Buying communion wine
Our church warden was worried yesterday as the wine he buys for the Eucharist has suddenly become more expensive.
I hadn’t realized we used a specific church wine; surely, if the wine we use is going to be consecrated anyway, we could just get whatever red is on offer at the supermarket? Am I missing something here?
Obviously it’s different for churches that use the non-alcoholic variety, but that doesn’t apply in our case.
I hadn’t realized we used a specific church wine; surely, if the wine we use is going to be consecrated anyway, we could just get whatever red is on offer at the supermarket? Am I missing something here?
Obviously it’s different for churches that use the non-alcoholic variety, but that doesn’t apply in our case.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
A church I used to know used port, and we buy it by the 10l in a wine box, so keeping it is not a problem. It would just be a PITA to be trying to store large numbers of bottles (we're a a cathedral, so get through a reasonable amount).
Where I lived previously, one independent wine shop actually sold (and still sells) "Communion Wine". It's Fairtrade and organic: "Made by the Stellar Winery in South Africa from Cabernet Sauvignon grapes with a splash of Muscat. It is lightly fortified to 15% abv to enhance its keeping properties. Poterion is also certified organic and suitable for vegetarians and vegans". I like the sound of it!
BTW I do have a problem with churches that use white wine for Communion - and, yes, I have come across it (something like Tokay).
White wine is often preferred because it is less likely to stain linens. Though in practice it tends to be more amber than white. And somewhat fortified so that it doesn't go off too soon.
I’ve known of some churches that provide both wine and non-alcoholic wine in wee cuppies, and that will use red for one and white for other to make it easy to distinguish between the two.
Fortified wines are used for communion; the extra alcohol therein has been demonstrated to keep the germs down. That means that we're talking primarily of port or sherry.
Color is a matter of taste.
Certainly the white sliced chorley-wood loaf the local Church of Scotland uses in no way resembles real bread. If I'm responsible for arranging communion (i.e. Maundy Thursday) then I just make unleavened bread. I quietly suffer the preservative filled, non-alcoholic wine substitute in deference to our recovering brothers and sisters, one of whom has in the past recounted the story of a multi-day bender sparked by alcoholic communion wine. Personally I liked the practice of my university chapel in consecrating one cup of wine and another of grape juice to allow anyone who cared to discreetly choose which station to receive from.
Hmmm. I've looked at a number of sensible articles online and the consensus seems to be:
1. Silver may have some antimicrobial properties but, if it does, we don't know how they work;
2. The short time-lapse between each person communicating means that any anti-microbial effect is non-existent anyway;
3. Using a purificator removes a high percentage of bacteria;
4. Those with active labial and respiratory infections should refrain from communicating;
5. The use of individual cups removes any risk of infection.
However, the amount of bacteria deposited on the chalice by each communicant is small and there is apparently no documented evidence of anyone being infected through the use of a common chalice - in fact one more likely to pick up an infection through touching the church's door handle!
There is. What do you think wine vinegar is? I assume that the stuff they use for communion is a diluted version of this with added sweetener and preservative. That is it is fermented but the alcohol is then removed. The stuff for the table do not have the sweetener and preservative.
Agreed.
We did that for a time with gluten-free bread. (We have a number of people with celiacs in the congregation.) A year or two ago, we went to gluten-free bread only. I realize the disciplines and canons of some churches would not allow that, but ours do.
Of course there is, though some vintners call it alcohol-free or dealcoholized wine. It’s wine from which the alcohol has been removed after fermentation.
I'll remember that- only nine months to go...
[/quote]
Yes, come to think of it there is a perfectly acceptable dealcoholized cab sauv that Tesco do- acceptable, that is, as a non- or only very marginally alcoholic (less that 0.5%, i think) table drink. I imagine that that'd count as wine for communion purposes, since it is actually wine (that has had things done to it to remove the alcohol) rather than simply juice.
BT I'd refer you to my daughter if I could. She's an infection control nurse and from her knowledge suggests that there is no failsafe on a shared cup not having viral forms on it. It only needs 2 of those (out of an estimated 20 million shared by one sick person) to make you sick.
As for worse germs on the door handle - well you're not licking that or drinking out of it are you?
No, but you will use those hands to share the peace with others, and to pick up your cube of white sliced and to handle your wee cuppie. And if you don't think your hands are in regular contact with the mucus membranes of your nose and mouth you're sorely mistaken.
You're a bad bad boy. No more trains for you
But if you put the wafer on your hand after touching the door handle....
2. The "noble metals" - silver and gold - actually do have anti-microbial properties. That's a reason to use them instead of pottery or wood.
3. Communion wine is fortified - sherry or port are used - because, again, the higher alcoholic content helps to kill bugs.
If I'm sick, I take by intinction, because of my concern for the concerns of others. Otherwise, I don't worry about infection from the chalice, because it just isn't a factor.
You use fortified wine when there may be recovering alcoholics in the congregation?
Over the years, I have observed a number of communicants declining the cup, some rising before the cup comes round, others waiting until the cup is before them, and then rising. I came to learn that one of my friends & fellow-communicants was in AA, and he told me that this was standard practice and had been discussed among other alcoholics. In his set (admittedly a spikey one), they preferred that to grape juice. He told me that his inability to take the wine was for him a strong reminder that we lived in a broken world, and that this consideration helped him greatly. I remember this conversation clearly, as it is rare in anglophone Canadian society that men speak frankly with other men of deeper things.
And can be harmlessly consumed at breakfast the next day
You're clearly not a P on Myers-Brigg ... I can't remember which hand is doing what at any given time.
Secondly, I know an anecdote does not make firm evidence but a family where I worship only ever takes the wafer and reports having far fewer colds and flu since doing so. If you want a clinical trial then...
The beneficial effect of them is, as far as I can tell, minuscule in practice. I think that I would tend to avoid wood, simply because it would tend to soak things up more than other materials and so be harder to ensure that it is properly clean. Pottery chalices do not, as far as I can see, represent a significantly greater practical risk of infection than silver or gold.
Nope! Not true. If you want to kill bugs, you need a much higher alcohol level. I think that the level has to be somewhere in the region of 50-60%. The communion wine we buy in bulk for the church has 12%. The small bottle of fortified wine that I use for home communions, that I got from the liquor store has 20%. Nowhere near enough to be a defence against infections.
Whilst there are a lot of untested assertions about the relative health benefits of various methods of distributing/receiving communion, one of the few things that HAS been scientifically tested is intinction. No matter how you do it, it significantly RAISES the possibility of cross-contamination. It is still not THAT great a risk (IMHO) but if you really want to avoid getting or passing on a bug, avoiding intinction would seem to be one answer.
(It would be really helpful if someone somewhere could carry out a genuine piece of scientific research on communion practices and relative risks of passing on infections. What we have at the moment are mostly untested assertions. After all, it is not that long ago that churches were advising people to practice intinction in order to avoid the possibility of getting HIV/AIDS. There was no serious scientific backing for this advice and it probably raised the likelihood that people would get other infections.)
So lots of people will decline the chalice when it comes round because they already intincted, and some will decline the chalice because they were just there for a blessing. You'd have to be watching very carefully indeed to spot a receive-in-one-kinder.
When I take by intinction (if I suspect I'm buggy), I have the priest do the dipping and place the host on my tongue.
Since I have a severely compromised immune system, I should, I suppose, avoid the chalice. But it has not been an issue for me.
There's this: https://www.anglican.ca/faith/worship/pir/euc-practice-infection/
The only Biblical requirement is that it has to be "the fruit of the vine."
The reason why grape juice became popular in many American churches is because of Mr. Welch. When he developed a way to pasteurize grape juice before it fermented, he developed a marketing ploy to get the Methodist churches to switch to grape juice. Then he was a major fund source for the temperance movement in the US.
I prefer wine, but I really do not see why a congregation may choose to use grape juice, since it is technically still the fruit of the vine.
Now if you want to talk about the type of bread, every mention of the Eucharist uses the word that means common bread, not unleavened bread. No doubt, the Last Supper had unleavened bread, but I think as Christianity spread people found out they could not necessarily have unleavened bread, so they just began using the common bread. Just a hypothesis.
Exclusion on the basis of personal issues? Not at the communion table surely!