Archdiocese: Communion host turned blood-red due to fungus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic90
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic90

Guest
twincities.com/ci_19546770

A fungus - not a miracle from above - caused a Communion host to turn red this past summer at a South St. Paul church, the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis said Wednesday.

The archdiocese began an “exhaustive biological analysis” of the consecrated host after it was found on the floor of St. Augustine Church following Holy Communion.

Rev. John Echert reported to archdiocese officials that it turned “blood red” after being placed in a cup filled with water. It also did not fully dissolve over several weeks.

“It appeared to be like the blood red of tissue,” Echert told the Pioneer Press in July. “If I had not known what it was, I would have thought that there was maybe a small bloody piece of tissue. It was striking enough that there was no way I could have disposed of the remains of the host at that time with good conscience.”

The wondrous wafer caused Catholics to speculate on Internet blogs, and led the archdiocese to turn it over to an independent scientific laboratory for examination.

“This incident was the result of natural biological causes and should not be considered in any other way,” the archdiocese said in a Wednesday statement.

The decision to examine the host was made by Vicar General Rev. Peter Laird, with the consent of Archbishop Rev. John C. Nienstedt, according to spokesman Dennis McGrath.

“It’s important to make sure when there’s a question like that,” McGrath said. "We can’t assume anything, it requires some investigation.

Advertisement

You can’t just make an assumption. I mean…it isn’t beyond the realm of probability for a faith that believes in miracles."

McGrath said he could not specifically name the fungus that caused the host to turn red because he has not seen the lab report.

One web blogger pointed to the red bacterium, Serratia marcescens, as a possible explanation.

According to Microbe Zoo, a website developed by the Center for Microbial Ecology at Michigan State University, the bacterium grows on bread and communion wafers that have been stored in a damp place.

The site goes so far as to cite Serratia marcescens as the probable cause of the bloodlike substance that a priest discovered on communion bread in 1263, referred to as “The Miracle of Bolsena.”

More recent incidents have pointed to fungal and bacterium contamination, including a highly publicized instance in 2006 when people flocked to a Dallas-area church after a host turned red in a glass.

According to a report on Texas Catholic Online, the Dallas Diocese had the host analyzed by two University of Dallas biology professors who concluded it anything but a miracle.

In a letter to the parish priest, Dallas Bishop Charles Grahmann wrote “… the object is a combination of fungal mycelia and bacterial colonies that have been incubated within the aquatic environment of the glass during the four-week period in which it was stored in the open air.”

H. Corby Kistler, a mycologist and adjunct professor at the University of Minnesota, said Wednesday that Fusarium fungus may have caused a red pigment on the St. Augustine host.

“Fusarium species are common environmental contaminants and often infest wheat and wheat products,” Kistler said.

Echert declined to comment Wednesday on the specifics of the lab result.

He did say he has heard firsthand from curious Catholics since word spread about the host.

“A number parishioners were excited about the possibility,” Echert said. "I received numerous calls from newspapers and radio programs and web sites about the matter. So there was a lot of interest, curiosity, enthusiasm and locally and nationwide, thanks to the web.

“Obviously, we’re disappointed and we hoped that God had provided us with a miracle here but our faith remains steadfast regardless.”
 
I’m glad they gave the communion to an independent group like that; while the result is disappointing, it would be better to disprove its authenticity than to have the faithful believing a false miracle.
 
It’s very much to the credit of the Church that we had scientists study the phenomenon and accept when a natural explanation is given. I’m sure some anti-Catholics out there will use this to make Catholics seem ridiculous somehow, but really it shows the Church to be quite rational and honest on the subject of miracles.

I just hope the process used for the analysis in no way desecrated the Eucharist.
 
I’m assuming the Host was consecrated… which means it was the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. How was He handled by these “independent” scientists? I’m not doubting the cause of the blood-red effect. I’m just worried about how Our Lord was cared for by these people.
 
I’m assuming the Host was consecrated… which means it was the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. How was He handled by these “independent” scientists? I’m not doubting the cause of the blood-red effect. I’m just worried about how Our Lord was cared for by these people.
Well once the Eucharist loses the physical properties (colour, texture etc) of bread, the Real Presence ceases. For example, when it gets digested in your stomach after consumption.

I’m sure the processes of chemical analysis would have removed any appearances of bread, and hence the Real Presence.
 
Well once the Eucharist loses the physical properties (colour, texture etc) of bread, the Real Presence ceases. For example, when it gets digested in your stomach after consumption.
I don’t think the Host turning red due to a fungus counts.
I’m sure the processes of chemical analysis would have removed any appearances of bread, and hence the Real Presence.
That doesn’t make me feel any better. That’s basically desecration of the Most Holy Eucharist.
 
I don’t think the Host turning red due to a fungus counts.

That doesn’t make me feel any better. That’s basically desecration of the Most Holy Eucharist.
No more desecration than consuming it knowing that your stomach acids will do the same. 🤷

Proper procedure when a Host is dropped at Mass, for example, is not to consume it, but to reserve it until after Mass, then dissolve it in clean water, until the point it no longer has the accidents of bread.

The water is normally carefully disposed of, out of respect to the fact that it once was the Host, but there’s nothing to say that after it is dissolved it couldn’t then be scientifically tested. To put a bit of the liquid on a culture plate and test for funguses for example. there’s no desecration because at that point there’s no Real presence remaining.
 
No more desecration than consuming it knowing that your stomach acids will do the same. 🤷
That’s completely different. You are partaking of Christ’s Sacrifice and receiving God Himself made man when you communicate.

You’re not fiddling about with a Host under a microscope.
but there’s nothing to say that after it is dissolved it couldn’t then be scientifically tested. To put a bit of the liquid on a culture plate and test for funguses for example. there’s no desecration because at that point there’s no Real presence remaining
It just seems wrong to me.
 
That’s completely different. You are partaking of Christ’s Sacrifice and receiving God Himself made man when you communicate.

You’re not fiddling about with a Host under a microscope.

It just seems wrong to me.
You have to understand that the real presence, ie Christ, does not stay in those accidents forever. Nor even necessarily for a long time. Not under any circumstances. Whatever you try to do to the Sacred Body and Precious blood the accidents will decompose to the point where the Real Presence, ie Christ, no longer remains.

To be blunt, the physical remains (no longer identifiable as bread and wine, so no longer the body and Blood) of that Host that you and so many millions of others consumed on Sunday have already been flushed down the toilet. Which for mine is an idea with far more ‘ick’ factor than the idea that some other remains (no longer Christ) might have been looked at under a microscope.

He planned it thus, to be only a temporary presence, knowing that if it were not so the scrupulous among us might be tempted to preserve our own waste or resort to equally ridiculous measures, for fear that He might somehow still remain within even when the accidents have long departed.
 
I don’t think the Host turning red due to a fungus counts.

That doesn’t make me feel any better. That’s basically desecration of the Most Holy Eucharist.
The fungus turned it red…the fungus was feeding upon it, so it was no longer identifiable as a host.

Better to do a chemical analysis and determine it was a fungus rather than falsely hold the fungus infected matter up as a miracle. That would be wrong.
 
Proper procedure when a Host is dropped at Mass, for example, is not to consume it, but to reserve it until after Mass, then dissolve it in clean water, until the point it no longer has the accidents of bread.
.
I did not know that. Thanks for sharing. 🙂
 
I’m glad they gave the communion to an independent group like that; while the result is disappointing, it would be better to disprove its authenticity than to have the faithful believing a false miracle.
Indeed … a balanced use of Faith and Science…I concur…it avoided a " false" miracle…and thusly later disappointment …IMHO
 
I did not know that. Thanks for sharing. 🙂
Not that it can’t be consumed, but given how many pairs of feet have trodden on your average Church floor, highly inadvisable and could make you very ill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top