What Liquid Do You Use in the Lord's Supper?

[AThornquist]

Moderate use of alcohol is safe during pregnancy according to all the OB/GYNs I know. And I know quite a few. The only danger to the child is in excess.

I guess it depends upon the child and its allergic problems on this side.

Good point, sir.

 

[Miss Marple]

I wonder if the sense of "communion" is lost if some are partaking of juice and some of wine?

 

[SRoper]

Seems like you could get in trouble with giving wine to anybody under 21, couldn't you?

I believe all states exclude sacramental use of wine from their underage drinking laws. In fact, a number of states also allow minors to drink under the supervision of their parents. In any case, we are to obey God rather than man. If wine is required, it is required.

 

[fishingpipe]

Going off of what SW shows in that quote, what is the biblical theology show to us in the Lord's Supper through the use of:

3) What does wine show forth that grape juice doesn't or can't?

Wine is red, signifying/representing the blood of Christ much better than a purple Welch's grape juice.
Wine ferments. It is alive, like our risen Savior. Grape juice is pasteurized. It will never ferment. It is dead, unlike our Christ.
Wine gives us joy. Sugary grape juice makes us hyper.

WCOF Chapter 27: II. There is, in every sacrament, a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, between the sign and the thing signified: whence it comes to pass, that the names and effects of the one are attributed to the other.

How poor a representation of the blood of Christ is grape juice. Our forefathers did well to recognize the importance of using what Christ used.

Oh come on. I can make as many representations about leaven. My family has been wine makers for years. You are assuming the wine they drank was purely red in the first place. What if they used white grapes. LOL. Freshly squeezed grapes is still Oinos.

As far as leavened vs. unleavened is concerned - the Bible and the WCoF both say, "bread." I've never really argued that one.

I have read much about a variety of reasons it would have been red wine rather than white. Everything from the type of soil in the region to the type of grapes that can be grown in that soil to the stability of the red versus white. (Many have said there wasn't even a white wine in those times, but I'm not so sure on that one.) But it's hard for me to think Christ would have used a white wine when saying, "This is my blood poured out for you." Surely His cup held fermented red wine.

For me, the teaching of the confession on "the sign and the thing signified" and "sensible signs" carries quite a bit of weight in my thinking. What is the Confession teaching us if not the importance between these visible attributes that I mentioned? What, then, does it mean when it says "There is, in every sacrament, a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, between the sign and the thing signified: whence it comes to pass, that the names and effects of the one are attributed to the other?" Does pasteurized grape juice represent Christ's blood well?

 

[govteach51]

We use the cheap Walmart grape juice.

 

[raekwon]

Both. Folks with wheat allergies occasionally bring their own bread, as well.

---------- Post added at 10:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ----------

Moderate use of alcohol is safe during pregnancy according to all the OB/GYNs I know. And I know quite a few. The only danger to the child is in excess.

Initially, I read this as "the only danger to the child is in Texas." I didn't get it.

 

[Andres]

Both. Folks with wheat allergies occasionally bring their own bread, as well.

---------- Post added at 10:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ----------

Moderate use of alcohol is safe during pregnancy according to all the OB/GYNs I know. And I know quite a few. The only danger to the child is in excess.

Initially, I read this as "the only danger to the child is in Texas." I didn't get it.

Well we do have rattlesnakes...

 

[Marrow Man]

I guess it depends upon the child and its allergic problems on this side.

Good point. My mother is allergic to alcohol. A small amount is enough to make her quite ill. I definitely think that the Reformed notion of a sacrament is sufficiently flexible to make allowances for unusual situations.

So is Ken Gentry. He mentions that in his book God Gave Wine. I'm not sure if I remember what he does for the Lord's Supper, though (the point of the book is that drinking alcohol in moderation is biblical, not the nature of the elements of the Lord's Supper).

 

[chuckd]

For those who are dogmatically advocating wine only, are there other ordinances that you strictly observe? For example, in Mr. Klein's post on William B. Sprague's sermon about being over-wise:

Now, whoever, professing to believe the Bible, endeavors to show that the ordinance of baptism in general, or of infant baptism in particular, is not there enjoined, so far reasons fairly; because he appeals to that which, with every Christian, must be the ultimate standard of truth. But surely it will not do for one who acknowledges the divine authority of the scriptures, to decide that this institution is of no value, merely because he cannot, or does not, discern its uses. I am far from admitting that these uses may not be discerned; but even if they could not be, I would say the grand question is, whether God’s word authorizes the institution; and if so, to refuse to submit to it were to make one’s self over-wise.

Does your church observe head-coverings for women? Do you literally wash others' feet? Or is there something unique about the Lord's Supper that wine must be dogmatically observed, but the others (one mentioned along with the tradition of the Lord's Supper in 1 Cor. 11) should be viewed as symbolic?

*I know over email or forums some language (intonation) is lost, but the above are honest questions that I would like thoughts on. I'm not trying to be rude.

 

[Craig.Scott]

We use wine. I would never take communion with grape juice, it is a breach of the Regulative Principle.





In Christ

 

[fishingpipe]

For those who are dogmatically advocating wine only, are there other ordinances that you strictly observe? For example, in Mr. Klein's post on William B. Sprague's sermon about being over-wise:

Now, whoever, professing to believe the Bible, endeavors to show that the ordinance of baptism in general, or of infant baptism in particular, is not there enjoined, so far reasons fairly; because he appeals to that which, with every Christian, must be the ultimate standard of truth. But surely it will not do for one who acknowledges the divine authority of the scriptures, to decide that this institution is of no value, merely because he cannot, or does not, discern its uses. I am far from admitting that these uses may not be discerned; but even if they could not be, I would say the grand question is, whether God’s word authorizes the institution; and if so, to refuse to submit to it were to make one’s self over-wise.

Does your church observe head-coverings for women? Do you literally wash others' feet? Or is there something unique about the Lord's Supper that wine must be dogmatically observed, but the others (one mentioned along with the tradition of the Lord's Supper in 1 Cor. 11) should be viewed as symbolic?

*I know over email or forums some language (intonation) is lost, but the above are honest questions that I would like thoughts on. I'm not trying to be rude.

I'm not sure if I fall in the "dogmatic" crowd you mentioned, though I believe wine-only to be the correct position, but I'll try to answer.

Neither head coverings nor foot washing are sacraments. The Westminster Confession does not teach us we are to observe either as a mandate as it does when it says, "bread and wine." The Lord's Supper is not a tradition, but a sacrament. We should observe it as Christ instructed us to observe it, with the elements he used. Hopefully that helps, from my poor layman's perspective.

 

[Craig.Scott]

For those who are dogmatically advocating wine only, are there other ordinances that you strictly observe? For example, in Mr. Klein's post on William B. Sprague's sermon about being over-wise:

Now, whoever, professing to believe the Bible, endeavors to show that the ordinance of baptism in general, or of infant baptism in particular, is not there enjoined, so far reasons fairly; because he appeals to that which, with every Christian, must be the ultimate standard of truth. But surely it will not do for one who acknowledges the divine authority of the scriptures, to decide that this institution is of no value, merely because he cannot, or does not, discern its uses. I am far from admitting that these uses may not be discerned; but even if they could not be, I would say the grand question is, whether God’s word authorizes the institution; and if so, to refuse to submit to it were to make one’s self over-wise.

Does your church observe head-coverings for women? Do you literally wash others' feet? Or is there something unique about the Lord's Supper that wine must be dogmatically observed, but the others (one mentioned along with the tradition of the Lord's Supper in 1 Cor. 11) should be viewed as symbolic?

*I know over email or forums some language (intonation) is lost, but the above are honest questions that I would like thoughts on. I'm not trying to be rude.

Yes I agree with head coverings. On foot washings it was not a worship practise but hygienic as that was a practise at that time. If it was got worship I would submit before the Word and be I obedient.

God would not have instructed wine if He did not want us to do do.








In Christ

 

[Stargazer65]

The folllowing was meant as a facetious comment and was not to be taken in a serious manner, I apologize for any confusion:

Posted originally by myself

Wow, I can't believe how many Christians are using wine. What's next, ashtrays in the pews?

 

[GulfCoast Presbyterian]

Wow, I can't believe how many Christians are using wine. What's next, ashtrays in the pews?

I don't understand the point? What connection can there be between observance of the sacrement of the Lord's Supper, and ashtrays?

 

[J. Dean]

Seems like you could get in trouble with giving wine to anybody under 21, couldn't you?

I believe all states exclude sacramental use of wine from their underage drinking laws. In fact, a number of states also allow minors to drink under the supervision of their parents. In any case, we are to obey God rather than man. If wine is required, it is required.

I did not know that! Very interesting information!

 

[Andres]

Wow, I can't believe how many Christians are using wine. What's next, ashtrays in the pews?

As uncharitable as your comment is to the saints of this board, I find it even more unsettling that you are attempting to link partaking of the Lord's Supper with careless alcohol abuse. Perhaps you need to reevaluate your understanding of the Lord's Supper.

 

[AThornquist]

Perhaps he was being facetious. Might as well find out before everyone piles on.

 

[GulfCoast Presbyterian]

Seems like you could get in trouble with giving wine to anybody under 21, couldn't you?

I believe all states exclude sacramental use of wine from their underage drinking laws. In fact, a number of states also allow minors to drink under the supervision of their parents. In any case, we are to obey God rather than man. If wine is required, it is required.

Mississippi would fall under "supervision of the parents" as far as I can tell. Since there are so many "dry" counties in Mississippi, there is a specific exception to the "illegal possession" laws for sacremental wine:

§ 97-31-33. Sale, possession, etc. of intoxicating beverages prohibited; exceptions; records to be kept by carrier; exceptions may be relied upon as defense


Nothing in this chapter shall make it unlawful:

(a) For any minister or priest of any religious sect or denomination in actual charge of a church, religious order or congregation to order, purchase, and have shipped, transported and delivered, wine for sacramental purposes, nor for any common carrier to ship, transport, carry or deliver wine for said purposes to any such minister or priest, nor for any such minister or priest to have, receive, control or possess wine for sacramental purposes, but the said wine shall remain in the possession of such minister or priest save when the wine is being administered in the sacramental service or in the service in commemoration of the Lord's Supper.

 

[Stargazer65]

Perhaps he was being facetious. Might as well find out before everyone piles on.

Ooops, I should have thought before I posted.

I apologize to anyone I may have offended, yes I was being facetious. Actually I would prefer wine for the Lord's Supper (but we don't have it), and I use alcohol in moderation personally.

At a church I previously attended, alcohol and smoking would have been associated with unsaved people only, hence the facetious remark linking alcohol and smoking.

OK, I'll just shut up for a while now and crawl into a hole somewhere...

 

[Stargazer65]

Thank you, I've gotten rusty on my internet posting skills.

Is there a smiley for spanking yourself like Rush Limbaugh does when he offends one his listeners?

 

[BJClark]

our church uses grape juice, why? I have no idea..but I will ask..

And what do you use for the 'bread'?

Do you use the wafers? crackers? or bread?

 

[KMK]

our church uses grape juice, why? I have no idea..but I will ask..

And what do you use for the 'bread'?

Do you use the wafers? crackers? or bread?

This thread has become unwieldy and is now closed.

Bobbi, would you mind starting a new thread if you want to ask about the bread? This thread was supposed to be primarily about the liquid aspect.

If anyone wants to address the elements vs. the circumstances surrounding the LS, please see this thread: http://www.puritanboard.com/f67/lords-supper-what-element-what-circumstance-72954/