Change sacrament prayer when not using bread/water

[ksfisher]

39 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

 

Seems to me that if we substitute water for wine when water is used instead of wine then if the first statement is ever ignored and something else is used then that wording should be substituted as well.

 

I agree that it would seem as if...but without direction from those who hold the priesthood keys by which the ordinance is administered I would stick with the prayer as revealed in the D&C and modified by the First Presidency as noted in Handbook 2.

[JLHPROF]

30 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I agree that it would seem as if...but without direction from those who hold the priesthood keys by which the ordinance is administered I would stick with the prayer as revealed in the D&C and modified by the First Presidency as noted in Handbook 2.

They already gave us direction in the first handbook quote.  We are not to use anything except bread and water.

Therefore if we are following those who hold the priesthood keys nothing else will be used even if the D&C says it doesn't matter.

But to use juice and bless the water or to use cookies and bless them as bread is pure folly and pharasaical.  You are basically misrepresenting in a prayer.

Edited October 31, 2017 by JLHPROF

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

But to use juice and bless the water or to use cookies and bless them as bread is pure folly and pharasaical.  You are basically misrepresenting in a prayer.

Professor, your position in this matter puzzles me.  I hope you don't mistake my forthrightness for hostility or ill will.  It is neither.  Many times, you have wrung your hands publicly here when those who hold the keys have made what you (who do not hold keys, or at least you don't hold those keys) consider unauthorized changes to ordinances.  Yet here you are, publicly endorsing ad hoc changes in ordinances, the procedure for the precise performance of which is mandated in "black letter" scripture.  Forget handbooks; forget First Presidency letters; forget any other official communication: We're talking about "black letter" scripture here, which, presumably, came from the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself.

I find the juxtaposition of those two things ... curious.

So, when Elder Ezra Taft Benson met with the Latter-day Saints in Europe (see here, last accessed 10/31/2017: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1980/10/prepare-for-the-days-of-tribulation?lang=eng) and they used potato peels in place of the bread, that ordinance was only valid if they said "potato peels" rather than saying "bread"?  At the risk of repeating myself, here's the problem with that position: It's not about what is used for the Sacrament; it's about what Christ is.  The minute the wording is changed to reflect whatever is being used, it becomes less about what Christ is (which is what the Sacrament is supposed to represent) and more about what's being used.

Christ isn't the "living Oreo Cookies." ("Omigosh!   I forgot!  They're not just Oreos!  They're Double Stuf!" )  He's the Living Bread.  And He's not the "living Hawaiian Punch.  He's the Living Water.

 

[ksfisher]

6 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

 

Christ isn't the "living Oreo Cookies." ("Omigosh!   I forgot!  They're not just Oreos!  They're Double Stuf!" )  He's the Living Bread.  And He's not the "living Hawaiian Punch.  He's the Living Water.

 

Amusingly well said.  The tie in to living bread and living water hadn't occurred to me in this context.  

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Amusingly well said.  The tie in to living bread and living water hadn't occurred to me in this context.  

That's because the sacramental prayer says wine.

[strappinglad]

Well, if we want to get picky, juice is mostly water, so is most soda. Besides, tap water is mostly water. Distilled water is really water. Any water from Central America at the time I was there was mostly water with some nasty bugs thrown in for good measure. I guess if you bless the water that is juice you are blessing ONLY the water. The bread  is a bit more problematic however, but bread and cookies and other bread-like materials have some of the same materials. Potato skins are another issue and yet I have had potato doughnuts and banana bread and zucchini bread which are called bread and have some bread ingredients. Then there is bread fruit. Just call what ever you are using, ' bread ' and you will be fulfilling the symbolic purposes ,thank you.

[JLHPROF]

56 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Professor, your position in this matter puzzles me.  I hope you don't mistake my forthrightness for hostility or ill will.  It is neither.  Many times, you have wrung your hands publicly here when those who hold the keys have made what you (who do not hold keys, or at least you don't hold those keys) consider unauthorized changes to ordinances.  Yet here you are, publicly endorsing ad hoc changes in ordinances, the procedure for the precise performance of which is mandated in "black letter" scripture.  Forget handbooks; forget First Presidency letters; forget any other official communication: We're talking about "black letter" scripture here, which, presumably, came from the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself.

I find the juxtaposition of those two things ... curious.

I find the fierce clinging to the sacramental prayer of "water" an interesting approach considering the sacramental prayer NEVER uses the word water in scripture.

D&C 27 which allowed us to use water instead of wine states

• "2 For, behold, I say unto you, that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory—remembering unto the Father my body which was laid down for you, and my blood which was shed for the remission of your sins.

So where this insistence that we say "water" and nothing else comes from I don't know.
Scripture says wine.  Scripture says it doesn't matter what we eat or drink.  And those priesthood holders said we say water instead of wine when we drink water instead of wine.

I don't see ANY logic in your position on this one.

[strappinglad]

If the Church were to go back to using wine instead of water, I as a PFR would strongly object. After seeing the mess Cherrios make after every meeting, I can't imagine the cleaning bill after very Sunday with wine stained rugs and benches, let alone the ruined white shirts.

[Kenngo1969]

55 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

... I don't see ANY logic in your position on this one.

If you don't see "ANY [sic]" logic in my position, then you're not looking hard enough.  I see the logic in your position, I simply disagree with that logic.  I have explained why I disagree at length.  Agree to disagree, as agreeably as possible I suppose.  This will be my last comment on the subject.  This is the fellowship forum, and we're perilously close to contending.

[Igor]

15 hours ago, strappinglad said:

While we are on the subject, I have noticed the actions of some deacons and teachers when they clear the sacrament table , will take the trays back to the prep room and dump the water and scarf the left over bread. That just seems improper to me . I realize that tossing the bread in the trash is also wasteful but ... If the Aaronic priesthood were to drink all the separate water cups that would be a bother to me also. Maybe we should let the bread dry and give it to the birds.

Here we instruct the Aaronic priesthood holders to first separate all bread in a cloth and *after* they cleaned up all the trays and put it in its place, they can consume the bread and actually sometimes they give it to primary children

[The Nehor]

21 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

So, Christ is the living Hawaiian Punch and the living Oreos, then, eh?  Who knew?  

At least you are not praying for God to miraculously transform them into something that will nourish and strengthen the body.