197 thoughts on “The Quick-R-Filler”

  1. They just need to come up with the Quick-R-Sermon.

    * Preaches directly from the Bible
    * No drips, spittle or snot from the preacher
    * Fits all standard topics
    * Introduction in 5 minutes or less
    * No extra-biblical points to ponder
    * Gets 40 amens per minute
    * Quick and easy altar call

  2. Just use a chalice. We rarely use the shot glasses. We walk to the chancel, get a piece of bread and dip it in the cup.

    1. I think this Quick-R-Filler lets you skip the cups altogether. Just aim the little hose and squirt directly into the mouths of your congregants.

  3. Ok this is a joke, right, Darrell? Nobody could be as cheesy as “Quick-R-Filler” for real, right?

    1. It seems to only be popular in the midwest, maybe it hasn’t made it to your neck of the woods :mrgreen:

        1. I think it’s only for the Midwest. Wouldn’t work on the East Coast or West Coast. Maybe not even in the South. Certainly not in Hawaii or Alaska. :mrgreen:

          And, I wonder if they have a special version for Canada.

        2. “Churches all over the Midwest” – everyone else is definitely out. 😀

          It can be a pain living in CA but you’ve gotta love the winter weather. It almost makes up for all of the ridiculous laws. 😉

    2. If it’s a joke, someone took the time to register a domain & get a website “designed” and hosted.

    3. It was my family’s duty to do the communion prep at an IFB church for the better part of 20 years. In fact, our communion trays were the EXACT model shown on the flyer in the OP!

      We would have paid a small fortune to get hold of one of these contraptions. Would have made life so much easier.

      Another thing we’d have paid out the nose for would have been truly wrinkle-free linen. Haha.

    1. Not @ our IFB church, they didn’t! The deacons would meticulously pour all the leftover juice in those teeny cups back into the Welch’s container.

      It resulted in “turned” grape juice a couple times, so they started dumping the leftovers in the sink.

      Wouldn’t want anyone to enjoy the grape juice that hadn’t been transubstantiated & had previously served as a symbol of Christ’s blood. 🙄

      1. When I clean up after Communion, I pour all the leftover into a Styrofoam cup and drink it. Why pour it down the sink and waste good juice?

      2. Years ago I had dinner with an elderly lady who had belonged to the WCTU. She told me I could get some apple juice from the fridge. It was probably 125 proof! I wouldn’t have been able to drive home if I had “enjoyed” a glass. I took one sip, pretended to drink during dinner, and dumped it when I wanted “more” (replaced with water). My dear friend didn’t see very well, so she didn’t notice.

      3. (Dr Jez- It may have been blessed, but ‘transubstantiated’ is what happens to RC wine, not fundy juice. Transubstantiation is when it is literally made into the blood, according to RC doctrine.)

        1. I think that’s why Dr. J said “… HADN’T been transubstantiated” (emphasis mine). 🙂

        2. I’m aware that Fundies don’t believe in transubstantiation. That’s why it seemed so weird that they wouldn’t let PKs or DKs drink the leftovers. I mean, if the juice was a symbol during communion, was it somehow sanctified & separated from all other juice?

  4. The irony for me is next to the pic of the Quick-R-Filler is an ad for a cruise line with a couple holding glasses of white wine. If they only knew they weren’t maintaining their separatism, lol.

  5. I don’t get why the clip art on the Quick-R-Filler has a chalice. Isn’t that like free advertising for the competition?

    1. Ok, the more I look @ this, the funnier it gets.

      Here’s the infomercial (as I imagine it):

      “Revolutionary Communion Prep System”

      The deacons/elders are using a graduated cup system: jumbo > XL > L > M > S > XS > communion cup, spilling the juice everywhere, muttering, “Dagnabbit all to heck!”

      Suddenly, a Mog with greased-back hair and wearing a $3000 exquisitely tailored white suit appears, holding the Quick-R-Filler. “Gentlemen,” he announces dramatically, “let me show you…a BETTER WAY!”

      *cue demo of Quick-R-Filler, complete with awestruck expressions on the faces of the deacons*

      At the conclusion of the demo, the deacons cry in unison, “What must we do to obtain this revolutionary device?”

      The Mog looks directly into the camera with a gleaming smile and says, “Supplies are limited. Order now, and get $10 off your total order. Now is the day of communion revolution! Call today, before the moment passes you by!”


      1. The Honorable Dr. Jezebel,

        Would it be a correct guess to say that you deliberately avoided ending the commercial with: “Call today! Don’t get left behind?”

  6. I am disappointed there is only one testimonial. How will I know if this is the right product to implement a juice bong?!

    1. You crack me up, TCB. That thing would be so easy to turn into a bong that it isn’t even funny.
      That makes me wonder– Did someone modify a bong design to make the Quick-R-Filler?

  7. Having filled all those little cups on multiple occasions, I’m all for a better way. U found a container similar to a picnic ketchup squeezer to be effective.

    I personally don’t care if you use grape juice or wine. I just want the spirit of the observance to be worshipful, not one of vengeance for partaking with hidden sin or rebellion.

    1. Well, considering that welches was originally developed as a replacement for communion wine, it all fits to me.

  8. Oddly enough….This device is similar to the machines that every Fundy U owns which are used to dispense their precious honorary doctorates!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

    I definitely see a developing patent infringement suit coming… 👿

    1. Dispensing honorary doctorates is easy.
      Just put a small TNT charge under a large pile of cow manure, stand way, way back, and press the detonator button.

    1. I wonder what the percentages would be of when IFB churches have communion. I’ve heard people here on SFL say they attended church where it was rare, but the IFB churches I attended (at least four) over 40 years always had it faithfully once a month.

      1. Our church had communion once a quarter.

        So did my FIL’s church.

        The church my spouse pastored had done communion twice a year; we changed it to quarterly.

        Our last Fundy-lite church attempted to do it once a month on family Sunday (when all kids stayed in main service). I think the reason they quit was because some parents (read: us) were letting their unsaved kids partake. 👿

      2. Every church I knew of growing up in IL had it monthly. It wasn’t till I went to PCC that I even heard of places doing it quarterly or annually. I can see the extra work and time involved doing it monthly, but annually seems to miss the point if there are places that practice it that rarely.

      3. Our church had it quarterly. Our current church (non-denom) has it once a month.

      4. In the church I grew up in, we had communion TWICE between 1997 and 2002 (the years I went there). And one time was right after a church split and it was just to prove a point about how unified we were after “they went out from us because they were not of us.” 🙄

  9. We Episcopalians have no use for such gadgets. One chalice and real wine, the way the Lord intended.

    1. And you know Jay, I have really found it to be much more reverent. And more a community act. What I haven’t found is the hammer of guilt, the condemnation that if we took it with unconfessed sin, God would git us. Certainly I feel very different at the altar rain than I did, fumbling with a cup of juice and a cranker in the pew.

        1. Yes, of course. George caught it, and I didn’t. I’m dreadfully sick with the flu, and more than usual is getting by me. (Yes, I had my shot last fall. Apparently for the other strain.)

      1. Absolutely, Luitgard! We have an “Altar Call” every time we celebrate the Eucharist!

        “The gifts of God for the People of God. Take them in remembrance that Christ died for you, and feed on him in your hearts by faith, with thanksgiving.”

      2. There is a significant difference between the theology behind traditional communion and the theology of communion practiced in “baptistic” churches. In the eucharist (my Lutheran tradition just calls it communion, holy communion, or the Lord’s Supper), God comes to the sinner in an act of imparting grace and forgiving sins. In the other, the sinner approaches God and must be careful to examine himself and be without unconfessed sin spas not to invite damnation. The former is new testament theology; the latter is old testament theology.

        1. Well said. I remember in the Baptist church I attended it was often preached that you shouldn’t take communion unworthily–if you had sin in your life, etc. And so often, people would not come forward for communion–which almost became a badge of piety.
          When I came to the Methodist Church, the invitation to the Table was all about Grace. If you are a sinner, you need to come to the Table for the forgiveness and grace you need to overcome is found here in the real Presence of Christ.
          For the Baptist it is a symbol and ritual. For those who hold to a higher understanding of the Sacrament it is a place of Grace, an encounter with God.

        2. It seems to me that a person without sin would not need communion.

          One of my favorite hymns (by Joseph Hart) says,
          If you tarry till you’re better,
          You will never come at all.

          Let not conscience make you linger,
          Not of fitness fondly dream;
          All the fitness He requireth
          Is to feel your need of Him.


        3. It’s a great hymn, no matter how you slice it.

          And I really mean great. These days everything is said to be awesome or lengendary or whatever, but this one is great for real.

        4. Hmmmm. In the Greek Orthodox churches I’ve attended the priest warns about partaking unworthily and most people at the mass DO NOT come forward. I think you’re reading a lot of Luther into every Eucharistic practice.

      3. Dear Liutgard, I hope you get well soon. Like you, I hate to fumble with a cranker in the pew.

        1. Dear BJg,

          This was priceless: “I hate to fumble with a cranker in the pew.”

          That makes me giggle.


        2. Well, bugger. Funny thing is, I was remembering trying to juggle a fussy child and a hymnal and the cup and the itty-bitty *CRACKER*… maybe the typo wasn’t far off!

          Still sick. Have a Dr appt on Friday.

    2. Our parish experimented once with white wine rather than red; it met with vocal disapproval from parishioners. The least uncomplimentary comment was that the white wine was the plasma of Christ. 😯

      1. The problem with “white” wine is that it’s actually almost clear.

        I once had a chalice of white wine and, because the inside of the chalice was gold-plated, I couldn’t tell whether there was actual wine in it or not.

        1. Jay, at my catholic church we also use white wine. I believe the reason is we use a gold plated chalice and the red wine would stain the chalice.

      2. One church we attended would use red wine and white grape juice so that if anyone did not wish to use wine, it was easy to tell the difference.

      3. “The least uncomplimentary comment was that the white wine was the plasma of Christ.” 😯


        That is hilarious!

  10. So, want to bet that it’s just a modified Welch’s cap, with a bit of tubing and a easily-broken valve at the end (oh, and don’t forget the gravity feed stand). At least they throw in shipping for the $50…

      1. BG,

        Do you remember the advertisements for “Sea Monkeys?”
        Were those things actually brine shrimp? Talk about false advertising.

        1. “Sea Monkeys” are still being sold, and they are, exactly, brine shrimp.

          There’s nothing wrong with keeping a tank of brine shrimp, but if you are expecting them to be little humanoid merpeople who live in underwater castles, like in the cartoons that advertise them, then you are going to be sorely disappointed.

          Here’s a typical ad:

          And here’s what you actually get (greatly magnified view):

    1. “Free shipping does not apply to Alaska, Hawaii or outside the USA.”

      Somebody should tell them about Flate Rate shipping with USPS. It saves me a ton on sending stuff to the Alaska branch of my family (and it works for Hawaii, too).

    2. I just noticed that the “testimonial” says this:
      “As with any product, changes come and in 2013 the juice we purchase changed the size of their cap, thus making our [Quick-R-Filler] filling system obsolete.”

      So it only works with one size and style of juice bottle cap!

      1. They only sell one size bottle in the Grocery Isles. Shipping is expensive to foreign places.

        1. I did wonder if we should buy an invention based on the recommendation of a committee that doesn’t seem to have a single member with enough mechanical aptitude to think of pouring juice from one bottle into another …

      2. The cap size change was clearly the work of the devil to make it harder for Christians to take communion.

  11. It’s so easy to order. Just print the order form, fill it out, and mail it in with a check or money order. No kidding.

  12. For a minute I thought this read “Popcorn for Communion Services.” Now there’s an image that’s rather fun. 😀

    1. Popcorn distributes itself. Just leave the top off of the popper, put it in the center of the sanctuary, and plug it in.

  13. Seems to me that the system this thing “replaces” (pictured with the red X over it on the about page) would work just as well. And it wouldn’t be subject to changes in bottle designs either.

  14. Ever since back when I was sometimes in charge of setting up the Communion table, I have wanted to use white grape juice. I wonder what the reaction would be, from the mog on down, when the covering was removed and the purple juice wasn’t there.

    1. Reminds me of an “angels on the head of a pin” discussion I once heard on a Christian radio station about whether it was okay with the Scriptures to use tomato juice instead of grape juice. (Apparently some missionary claimed to have access to the former but not the latter.) Conclusion: tomatoes grow on vines, so they are the fruit of the vine just like grapes!! Ta-da!!

      1. Riiiiight. Not only are they New World, but they a *nightshade*. For a people who are so flippin’ literal about so many things (and not, when convenient), do they really think Jesus would have served anything that came from a plant that would have been seen as poisonous?

        Besides, the best use of tomato juice is to throw booze and a celery stick in it. Heh. Now there’s a picture!

  15. 2 questions:
    1. Is it strong enough for a keg stand?
    2. Why is it funnier to me to keep reading it Quick-Are-Filler?

  16. Hey! A product you will use four times a year, after someone reminds you that the church’s bylaws require a quarterly Lord’s Supper.

  17. do they have a device to mass produce the little pills of wonder bread that goes with the juice?

    1. Worst communion I ever attended (at the Bible church my parents attended before they became fundies) offered crunched up saltines for communion one time because the Christian bookstore was out of the hard-tack-like substance that they sold as “communion wafers.”

      1. Yup. Nothing like a lack of preparation to engender a sense of security, eh?

        We get ours from a mail order company, quite some time ahead. Pretty sure the Altar Guild is responsible for that.

  18. “The quicker filler: Now you can have only one element of the Lord’s supper just like before, but with less hassle!”

    1. There was a church in the area of my seminary which used those pre-filled cups with wafers for their communion. We called it fast food Jesus.

        1. If I remember correctly, there was a seal over the grape juice. The wafer was on top of that seal, and covered by another seal….so you open the top seal, find the wafer, then open another seal, and find the grape juice.

          The mega church that used this as their communion elements didn’t have any liturgy. So you would finish singing the worship songs, the singer would leave the stage, there was some Scripture flashed on the screens. Then suddenly you are passed this tray with these cup and wafers sealed together, with no words of presentation. Everyone would simply receive communion and then a bag was passed for you to discard the remaining cup. I never have had such a flippant celebration of the Lord’s Table.

        2. I think this may have been designed so astronauts can take communion in space.
          There’s something like that mentioned in “Packing for Mars,” by Mary Roach, but it’s been a while since I read it.
          Another topic covered is how Muslim astronauts are supposed to pray facing Mecca while in a vehicle that constantly changes its direction relative to Mecca.

        3. Those look like those little mini-coffee creamers that people are always stealing from restaurants to get some free creamer.

          @ Big G: Apropos of nothing in particular, has there ever been a Muslim astronaut?

        4. DS: I asked Google this question, and apparently there have been nine Muslim astronauts so far, most of them on Soviet/Russian spacecraft:


          Here’s a little more detail on the problem of how to pray facing Mecca while you’re rapidly orbiting the earth:


          Related problem: How do you observe Ramadan in orbit when your space vehicle experiences 12 sunrises and 12 sunsets every day?

        5. That’s interesting, Big G. Although I can’t imagine that the Soviets were particularly solicitous of the religious needs of their cosmonauts!!

    1. “Are you washed (are you washed)
      In the Blood (In the Blood)
      In the soul cleansing blood of the Lamb?
      Are your garments spotless? Do they need dry-cleaned?
      Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb?”

        1. Very odd, Semp. I got it off YouTube with no trouble.

          You might try going to YouTube directly, typing in “there’s power in the blood” on its search function. It’s a video of cute children singing the song, incorporating some sign language.

        2. I just tried going to YouTube directly and easily found the video among several.

          Have faith! You can do it, Semp!

      1. My grandma Ruth, after the onset of alzheimers, sang, “there’s flower in the blood, flower in the blood!”

        She was a sweetheart.


  19. Ahhhh, nothing like splitting the bottle into several cuplets instead of one single cup! Sanitation and convenience, you know.

    And who cares about the imagery?

    With the one cup, we all, as a group partake of Him. We all drink from the One Cup. We are one body. We are saved together. We are a community. We together as living stones are part of a great Spiritual House, the Temple of God. Nothing any of us do is without the other.

    With the single cups, it is all about me and Jesus (who cares about you?). The Blood is parceled out into individual packets, as it were. No need for community. It speaks of the rugged individualism we like to see. As individual stones we are not good for building anything, but we sure can break a lot of windows!

    Yes, yes, I have been in myriads of communion services with the individual cups and the “me and Jesus” individualism always present. It was not until my introduction to the Episcopal Church that I began to see the emphasis on community in the New Testament.

    1. First, let me say I’m talking out of ignorance of churches that use one chalice because I’ve never attended a church that did so.

      I do think convenience is part of it. Jesus had 11 disciples there, unlike a church that may have 100 or more.

      Also, I don’t think individual cups destroy the picture of unity. With a single chalice, everyone drinks from the same cup, but they drink at separate times. With individual cups, we actually all drink together at the same time – I’ve always thought that conveyed tremendous unity, at least to me.

      1. I understand. I didn’t know either. And I am not saying that single cups mean the church doesn’t believe in the communion of Saints.

        But the symbolism in Scripture is potent. As a Baptist I only saw symbolism the way I was taught to see it. I also learned to sneer at tradition.

        But let me give you an invitation. You don’t have to accept, of course. But I think it would be worth your experiencing it. Go visit your local Episcopal Church. They practice open communion. You would not be excluded.

        And I think you would enjoy the experience, even if you never went back.

        I am not talking such drivel as to say that we are the “true church.” Grief! I have had my fill of such. But the service is filled with Scripture like you probably have never experienced. And the service encompasses the whole of the gospel, not leaving you with a call to repentance like the regular Baptist services do.

        I don’t have the eloquence to say what is in my heart about the meaning the services have. And knowing that, with minor variations, Anglican and Episcopalian all over the world are reading the same Scriptures, affirming the same statement of Faith, worshiping the same Lord. We do indeed engage in “Common Prayer.”

        So you have an invitation. Let me know what you think of it, if and when you take it up.


        1. There a great deal there caught hold for me. There is something very powerful that happens when, for instance, we’re praying the Prayers of the People, and I know that at that same time thousands of people are united with us in the same prayers… practically knocks me down, to think of it.

        2. Thank you for the suggestion, rtgmath. There is an Episcopal church in town, and we’ve done a couple community activities with them. I may see if I can attend a service sometime.

          Another question: you say, “Who cares about the imagery?” but I also feel that the imagery is broken if people just dip bread in the cup. I feel personally that the cup should be drunk on its own. (I don’t remember which church does that, but I remember reading it.) To me, that seems like giving in to convenience.

        3. I partake of the cup. My daughter (14) dips the wafer (the bread) in the cup when she attends.

          Dipping is something that is allowed, and is appropriate for, say, those who for some reason cannot or should not drink alcohol.

          I do care about imagery. My question was sort of a response to the way people so lightly treat it for convenience sake. It is almost like the question, “What is truth?” Too many people have very little regard for it. This is not to say that there are not many facets to an issue, but a lot of people simply make up “facts” as they please to try to “prove” (sell) their point.

        4. “I also feel that the imagery is broken if people just dip bread in the cup. I feel personally that the cup should be drunk on its own. (I don’t remember which church does that, but I remember reading it.) To me, that seems like giving in to convenience.”

          @pastor’s wife:

          In the Orthodox Church, the chalice is prepared by putting the Body in the chalice after the Epiclesis. So the Faithful partake of the cup by receiving from a spoon, both body and blood together. We have done it this way from the beginning. There is no loss of imagery there, and if you know anything about the Orthodox Church, you know that we don’t much care to give anything up for convenience’s sake. 😛

    2. Another thing about stones is they are natural and not the end result of a manufacturing process. They are also of different sizes, shapes, and colors and are chosen (and perhaps individually modified) by the builder for use in constructing a thing of beauty. Bricks, on the other hand, are manufactured, are pretty uniform in appearance, and are interchangeable in function. Too many Fundy institutions prefer bricks.

  20. I went to a service at a Methodist church once. For communion, we broke off a piece of bread, dipped it in the large chalice the pastor was holding, and ate.

    1. At some Plymouth Brethren “Assemblies” they use a loaf of bread everyone breaks a part from. I was Plymouth Brethren before I became Baptist.

    2. This somewhat complicated and (in my wife’s opinion) particularly nasty form of taking communion is known as intinction!! (Yay for new made-up Christian words!)

    3. I understand that is true for many churches- at least that it is an option. For someone concerned about using the communal lip of the cut, such as someone with a compromised immune system, it sort of make sense, except that the germ opportunities aren’t a whole lot different. But it makes them feel better, I guess.

      I figure I’ve been exposed to everyone else’s germs by the time we’re done passing the peace anyway. 🙄

  21. When I looked at SFL this morning, right next to the Quick-R-Filler picture was a banner ad that stated “THE SMARTEST ITEMS FOR THE SMARTEST PEOPLE IN THE GALAXY”.

    I don’t believe ThinkGeek carries this product, though. I do love their site. Some day, when I’m rich, I’m going to buy one of each item from them.

  22. All this caters to the departure of the New Testament’s Agape feast, which was a full meal.

    Believers enjoyed a full meal together which included the bread and the wine as a part of the meal, not separate. It was a celebration, not a introspective funeral durge.

    Man-made tradition seems to breed commercial innovation.

    1. The Divine Liturgy is anything but an introspective funeral dirge, BigRedOne, and we do have an agape meal after (although this has been largely reduced to “coffee hour” in most parishes, it’s still a communal meal).

      What makes the difference is not whether we partake of the Gifts as part of the meal or whether we partake of them separately before the meal.

      What makes the difference is whether or not we see the offering and reception of the Gifts as a joyous occasion or one of sadness.

      I can’t imagine a service would be anything but a funeral dirge when the idea is, as it is held in the Roman communion, anyway, that we are sacrificing (or re-sacrificing, or participating in the sacrifice of) Christ.

      But when, as it is held in the Orthodox Church, we are offering the offering of Thanksgiving, and receiving in return, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, the _risen_ and _living_ Body and Blood of our _risen_ and _living_ Lord, who was sacrificed for us, and rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, then it can be nothing but a celebration, a reverie, and moment of grace shining forth with healing in it’s wings.

      This is even more so the case when we partake separately from a regular meal, having prepared ourselves through prayer and fasting. The Body of Christ is given as food for the world. Mixing that in as a normal part of a normal, mundane meal, seems to cheapen the Gifts, making them just plain old stuff to be eaten with the rest of the plain old stuff.

      The current ways were developed as a safeguard against abuses of the type Paul addresses in his letter to the Corinthians.

      1. Even in the Roman celebration of the Eucharist–which was the ground work for the Episcopal and Methodist and Lutheran and etc. celebration, the participating in the sacrifice of Christ is not about a funeral but is the full story of Creation to Resurrection to coming Kingdom. in the liturgy the celebration of being freed from our slavery to sin and death is announced. And because of our freedom we offer ourselves as living and holy sacrifices in union with Christ’s offering for us.
        The fullness of the liturgy includes the healing of all Creation as we sit at the Lord’s Table in person.
        The Table–like the Hebrew celebration of the Passover–covers the entire story, not just part.

        1. Leanne: There is much talk of liturgy. I’ve found much of it to be a blessing in the sense of the direction with which it causes the human heart and mind to direct its attention. I wouldn’t say there isn’t liturgy without merit. Liturgy is merely patterns in how we worship publicly.

          Liturgy, however, from the IFB perspective is fully contained within the bulletin and directed by the so-called “Pastor.” Liturgy in other circles is directed usually by a Bishop or Priest and is really less about the Bishop or Priest and more about liturgy itself. That’s just my opinion spoken from a limited knowledge!

          In 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 there is no liturgy in the gathering of the ekklesia, or “church.” Christ is the head and the Holy Spirit dispenses gifts according to His good pleasure and in the measure fitting to His purposes. There is no clergy. There is no laity. The “order” is accomplished according to Paul’s instruction here and throughout the NT. There is no chaos where the Holy Spirit is governing. The fact the Holy Spirit is quite capable of directing the body of Christ seems difficult for us type-A humans to grasp. We have to be in control, and liturgy is the answer. It’s safe. This way the less attractive members won’t “make common” what’s happening in the gathering by exercising their gift(s) publicly (even though 1 Cor 14:26 allows such).

          You see, the church is to be different from the surrounding pagan culture, not like it. What seems common to us is quite remarkable to Jesus Christ. You are right in that the “Table” covers the entier story! I’m just weary of the ceremonial practice that takes away from the horizontal relationship between members of Christ’s body and we share together, face-to-face, the partaking of these elements in the context of a “common” meal as demonstrated throughout the NT.

          Leanne, I’m not being critical of you personally. I’ve enjoyed reading your comments. Though your perspective is different than mine, I regard your words with as much contemplation as I can muster! There is much, I’m sure, which we can share in our dialogue and profit.


      2. SteveA, I suppose I’m speaking on the typical Baptist communion.

        You wrote: “This is even more so the case when we partake separately from a regular meal, having prepared ourselves through prayer and fasting. The Body of Christ is given as food for the world. Mixing that in as a normal part of a normal, mundane meal, seems to cheapen the Gifts, making them just plain old stuff to be eaten with the rest of the plain old stuff.”

        In all actuality, it was a common meal where the bread and wine were enjoyed. It wasn’t meant to be a ceremony. Nowhere in the NT is the Lord’s Supper, or the subsequent breaking of bread, portrayed as ceremony or some supernatural event. Our Lord doesn’t even communicate this. As far as the Passover is concerned, our Lord was the fulfillment; not only of the Passover, but the entire OT law, both ceremonial and moral. I don’t believe that there is anything in the NT that requires believers to adhere to those “shadows.”

        There is simplicity to church life in the NT that we’ve strayed from over the last 1,700 years, and since the reformation in particular.

        As far as the abuses addressed by Paul, he was referring to the manner in which they participated in the 1 Corinthians 14 style of meeting. It appears that the wealthier members did not wait for the other members who were not able to come until later (perhaps after their work). When they arrived there was nothing for them, and those that didn’t wait were filled and some were drunk.

        I’m not sure relegating communion to officiating clergy and passive laity in a ceremonial setting is the answer. It certainly isn’t anywhere to be found in the NT.

        I may not fully understand where you’re coming from as far as the Gifts in relation to communion. Also, I’m not pretending to know your perspective in light of your theological training and experience within the “Orthodox Church.”

        Thank you for taking the time to share your views!


        1. @BigRedOne:

          Thanks for taking time to reply. To give you some idea of who I am and where I’m coming from: I was raised IFB, and graduated GSBC ’06 w/ BA in Pastoral Theology.

          In 2010, I was received into the Orthodox Church. The story of how I landed there is an interesting one, but a long one, so I’ll spare you the details.

          Suffice it to say that along the way I got involved with the house church movement, so I am more than familiar with the idea of doing communion as a simple meal, with no ceremony whatsoever.

          I’d like to address your concerns one at a time:

          1. “In all actuality, it was a common meal where the bread and wine were enjoyed. It wasn’t meant to be a ceremony. Nowhere in the NT is the Lord’s Supper, or the subsequent breaking of bread, portrayed as ceremony or some supernatural event.”

          A cursory glance is all that is required (although the same conclusion can be reached by deep perusal as well) to show that it is, in fact, a ceremony: the ceremony of Passover. The structure of the entire thing, as celebrated initially by our Lord Himself, and recorded in the Gospels — particularly John, but the synoptics as well — is the structure of the Passover meal as practiced at that time. Furthermore, to show that He did not mean to overthrow this, He says, “As often as you eat _this_ bread, and drink _this_ cup…” (emph. mine)

          And Paul writes, saying that he delivered to the Corinthians that which was delivered to Him, _how_ the Lord took bread…etc. Again, he says, “in like manner…” to begin his relation of the cup.

          So it is a defined way, a manner, a ceremony, complete with pronouncements (“this is my body…this is my blood”), motions (“he took bread, and blessed it, and broke it”, “and when He had dipped it, and gave it”, “and when they had sung a hymn, they went out”, etc.).

          I could say more, but I hope this will suffice.

          2. “As far as the Passover is concerned, our Lord was the fulfillment; not only of the Passover, but the entire OT law, both ceremonial and moral.”

          And I agree, as does Paul. However, there is a difference between fulfillment and ending. We no longer sacrifice goats and bulls because Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. And what was sacrificed, but His Body and His Blood? He says so Himself: “This is my body, which is broken for you…This is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you.”

          Furthermore, it is evident that He expects the Faithful to partake of that Body and Blood, and so enter into the new covenant, in that He says, “Take, eat”, and again, “drink ye all of it”.

          And that this practice was not a one-time thing, Paul witnesses, as does Luke. “We knew him in the breaking of the bread.” And again, “they joined in the Apostles teaching, and communion, and in the prayers, and in the breaking of the bread.”

          And lest you say that these things are all metaphorical, again Paul prevents you, saying, “behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?” And likewise, the writer of Hebrews agrees: “We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.”

          3. “the 1 Corinthians 14 style of meeting”

          First off, I’d like to point out that 14 is not separate from 10-13, but rather the finishing touches.

          Furthermore, none of 10-14 is plenary. Paul says at the end, “And the rest I will set in order when I come.” Meaning that what he has just written is the bare bones — enough to keep them busy until he gets there — but that he’ll get them fully “dialed in” upon his arrival. So it is less than useful to get the final shape of the service from the bare descriptions he gives, or to act as though what he wrote was the end-all be-all of how to do church.

          4. “I’m not sure relegating communion to officiating clergy and passive laity in a ceremonial setting is the answer. It certainly isn’t anywhere to be found in the NT.”

          First of all, the laity are anything but passive. They are to praying, providing their Amen, singing, teaching, etc. Also, in Orthodox ecclesiology, the laity is the body of Christ. The two are synonymous. The “clergy” are simply the Orders within the Priesthood that are tasked (among other things) with the preparation and presentation of the Gifts.

          The entire Priesthood (meaning, the whole Church) has tasks and gifts, as distributed by the Holy Spirit. This includes the Order of the Deacons, the Presbyters (aka priests), the Bishops, the Singers, the Doorkeepers, the Exorcists, the Teachers, etc. etc. etc.

          Or did you think our Royal Priesthood was honorary or in thought only?

          You use the term “relegating”. I think a much better term (more in line with the reality of the charge) would be “entrusting”.

          Even in the “common meal” paradigm, the Scripture is clear that there are those who are set aside specifically by the Holy Spirit and entrusted with the administration of the meal. A simple reading of Acts 7 should suffice for this point.

          I know I’ve gone really long, but I’ve tried to keep it succinct. Hopefully, you can see how what we do is in fact the practice of the Scriptures (and I haven’t even started in on the witness of the early fathers!).

          Let me know if you have any questions. Perhaps start a forum thread to discuss?

        2. “There is simplicity to church life in the NT that we’ve strayed from over the last 1,700 years, and since the reformation in particular.”

          I think Baptists like to discount just how early Eucharistic theology entered into the church. I think it is most likely present in Ignatius and was certainly there by the time of Justin Martyr. I do not personally find it in Papias, however.

          I agree that it is not clear in the New Testament, however, a fairly literal reading of certain passages can be used to support it.

          So I’d move your estimate back a little. Eucharistic theology was present by at least AD 130 and probably by AD 105. At the very least, it was taught by people who were taught by people taught by the Apostles themselves.

        3. I did not feel you being critical. Liturgy is a tool to tell us our story as found in Scripture and interpreted throughout the history of the Church. And I understand the baptist liturgy as different to the liturgy of the Roman church, Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran, etc.

          As Elijah points out, the early church had liturgy quite early–within 100 years of Christ, we find the liturgy written down.
          And I think it is part of the Baptist/ fundamental tradition to say they are trying to get back to Biblical Christianity–only what is found in Scripture. (AT least that is what I was taught) But the liturgy and wording is found so close to the time of the New Testament having been written.
          I am not trying to make a case for liturgy. People experience God through different liturgies.
          When you equate some liturgy to funeral dirges or to state that the laity is passive is to discount the places others are experiencing God. It may not be your cup of tea, but it is meaningful to many of us. Reciting the story from Creation to the New Heaven and New Earth reminds me who I am and whose I am. I am participating as a lay person just as much as I am participating as a clergy person.
          No Episcopalian or Methodist or Catholic or Orthodox Christian is going to deny traditions play a large part in our faith. We do not believe the Christian faith was created in a vacuum or has evolved in a vacuum. Tradition and theologies have shaped how we interpret Scripture. Its the same for those of the Baptist faith, they just don’t want to admit that tradition and theologians have influenced their interpretation. They are seeking to have this pure “biblical” faith but no matter what our views are, we cannot erase what Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, Zwingli, Moody, Graham, Piper, Wright–have all done to shape Christianity. Our understanding of Scripture has been shaped by those who lived between Christ and now. Knowing the lens we look at Scripture through rather than denying the lenses exist is most healthy.

        4. “I’m not sure relegating communion to officiating clergy and passive laity in a ceremonial setting is the answer. It certainly isn’t anywhere to be found in the NT.”

          Actually, every Baptist Church I have ever attended relegates it to officiating clergy and passive laity. Even if they deny having such. At my IFB church, only the deacons were allowed to distribute the wafers, nubs, or whatever you wish to call communion crackers. Only the deacons were allowed to pass the cups.

          In the Episcopal tradition, there is no such thing as a passive laity. I found out a long time ago that misconceptions abound, and the willingness of people to forsake their misconceptions when presented with different information is usually minimal.

          My suggestion is that you find out. Visit an Episcopal Church. Ask questions.

          As for the Catholic Church, the liturgy is similar, but I do not know what differences there are. We use a common lectionary for Scripture reading.

          But again, misconceptions abound and people who should want to know the facts are usually more comfortable with their misconceptions than they are with the actual facts.

          I attempted to correct a deacon at my church on a point or two about Catholic practice of prayer, and he wasn’t interested. He wanted to make the point that Catholics were idolaters, when the facts show otherwise.

  23. I guess Im a little thrown off by this Episcopal talk as well as Grape juice/real juice,loaf a bread/breakin bread, open/closed, member/non-member, raise glasses agianst evil forces, whiskey for men beer for horses.

    Not sure who’s a former IFB, present fundie or just makin funnie and never been a whitey, tighty fundie wunny. But it would make a great fundie novel to tell the story of how a person hurdles the wall between the IFB (quack)mire and into the cow pies of an Episcopalian church.

    1. I don’t usually go out and out and say someone on here is being mean, but calling the Episcopalian church cow pies is mean! (and I’m a Southern Baptist.)

      1. Thank you, Beth D!

        Actually, we’ve been called worse. ”
        “Whiskeypalians,” for example.

        And properly the churches are Episcopal and are filled with Episcopalians and visitors.

        (Episcopal = adjective; Episcopalian – noun)

        1. Whiskeypalians sounds tasty. I’ve always believed Holy Day celebrations should involve good food and good alcohol.

    2. Dear APVF,

      Thank you for your compassion and genuine concern for our spiritual welfare as evidenced by your warning us to avoid bad churches. Thank you also for the kind and gracious way with which you did this. May I gently point out, however; that in your zeal, you seem to have neglected to enlighten us as to which churches we should be attending.

      Again, bless you for your compassion, and if you’re going to be on the roads tonight, drive safely. I’m assuming you’re here because the AA meeting you were planning to crash was cancelled due to weather.

      All the Best,


  24. There is one deacon in our church (nondenominational but its really Baptist) who doesn’t trust the congregants to pass the grape juice. If you are seated on the aisle, he will hold the tray and let us take out cups, but won’t let me pass it if there is a space between me and other folks seated on the same pew. I guess he’s afraid one of us senior citizens will spill it. We’ve become pretty liberal – even allow one lady deaconess to participate.

    1. I’ve actually often wondered how the “pass the rickety tray with brim-full cups of purple grape juice” method of communion hasn’t caused more spills and mishaps. You’d think there would be churches across the country with dark purple stains on the carpet and pews!!

      1. I’ve wondered that myself, ever since I was 11, and accidentally dropped an offering plate full of change. Naturally, the floor was tile, so not only did it make an unearthly clatter, the money clattered over half of the church. 😳 When you’re 11, it is the end of the world! I have to wonder what it would have looked like if it had been a communion tray. A murder scene, likely.

        1. If the plate had been filled with bills, not coins, dropping the plate wouldn’t have made such a clatter. 😳

        2. Well, it was the 70s (inflation and all), and I suspect it was Sunday School. At that particular church we all met together for a bit before going to our classes, and there was an offering then.

  25. Apologies!! ‘the cow pies of the IFB into the quack(mire) of the Episcopal church’. Better?

    I’m confused, am I only supposed to make fun of fundies or can I have some fun with guys in goofy outfits praying for my forgiveness? Oop there I go again.

    1. Well this site is called Stuff Fundies Like.

      You can always start a blog called Stuff Episcopalians Like.

    2. There are a lot of things about all denominations which offer ample material to poke fun at. Unfortunately what we find funny is not always funny to others. And the truth is many people on this forum have been hurt by Christians and especially fundamentalism and so we bleed all over each other on this forum.

      What I hear in your words are a lot of pain caused by Christianity, not just fundamentalism. Perhaps I am mistaken and hearing the wrong things in your words but that is what I hear. And if I am correct, I am sorry for the pain caused to you in the name of Christ.

  26. HaHa Leanne your to sensitive to comments from people you know nothing about. Im sorry I made “have some fun” read as though Im in pain.

    1. I guess we both read each other wrong. I wasn’t offended by any of your statements so I am not sure why you are telling me I am too sensitive.
      There is an edge in your humor–that is ok. And it can at times indicate pain. As I stated, I could be wrong since I don’t know you…obviously am. I don’t know why you are apologizing since I stated I could be understanding your humor wrong anyways.

  27. My church uses a large chalice that all may drink from, but then we’re Romish Papists.

Comments are closed.