Ian Hoare > wrote in
:


>
>>I'll not include any tasting notes here.
>
> Very sensible, as transubstantiationalists would probably regard it as
> blasphemous! Actually, I think the blasphemy - if it be such - is more
> in using a morally reprehensible name for something that is destined
> for a holy purpose.

Oh dear! that is a bit of a problem isn't it? Better to stick to lambasting
Christ's tears (Lacryma Christi) than any other more substantial portions.