Holy Communion on Good Friday

Our new priest told us today that we would be having Holy Communion this Good Friday. We were all rather stunned as none of us had ever been to an Anglican service on Good Friday and received communion. (Note that the service proposed is not even reserved sacrament.) The general feeling among many of our congregation is that they would not partake, but rather just remain in their seats and I concur with this. My thought is that Good Friday is a day of reflection and abstinence for the death of our Lord, with the celebration and rejoicing to come on Easter Day when we will say "Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again." We are a very traditional parish which many would consider Anglo Catholic. I'm interested in how shipmates regard all of this situation and if you celebrate the Eucharist on Good Friday.
«13

Comments

  • Leorning CnihtLeorning Cniht Shipmate
    edited March 2018
    HC from the reserved sacrament would be entirely normal on Good Friday. I don't think you'll find an Episcopal church in these parts that doesn't do that. A Mass, though :astonished:

    Have you discussed this with your priest? Has he explained why he thinks this is OK?
  • DavidDavid Shipmate
    As Leorning Cniht says, communion from the reserved sacrament would be normal in many Church of England parishes, while some may have a service not involving communion. I can understand your surprise, but if your priest insists on going ahead surely it would be better not to attend at all and go elsewhere than to attend and turn holy communion on Good Friday into a petty protest.
  • Yes, HC from the Reserved Sacrament for us, too (C of E - fairly Anglo-Carflick).

    Mind you, the 1662 BCP does provide Collect, Epistle, and Gospel for Good Friday, which rather implies that the 'Lord's Supper may be celebrated if so desired.

    I suspect the usual practice in past years was for the service of Ante-Communion to be said (which would include those readings).

    I take rhubarb's point, though (welcome aboard, BTW), that it seems a bit odd to introduce a full Eucharist where, in the past, abstinence from Communion has been taught and practised.

    IJ
  • Up until a relatively recent change of vicar, our church used to have communion in one kind only on Good Friday. I would be interested to know the theology behind this, and why it later changed to both.
  • David wrote: »
    I can understand your surprise, but if your priest insists on going ahead surely it would be better not to attend at all and go elsewhere than to attend and turn holy communion on Good Friday into a petty protest.
    I’ll admit that I can understand the congregation’s reaction, but an organized boycott of Communion hardly seems like an appropriate answer.

    Someone needs to talk to the priest. I’d frame it as “we’re not used to this and are having trouble understanding the reason. Can you help us understand why you think it’s important we celebrate Communion on Good Friday?” If he doesn’t respond pastorally by either changing plans or engaging in some helpful explanation—or maybe at least saying “let’s see how it goes, and then talk about whether it’s something to do next year”—then just go somewhere else on Good Friday.

  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Call me stupid, but I struggle to think of a more appropriate occasion, bar perhaps Maundy Thursday.
  • LeoLeo Shipmate
    I'd be up for it. But we do the Liturgy of the Presanctified.

    Samuel Pepys records more communicants at St. Paul's Cathedral on Good Friday than on Easter Day.
  • We are middle of the road CofE and I have never known communion celebrated on Good Friday. After stripping the altar and sanctuary of all coverings and ornaments including the Reredos Cross and Candelabra after the Maunday Thursday communion only the reserved sacrament would be available until after the Easter Eve Vigil when all ornaments and coverings are replaced and the altar dressed for Easter. First communion is usually 08:00 Sunday morning.

    I would say that 'celebrating' communion is inappropriate on Good Friday. A day of contemplation, reflection and witness to the faith is called for, not 'celebration' or 'Eucharist'. Some churches do veneration of the cross, others 3 hour devotional Friday afternoon.

    Stations of the cross in the local RC church, followed by an ecumenical procession of witness was for many years practiced in our local deanery on Good Friday morning.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    Call me stupid, but I struggle to think of a more appropriate occasion, bar perhaps Maundy Thursday.
    I know some disagree—we’ve had the discussion here before—but I’d say Easter would be the more/most appropriate occasion.

    But then again, I think of Maundy Thursday–Good Friday–Holy Saturday–Easter as basically one event.

  • Chorister wrote: »
    Up until a relatively recent change of vicar, our church used to have communion in one kind only on Good Friday. I would be interested to know the theology behind this, and why it later changed to both.

    Communion in one kind is common on Good Friday, presumably because the wine/MPB is not normally reserved. In the pre-1955 Roman Rite, the priest did put unconsecrated wine into a chalice along with a particle of consecrated host, and then consumed both himself. No one else received. After 1955, the chalice was no longer used and communion was extended to the people.

    I'm not sure what the practice is for the Liturgy of the Presanctified in Eastern churches.
  • Simply. Not. Done. in the Orthodox Church. The one day of the entire year when the Eucharist absolutely positively may not be served. Not even pre-sanctified. Nothing.
  • We are middle of the road CofE, (our claim to fame being the very first purpose built and dedicated Church of England church in the world), and I have never known communion celebrated on Good Friday there. After stripping the altar and sanctuary of all coverings and ornaments including the Reredos Cross after the Maunday Thursday communion, only the reserved sacrament would be available until after the Easter Eve Vigil when all ornaments and coverings are replaced and the altar dressed in Easter colours. First communion is usually 08:00 Easter Sunday morning.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Simply. Not. Done. in the Orthodox Church. The one day of the entire year when the Eucharist absolutely positively may not be served. Not even pre-sanctified. Nothing.

    Meaning that you have a Eucharist on Holy Saturday?
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Really failing to understand the theology of not "remembering the Lord's death until he comes" at a period where we, erm, remember his death.
  • Curiosity killedCuriosity killed Shipmate, 8th Day Host
    Normally there is a Eucharist on Maundy Thursday, to remember the Last Supper, followed by stripping of the altar, the church remains bare until Easter. I've attended vigils from the end of the Maundy Thursday service to midnight in a garden of remembrance. We leave the church in silence after the Maundy Thursday service and see the services on Good Friday and the Easter Vigil as part if the same service. Easter Vigil starts in a dark still church until the Gloria, when colour and noise comes back. Good Friday is a service of mourning remembering the death on the Cross.
  • BasilicaBasilica Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Really failing to understand the theology of not "remembering the Lord's death until he comes" at a period where we, erm, remember his death.
    I'm not a Lutheran (and not an expert either), but my understanding is that Good Friday is almost the principal day for Holy Communion, on precisely these grounds.

    In the Catholic tradition (to which I belong), a celebration of the Eucharist is seen as a participation in the sacrifice of Calvary. That sacrifice is present in a particular way on Good Friday, and the joy inherent in an offering of the Eucharist would be inappropriate.

    St Thomas writes:
    The figure ceases on the advent of the reality. But this sacrament is a figure and a representation of our Lord's Passion, as stated above. And therefore on the day on which our Lord's Passion is recalled as it was really accomplished, this sacrament is not consecrated. Nevertheless, lest the Church be deprived on that day of the fruit of the Passion offered to us by this sacrament, the body of Christ consecrated the day before is reserved to be consumed on that day ST III qn 83 a2
    Now, Thomas can be inclined towards retrospective and ahistorical justification for liturgical practices, but I think this is a decent summary of the Catholic view.
  • Never, never, never: I was taught the only exception was if someone was at the point of death and requested the sacrament, in which case it would be from the reserved sacrament after the Maundy Thursday evening Mass.

    Ante-Communion on Good Friday morning, yes: but no consecration.
  • angloidangloid Shipmate
    The theology is that Passion-Resurrection is one event, as it were 'exploded' into separate parts to allow us to focus on each aspect in turn. Hence the 'remembering' in the Eucharist is not of Christ's death alone but 'death-and-resurrection', which is why we don't celebrate it on Good Friday. That's as the tradition has evolved, because on the above theory I suppose there should really be only one celebration for the whole Triduum, at the Easter Vigil... but that would mean not on Maundy Thursday which would be very odd. And pace Curiosity Killed, Good Friday is not entirely a day of mourning, as if it were Jesus's funeral service. We celebrate it in the light of the resurrection; we read St John's Passion with its underlying note of glory; and we wear red vestments which are associated with martyrdom and kingship, not black with their associations of mourning.
    (By 'we' I mean of course those Christians in the modern Western liturgical tradition, as expressed in the Roman Missal and the C of E's Common Worship/ Times and Seasons, among others. I don't intend to disparage other traditions or other understandings: the mystery of our redemption is too deep to be confined to one way of looking at it.)
  • Yes, what Angloid said. Maundy Thursday + Good Friday + Easter Day (which begins on the Saturday evening, IYSWIM) are all part of one great liturgical act.

    IJ
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    Call me stupid, but I struggle to think of a more appropriate occasion, bar perhaps Maundy Thursday.
    Agreed. The one time I'm not so keen to celebrate it - and I know many will disagree - is on Easter Sunday, especially if it's in the usual Baptist manner of coming at the end of the "main" service. To me it seems strange to focus on the jubilation of the Risen Lord and then backtrack to the Last Supper. If you're going to do it all, do it as an early morning service, before we get to all the celebrating.

  • Well, this is, of course, where various paths diverge.

    Some would say that the Eucharist - with the Risen Lord present in the sacramental signs of bread and wine (however your church defines that presence!) - is the natural conclusion of the three days' observance, and that it is the spiritual nourishment and strength imparted by the reception of the sacrament that impels the faithful to go out, and proclaim the Risen Lord in their everyday lives.

    That does not in any way detract from or denigrate other peoples' views, IMNSHO.

    It's proclaiming the Risen Lord - however you do it - that's important.

    IJ
  • Of course. And - strangely enough - I would have a lot of time for celebrating Eucharist on Easter Sunday evening, because of the Emmaus story. (But we don't have a service then!) Just not at (the end of) the main Easter morning service. YMMV of course.
  • angloidangloid Shipmate
    That is an interesting perspective, Baptist Trainfan. Am I right in thinking the reason you are reluctant to celebrate the Eucharist at Easter is that you see it primarily as a commemoration of the death of Christ? That's what I mean by different traditions contributing to the depth of understanding the Mystery.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    Call me stupid, but I struggle to think of a more appropriate occasion, bar perhaps Maundy Thursday.
    Agreed. The one time I'm not so keen to celebrate it - and I know many will disagree - is on Easter Sunday, especially if it's in the usual Baptist manner of coming at the end of the "main" service. To me it seems strange to focus on the jubilation of the Risen Lord and then backtrack to the Last Supper. If you're going to do it all, do it as an early morning service, before we get to all the celebrating.

    It's interesting how you put it as 'backtracking' to the Last Supper. I think of the Eucharist (which I would argue is about 'thanksgiving' more than 'celebration' ) more as placing the commemoration of Christ's death into the wider perspective of him as Risen Lord; rather than stopping to remember a moment where he was killed on the cross. So, more a case of taking Christ's death forward into the future fulfilment of God's purposes, rather than going backwards to relive one particular, albeit important, moment

    Maybe that's also reflected in the different beliefs churches have of what the bread and wine actually are, too? I would understand my tradition as teaching that bread and wine are Jesus's real flesh and blood (John 6); therefore the flesh and blood of the triumphant, death-defying Resurrected Christ in the present moment. I suppose if one views bread and wine as symbolic, rather than the bodily presence of Christ, it would make it easier not to worry about the debateable contradiction of his physical resurrected presence on a Good Friday altar!

    However, that's the theology. In practice, I can't say I'd get too het up about it myself if I came across it in other places. My experience is of the empty chalice on the Good Friday altar; no celebration of communion, and no distribution of the reserved sacrament. Though I have no objection to the latter, I would personally feel, liturgically, the former to be inappropriate. But only in the context of my own tradition, perhaps. We shall concentrate on the Liturgy and Veneration of the Cross. No doubt that will NOT be enough for some of our folk anyway!
  • Well, this is, of course, where various paths diverge.

    Some would say that the Eucharist - with the Risen Lord present in the sacramental signs of bread and wine (however your church defines that presence!) - is the natural conclusion of the three days' observance, and that it is the spiritual nourishment and strength imparted by the reception of the sacrament that impels the faithful to go out, and proclaim the Risen Lord in their everyday lives.

    That does not in any way detract from or denigrate other peoples' views, IMNSHO.

    It's proclaiming the Risen Lord - however you do it - that's important.

    IJ

    That makes sense on Easter if your text is the Emmaus road experience.
    Otherwise, as a non-liturgical Christian I'm prone to thinking Good Friday is a great time for communion, but recognize I'm bucking some larger & older traditions there.

    But hearing the amount of heat applied to the poor priest who put forth the notion does make me grateful to be in a (somewhat) more flexible denomination... (not to start a flame war, it was a good message for me as I've been in a vocational funk these days...)
  • Perhaps it's not the notion itself so much as the way it's apparently been sprung on the congregation that's causing a stir at rhubarb's church.

    I can't help thinking that the 1662 BCP's Communion Service, with its cross-centred theology, would actually feel quite appropriate on Good Friday...

    IJ
  • [Cliffdweller] But hearing the amount of heat applied to the poor priest who put forth the notion does make me grateful to be in a (somewhat) more flexible denomination... (not to start a flame war, it was a good message for me as I've been in a vocational funk these days...)

    The Eucharist, (if seen as non-mandatory or optional), should not turn into an event to squabble over. If people turn up on Good Friday to this priests 'celebration', then that's fine, if they don't, that's fine too.

    Since it seems to have been an 'introduced' novelty though it would hardly be right if the priest got the hump if no one turned up. On the other hand, some people there might have been secretly longing for opportunity to receive a 'consecrated there and then' communion.

    I wonder what prompted the priest to bring in this innovation? Is he ultra enthusiastic at celebrating communion?
    Does he object to reserved sacrament in principle?
    Does he want to establish who is 'on his side' in liturgical matters?
    Does he want to see who does what about it?
    Or is he just wet behind the ears and didn't have any idea what he was getting into?

    I'd say he needs a good Reader, (CPO) to sus out the morale of the lower deck and report back if there are mutinous mutterings in the fo'cs'tle. Many an incumbent has had an unnecessarily uncomfortable maiden voyage simply by not listening to the 'shot rolling' on the upper deck, in the night watches.
  • angloidangloid Shipmate
    Too many churches IMHO – even those with otherwise strong liturgical traditions – seem to panic on Good Friday. Either they will put on a multiplicity of services to 'satisfy' everybody's wishes, although this is one day in the year when everybody ought to aim to worship together. Or they will ignore the official liturgy altogether which is strange if they wouldn't do this at any other time. 'Say the black; do the red' is a good guideline in Holy Week above all.

    Celebrating the Eucharist on Good Friday however is not forbidden in the C of E and as some have argued in this thread, maybe appropriate. What is important is to establish a liturgical tradition and stick to it, not make radical changes without consultation.
  • I have mentioned this before, and it was years ago, but once I went with somebody who was a cradle Unitarian (but who rarely attended these days) to their Good Friday service, which was communion ... it was one of the very few occasions in the year when they did have communion. Just goes to show that for some churches it is totally fitting. I appreciate that many Trinitarian Christians would struggle with the idea of a Unitarian communion, but for one such as myself from a non liturgical Brethren/Baptist/URC background I found it rather moving to share communion with people from such a 'different' faith perspective
  • LeafLeaf Shipmate
    Basilica wrote: »
    I'm not a Lutheran (and not an expert either), but my understanding is that Good Friday is almost the principal day for Holy Communion, on precisely these grounds.
    You are two-thirds wrong and one-third correct :wink: according to the proportionate memberships of Evangelical* to Missouri Synod** Lutherans in North America.

    Evangelical*: no Holy Communion on Good Friday.
    Missouri Synod**: definitely Holy Communion on Good Friday.

    *Evangelical in this context, like inconceivable, does not mean what you think it means.
    **Missouri Synod and similar bodies (WELS, LCC, and other TLA's)

  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    Simply. Not. Done. in the Orthodox Church. The one day of the entire year when the Eucharist absolutely positively may not be served. Not even pre-sanctified. Nothing.

    Meaning that you have a Eucharist on Holy Saturday?

    Yes. One of my favourite services.
  • I used to work down the street from an RC church. Several of us in our office were Christians and wanted to go to GF services, and we staggered going so we all could go.

    St. Whatsit had a Seven Last Words service, focusing on the last 7 things Jesus said from the cross. Readings, meditation and prayer, sometimes respectful liturgical dance performance. No Eucharist. Packed service, every year. Lasted about 3 hours; but it was in a business district, so people came and went. Really hard to find a seat.

    I did a search, and I see lots of other churches have that kind of service, too. Some call it "Tennebrae".

  • Curiosity killedCuriosity killed Shipmate, 8th Day Host
    The service I am used to on Good Friday is the last hour of that service, from 2pm to 3pm - leaving in silence, remembering the death on the Cross.

    (I am also used to a children's service at 10am and a ecumenical Walk of Witness, both telling the story of Easter, one in the church and the other as a public procession down the High Street led by someone carrying a full size cross and stopping at various points along the way to tell parts of the story.)
  • BasilicaBasilica Shipmate
    Leaf wrote: »
    Basilica wrote: »
    I'm not a Lutheran (and not an expert either), but my understanding is that Good Friday is almost the principal day for Holy Communion, on precisely these grounds.
    You are two-thirds wrong and one-third correct :wink: according to the proportionate memberships of Evangelical* to Missouri Synod** Lutherans in North America.

    Evangelical*: no Holy Communion on Good Friday.
    Missouri Synod**: definitely Holy Communion on Good Friday.

    *Evangelical in this context, like inconceivable, does not mean what you think it means.
    **Missouri Synod and similar bodies (WELS, LCC, and other TLA's)
    One-third correct is much higher than my normal batting average!

    I'm much more familiar with European Lutheranism than with American (therefore I'm very familiar with the meaning of Evangelical/Evangelische!) so this is really interesting.
  • LeafLeaf Shipmate
    Basilica wrote: »
    I'm much more familiar with European Lutheranism than with American (therefore I'm very familiar with the meaning of Evangelical/Evangelische!) so this is really interesting.
    Ah, fair enough! Any mentions of "North America" + "Evangelical" tends to set people's hair on fire, so thank you for your note.


  • We don't offer communion on Good Friday. I understand that it is permissible in the Anglican Church but have never been in a church where it happened. To be honest, I kinda prefer Good Friday to be non-Eucharistic. We have communion on Maundy Thursday (which seems natural to me). Then GF is a service of reflection and meditation and we celebrate (with Eucharist) on Easter Sunday.

    With regards to the new minister who wants GF to be a full communion service - I actually don't think that there is a big problem with people attending the service but not receiving. If they show up (rather than going elsewhere) they are showing support - but they are simply saying "it is not my practice to receive HC on Good Friday." You don't have to make a big song and dance about it, but giving the minister a quiet heads up before the service would be nice.

    (Of course, I think that this new minister is WRONG to lead a service of Holy Communion and WRONG to not have checked what the local customs are before making this decision.)

    (I have just recalled that, in the dim and distant past, when I was a member of a Baptist Church, Good Friday was one of the few times when we DID have a communion service.)
  • Just a thought: If one looks at Maundy Thursday–Good Friday–Holy Saturday–Easter per Jewish reckoning—which the Paschal Triduum arguably does—then sundown Thursday to sundown Friday is the same day, which means that Good Friday services (at least traditional noon–3:00 ones) are on the same day as the Maundy Thursday Eucharist. At least, as Jesus and the disciples reckoned time, the Last Supper and the crucifixion took place on the same day.

    FWIW.
  • Lily PadLily Pad Shipmate
    Unwise to choose to do something that goes against local practice on such an important day. Consulting the congregation would be the way to go. If he was so sure about doing it, then he needs to take in their discomfort with the practice and acknowledge it. Surely someone will be chatting with him and not just letting him assume they are all with him.
  • LeoLeo Shipmate
    Golden Key wrote: »
    I used to work down the street from an RC church. Several of us in our office were Christians and wanted to go to GF services, and we staggered going so we all could go.

    St. Whatsit had a Seven Last Words service, focusing on the last 7 things Jesus said from the cross. Readings, meditation and prayer, sometimes respectful liturgical dance performance. No Eucharist. Packed service, every year. Lasted about 3 hours; but it was in a business district, so people came and went. Really hard to find a seat.

    I did a search, and I see lots of other churches have that kind of service, too. Some call it "Tennebrae".

    No, Tenebrae is anticipated Morning Prayer with Lamentations.
  • Tenebrae can still sometimes be found in traditionally-inclined Anglo-Catholic churches, on the evening of Wednesday of Holy Week (IIRC).

    I gather that it can be rather long......but that there are some really dramatic moments......
    :cold_sweat:

    IJ
  • Presanctified Communion on Good Friday was 'dropped' some years ago where I go to church, through a change of vicar. Holy Week and Easter only happen once a year and I like the full Triduum; so I find it elsewhere and go to a church where they do it 'properly'.
  • rhubarbrhubarb Shipmate
    I appreciate everyone's thoughts. Our new priest disapproves very strongly of the reserved sacrament, so there is no way that could be used. Apparently he went to the Parish Council with his plan for HC on Good Friday and everyone said no way. It appears that the minister (let's call him Fred) considers that he consulted and therefore that's all he had to do. He's turning into a mini dictator.
    In the past we have begun Good Friday with Stations of the Cross which led into Passion readings, reflection and other liturgy. Because the choir has a commitment at church, we will participate in the service but have decided not to take communion and just stay quietly in our seats. We are not going to make a big issue, but felt that what we have planned is to make a statement in our own way. After all, there is no compulsion to take communion.
    I'm not sure what we can do about Fred. He has come from a very liberal congregation to a traditional Anglo Catholic parish and is just not fitting in. I get the impression he wants to 'fix' us. I'm not sure how we ended up with him and it would be sad if people left because of the changes he wants to make. I can but pray for some resolution.
  • Leo--
    Leo wrote: »
    Golden Key wrote: »
    I used to work down the street from an RC church. Several of us in our office were Christians and wanted to go to GF services, and we staggered going so we all could go.

    St. Whatsit had a Seven Last Words service, focusing on the last 7 things Jesus said from the cross. Readings, meditation and prayer, sometimes respectful liturgical dance performance. No Eucharist. Packed service, every year. Lasted about 3 hours; but it was in a business district, so people came and went. Really hard to find a seat.

    I did a search, and I see lots of other churches have that kind of service, too. Some call it "Tennebrae".

    No, Tenebrae is anticipated Morning Prayer with Lamentations.

    I wondered about that. I'd known of Tenebrae, long ago, and forgotten what it was. But GF didn't see right for it. However, many of the search hits contained that.

    I just did more searching. The Wikipedia article for Tenebrae is quite a mouthful, and the intricacies of the liturgical calendar are beyond me. But I gleaned that RC, Anglican, Orthodox, and Protestant church practices vary. RC practices changed with Vatican II, and there's a very detailed chart of the pre-Vat2 practices. Some churches on the Protestant end of things either dropped Tenebrae in favor of Seven Last Words, or merged them.
  • If the parish is Anglo-Catholic how on earth did someone who is a hardline Protestant (because there's nothing liberal about opposing the reserved sacrament) get appointed? It sounds to me like a failure in the appointments process.
  • Golden Key wrote: »
    Leo--
    Leo wrote: »
    Golden Key wrote: »
    I used to work down the street from an RC church. Several of us in our office were Christians and wanted to go to GF services, and we staggered going so we all could go.

    St. Whatsit had a Seven Last Words service, focusing on the last 7 things Jesus said from the cross. Readings, meditation and prayer, sometimes respectful liturgical dance performance. No Eucharist. Packed service, every year. Lasted about 3 hours; but it was in a business district, so people came and went. Really hard to find a seat.

    I did a search, and I see lots of other churches have that kind of service, too. Some call it "Tennebrae".

    No, Tenebrae is anticipated Morning Prayer with Lamentations.
    I just did more searching. The Wikipedia article for Tenebrae is quite a mouthful, and the intricacies of the liturgical calendar are beyond me. But I gleaned that RC, Anglican, Orthodox, and Protestant church practices vary. RC practices changed with Vatican II, and there's a very detailed chart of the pre-Vat2 practices. Some churches on the Protestant end of things either dropped Tenebrae in favor of Seven Last Words, or merged them.
    At least in these parts, many non-Catholic, non-Anglican/Episcopalian, non-Orthodox churches will have a “Tenebrae” service during Holy Week, often on Good Friday. The degree to which it conforms to the traditional Tenebrae will vary widely—in my experience the constant will be the gradual extinguishing of candles and the removal of the one candle at the end. And yes, it may be merged with readings of the Passion or the Seven Last Words in place of Lamentations.

  • Lily PadLily Pad Shipmate
    Rhubarb, I can't imagine this fellow will last long there. Is this his first parish?

    I can't help but be amused at the thought of him needing to finish up the cup if he fills it presuming everyone will commune and then everyone stays put.
  • That happened one Sunday at Our Place, when I (acting as Deacon) rather over-filled the chalice...and over-estimated the number of possible communicants...

    The priest asked me to finish up the wine, as he was driving that afternoon. Fortunately, I was still, at that time, not allowed to drive (fits!), so was able to oblige.

    Oops...
    :blush:

    Re the OP, perhaps we ought not to speculate too much about rhubarb's church and vicar, but it does seem as though he's not made too auspicious a start.

    IIRC, when the C of E's little red book Lent, Holy Week, and Easter came out in 1986, it was made quite clear that Communion on Good Friday - whether from the Reserved Sacrament, or from a 'full' celebration - was quite as much in order as a liturgy without Communion, and various suitable options were available. AFAIK, this is still the case with the current Times and Seasons provision.

    IJ
  • Why would someone object to the Reserved Sacrament per se? I should think that all churches would find it extremely useful when trying to provide for additional services, eg. in nursing homes, or in large multi-church benefices, regardless of what happens on Good Friday.
  • Indeed, and I suspect that Reservation - though not necessarily in the church - is quite common in the C of E. As you say, useful for Home Communions etc., and as one who visits the housebound with Communion most weeks, a very precious resource.

    For some, I guess, the idea of 'worshipping' Jack Chick's 'Cookie God' is anathema, but if they'd only look at the history of the early Church, they'd see that taking the Sacrament to those unable to be at the Sunday Eucharist was common practice.

    I understand that, in our local hospital, the Sacrament is reserved, and set aside for use on the wards, by various hospital chaplains - so it could well have been consecrated by e.g. a URC minister. IIRC, the Romans keep theirs separate.....
    :wink:

    IJ
Sign In or Register to comment.