The Blood of Christ?

[Fish and Bread]

I visited a parish today where instead of wine a non-alcoholic orangish beverage tasting of honey was consecrated at communion.

Discuss amongst yourselves. ;)

[IowaLutheran]

I'm never one to say that whether Jesus is truly present in body and blood via holy communion is dependent on what elements are used or the pedigree of the person presiding. If Jesus wants to be there, far be it from me to say he is not, or can't be there.

Having said that, I do believe that there should be a proper degree of respect for tradition in this vitally important sacrament. It doesn't sound like a church I would go back to.

[Fish and Bread]

Having said that, I do believe that there should be a proper degree of respect for tradition in this vitally important sacrament. It doesn't sound like a church I would go back to.

The options are limited around here for someone trying to ride a bus to church on a Sunday morning. :) It's either this or convert and become a Lutheran. :)

Actually, it's a sung mass and incense is usually used, which I like, and the people are pleasant, but, like most Arizona churches, the decor is too bright and contemporary. I miss the nice dark ancient looking decor of the east coast with the dark santuaries and so forth. Peach colored walls and a spotlight on the crucifix in an already bright room seems a bit tacky to me. On the other hand, if they tailored a church to my tastes, I'd probably be the only one that would want to go. ;)

It may also take me a while to get used to the musical settings. They're not bad, just different. I'm used to signing the gloria to a certain tune, darn it. ;) Also, I'm used to a Rite II gloria in a Rite II service and not a Rite I gloria in a Rite II service, but those are things I could come to enjoy in time. I'm a bit crummugeny about church. It takes me a few weeks to adapt to anything that's different from what I'm used to and then I'm generally alright. :) The sermon was good and I think I'll do fine here after a while.

[gitlance]

1) Was this an Episcopal parish?

2) Would you be willing to share with us the name of the parish, or with me alone via PM?

3) I once went to a parish where they used white wine... I'm not so sure it was valid...

[Fish and Bread]

1) Was this an Episcopal parish?

Yes. They even self-identify as Anglo-Catholic.

2) Would you be willing to share with us the name of the parish, or with me alone via PM?

Depends on why you want to know. :)

3) I once went to a parish where they used white wine... I'm not so sure it was valid...

I've seen white wine all over the place, it drives me nuts, because it's supposed to be *blood*. When's the last time anyone saw white blood? It's not really a big deal, I suppose, but I tend to get hung up on little things liturgically. I really like sticking with tradition unless there is a compelling reason not to (And the fact that red wine stains is not a compelling reason not to use it liturgically, in my opinion). :)

[karen freeinchristman]

I've been to a few churches where the wine is quite yellowy-orangey, and I think it is a type of sherry. I don't like it, personally. My church uses RED wine, and it is really good.
Are you sure this one was non-alcoholic?

[Fish and Bread]

Are you sure this one was non-alcoholic?

It said it was a type of non-alcoholic wine in the bulletin and I didn't taste any alcohol, so it seems that the bulletin was accurately depicting the non-alcoholic part. I'm not sure where the wine part comes in, because it didn't taste anything like the wine I've had in the past, but it perhaps it was just an unusual type of wine in terms of sweetness and coloration. :) I rarely drink wine, so that's entirely possible, though it seemed to be roughly half honey and to have a similar consistancy to what I'd image watered down honey might feel going down one's throat.

[Finella]

I've been to a few churches where the wine is quite yellowy-orangey, and I think it is a type of sherry. I don't like it, personally. My church uses RED wine, and it is really good.
Are you sure this one was non-alcoholic?
Karen -- my childhood church used sherry for eucharist as well. I had no idea it was sherry until I was hanging out with friends in college and an older friend offered us sherry -- my first reaction was, "Hey, this is communion wine!"

I guess I won't tell y'all about a priest friend who celebrated eucharist with orange juice and doughnuts... just the one time, we had nothing else!

::ducks::

[IowaLutheran]

The options are limited around here for someone trying to ride a bus to church on a Sunday morning. :) It's either this or convert and become a Lutheran. :)



Come on over! ;)

[Wiffey]

WRT non-alcoholic wine, I do know that many recovering alcoholics cannot take Communion if the wine contains alcohol...and a lot of parishes do sponsor groups like AA. So maybe they are doing this to accomodate recovering parishioners?

Personally, I vote for Manischewitz (because it reminds me of Passover)!

[Mysterium_Fidei]

...How lovely for them, I think I'm going to be swimming the Tiber soon.

[romaneagle13]

it had honey in it? sounds a little like mead. but that is alcoholic.

I didn't know we had a rule (like the VC's) about what communion species had to be made of. Does it really matter if the wine is white or red or sherry?

[Fish and Bread]

Does it really matter if the wine is white or red or sherry?

Probably not. I just like routine and traditions. :) Change for the sense of change bothers me. It's a personality thing more than a theological thing. To me communion wine is just supposed to be red and kind of bitter tasting. :) After a few weeks, I'll probably get used to this new type of communion drink. There's no real problem with it per say, I just don't know why people randomly change things if there's no benefit to the change. I'm the type of person who never rearranges furniture either, when I am dwelling in a place where I have a say in that sort of thing. :)

[gitlance]

...How lovely for them, I think I'm going to be swimming the Tiber soon.
I think I may be joining you...

[Counter-Reformer]

it had honey in it? sounds a little like mead. but that is alcoholic.

I didn't know we had a rule (like the VC's) about what communion species had to be made of. Does it really matter if the wine is white or red or sherry?
It should be reddish wine for it does represent atleast in a visual sense before the consecretion the blood that Christ spilled for us.

[karen freeinchristman]

It should be reddish wine for it does represent atleast in a visual sense before the consecretion the blood that Christ spilled for us.
I agree it should be 'reddish'.

[Andy Broadley]

OK, I'm out of my depth here, so bear with me. The Army does not even practice communion so I'm no expert, to say the least.

But in the Bible, does it actually state what was in the cup?

I thought it just said that after supper Jesus took the cup.....

Was red wine the only wine made in that region at that time?

I dunno, so I'm not suggesting anything one way or the other.

I know that Jesus tells them that this is His blood spilled for them, but does it say that it was red wine?

For that matter, he also broke bread, so why is comminion usually observed using fancy little wafers?

[gtsecc]

The Church Jesus founded has prescribed Red Wine.
You can't find out that detail from the bible, but you should not expect to find it there. The practice by all Christians is one cup and red wine. I am not sure how we can get around that and still feel obedient.

[Fish and Bread]

OK, I'm out of my depth here, so bear with me. The Army does not even practice communion so I'm no expert, to say the least.

But in the Bible, does it actually state what was in the cup?

I don't think it does, but we know that a lot of the drinks we have today simply didn't exist back then. Grape juice, for example, was invented in the 19th century. Based on available and the cultural patterns of the time, it's very likely to have been wine and red wine makes sense, given that it is the most symbolic of blood. It's also notable that until the 19th century, red wine seemed to be more or less exclusively what Christians used. The uniformity of it suggests that that is likely to have been what the Apostles taught the early bishops and presbyters (Greek usually translated as priest or elder, depending on denomination). It's just supposition, but all the pieces fit.

That said, try not to get too hung up over it. I don't think God is nitpicky, so I attempt to go against my sinful nature and not be nitpicky either. ;) But red wine is what I believe Jesus used and thus ideal. I'll accept substitutes, but to me they're inferior ones, unless there is a necessary reason for them (i.e. red wine is not available or there are alcoholics who need grape juice).

For that matter, he also broke bread, so why is comminion usually observed using fancy little wafers?

The three synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) time the passion narrative in such a way as to suggest that the Last Supper took place during Passover. During Passover, leavened bread (i.e. the normal fluffy kind) is forbidden to Jews and as such any observant Jews (Such as Jesus and the Apostles) celebrating a meal during such a time would have use unleavened bread (The flat waferlike stuff often used at communion). So, even though Jesus didn't use little perfectly wafers with crosses that some churches use, it's very likely that he *did* at least use flat unleavened waferlike bread. Also, if we go back into the Old Testament, we see angels dining exclusively on unleavened bread and God expressing a strong preference for it -- symbolically suggesting it's the bread of heaven.

All that is not to say that unleavened bread *must* be used, I just think it's preferable, because it's probably more like what happened at the Last Supper, and neat symbolically.

[higgs2]

The Church Jesus founded has prescribed Red Wine.
You can't find out that detail from the bible, but you should not expect to find it there. The practice by all Christians is one cup and red wine. I am not sure how we can get around that and still feel obedient.
Where is that stated?

[gtsecc]

One can make a case for either leaven or unleavened.
One accepts leaven or unleavened based upon what one’s Bishop says.
You can't get anywhere trying to find the answer in the Bible or Archeology.

[gtsecc]

Where is that stated?

Ask your Bishop - it would be in the catechism for the Romans, and The EasternOrthodox probably do it because the Bishops says so.

Only in the AC have we decided to question everything because of the reformation's influences.

Basically, we accept Red Wine, and the Bible from the same authority, and believe they are correct on both accounts

[higgs2]

Ask your Bishop - it would be in the catechism for the Romans, and The EasternOrthodox probably do it because the Bishops says so.

Only in the AC have we decided to question everything because of the reformation's influences.

Basically, we accept Red Wine, and the Bible from the same authority, and believe they are correct on both accounts
Okay, he's making a visitation next weekend so I will. in the meantime, I suppose I'll see what my priest has to say about it.

[pmcleanj]

As I recall from the discussions on the professional liturgics e-list I sit in on, the generally-agreed requirement for the Elements of the Eucharist are that they be wheat bread, and fermented grape wine. The presence of honey in the bread is particularly forbidden because at one time honey was sacred to Ishtar; but more generally the bread should comprise nothing but wheat flour and water (which generally implies that only naturally occuring yeasts can be present as a leavening agent, and tends to result in rather flat bread where it is leavened at all).

That is, of course, by those liturgists attendant on the list who are inclined to strict limitations on their understanding of "correct matter". There are plenty who debate the recipes for eucharistic bread on the grounds that the wheatflour-and-water formula is not only tasteless and tough, but also scatters irretrievable crumbs of the Holy Presence all over the fair linen cloth and even the floor.

The colour and variety of the grapes are not specified.

From the OP, it sounded like what was being served was consecrated(?) Tang, but from additional clarification it sounds like it was probably a dealcoholized Sherry or Madiera wine -- which does in fact meet the necessary requirement of being grape wine and fermented. Tradition doesn't have a ruling on the modern process of dealcoholization (which is a post-fermentation procedure).

That being said, a sacrament should not only effect the grace that it symbolizes, but also symbolize the grace that it effects. Red wine is better liturgical drama, because of its greater resemblence to blood. But for those who buy into the 'Transubstantiation' explaination of what's going on, colour would just be one more irrelevant "accident", would it not?

Interestingly, despite the argument that bees, and hence their product honey, are sacred to Ishtar and therefore cannot approach the altar where they might be mistaken for a pagan sacrifice; those same liturgists who emphasise "correct matter" insist that sanctuary candles must be at least 51% beeswax (the other 49% being unspecified: presumably tallow or parafin). A 50-50 candle is not sacred enough. So why isn't the beeswax as verboten as the honey?

[karen freeinchristman]

From the OP, it sounded like what was being served was consecrated(?) Tang
:eek:

At first, I didn't know what you meant by 'Tang', and then my American heritage kicked in and I remembered! As PV would say, 'IS OUTRAGE'! :D

That being said, a sacrament should not only effect the grace that it symbolizes, but also symbolize the grace that it effects. I love this statement! :)


Interestingly, despite the argument that bees, and hence their product honey, are sacred to Ishtar and therefore cannot approach the altar where they might be mistaken for a pagan sacrifice; those same liturgists who emphasise "correct matter" insist that sanctuary candles must be at least 51% beeswax (the other 49% being unspecified: presumably tallow or parafin). A 50-50 candle is not sacred enough. So why isn't the beeswax as verboten as the honey?
That IS interesting! :confused:

[Father Rick]

Ok.. my 2 cents here...

Personally, I prefer a slightly sweet red wine throughout the year, except for Lent, when I switch to a very dry red wine. The switch back to the sweeter wine on Easter is always noticed-- and I think a quite appropriate symbolism.

That being said-- by guess for the wine described here is that it may be a denatured Catawba wine. Cawtaba grapes tend to produce a very peachy colored wine and in a chalice it often looks very "orangy". It is fairly sweet as well.

As to symbolism-- when I was in highschool, I volunteered for a bloodbank. When people gave blood it was all shades of red, from deep burgundy to pinkish. One person even had blood that looked bright orange (which was quite shocking!). The phlebotomists actually stopped in the the middle of taking their blood and re-did it-- the 2nd time it was a little redder,but still quite orange. I have no idea why it was that way, but I'll always remember it.