Can one get sick from the Eucharist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter holdencaulfield
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Namesake said:
OK, you are quite correct.

The deal is that the wine has not actually changed. It’s still wine. Various microorganisms can grow well in wine. But more to the point, the bugs get on the chalice. There isn’t anything particularly special about the metal cup that will prevent transmission of those bugs. It’s ridiculously superstitious to think that because of transubstantiation, which isn’t at all science, people will be protected against disease transmission. It’s really impossible to believe that>
Click to expand...
Except I wouldn’t say it’s “superstitious,” because for Catholics there is-- there should be-- true faith on this matter. It is, however, presumptious to assume that the germs on the chalice won’t act like “real” germs because the cup is holding the Precious Blood. There is nothing in our doctrine that should lead us to think this.

The germs are still germs, and if there are any germs on the chalice, we still have just as good a chance of getting sick from them. The Church has never taught otherwise. It almost seems to me that you’d be “testing” God to drink from the chalice (knowing that it’s covered in sick germs) and fully expect that you won’t get ill.
 
To Seminarian X:
My comment to your post was a little bit under the belt because it was almost ad hominem. I apologize for that, you have the right to your opinions given that they do not like in contradiction with the Church teachings.

To Namesake:
I think that you are too concerned about this life that it is like a grain of sand in the desert when you compare it to the rest of our eternal life. My question is do I rather suffer in this life because of germs from the chalice and accept Christ present in the Host or do I rather play it safe and avoid a deeper relationship with Christ? My take is that Christ died to save my eternal body and soul from hell and not this corrupted body from death.
 
My own personal opinion is that one can catch a lot more (and possibly nastier) bugs from a public restroom than from the Cup.

I’ve received communion in the Eastern tradtition (from the spoon) for nearly a year and have yet to get sick from it, near as i can tell. Sure, I get the occasional cold or sniffle, but I chalk that up to being in contact with other human beings. I’m more likely to catch a cold my baby’s picked up from his older sibling or my husband, who is a teacher, than from the Eucharist. I wouldn’t let a fear of getting sick keep me from receiving communion.

Bear in mind, in the Eastern tradition, one is to open one’s mouth and the priest is supposed to turn the spoon over so the bread “falls” into one’s mouth–we are not supposed to close our mouth around the spoon. It’s much different than drinking from the common cup.

Hey, if the Roman Catholics go back to the spoon method, maybe this debate will be settled once and for all! 😉 j/k
 
As far as I know, there’s nothing that says we won’t get sick when there are viruses alongside the Precious Blood or on the rim of the Chalice.

Yes, the wine is, Sacramentally, Jesus’ Blood (and His Body). But physically it’s still wine so yes, germs can still enter and infect someone. But it is the germ’s fault, not the Precious Blood’s.

If so, I might as well drink that Holy Water standing on the home altar (quite old; it already has this greenish tinge) and not expect to get sick. After all, the water is blessed and God will protect me from any possible disease since the water is blessed, right?

Or as an alternative, I will jump from the balcony. God will send His angels to protect me from dashing my foot against a stone, right? :rolleyes:

Finally, What’s wrong with receiving only the Host anyway? Doesn’t that also contain Our Lord’s Blood along with His Body? Why not avoid the wine if you’re sick and take the Host instead? It also contains Jesus’ Blood. Last time I checked, the Church does not teach that Jesus is divided 50% by 50% between the Host and wine.

Finally, I remember that scene from The Last Temptation of Christ where Jesus recited the Words of Institution and the disciples found themselves eating actual human flesh and blood, which they found quite hard to consume (literally). Let us thank God that He does not choose to do that (save for some special exceptions) at every Masses or we’ll be in more heated discussions about whether consuming human flesh and blood is sanitary! 😃
 
catherineajt said:
My own personal opinion is that one can catch a lot more (and possibly nastier) bugs from a public restroom than from the Cup.

I’ve received communion in the Eastern tradtition (from the spoon) for nearly a year and have yet to get sick from it, near as i can tell. Sure, I get the occasional cold or sniffle, but I chalk that up to being in contact with other human beings. I’m more likely to catch a cold my baby’s picked up from his older sibling or my husband, who is a teacher, than from the Eucharist. I wouldn’t let a fear of getting sick keep me from receiving communion.

Bear in mind, in the Eastern tradition, one is to open one’s mouth and the priest is supposed to turn the spoon over so the bread “falls” into one’s mouth–we are not supposed to close our mouth around the spoon. It’s much different than drinking from the common cup.

Hey, if the Roman Catholics go back to the spoon method, maybe this debate will be settled once and for all! 😉 j/k
Click to expand...
One of the ancient methods of receiving the wine in the Roman Rite is drinking the Precious Blood using a fistula (a reed-like device made of gold, like a straw). This custom survived in pre-VII Papal Masses where the Pope uses such a straw to consume the Precious Blood. Though the image of the people ‘slurping’ the Blood of Jesus using a straw seems a little disturbing, if you ask me…
 
patrick457 said:
Or as an alternative, I will jump from the balcony. God will send His angels to protect me from dashing my foot against a stone, right?
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. Let’s not test God.

Another thing, If the Body and Blood wasn’t susceptible to germs and the like, then that would be a true miracle in the physical, visible realm. Total faith wouldn’t be required-- we could just accept transubstantiation as a scientific fact, exclusive from our faith in Jesus and obedience to the magisterium. Does that make any sense…?

This all reminds me, last weekend our regular priest who said mass did not give out communion. He went and sat off to the side after he concecrated the Eucharist while the deacon and an assisting priest and some EMHCs took over. I wondered why at that time, but now I’m thinking he was probably sick!
 
I’ve been drinking out of a common cup since I was 10, when I wasn’t Catholic, and I continue to do it now that I am Catholic. I have never gotten sick in either church from receiving, but then again, I also rarely get sick in general (somehow despite the other 4 people in my very small house who ended up with stomach viruses I managed to avoid it…). But if you have a weak immune system there’s nothing wrong with avoiding the cup, because in theory you COULD get sick from it.
 
patrick457 said:
Yes, the wine is, Sacramentally, Jesus’ Blood (and His Body). But physically it’s still wine so yes, germs can still enter and infect someone. But it is the germ’s fault, not the Precious Blood’s.
Click to expand...
No it is the Blood and Flesh as well. Although it resembles bread and wine physically, it is not bread and wine.
 
This is a very interesting question, I never really thought about it.
I have strep throat right now, I was told by the doctor that I cannot share food or drink for 10 days. I don’t want to infect others, what should I do? I can receive the Eucharist, but I want to know about the Blood of Christ.
 
ichen said:
This is a very interesting question, I never really thought about it.
I have strep throat right now, I was told by the doctor that I cannot share food or drink for 10 days. I don’t want to infect others, what should I do? I can receive the Eucharist, but I want to know about the Blood of Christ.
Click to expand...
DO NOT receive the precious blood.
Step away from the chalice until your doctor gives you the all-clear!
 
ichen said:
This is a very interesting question, I never really thought about it.
I have strep throat right now, I was told by the doctor that I cannot share food or drink for 10 days. I don’t want to infect others, what should I do? I can receive the Eucharist, but I want to know about the Blood of Christ.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Sacred Body should be fine however, unless close proximity could contaminate the priest.
 
holdencaulfield said:
No it is the Blood and Flesh as well. Although it resembles bread and wine physically, it is not bread and wine.
Click to expand...
You are another Catholic that doesn’t quite understand transubstantiation. The bread and wine do not physically change. Christ is present sacrementally, not physically.
 
Namesake said:
You are another Catholic that doesn’t quite understand transubstantiation. The bread and wine do not physically change. Christ is present sacrementally, not physically.
Click to expand...
First of all you are Protestant so you don’t know what we believe. We believe in Transubstantiation which is exactly what I outlined. I don’t care whether you believe in this or not I’m just stating what we believe.
 
Namesake said:
You are another Catholic that doesn’t quite understand transubstantiation. The bread and wine do not physically change. Christ is present sacrementally, not physically.
Click to expand...
tran·sub·stan·ti·a·tion /ˌtrænsəbˌstænʃiˈeɪʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[tran-suhb-stan-shee-ey-shuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
  1. the changing of one substance into another.
  2. Theology. the changing of the elements of the bread and wine, when they are consecrated in the Eucharist, into the body and blood of Christ (a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church).
    Compare transignification.
[Origin: 1350–1400; ME transubstanciacioun < ML trānssubstantiātiōn- (s. of trānssubstantiātiō). See transubstantiate, -ion] Source
 
holdencaulfield said:
First of all you are Protestant so you don’t know what we believe. We believe in Transubstantiation which is exactly what I outlined. I don’t care whether you believe in this or not I’m just stating what we believe.
Click to expand...
Protestants don’t know what Catholics believe? So you gotta be Catholic before you know what Catholics believe?
 
holdencaulfield said:
tran·sub·stan·ti·a·tion /ˌtrænsəbˌstænʃiˈeɪʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[tran-suhb-stan-shee-ey-shuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
  1. the changing of one substance into another.
  2. Theology. the changing of the elements of the bread and wine, when they are consecrated in the Eucharist, into the body and blood of Christ (a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church).
    Compare transignification.
[Origin: 1350–1400; ME transubstanciacioun < ML trānssubstantiātiōn- (s. of trānssubstantiātiō). See transubstantiate, -ion] Source
Click to expand...
Are you prepared to state that the Catholic Church teaches that the bread and wine physically change into the body and blood or Jesus?
 
Namesake said:
Protestants don’t know what Catholics believe? So you gotta be Catholic before you know what Catholics believe?
Click to expand...
There is some truth to what you say, if you read books by non-Catholics and not by Catholics loyal to Church teaching. The latter is the way to know what Catholics believe.
 
sphilomena said:
There is some truth to what you say, if you read books by non-Catholics and not by Catholics loyal to Church teaching. The latter is the way to know what Catholics believe.
Click to expand...
How about reading the CCC and reading what Catholics here post? Does that qualify?
 
Namesake said:
Protestants don’t know what Catholics believe? So you gotta be Catholic before you know what Catholics believe?
Click to expand...
“In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained.” (CCC 1374)

“This presence is called real” (CCC 1374)

“that Christ becomes present in this sacrament.” (CCC 1375)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top