are, but to save you the effort (and stop any claims of justification through ignorance), here it is:
quote:
Current regulations apply until further notice and the law has not yet changed
Whether or not you approve of the Canon is irrelevant - the rule is clear.

The OP asked is the situation at his church was legal or 'right': the answer to that is NO, not legal and not right.

--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet

Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged
american piskie
Shipmate
# 593

 - Posted      Profile for american piskie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adam.:
I've actually seen this at St. Mary's. I assume they don't do it for their main Sunday service, which I never attended, but they did it as recently as the early 0ies at at least one weekday service once.

The only time I have seen this in St Mary's was at the start-of-term University Communion using the BCP in its Latin version. Of course the chancel desks were decently draped with houselling cloths. As I recall it the celebrant and gospeller brought the elements; no passing along the row!

(As far as I know nothing has changed, but I haven't been for a bit.)

Posts: 356 | From: Oxford, England, UK | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
The OP asked is the situation at his church was legal or 'right': the answer to that is NO, not legal and not right.

Er - no, it wasn't the OP. I in fact asked that questions on a different thread, about the service I attended, where we had the first section of Holy Communion without the Sacrament itself on an occasion when, due to illness, the Sacrament itself could not be offered.

Others brought up the legality (or not) of "passing round" Communion.

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 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 american piskie:
quote:
Originally posted by Adam.:
I've actually seen this at St. Mary's. I assume they don't do it for their main Sunday service, which I never attended, but they did it as recently as the early 0ies at at least one weekday service once.

The only time I have seen this in St Mary's was at the start-of-term University Communion using the BCP in its Latin version. Of course the chancel desks were decently draped with houselling cloths. As I recall it the celebrant and gospeller brought the elements; no passing along the row!

(As far as I know nothing has changed, but I haven't been for a bit.)

That's precisely the context in which I remember it.

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

Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378

 - Posted      Profile for Gramps49   Email Gramps49   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
When I was a chaplain in the USAF our general Protestant service had it both ways. For those accustomed to receiving it from the altar, I would distribute the elements. For those more accustomed to receiving them in the pews either the Baptist or Methodist chaplains would distribute them.

I think the point about canon law is a good point--it is there only to insure good order. It is not a hare and fast command. But if you insist on it technically when the priest hands the elements to the first person in the circle or pew distributing the elements? Does it really say the congregant must receive the elements from the priest or licensed assistant (notice the similarity to the question the snake asked Eve)?

Think of it, at that first meal, did Jesus go to each individual disciple and give the disciple the element himself? Or did he pass them around the table? Tradition gets murky.

No, the most important part of the distribution is that the elements are taken and eaten/drunk.

Now, at my congregation, the altar is in the center of the sanctuary, the congregation sits around the altar. We all go up to commune at the table--there may be a couple of elderly who cannot come up, in those cases the assistants will go to them to commune them.

At my congregation, we will have several people assist in the distribution, the head usher will normally ask people if they are willing to assist before the beginning of worship. And, yes, we have had kids in the later grades of elementary and middle school distribute communion. One girl was tasked with distribution the day she was baptized (not even confirmed) She was in the fourth grade at the time. I was following her, coaching her as she assisted--she did real well.

I say don't let canon law become legalistic. Understand its purpose. Honor it as much as possible. If there is a question, consult your bishop (going through proper channels, of course).

Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:

I say don't let canon law become legalistic. Understand its purpose. Honor it as much as possible. If there is a question, consult your bishop (going through proper channels, of course).

Canons aren't suggestions. They really are binding on the members of a church, and especially upon the clergy. A priest who flouts his church's canons is walking on thin ice.

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

 - Posted      Profile for Zappa   Email Zappa   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
While that is true - and the canons regarding property issues are probably fairly important - the last time I checked even Anglican Christianity was not Torah-based, and a couple of blokes called Jesus and Paul buggered up legalistic impositions.

Therefore context becomes critical, for canonical hermeneutics as much as for biblical hermeneutics. What best serves a gospel of grace in all the nuances of this context.

--------------------
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
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I get what you're suggesting. But if I get hauled before the ecclesiastical tribunal for breaking canons, the issue is not going to be so much how I feel about them as how the tribunal feels about them. Better safe than sorry.

--------------------
"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
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
I get what you're suggesting. But if I get hauled before the ecclesiastical tribunal for breaking canons, the issue is not going to be so much how I feel about them as how the tribunal feels about them. Better safe than sorry.

Or better to do what is pastorally right and take the risk that the church hierarchy will see it differently. I'm not sure our exemplar Christ played it safe.

Gramps - some of our children helping in distribution are as young as 6. It seems to work.

[ 10. February 2015, 06:37: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Basilica
Shipmate
# 16965

 - Posted      Profile for Basilica   Email Basilica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's not just about playing by the rules lest you be disciplined. It's also about participating in the rites and disciplines of the wider church. The Church of England is not congregationalist.
Posts: 403 | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Depends how tightly you define "rites and disciplines" really Basilica.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
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