Frequency of Communion?

[George]

Why do some churches do communion only once a month or even every six months or only once a year, as opposed to doing it every Sunday? Orthodox Churches do it every Sunday and during every Divine Liturgy to allow us to partake of the Body and Blood of the Lord.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Why do some churches do communion only once a month or even every six months or only once a year, as opposed to doing it every Sunday? Orthodox Churches do it every Sunday and during every Divine Liturgy to allow us to partake of the Body and Blood of the Lord.

Communion is available at every mass for Catholics. My parish has daily masses and four masses for Sunday. I do not know why some denominations have the Lord's supper infrequently. Maybe it is to keep costs down or reduce the amount of washing up after each service?

 

[Albion]

The every-Sunday format is the historic way, but the churches which choose not to do it that way have two main explanations:

1. Weekly reception tends to make communicants take it too much for granted or not appreciate the significance of it as much as they should.

2. One of the themes of the Reformation was restoration of instruction as an important part of the corporate worship service.

In the Orthodox churches of your familiarity, George, the sermon is so reduced or simplified that there isn't even a pulpit. The reason of course is that the Liturgy with all that it means is considered the more important part. But if we can think in the context of Western Christianity ca. 1500, the sermon then was also minimized in Roman Catholic churches because the miracle of the Mass had been made more and more the focus over the centuries. A lot of priests, in fact, avoided giving a sermon because they considered that to be a burden or an annoyance. The Reformation sought to redress this wrong, although that particular reform is not as well remembered today as are Sola Scriptura and some other things.

 

[MoreCoffee]

The every-Sunday format is the historic way, but the churches which choose not to do it that way have two main explanations:

1. Weekly reception tends to make communicants take it too much for granted or not appreciate the significance of it as much as they should.

2. One of the themes of the Reformation was restoration of instruction as an important part of the corporate worship service.

In the Orthodox churches of your familiarity, George, the sermon is so reduced or simplified that there isn't even a pulpit. The reason of course is that the Liturgy with all that it means is considered the more important part. But if we can think in the context of Western Christianity ca. 1500, the sermon then was also minimized in Roman Catholic churches because the miracle of the Mass had been made more and more the focus over the centuries. A lot of priests, in fact, avoided giving a sermon because they considered that to be a burden or an annoyance. The Reformation sought to redress this wrong, although that particular reform is not as well remembered today as are Sola Scriptura and some other things.

I do not know what 16th century Catholic clerics thought about sermons but homilies were always part of the mass and usually short and to the point except in a few cases. Where did you get information about 16th century Catholic clerics' thinking about sermons?

 

[Confessional Lutheran]

My parish has the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper at both Divine Services every Sunday. It's truly a blessing.

 

[Albion]

I do not know what 16th century Catholic clerics thought about sermons but homilies were always part of the mass and usually short and to the point except in a few cases. Where did you get information about 16th century Catholic clerics' thinking about sermons?

You might find it interesting to study the Roman Church's response to this problem. One of the first concessions to the Reformation that the RCC made was to require priests to give sermons and to stop farming that duty out to seminarians, which was a common practice.

Nevertheless, sermons were characteristically brief before the Reformation. As might be expected, the reaction on the part of Dr. Luther was to say that sermons ought to last for an hour and a half...if the minister couldn't make it the whole way! :Nooo:

 

[MoreCoffee]

You might find it interesting to study the Roman Church's response to this problem. One of the first concessions to the Reformation that the RCC made was to require priests to give sermons and to stop farming that duty out to seminarians, which was a common practice.

Nevertheless, sermons were characteristically brief before the Reformation. As might be expected, the reaction on the part of Dr. Luther was to say that sermons ought to last for an hour and a half...if the minister couldn't make it the whole way! :Nooo:

I presume that seminarians were available only in towns and cities where there was a seminary. The Catechism of the Council of Trent was written to provide material for homilies and instruction for both the parish priests and the faithful in the parishes. In the 16th century mass always included communion for those who were prepared to receive by confession and prayer.

 

[Albion]

Here's an interesting snippet that I just found online:

The days before the Reformation were preaching poor times. Many of the established clergy, bishops, and priests, simply did not preach at all. It is said that the lay people could not expect any preaching from the priests in the local parish. Weeks and even months could go by without their hearing any sermon from the pulpit of their local church. Many priests simply forsook their parishes (local churches), checking on them only on occasion. The English Reformer, Hugh Latimer, called such absentee priests "strawberry parsons" since "they came only once a year and stayed for a very short time," (quoted by G. J. Murray in The Preaching of the English Reformers, pp. 9,10).

 

[NewCreation435]

We typically only have communion once a quarter. I think mainly that is done due to cost and it's tradition to do it that way in many Baptist churches

 

[Lamb]

We have a smaller church and it's offered every other Sunday. Cost would be the main reason why it's not every Sunday.

 

[Albion]

What's the cost? It's peanuts, really. Fifteen dollars or less for a bottle of wine and a couple of loaves of bread (if the cost of hosts is too much, which it isn't)

 

[TurtleHare]

Why do some churches do communion only once a month or even every six months or only once a year, as opposed to doing it every Sunday? Orthodox Churches do it every Sunday and during every Divine Liturgy to allow us to partake of the Body and Blood of the Lord.

As often as you eat this bread and drink this cup is how the Lord put it and that could mean as often as once a week or it could mean as often as once a season like back in Luther's day when a town had a church and communion was when the preacher came around. It wasn't as often as some other towns but coulda been more often than some others and the reverence is no less because of their circumstances, know what I mean?

 

[NewCreation435]

What's the cost? It's peanuts, really. Fifteen dollars or less for a bottle of wine and a couple of loaves of bread (if the cost of hosts is too much, which it isn't)

Not if you have a couple of hundred people in the congregation. Someone also has to take the time to prepare it and to serve it

 

[MoreCoffee]

Not if you have a couple of hundred people in the congregation. Someone also has to take the time to prepare it and to serve it

We have around 800 people and the cost of communion wine and communion hosts is quite high, several hundred dollars per month.

 

[Albion]

Not if you have a couple of hundred people in the congregation. Someone also has to take the time to prepare it and to serve it

Lammchen said hers was a small congregation, though. And even if there were several hundred communicants, I could do it for thirty bucks. Several bottles and a few loaves of bread needing to be cut into pieces. That's it!

Ah, but you also said it would be a bother, with people needed to 'prepare it and serve it.' What do you think we re talking about here--a congregational dinner?

But if the Lords Supper is not as important as the coffee hour, the printing of the bulletins, the candles that burn own and have to be replaced....sure, economize on the Lords supper. From what I'm reading, that seems to be the one thing that's expendable if we have to economize!!

Excuse me, please, for allowing my disgust to show.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I an confident that the money is well spent when it is spent on the wine and hosts for holy communion.

 

[NewCreation435]

Lammchen said hers was a small congregation, though. And even if there were several hundred communicants, I could do it for thirty bucks. Several bottles and a few loaves of bread needing to be cut into pieces. That's it!

Ah, but you also said it would be a bother, with people needed to 'prepare it and serve it.' What do you think we re talking about here--a congregational dinner?

But if the Lords Supper is not as important as the coffee hour, the printing of the bulletins, the candles that burn own and have to be replaced....sure, economize on the Lords supper. From what I'm reading, that seems to be the one thing that's expendable if we have to economize!!

Excuse me, please, for allowing my disgust to show.

Your acting like somehow this is my decision to make and it is not. Nobody in church leadership has asked me how often to have communion. I would actually prefer it much more often myself
There has been several mentions of "loaves of bread" but if I am reading scripture correctly the bread present at the Last supper was not leavened. It was unleavened bread. If we are going to do things as Jesus did then it would be the same.

 

[Albion]

Your acting like somehow this is my decision to make and it is not. Nobody in church leadership has asked me how often to have communion. I would actually prefer it much more often myself

Not at all. If anything, I was reacting to the reasoning you (and not just you) used to defend those policies, whether or not you have any say in what the church does.

The argument that says two or four more Holy Communion services per month is too expensive is bogus. It just is. And, actually, I do not object to having Morning Prayer without Holy Communion on some sort of schedule, alternating in some way...but please! The argument that it is necessary for economic reasons is just invalid.

There has been several mentions of "loaves of bread" but if I am reading scripture correctly the bread present at the Last supper was not leavened. It was unleavened bread. If we are going to do things as Jesus did then it would be the same.

Then use regular hosts which can be purchased for very little also. Or crackers such as are sold in some Christian Supply Stores. None of these approaches are costly. All of them are in use, depending on which church we are talking about.

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

Jesus laid only a few commandments on His “footstep followers” (to use a meaningful term).

One was to love one another, as He had loved them (us). (John 13:34, etc.)

Another was to proclaim His death in a special way (until His coming again), as often as they ate this bread and drank this cup. (1 Corinthians 11:23-26)

==============================================================================================

But just what do “this bread” and “this cup” actually mean?

Bearing in mind that the doctrines of transubstantiation and consubstantiation were unknown in apostolic times, the terms can mean only one of two things:
- Normal, everyday bread and normal, everyday wine; or
- The special unleavened bread and the specially prepared wine used by Jews in the Passover (Pesach) commemoration.

Therefore the only two possible options available to obey the Master’s command are:
- 1. Commemorate His death in that special way at each and every meal:
--- As the early Jewish church could have done because bread and wine were the bases of normal meals;
--- But as we cannot consistently do, because bread or wine are not universal meal bases internationally;
- 2. Commemorate His death once a year on the 14th Nisan, at the time of year associated with that special bread and wine, and more specifically on the day He gave His life for us.

All other practices – weekly, monthly, daily (maybe at multiple times) during special church services, etc., are demonstrably of human origin. They do not conform to Jesus’ specific command.

==============================================================================================

History tells us that the original apostolic church did indeed obey Jesus’ command. It was only after people of pagan background flooded the visible church, that things began to change. In those areas where the pagans dominated, there was a change of practice once the apostles were no longer around.

The outnumbered obedient followers of Jesus continued the apostolic practice wherever they could, for as long as they could. They were labelled “Quartodecimans”, meaning “14th Day-ers”. (The term might even have been a derogatory one.) Those faithful followers were officially persecuted out of existence in the late fourth or early fifth century, by the then-pagan-controlled church.

==============================================================================================

Frequency of communion? For the Reader personally?

It could simply depend on where your loyalty lies.

==============================================================================================

 

[MoreCoffee]

==============================================================================================

Jesus laid only a few commandments on His “footstep followers” (to use a meaningful term).

One was to love one another, as He had loved them (us). (John 13:34, etc.)

Another was to proclaim His death in a special way (until His coming again), as often as they ate this bread and drank this cup. (1 Corinthians 11:23-26)

==============================================================================================

But just what do “this bread” and “this cup” actually mean?

Bearing in mind that the doctrines of transubstantiation and consubstantiation were unknown in apostolic times, the terms can mean only one of two things:
- Normal, everyday bread and normal, everyday wine; or
- The special unleavened bread and the specially prepared wine used by Jews in the Passover (Pesach) commemoration.

As far as I know all wine was prepared in essentially the same way in the first century. Grapes were harvested, crushed, and the juice filtered and allowed to ferment in enclosed containers - either pots, or barrels, or skins - until it was ready for drinking. The same is true of bread if it were unleavened then it was water, salt, and flour made from wheat or whatever grain was grown in the region and if the was leavened then it was water, salt, and the same flour but with some leaven added from a culture kept alive in the household.

Today both wine and bread are made in many different ways with chemical additives to aid rising and to suppress mould and other things. The bread and wine used in a mass are like the ancient bread and wine made from water, salt, and wheat flour in the case of the hosts, and grape juice naturally fermented in the case of wine.

Therefore the only two possible options available to obey the Master’s command are:
- 1. Commemorate His death in that special way at each and every meal:
--- As the early Jewish church could have done because bread and wine were the bases of normal meals;
--- But as we cannot consistently do, because bread or wine are not universal meal bases internationally;
- 2. Commemorate His death once a year on the 14th Nisan, at the time of year associated with that special bread and wine, and more specifically on the day He gave His life for us.

At every shared meal in the mass we do take the bread and wine as our commemoration of the Lord's death until he comes again. What others do I cannot say with confidence because I do not participate in their services. But Catholics have a common meal of consecrated bread and consecrated wine at every mass.

All other practices – weekly, monthly, daily (maybe at multiple times) during special church services, etc., are demonstrably of human origin. They do not conform to Jesus’ specific command.

==============================================================================================

History tells us that the original apostolic church did indeed obey Jesus’ command. It was only after people of pagan background flooded the visible church, that things began to change. In those areas where the pagans dominated, there was a change of practice once the apostles were no longer around.

The outnumbered obedient followers of Jesus continued the apostolic practice wherever they could, for as long as they could. They were labelled “Quartodecimans”, meaning “14th Day-ers”. (The term might even have been a derogatory one.) Those faithful followers were officially persecuted out of existence in the late fourth or early fifth century, by the then-pagan-controlled church.

==============================================================================================

Frequency of communion? For the Reader personally?

It could simply depend on where your loyalty lies.

==============================================================================================