Communion for the disabled

  • Thread starter Thread starter alessandro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

alessandro

Guest
From my blog: Officials of the Catholic Church in Arizona have a dilemma: How to allow a 10-year-old autistic boy to receive Communion when he is unable to swallow.

Because of his autism, Matthew is unable to swallow foods of certain textures or consistencies. In particular, he has been unable to swallow bread of any kind. When it comes to the wafer Host, he spits it out. To complicate things further, the child does not want to drink wine.

His stay-at-home father has tried to find a solution — That is, he allows Matthew to receive the Eucharist; but before the child spits it out, and after it has been in the mouth for several seconds, the father takes and consumes the Host himself. (He only consumes that one Host.)

Apparently, this arrangement had been sanctioned by the family’s former parish in Pennsylvania, where the child went to Catechism classes for two years before receiving first Communion.

Now that the family has moved to Arizona, local officials don’t know how to respond, really, but in the meantime, they have put a moratorium on the practice.

Phoenix Diocese officials contend that Matthew has not been prohibited from Communion, only that the bishop is “not able to approve the present practice,” according to his letter. He offered assistance, which has come in the form of various hosts for Matthew to try, educational material and other recommendations for the parents, including respite care, in which trained personnel would look after the children while the parents took time for themselves.One of the particular concerns is that the child is not receiving the Host validly: The Catholic faith holds that, via the miracle of transubstantiation, the Host actually becomes the Body of Christ, thus perpetuating for all time the grand Sacrifice of Our Lord on Calvary. Matthew’s reception of the Host for a few seconds does not equate to actually taking and eating it, and thus his action is reduced to a symbolic gesture rather than valid reception of the Sacrament.

“Matthew deserves to be able to take the Eucharist fully and completely,” said Isabella Rice of the diocese Office on Disabilities and Pastoral Care. “As long as he is unable to do so, we will keep working with him.”The family is appealing the moratorium, and request that, until a suitable alternative is found, Matthew be allowed to continue to receive Communion in the previous manner. Their appeal is based on the USCCB’s “Guidelines for the Celebration of the Sacraments with Persons with Disabilities,” which says that “cases of doubt should be resolved in favor of the right of the baptized person to receive the sacrament.”

Read the full blog entry and a reprint of the Arizona article here.

What are your thoughts?
 
My own view is that the moratorium is justified.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m a staunch advocate of rights for the disabled (my own brother is handicapped).

However, you can’t just go and make your own rules for what is acceptable practice for receiving Communion. I feel bad for the family, which was misguided by its previous parish in Pennsylvania. No doubt the intention was a sincere and charitable one, but it was incorrect.

While others might view the moratorium as harsh, I applaud the Arizona Church officials for their effort to work with the family and find a valid alternative. I know that in medicine, for severely ill and comatose patients, hospital priests sometimes give only a small fragment (even a crumb) of the Host that eventually gets swallowed with the saliva. If the child will not take a sip from the Chalice, perhaps a droplet of wine could be placed in his mouth. This too is surely to be swallowed.

It is, definitely, a challenging problem to overcome. My prayers go out to the family and church officials involved.
 
40.png
alessandro:
. . .

Now that the family has moved to Arizona, local officials don’t know how to respond, really, but in the meantime, they have put a moratorium on the practice.

Phoenix Diocese officials contend that Matthew has not been prohibited from Communion, only that the bishop is “not able to approve the present practice,” according to his letter. He offered assistance, which has come in the form of various hosts for Matthew to try, educational material and other recommendations for the parents, including respite care, in which trained personnel would look after the children while the parents took time for themselves.One of the particular concerns is that the child is not receiving the Host validly: The Catholic faith holds that, via the miracle of transubstantiation, the Host actually becomes the Body of Christ, thus perpetuating for all time the grand Sacrifice of Our Lord on Calvary. Matthew’s reception of the Host for a few seconds does not equate to actually taking and eating it, and thus his action is reduced to a symbolic gesture rather than valid reception of the Sacrament.

“Matthew deserves to be able to take the Eucharist fully and completely,” said Isabella Rice of the diocese Office on Disabilities and Pastoral Care. “As long as he is unable to do so, we will keep working with him.”The family is appealing the moratorium, and request that, until a suitable alternative is found, Matthew be allowed to continue to receive Communion in the previous manner. Their appeal is based on the USCCB’s “Guidelines for the Celebration of the Sacraments with Persons with Disabilities,” which says that “cases of doubt should be resolved in favor of the right of the baptized person to receive the sacrament.”

. . . .
Click to expand...
I don’t see any doubt about the current practice. The diocese has declared that it is wrong. They are trying to find a practice that is right. There may be doubt about whether they can find one. But that does not justify continuing a wrong practice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top