After Holy Communion

[JVAC]

What does your church do with the species after the meal is shared?

[LynneClomina]

species? well, cross breed them of course.

what is "species"

[JVAC]

I used this word because I didn't want to step on toes. Species can mean Bread and Wine that is shared, or the Body and Blood that is shared. Species is just a general term that makes different idealogies feel more warm and fuzzy inside, instead of, "that, I don't believe that anyway".

I was just curious as to what is done with the left overs?

In my church they are always consumed. If there the Body is left it is saved for next time and if the Blood is left it is drank by the Celebrant.

-James

[LynneClomina]

oh.

we use a loaf of bread torn up into bits. what bits arent used are thrown out.
what is left of the loaf and grape juice is usually given to somebody that can use it at home.

[ByzantineDixie]

What does your church do with the species after the meal is shared?

We do some inconguous things. You'll quickly see the problem.

The wafers (nasty stuff...we sit up front and usually get pieces of the celebrant's host--much better. Whole wheat?) in the box thing (forgot that name) are returned to wafer storage for the next service.

The wafers on the paton are crumbled and placed on the grass.

The wine in the carafe (forgot the official name?) is returned to the Manischewitz bottle.

And the wine remaining in the common cup is pour out directly on the ground.

In some way I understand the issue of reverence...yet in another...the elements are either all holy or they are all not. I like what your church does, James.

Peace

Rose

[Lotar]

Dump it on the ground? :eek:

They're supposed to drink it...

[ByzantineDixie]

Dump it on the ground? :eek:

They're supposed to drink it...

I believe historically churches used to have sinks that drained straight to the earth, not the sanitary sewer system, for the purpose of disposing consecrated communion wine and or rinse water (these sinks have a special name too, but I don't recall) . RCCs might still have these--the church I grew up in did...ants used to come up from it all the time. Anyway--that's where the concept comes from.

I understand the idea of drinking all of it but this is Manischewitz!!! ;) You are from California...surely you understand!!! :D

Peace

Rose

[Phoebe]

I think it is re- used. I don't think the common cup is more than half full to begin with, and sometimes three or four drink from it.

We use MD Concord Grape. ;) We use the white wafers. We had some wheat last year. They were too much like bread. The wine was offered too soon to be able to swallow the bread first.

[Henhouse]

I hope y'all don't think of me as partaking "in an unworthy manner"...
Our church uses saltines and Welch's; I'm sure it is thrown out afterwards.

[InnerPhyre]

oh.

we use a loaf of bread torn up into bits. what bits arent used are thrown out.

:eek: You throw it out? Does your church believe in the Real Presence?

[TwinCrier]

Rather you believe in the real presence or not, that is such a waste. Whether you believe symbolic or not, why not eat and drink?

[Rechtgläubig]

I believe my pastor saves and re-consecrates the elements at the next communion service where they are consumed.

[LynneClomina]

:eek: You throw it out? Does your church believe in the Real Presence?

nope. it's seen as symbolic only, done in REMEMBRANCE.

[LynneClomina]

Rather you believe in the real presence or not, that is such a waste. Whether you believe symbolic or not, why not eat and drink?

eat what? the dried up "croutons" that are left at the end of the service? there isnt usually THAT much left over. the untorn up bread is given to someone who can use it. same for the juice.

we have been known to grab a few extra peices after communion for a snack during the message (sermon)... is that less of a waste?

[Rosa Mystica]

I'm Catholic, so I do believe in the Real Presence. I've always seen the priest consume whatever's left after Communion (I think. Or maybe I wasn't watching closely)? I'm not sure what else is done, though I think the rest is saved for the next Mass.

[JVAC]

Rose,

I think spilling it upon the ground might be acceptable, after all his blood was spilled upon Golgatha. I guess it does depend on the manner in which you take care of it. I have to admit I have never heard of that brand of wine before. Our Church uses a local winery, I think Nonini or something like that. The wine that we have doesn't taste like any other wine I have tasted. I think maybe it is because after it is Consecrated it is something new and it has its own unique taste.

Anyway, there are some interesting differences here.

-James

[ChiRho]

nope. it's seen as symbolic only, done in REMEMBRANCE.


Real Physical Presence "This IS my Body...This IS my Blood"

Objectively, this IS what Holy Communion IS, regardless the depth in which one despises this Sacrament.

[ChiRho]

eat what? the dried up "croutons" that are left at the end of the service? there isnt usually THAT much left over. the untorn up bread is given to someone who can use it. same for the juice.

we have been known to grab a few extra peices after communion for a snack during the message (sermon)... is that less of a waste?


Truely, this is disturbing!

[InnerPhyre]

nope. it's seen as symbolic only, done in REMEMBRANCE.

Catholic communion is done in remembrance too. The question I posed was not "why do you do it?" But "what is it?" If it is only bread to you and nothing more, then I can understand why you'd trash it. The thought of trashing the precious Flesh and Blood of our Lord is what caught me off guard.

[puriteen18]

I'm a Calvinist, so I believe in the spiritual presence only.

After the Supper, the elements remaining are put back in a separate frige in an area of the kitchen with all the other bread and wine and used next time. They are not thrown away because, even though we do not believe that they are the Body or Blood, they have been set apart for a holy use.

[puriteen18]

eat what? the dried up "croutons" that are left at the end of the service? there isnt usually THAT much left over. the untorn up bread is given to someone who can use it. same for the juice.

we have been known to grab a few extra peices after communion for a snack during the message (sermon)... is that less of a waste?
Doesn't that seem a little sacreligious to you?

And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation.

Maybe that doesn't exactly apply, but it's close enough to make me worry about that of which you speak.

[Knight]

FYI, many Protestant churches that do not believe in the transubstantiation or constubtantiation (sorry for spelling errors there....) refer to the Communion "stuff" as the elements.

I had never heard of the term "species" before...

I'm not exactly sure what is done with the leftovers. I think the wafers are disposed of and we rarely have any juice left over. We do throw out the plastic cups that we partake from...

[TwinCrier]

Real Physical Presence "This IS my Body...This IS my Blood"

Objectively, this IS what Holy Communion IS, regardless the depth in which one despises this Sacrament.I don't think this was a debate on that aspect, but on what is done with the leftover bread, or in your case, leftover Jesus. Jesus also many times said we are His sheep. I am not a sheep. That is called a metaphor.

[JVAC]

I don't think this was a debate on that aspect, but on what is done with the leftover bread, or in your case, leftover Jesus. Jesus also many times said we are His sheep. I am not a sheep. That is called a metaphor.
Both your opinion and ChiRho's are valid here, however, I don't know if I approve of your sarcasm, [or at least what I interpreted to be sarcasm]. ChiRho was expressing the orthodox view even though it might have been semi-combative. We need to all remember that about [here comes an informal statistic] 85% of christians believe in the real pressence, if not more.

-James

[InnerPhyre]

I don't think this was a debate on that aspect, but on what is done with the leftover bread, or in your case, leftover Jesus. Jesus also many times said we are His sheep. I am not a sheep. That is called a metaphor.

Wow....that's condescending.....


::bows out quietly::

[theseed]

Real Physical Presence "This IS my Body...This IS my Blood"

Objectively, this IS what Holy Communion IS, regardless the depth in which one despises this Sacrament.
And Jesus followed it up with "Do this in rememberance of me"

[Matrona]

I don't think this was a debate on that aspect, but on what is done with the leftover bread, or in your case, leftover Jesus. Jesus also many times said we are His sheep. I am not a sheep. That is called a metaphor."Leftover Jesus"? :eek: :cry: :(

To answer the OP, for the record, in all Orthodox churches, anything left of the Eucharist in the chalice is consumed by the priest. Wine and leavened bread are the elements that are consecrated and become the Body and Blood.

There are special situations where the consecrated Eucharist is reserved for later. On Holy Thursday in the Orthodox Church (Holy Thursday is the Thursday of Holy Week), the priest places the consecrated Eucharist in the tabernacle and it is left there for one year, to have on hand in case of emergency, sickness, etc.

(The next year during Holy Week, the priest consumes whatever is left in the tabernacle. Bread and wine would have spoiled in various ways in the space of a year. But the Eucharist, being the Body and Blood of our Lord, does not spoil and is perfectly safe to consume, even after a year!)

[theseed]

85% of christians believe in the real pressence, if not more.

And because everbody beleives in it, it must be true.

[Rosa Mystica]

eat what? the dried up "croutons" that are left at the end of the service? there isnt usually THAT much left over. the untorn up bread is given to someone who can use it. same for the juice.

we have been known to grab a few extra peices after communion for a snack during the message (sermon)... is that less of a waste?


This concerns me as well, regardless of whether or not one believes in the Real Presence. Is this a standard practice in Calvinist churches?

[theseed]

If there is too much wine left over, then wouldn't the RC priest get drunk when he finishes it off?

[Rosa Mystica]

If there is too much wine left over, then wouldn't the RC priest get drunk when he finishes it off?

I somehow don't think there's a lot of wine in the chalice to begin w/. Not to mention that the wine used is new wine- apparently very hard to get drunk off (I've been told the alcohol content is very low). Also, some parishes don't offer the Blood at Communion, so the issue doesn't arise in these cases.

[theseed]

I somehow don't think there's a lot of wine in the chalice to begin w/. Not to mention that the wine used is new wine- apparently very hard to get drunk off (I've been told the alcohol content is very low). Also, some parishes don't offer the Blood at Communion, so the issue doesn't arise in these cases.
Why are the Aposltes accused of being drunk of new wine? What if they run out of wine?

[Rosa Mystica]

What if they run out of wine?

What do you mean by this? :confused:

[LynneClomina]

Real Physical Presence "This IS my Body...This IS my Blood"

Objectively, this IS what Holy Communion IS, regardless the depth in which one despises this Sacrament.

ahhh, did you say that I despise the sacrament? are you accusing me of something???

it is His body - metaphorically. blood - metaphorically. that in no way implies despising, and i would thank you not to read that into it.

[LynneClomina]

Catholic communion is done in remembrance too. The question I posed was not "why do you do it?" But "what is it?" If it is only bread to you and nothing more, then I can understand why you'd trash it. The thought of trashing the precious Flesh and Blood of our Lord is what caught me off guard.

what is it? i answered that - by saying it is remebrance ONLY. its bread and grape juice. no, to us it is not the preciouse flesh and blood of Jesus. we break bread in remembrance of the breaking of His body, we drink wine in remembrance of him spilling his blood and drinking the vinegar of death, so to speak.

someimes we do communion at the dinner table, or at a picnic.

it's not about the bread/wine, it's about our heart remembering and identifying with Him.

[LynneClomina]

Doesn't that seem a little sacreligious to you?

And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation.

Maybe that doesn't exactly apply, but it's close enough to make me worry about that of which you speak.

why? we dont see it as the body and blood of Jesus, it is bread and wine. we dont bless it or set it aside as holy. so why would it be sagreligious?

[LynneClomina]

This concerns me as well, regardless of whether or not one believes in the Real Presence. Is this a standard practice in Calvinist churches?

remember, calvinism is not a denomination, it is a doctrine. various types of churches adhere to it - denominational, non-denominational, traditional, modern, conservative, charismatic. you name it. there is no "standard" per se. i dont agree with EVERYTHING calvin taught, and that's ok, becuase he's not infallable. there are varieties and flavors. it's the TULIP doctrine that seems to categorize you calvinistic or not.

[LynneClomina]

Why are the Aposltes accused of being drunk of new wine? What if they run out of wine?
can NEVER run out of new wine!!!! ^_^ :D :yum: :bow:

[Matrona]

why? we dont see it as the body and blood of Jesus, it is bread and wine. we dont bless it or set it aside as holy. so why would it be sagreligious?
If you saw someone rip up a Bible, wouldn't you be upset?

I'm going to guess that your answer would be "yes". If so, why's that? It's only a book, right? Just some printed words on some paper glued together. Only, a Bible is so much more than that, for obvious reasons. The Bible's value is not in the book itself, but in what it represents.

Same with the elements you use for your eucharist. They might just be bread and grape juice to you, but you are partaking of them to remember Christ's sacrifice and that in itself lends a kind of sanctity to it, for the same reason you don't want to see someone rip up a Bible (I'm guessing). Does your church ask for people to only partake of the communion if they are baptized Christians who believe the teachings of your church? The word holy means 'set apart'. Why shouldn't the tools we use in worship be set apart? Our God is holy!

[LynneClomina]

If you saw someone rip up a Bible, wouldn't you be upset?
no. it is only a book. the WORD is forever, and transends the millions of copies of the bible available. the book is easily replaced. i would feel very sad that they felt to rip it up, but my first priority would be them, not the COPY of the bible they are tearing up. i would just hope it's not the bible i've been writing in for years! that's harder to replace.
The Bible's value is not in the book itself, but in what it represents. i dont see it quite the same - the book "copy of the bible", it's value is not the book it's self, but what is written in it - the Word. the book is just a book, if it can be replaced. the Word is eternal. Does your church ask for people to only partake of the communion if they are baptized Christians who believe the teachings of your church?
no. before communion, everyone is instructed to examine their hearts. if they, in good conscience, consider themself a believer, a christian, a disciple of Christ, then they can partake. seeing as how we believe it to be bread and wine, there is no consequence except in one's concience if they are not a believer and partake.... in fact, it may cause them to further examine their hearts and even come to embrace the gospel.

[ChiRho]

ahhh, did you say that I despise the sacrament? are you accusing me of something???

it is His body - metaphorically. blood - metaphorically. that in no way implies despising, and i would thank you not to read that into it.


"For to remember Christ is to remember his benefits and realize that they are truly offered to us; and it is not enough to remember the history, for the Jews and the ungodly can also remember this."

Augsburg Confession

When one neglects something one should love, one demonstrates hatred towards it. God shows us this with the story of Esau and Jacob. When Esau neglected his birthright, he despised that which he should love.

Just wondering..."This IS my Body"...

Scripture doesnt say "this is like my body," but "This IS my Body"

How do you know it is metaphorical? How is His body like the bread?

One more question, is the idea of God manifesting Himself into something physical of this world unbelievable to you?

[theseed]

"For to remember Christ is to remember his benefits and realize that they are truly offered to us; and it is not enough to remember the history, for the Jews and the ungodly can also remember this."

Augsburg Confession

When one neglects something one should love, one demonstrates hatred towards it. God shows us this with the story of Esau and Jacob. When Esau neglected his birthright, he despised that which he should love.

Just wondering..."This IS my Body"...

Scripture doesnt say "this is like my body," but "This IS my Body"

How do you know it is metaphorical? How is His body like the bread?

One more question, is the idea of God manifesting Himself into something physical of this world unbelievable to you?And he said do this in rememberance of me, not so that you can have your sins covered by grace each time

[theseed]

Let me clarify

1)What if the priest runs out of wine

2)The apostles were accused of being drunk on new wine, implying that it is easier to get drunk on it.

[JVAC]

And because everbody beleives in it, it must be true.
Was that what I said? No, I said your view was unorthodox, compared to everyone else. Stop getting all butt-hurt, this is a simple thread, I know you don't believe in the Real Pressence so you can just say your piece on subject and stop attacking orthodox beliefs.

-James

[theseed]

nevermind :sigh:

[theseed]

What does your church do with the species after the meal is shared?
My church, and most Baptist churches as far as I know, don't have waste because they use the little cups and little sqaure crakers that are made specifically for the Lord's Supper.

[JVAC]

Orthodox means right doesn't it?
No, it means [holding sound and generally accepted views]

1)What if the priest runs out of wine
Depending on the Church you go to and the attendance, you will find that most with large congregations mix the wine with water making more of the substance, and then consecrating it.

2)The apostles were accused of being drunk on new wine, implying that it is easier to get drunk on it.
If you are thinking of the day of Pentecost I don't think that is a valid point.

[ChiRho]

And he said do this in rememberance of me, not so that you can have your sins covered by grace each time

"This IS my body"

For to remember Christ is to remember his benefits and realize that they are truly offered to us; and it is not enough to remember the history, for the Jews and the ungodly can also remember this.

Augsburg Confession


Again, I offer the same question, but to you. Is it too much to believe that God could manifest Himself into something physical of this world?

[TwinCrier]

Both your opinion and ChiRho's are valid here, however, I don't know if I approve of your sarcasm, [or at least what I interpreted to be sarcasm]. ChiRho was expressing the orthodox view even though it might have been semi-combative. We need to all remember that about [here comes an informal statistic] 85% of christians believe in the real pressence, if not more.

-JamesSo if I say it's just bread I am disrespecting the sacrement because it's susposed to literally become Jesus, but if I refer to it as Jesus or blood I am being sarcastic. What would you perfer those of us who don't believe the wafer is physically Jesus call it so as to not hurt your feelings? Or am I being condesending by even asking?

[JVAC]

So if I say it's just bread I am disrespecting the sacrement because it's susposed to literally become Jesus, but if I refer to it as Jesus or blood I am being sarcastic. What would you perfer those of us who don't believe the wafer is physically Jesus call it so as to not hurt your feelings? Or am I being condesending by even asking?
You could say body and blood, that is what it is refferred to. However, when you say it is Jesus, it just doesn't sound right. Jesus is at God's right hand, he doesn't come down and we bite off a leg. I guess it all comes down to meaning, and I interpreted it one way. Obviously if we were talking I could get your tone of voice and other body language, however, I do not have that extra information.

So by simply calling it his body and blood, it can't be taken the wrong way, but calling it Jesus intimates things.

-James

[InnerPhyre]

I think what everyone here wants, TwinCrier, is for you to respect, not agree with, their beliefs. I would not go up to an Amish fellow and tell him sarcastically that his beliefs about shunning technology are stupid. In my mind, they may be, but to present the argument in that manner would be rude. I'm not promoting my view one way or another here, because I'm not allowed to debate. I just think that those who hold more orthodox beliefs just want you to understand that this is something very very sacred and holy for them, and to respect that without being condescending or sarcastic.

[theseed]

If you are thinking of the day of Pentecost I don't think that is a valid point.
Why?

[LynneClomina]

"For to remember Christ is to remember his benefits and realize that they are truly offered to us; and it is not enough to remember the history, for the Jews and the ungodly can also remember this."

Augsburg Confession

When one neglects something one should love, one demonstrates hatred towards it. God shows us this with the story of Esau and Jacob. When Esau neglected his birthright, he despised that which he should love.

Just wondering..."This IS my Body"...

Scripture doesnt say "this is like my body," but "This IS my Body"

How do you know it is metaphorical? How is His body like the bread?

One more question, is the idea of God manifesting Himself into something physical of this world unbelievable to you?

DO NOT accuse me of demonstrating hatred toward communion by neglecting it. how freakin dare you.

[LynneClomina]

"For to remember Christ is to remember his benefits and realize that they are truly offered to us; and it is not enough to remember the history, for the Jews and the ungodly can also remember this."

Augsburg Confession

When one neglects something one should love, one demonstrates hatred towards it. God shows us this with the story of Esau and Jacob. When Esau neglected his birthright, he despised that which he should love.

Just wondering..."This IS my Body"...

Scripture doesnt say "this is like my body," but "This IS my Body"

How do you know it is metaphorical? How is His body like the bread?

One more question, is the idea of God manifesting Himself into something physical of this world unbelievable to you?

oh, ok...

so, the bible tells us all about what God looks like, did you know that?

He IS a strong tower... wow, you mean like those cool castle towers in the old days? y'know, for some reason i thought He was more human than that. :confused:

2Sa 22:32 - And who IS a rock, except our God? .... oh, and he is a rock too. so much for those scriptures that say that God is spirit, it's very plain here, He is a rock. :sorry:

Ps 84:11 - For the Lord God IS a sun and shield. wow, he's a shield, i didnt know those could talk. and a sun? oh please, dont burn me up, k? :eek:

oh, and He's a lion too. i just dont understand how He can really BE all those things at once. :scratch:

oh, and he's a vine, too. i'm having a hard time picturing a lion/vine/tower/rock/sun/shield being. He must look pretty weird. ^_^

"like" is EXTREMELY implicit in those verses, why not at the last supper?

how is His body like the bread? i'm not answering that one again.

[LynneClomina]

You could say body and blood, that is what it is refferred to. However, when you say it is Jesus, it just doesn't sound right. Jesus is at God's right hand, he doesn't come down and we bite off a leg. I guess it all comes down to meaning, and I interpreted it one way. Obviously if we were talking I could get your tone of voice and other body language, however, I do not have that extra information.

So by simply calling it his body and blood, it can't be taken the wrong way, but calling it Jesus intimates things.

-James

if the shoe fits....

why not call it Jesus, if you believe it IS Jesus? :scratch:

what does it intimate? that the bread and wine are Jesus? well, that's what ppl on this thread have been saying all along, so what is the problem???

[LynneClomina]

[font=Verdana][size=2][color=#000000]
If you are thinking of the day of Pentecost I don't think that is a valid point.
no, it's a very valid point = if they think they are acting LIKE they are drunk on new wine, then they are COMPARING again, darn them. those nasty metaphors. if they specifically say they seem drunk on new wine, then by necessity, they MUST have been able to get drunk off of new wine.

[Rechtgläubig]

1 Cor. 11:23-27
23For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.



Therefore the whole force of this Pauline statement lies in this subordinate particle (hoste), which brings out the meaning and causes it to depend on the words of institution, from which the meaning of this statement is clear, namely, that those who eat unworthily in the Lord’s Supper become guilty of that thing which they have violated by eating unworthily

(Martin Chemnitz's exgesis of 1 Cor. 11:23-27)

[Rechtgläubig]

it's seen as symbolic only, done in REMEMBRANCE.
What better way to remember our Lord than to receive His body and blood that were given and shed for us?

[LynneClomina]

[left]
What better way to remember our Lord than to receive His body and blood that were given and shed for us?

hmm, aparantly you think that i eat and drink in an unworthy manner. no, i examine my heart thoroughly before communion, and pretty much daily, or more often.

i eat the bread and drink the "wine" in a fine manner, thanks.

and i recieved the body and blood of Christ at salvation already. during communion i am remembering Him through the symbolic breaking of bread and "spilling" of wine.

y'all arent being very fair towards those of us who believe that the communion elements are ONLY bread and wine.

[puriteen18]

why? we dont see it as the body and blood of Jesus, it is bread and wine. we dont bless it or set it aside as holy. so why would it be sagreligious?
Sorry if this is a little off the original topic here, but I'm curisous.

Why do you not set the elements apart for holy use, seeing that they are for the sacrament?

[puriteen18]

This concerns me as well, regardless of whether or not one believes in the Real Presence. Is this a standard practice in Calvinist churches?
No, no, no.

As LynneClomina has kind of already said 'Calvinism' is not a denomination. What is many times called 'Calvinism' today has very little to do with the historical doctrine and practice of John Calvin and his followers.

Today, many peopel call themselves Calvinists because they adhere to what is called the "Five Points". The Five Points are a summary only of the Calvin's theology of Salvation; these are sometimes called the 'doctrines of grace'.

Calvinists who practice the historical faith are usually called Reformed rather than 'Calvinists'.

This is a very recent difference, only developing in the last 50 years or so.

All Calvinists before this believed in the spiritual presence and did set the elements apart from common food.

His teaching on the Supper is very confusing, and he calls it a mystery. It may be good to note that while he was accused of denying the Presence by the Lutherans, he was also accused of teaching the Presence by the Zwinglians.

Historically practicing Calvinists (i.e. Reformed) do believe in the spiritual presence and just as the meetinghouse is called the sanctuary (seperate place) and set apart from common homes, so too are the elements set apart from common food.

[September]

Back to the topic... in our church (Anglican), the priest and/or communion assistant consumes the remaining bread and wine after everyone has received -- there is usually very little. I have heard that if there is quite a bit leftover, the wine is to be poured onto the ground and the bread scattered outdoors for the birds -- to be returned to nature as I understand it. I don't recall this ever happening within my own congregation, however.

[LynneClomina]

Sorry if this is a little off the original topic here, but I'm curisous.

Why do you not set the elements apart for holy use, seeing that they are for the sacrament?

i dunno. because the sacrament is not really about the bread and wine, it's about focussing on how Jesus was broken and His blood spilled for us, it's our heart attitude, remembering that what He did was for us today, etc. i would say that the moment the bread was taken off the shelf at the grocery store and the grape juice picked out of the freezer is the moment when they are set apart, because they are being purchased or otherwise recieved FOR THE PURPOSE of communion. we're not into ceremony. being set apart either IS or it ISN'T.

we dont talk about "sacraments" at our church, we talk about our heart condition. not about traditions (good or bad), we focus on examining ourselves and seeing if we are where God wants us to be on our walk with Him.

where does the term "sacrament" come from anyways?

we basically have the three, i guess, marriage, baptism, and the Lord's supper. but we never speak of them as sacraments. i only know what that is from when i was in catholic school as a child!

[puriteen18]

A question for those who deny that Christ is indeed present in His Supper:

Why is it called communion if it is not communion?

I Corinthians 10.16
The cup of blessing which we blesse, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we breake, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

P.S. Please, do not accuse me of saying that the elements are Christ or that He is in, above, beneath and around them, because I don't believe either, but I do believe that He is present there spiritually somehow to endow us with all benefits. It is a mystery of our faith.

[puriteen18]

i would say that the moment the bread was taken off the shelf at the grocery store and the grape juice picked out of the freezer is the moment when they are set apart, because they are being purchased or otherwise recieved FOR THE PURPOSE of communion. we're not into ceremony. being set apart either IS or it ISN'T.
Well, I didn't mean that there was a ceremony previous to the Celebration in which they were set apart. I also think that hey are set apart when there are bought with the purpose of being used in the Supper. There is no prayer done over them untill they are uncovered at the Table.

we dont talk about "sacraments" at our church, we talk about our heart condition. not about traditions (good or bad), we focus on examining ourselves and seeing if we are where God wants us to be on our walk with Him.
Why not keep traditions if there are good (i.e.Biblical)?

[LynneClomina]

Well, I didn't mean that there was a ceremony previous to the Celebration in which they were set apart. I also think that hey are set apart when there are bought with the purpose of being used in the Supper. There is no prayer done over them untill they are uncovered at the Table.


Why not keep traditions if there are good (i.e.Biblical)?
IS is biblical?

[LynneClomina]

A question for those who deny that Christ is indeed present in His Supper:

Why is it called communion if it is not communion?

I Corinthians 10.16
The cup of blessing which we blesse, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we breake, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

P.S. Please, do not accuse me of saying that the elements are Christ or that He is in, above, beneath and around them, because I don't believe either, but I do believe that He is present there spiritually somehow to endow us with all benefits. It is a mystery of our faith.

well, we should be in communion with Christ at all times, really. but specific to the Lord's supper - when we are remembering his broken body and spilled blood in communion, we are identifying ourselves with Him specifically in that regard - His atonement for us and us dying to self for Him in return...

[theseed]

"Communion" means to share. Hence, communion of the saints means sharing. Our word communist comes from this.

[LynneClomina]

"Communion" means to share. Hence, communion of the saints means sharing. Our word communist comes from this.

yeah, amen. we should be sharing in the suffering and death of Christ daily!!! :clap:

[LuxPerpetua]

If anyone is interested in my view of the Eucharist (my, has this thread branched!) you are welcome to pm me and I will respond. I have a very complex view of the Eucharist, but I also think that it is the true body and blood among many other important things, which I won't get into now.

What does cause me to question my own belief in the Real Presence is a passage I read in Isaiah in which violence is described in these terms: "Each will feed on the flesh of his own offspring" (Isaiah 9:20). I don't know the comparison of the Hebrew here to the Greek in the New Testament passages of the Lord's Supper, but I don't think this Hebrew verse is implying cannibalism but rather violence, and therefore "feeding on flesh" would be a metaphor.

Personally, I believe in the Real Presence because it is easier for me to comprehend and I like the great symbolism that has grown out of this belief (all of the liturgy, hymns, writings, etc. that celebrate the Real Presence). I acknowledge the possiblity that I may be wrong.

I think when the Eucharist becomes a stumbling block in our unity in Christ, we've lost one of the greatest graces of communion. Just my opinion.

[LynneClomina]

I think when the Eucharist becomes a stumbling block in our unity in Christ, we've lost one of the greatest graces of communion. Just my opinion.
AMEN, Lux!!! :clap:

[premilldispensationalist]

:eek: You throw it out? Does your church believe in the Real Presence?

No but I do :D

Regards,
Richard Sherratt

[TwinCrier]

I think what everyone here wants, TwinCrier, is for you to respect, not agree with, their beliefs. I would not go up to an Amish fellow and tell him sarcastically that his beliefs about shunning technology are stupid. In my mind, they may be, but to present the argument in that manner would be rude. I'm not promoting my view one way or another here, because I'm not allowed to debate. I just think that those who hold more orthodox beliefs just want you to understand that this is something very very sacred and holy for them, and to respect that without being condescending or sarcastic.I wasn't, in fact I was going out of my way NOT to be. I presummed that the body and blood was that of Jesus, but if you believe Jesus is sitting the the right hand of Gad all the time and just sends His flesh and blood to be in the sacrement then it doesn't seem like he is literally "present" since He is still at the right hand of the Father. I guess that's why you call it a mytery, because that certainly describes it to me. :scratch:

[ChiRho]

See below...

[ChiRho]

"I think when the Eucharist becomes a stumbling block in our unity in Christ, we've lost one of the greatest graces of communion. Just my opinion."

-LuxPerpetua



Does one sacrifice truth for the sake of compromise or unity?

For (27) I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that (28) the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread;
24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."
25 In the same way He took (29) the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the (30) new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death (31) until He comes.
27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be (32) guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.
28 But a man must (33) examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.
30 For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number (34) sleep.
31 But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are (35) disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with (36) the world.
33 So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another.
34 If anyone is (37) hungry, let him eat (38) at home, so that you will not come together for judgment. The remaining matters I will (39) arrange (40) when I come.

1 Corinthians 11:23-34 NASB

What do these versus mean?

If one reads these versus and comes to the conclusion, that worthiness, depends solely upon what or to what degree the Christian remembers, how or when, does the Christian know that the Christian believes sufficiently? To claim that Communion is mere symbol, or that It's validity is based only upon that which the believer believes and remembers about the historical account (according to Scripture) of the Sacrifice of Christ, then how does the believer ever know that one believes enough or remembers fully? Is anyone capable, in this sin drenched world, of remembering the Sacrifice as one should? Turning assurance inward brings an enormous amount of doubt.
Having faith that Christ, places Himself there, under the bread and wine, and to trust that this very Flesh that we grind our teeth against, and this very Blood that wets our palate, was truely Sacrificed and Shed for us is our only responsiblity. Given and Shed for you, for the forgiveness of sins. What is the Body and Blood but forgiveness? Salvation paid in the only currency accepted, Innocent Blood.

Turning assurance outward, to the very words of Christ,

"This is my Body...This is my Blood...Shed for you for the forgiveness of sins."

and trusting this to be true, sustains and strengthens faith.

No longer are we stricken with those doubt-ushering questions of whether we believe enough to be worthy, instead, we know without doubt, that we are sinners completely, and trust the words of Institution that this bread and wine at our Lord's table is also His Sacrificed Body and Blood, by His doing, not ours. We kneel to accept only that which He can give, regardless of our sinful state of mind.

May the Peace of the Lord be with you always!

[LuxPerpetua]

I'm not debating the Real Presence, since I already stated that I believed in it. ;)

I did mention another reference to "feeding on flesh" that doesn't mean literally eating flesh but is rather a metaphor. I also agree with Lynn that metaphors are used extensively throughout the NT to describe Jesus (like rock, cornerstone, living water, etc.). It's references like these that at least make me go, "hmmm."

My only problem with Real Presence doctrine is that I disagree with close/closed communion, and most churches that believe in the Real Presence deny communion to even baptized, full-believing Christians.

The true point of communion to me is that, like baptism and prayer, it reminds of of our need for Christ's sacrifice for our sins and on our total reliance upon God for salvation. It puts an emphasis upon the crux of our faith--the crucifixion and the hope that comes with the resurrection. ALL Christians, regardless of their belief or non-belief in the Real Presence, take communion very seriously. When we identify ourselves with the crucifixion we are essentially humbling ourselves and admitting that we NEED a savior and that we cannot save ourselves or ever be "good enough." We are in need of personal repentance and salvation through Christ. Communion services also remind of our of connection to the larger body of Christian saints, the invisible church. In my opinion these are the larger issues at stake with the Eucharist. Injesting Christ's actual body and blood is an awesome experience, but I know He already lives in me anyway as a Christian so this is just icing on the cake.

Thus, I personally think that it is wrong to deny communion to all baptized Christians. None of us is without sin or is worthy to partake of this table. Salvation is God's gift to us, and we remember that in the Eucharist. If God has chosen us as Christians, who are we to deny each other a reminder of this? Who are we to deny Christ's body and blood (even if they don't recognize it as such but still keep it holy) to someone whom the Holy Spirit lives within? I don't want that responsibility because then I would be judging, and who am I, a sinner, to judge others' hearts?

These are just my thoughts on the subject. :)

P.S.
Don't forget that Hebrews calls Jesus' body the curtain of the temple, and as a result of His sacrifice the curtain was broken so that all believers can have access to the altar of God through Christ. I love this metaphor!

[theseed]

Why is this post blank?

[LuxPerpetua]

Which post?

[theseed]

Which post?
The one above my post, by ChiRho

[LuxPerpetua]

I posted after Chi Rho . . . can you see my post (it's a long post)?

[theseed]

I posted after Chi Rho . . . can you see my post (it's a long post)?
No, not that post. Post #31

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?goto=lastpost&t=104968

[LuxPerpetua]

Post 31 is not blank on my screen. :confused:

[theseed]

Post 31 is not blank on my screen. :confused:
It is on mine, its ChiRho's post. I'm in threaded mode. It's blank. And when I quoted it, nothing was there.

[aanjt]

In my parish, and from what I know all priests should be doing this in the Anglican/Episcopal Church, the Body and Blood are consumed. When the sacrament is taken to a shut-in, some of the Body will be put into the pix and the Blood into a vessel to take to the person who is ill.

For reference. Rememberance means "to make present." We believe that Christ is literally present in the Eucharist, we believe in the Real Presence. Also, we get this from John 6 where Christ says to his many disciples "Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life in you" and again "Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink." After this, many disciples left saying it was a hard saying. The original 12 stayed and when Christ asked them if they too were going to leave, they responded, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." Not once did Christ say that he did not mean this literally.

When the linens are washed (I don't remember the name of the cloth that wipes the chalice), they are washed in the sacristy. That is where a sink is where the pipe goes directly to the earth. The reason is because the blood of Christ should never be put through a sewage system. It is to go to back to the earth. I have never seen a case where there was too much consecrated, but if that were to happen, the rest would be put into the tabernacle where the Reserved Sacrament is kept. There is always some in the tabernacle.

Yours in Christ,
Jen

[theseed]

Not once did Christ say that he did not mean this literally.


I will disagree. John's Gospel is full of symbolism, for example. Jesus is the word and Jesus is the ligth. And when he gave his sermon after feeding the 5000 men + women and children, he told this disciples: "The words I speak to you, they are spirit and life", which indicates to me in the context that he was not being literal.

But, this thread is not to debate the "real presence"

[ChiRho]

disregard for now...I will post in a bit. (at work and hoping for time)

[aanjt]

I will disagree. John's Gospel is full of symbolism, for example. Jesus is the word and Jesus is the ligth. And when he gave his sermon after feeding the 5000 men + women and children, he told this disciples: "The words I speak to you, they are spirit and life", which indicates to me in the context that he was not being literal.

But, this thread is not to debate the "real presence"

I'm not getting into a debate either, just explaining why we, who believes that the bread and wine are the Body and Blood of Christ, believe what we do. I have come across people who never read John 6.

Yours in Christ,
Jen