• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Eucharistic Practice

seeking.IAM

A View From The Pew
Site Supporter
Feb 29, 2004
4,698
5,400
Indiana
✟1,060,462.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Last Sunday my priest announced a change in practice. I am interested in other Anglican reactions to it. Some background: I recently moved so this is a relatively new parish for me. When I arrived, I noticed that local practice was for most people to shun the common cup in favor of intinction. I don't know the history of this in this parish, but it was as the pandemic was winding down. This was a change from my former church, which I found unusual.

Sunday's announcement was two-fold: to address widespread intinction as well as to accommodate those who abstain due to sobriety. The announcement was that sipping from the Chalice was preferred along with dispelling myths about it being unsanitary in comparison to intinction. Okay, so far, but there is more. Secondly, going forward two chalices would be passed, the first containing wine and the second grape juice to accommodate those maintaining sobriety. Thirdly, if you want wine, you must sip from the first chalice coming to you. If you want to dip or if you want the non-alcoholic element, you wait with host in hand for the second chalice of grape juice. In short, wine requires sipping from the common cup and intinction requires the grape juice. Both are consecrated in the same way. A subsequent newsletter published messages from several congregants who were very appreciative of the being able to fully participate after abstaining from the cup for 10 or 20 years for sobriety reasons.

There certainly is a logic to aspects of it I reckon, but I am not sure how I feel about the two cups with different elements. Perhaps it is no different than a side offering of gluten-free bread? It begs the question, are there practice adaptations that alter the theology of what we are doing and where is that line drawn? I dunno. :scratch:
 
  • Informative
Reactions: The Liturgist

Shane R

Priest
Site Supporter
Jan 18, 2012
2,365
1,209
Southeast Ohio
✟656,350.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
That is an illicit eucharist according to the Canons I am under. I'm sure I have colleagues who would even argue it to be invalid. The pertinent Canon states that the eucharist is only to be celebrated with bread and wine. The bishop is fairly lenient with local practice regarding bread but there is no leeway in wine.

Also, the chalice is not passed. It remains under the control of the minister or chalicist. Intinction is performed by the chalicist and the purpled bread is placed on the communicant's tongue or in the mouth.
 
Upvote 0

seeking.IAM

A View From The Pew
Site Supporter
Feb 29, 2004
4,698
5,400
Indiana
✟1,060,462.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Also, the chalice is not passed. It remains under the control of the minister or chalicist

Just to clarify any misunderstanding, new practice does not involve the passing of the chalice. There are two chalacists, each bearing a different cup for the communicant, but still under control of a chalacist. We take communion at the altar rail; it is the chalacist that is passing up and down the rail serving the communicants.
 
Upvote 0

Shane R

Priest
Site Supporter
Jan 18, 2012
2,365
1,209
Southeast Ohio
✟656,350.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Just to clarify any misunderstanding, new practice does not involve the passing of the chalice. There are two chalacists, each bearing a different cup for the communicant, but still under control of a chalacist. We take communion at the altar rail; it is the chalacist that is passing up and down the rail serving the communicants.
Aha. Thank you for that clarification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
35,339
19,868
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,624,832.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
In the diocese I serve in, the use of grape juice is not authorised. I can see arguments both ways about that, but I have not found it to be a problem in practice.

I am puzzled as to why intinction with wine is not being practiced. Does it just get too complicated if you have to think about wine for sipping, wine for intinction, and juice for intinction (three chalices)?
 
Upvote 0

RamiC

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2025
461
343
Brighton
✟9,579.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Okay, I am intrigued because every Priest I know of in this corner of the world objects to intinction. Is this a local thing I have encountered? Is it accepted practice elsewhere?

BTW, pleased to meet you all, because I am new here.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
35,339
19,868
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,624,832.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Okay, I am intrigued because every Priest I know of in this corner of the world objects to intinction. Is this a local thing I have encountered? Is it accepted practice elsewhere?
I'm in Australia, and I've served in two different dioceses and worshipped in a few more, and here intinction as an option is quite normal.
BTW, pleased to meet you all, because I am new here.
Welcome!

Edited to add: I've also visited New Zealand and worshipped there, but I honestly can't remember what the practice was with regard to intinction. It was a bit over ten years ago!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Shane R

Priest
Site Supporter
Jan 18, 2012
2,365
1,209
Southeast Ohio
✟656,350.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Okay, I am intrigued because every Priest I know of in this corner of the world objects to intinction. Is this a local thing I have encountered? Is it accepted practice elsewhere?

BTW, pleased to meet you all, because I am new here.
The direction I was given is that intinction is preferable to receiving in one kind. But receiving in one kind is better than individual cups.
 
Upvote 0

RamiC

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2025
461
343
Brighton
✟9,579.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
There certainly is a logic to aspects of it I reckon, but I am not sure how I feel about the two cups with different elements. Perhaps it is no different than a side offering of gluten-free bread? It begs the question, are there practice adaptations that alter the theology of what we are doing and where is that line drawn? I dunno. :scratch:
The one cup is important to me, although I don't think I would mind personally if it was alcohol free or grape juice, but since Shane R says that the Canon forbids it, okay that is a no go. For some reason I am not bothered about a couple of people at our church who have the gluten-free side option. I don't know why the thought of two cups does disturb me, when the bread difference does not. Maybe I am being irrational.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
35,339
19,868
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,624,832.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
The direction I was given is that intinction is preferable to receiving in one kind. But receiving in one kind is better than individual cups.
That's interesting. Here they are all (except the individual cups) treated as equivalent. In each case the communicant is receiving Christ; the rest is adiaphora.
 
Upvote 0

seeking.IAM

A View From The Pew
Site Supporter
Feb 29, 2004
4,698
5,400
Indiana
✟1,060,462.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
@Paidiske and @Shane R to what extent does a Bishop establish parameters for the Eucharist within their diocese, such as intinction, common cup, and the method discussed in the OP? To what extent is practice governed by canon, Bishop edict, or local priest decision?
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
35,339
19,868
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,624,832.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
@Paidiske and @Shane R to what extent does a Bishop establish parameters for the Eucharist within their diocese, such as intinction, common cup, and the method discussed in the OP? To what extent is practice governed by canon, Bishop edict, or local priest decision?
I think that varies a bit depending on the culture of the diocese.

When I was in Melbourne, which is a big metropolitan diocese with a culture of a very great deal of liturgical diversity, even if the archbishop (or assistant bishops who each looked after a "region" within the diocese) had tried to establish parameters, I suspect they would have been largely ignored in many places. There are some norms spelled out in the prayer book rubrics (such as that the wine must be "fermented juice of the grape," but even those are not always adhered to. Local priest and local parish custom tend to be far more determinative.

But where I am now, which is a (still geographically big, but with a much smaller number of parishes) country diocese with much more of a culture of liturgical conformity and of the bishop making many of these decisions, it's much more about whatever the bishop's last email said. Especially since Covid, when we had to get used to the diocese interpreting and communicating how changing government regulations impacted on our liturgical practice.

Getting that through to the laity can be a challenge, though. Our bishop here has decided that if receiving by intinction, the communicant must not intinct their own wafer (which was normal pre-Covid in lots of places), but the priest must intinct it for them. I keep trying to get that through to them until I'm blue in the face, but I still see people intincting their own as the chalice comes past...
 
  • Prayers
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Feb 10, 2013
28,493
17,144
29
Nebraska
✟533,703.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
That's interesting. Here they are all (except the individual cups) treated as equivalent. In each case the communicant is receiving Christ; the rest is adiaphora.
[posting in fellowship]

Since you are a priest, if someone only receives the host (bread) alone they receive communion wholly? Just like if a celiac only received the cup (wine) alone they receive communion wholly?

Do I understand correctly?
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
35,339
19,868
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,624,832.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
[posting in fellowship]

Since you are a priest, if someone only receives the host (bread) alone they receive communion wholly? Just like if a celiac only received the cup (wine) alone they receive communion wholly?

Do I understand correctly?
Yes. Even though we would see it as normative to receive in both kinds, to receive in one kind is sufficient.
 
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Feb 10, 2013
28,493
17,144
29
Nebraska
✟533,703.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Yes. Even though we would see it as normative to receive in both kinds, to receive in one kind is sufficient.
Ah, I see.

That makes sense.

(I think Christianity as a whole receives both kinds as normative with the exception of (Western) Catholicism where the laity normally receive only the host (bread) under normative circumstances, and cup (wine) under limited circumstances. Sorry, not to go off topic).
 
Upvote 0

RamiC

Well-Known Member
Jan 1, 2025
461
343
Brighton
✟9,579.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
but the priest must intinct it for them. I keep trying to get that through to them until I'm blue in the face, but I still see people intincting their own as the chalice comes past...
This is the key to where I came in here, I think it is the Priests not wanting people to dip their own bread. I have seen the wording that the entire practice is "devoutly to be avoided" in a pew sheet, perhaps that was just that particular Priest's own depth of feeling about it.

On the OP though, only wine with the alcohol removed could satisfy "fermented juice of the grape," and absolute abstention. That may not work for people in addiction recovery, although I know at least one who does fine (in the Eastern Orthodox Church) just taking both kinds, so he is at the same cup as everyone else.
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
12,046
8,318
✟393,135.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Ah, I see.

That makes sense.

(I think Christianity as a whole receives both kinds as normative with the exception of (Western) Catholicism where the laity normally receive only the host (bread) under normative circumstances, and cup (wine) under limited circumstances. Sorry, not to go off topic).
In fact it's so normative that at least in the Episcopal Church when most dioceses started to mandate and/or encourage communion in one kind during the early stages of COVID there was a lot of resistance and even outrage. Which makes sense when one of the core issues of the information was communion in both kinds.
 
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Feb 10, 2013
28,493
17,144
29
Nebraska
✟533,703.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
In fact it's so normative that at least in the Episcopal Church when most dioceses started to mandate and/or encourage communion in one kind during the early stages of COVID there was a lot of resistance and even outrage. Which makes sense when one of the core issues of the information was communion in both kinds.
Ah, that makes sense.
 
Upvote 0

Shane R

Priest
Site Supporter
Jan 18, 2012
2,365
1,209
Southeast Ohio
✟656,350.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Widowed
Continuing churches tend to be more magisterial than most other Anglican churches, with the exception of those which retained 'Episcopal' in the name. Most bishops are particular about how the eucharist is celebrated. Many personally instruct the ordinands or designate an Archdeacon whose celebration is essentially the same to do so.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
13,948
7,343
50
The Wild West
✟666,571.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
That is an illicit eucharist according to the Canons I am under. I'm sure I have colleagues who would even argue it to be invalid. The pertinent Canon states that the eucharist is only to be celebrated with bread and wine. The bishop is fairly lenient with local practice regarding bread but there is no leeway in wine.

Also, the chalice is not passed. It remains under the control of the minister or chalicist. Intinction is performed by the chalicist and the purpled bread is placed on the communicant's tongue or in the mouth.

Interestingly that’s exactly how the Syriac Orthodox do it, and its my preferred method. Eastern Orthodox like the OCA use a similar approach but use a shared spoon to administer the intincted Eucharist. Some added precautions were taken by some jurisdictions during the pandemic, but no one got sick anywhere as far as I am aware.

The Eastern Orthodox and most everyone else except the Armenians do not use straight wine, but rather dilute the wine with Xeon, not the element Xenon*, but rather, boiled water, immediately before the Eucharist, which is intended to reflect how blood and water spilled from the side of our Lord and to make the Blood warm.

The Copts usually have everyone queue up twice, first to receive the Body and then the Blood, and afterwards people partake of a cup of holy water to wash it down, and receive some delicious fresh baked blessed bread (antidoron - the other Eastern and Orienta
Orthodox churches and the Assyrian Church of the East also do this, with the Assyrians adding sugar to differentiate it from the Eucharistic, since antidoron is blessed bread, but not consecrated; it is taken from the bread from which the Lamb or Eucharistic Host is cut, and also from additional loaves baked for that purpose, including in many Coptic churches smaller loaves given to the people to take home. The Armenians give out unleavened antidoron and consecrate unleavened bread in the Eucharist.

By the way my friends, particularly @Shane R , forgive me for being out of touch lately, I have been very ill after the fall I had last summer and I also recently moved into a nice new accomodation for which I am thankful, but the process has left me with no energy, and my focus is on trying to recover so I can resume my pastoral duties and also resume my work as a systems programmer. Your prayers and those of my other Anglican friends are always appreciated.

* I watched a video of a chemist inhaling Xenon, I think, and it had the opposite effect of Helium, giving them a deep voice like a science fiction villain or Xerxes from the celebrated Spartan epic The 300. Obviously we should not try this at home, and I would be especially scared of doing that if I were a diver or about to fly on an aircraft at high altitude. Now, when I was in the hospital for a week due to a pulmonary embolism, the radiologist determined it had healed by having me breathe radioactive Xenon 135 and by injecting radioactive Technetium into my blood, which was disquieting. However the Xenon 135 was in a quantity insufficient to make me sound like Darth Vader, and perhaps Xenon 135 doesn’t have the same effect as stable Xenon, but I am unwilling to find out.
 
Upvote 0