S
starrs0
Guest
Can communion wafers be in any other shape (like a fish for instance) as long as their made from unleaved white flour or must they always be round?
- Status
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
I would suppose they could be another shape. I have seen square. The circle has a symbolic meaning. Since it has no beginning or end it symbolizes God.
R
RBushlow
Guest
What does the Church say? Anyone know where we could find this kind of information?
M
metal1633
Guest
The Church has not specified the shape of the Bread used in Communion.
R
RichT
Guest
During training to become a EMHC, we have been told it is okay to break the wafer if it looks like we are running short. I would presume that since that changes the original shape, then it would be okay to make them in other shapes to begin with.
T
Timidity
Guest
Br. Rich SFO:
This sounds like after-the-fact symbology. All polygons have no beginning or end.
M
muledog
Guest
According to Inaestimabile Donum:
By reason of the sign, the matter of the Eucharistic celebration “should appear as actual food.” This is to be understood as linked to the consistency of the bread, and not to its form, which remains the traditional one. (#8)
- muledog
A
asquared
Guest
the flour has to be wheat, it can either be white or whole wheat (or the newly approved low-gluten flour, see other threads on that topic.) the shape is probably round because that lessens the possibility of particles being broken off and lost when placed in the hand, and easier to place on the tongue of the communicant.
C
CatholicNerd
Guest
A FISH? :ehh: Great, that’s all we need. Liturgical goldfish crackers… oh, wait, those have been used, too…
P
Paul_W
Guest
The large host held by the priest is broken into triangles and trapezoids. These are distributed to the faithful, along with the smaller, round hosts.
T
Trelow
Guest
Why are individual breads used?
We have always used one loaf, any time we have had Holy Communion (Methodist).
I know that some Methodist churches use the wafers, but I have only seen Catholics use wafers.
Practicality?
We have always used one loaf, any time we have had Holy Communion (Methodist).
I know that some Methodist churches use the wafers, but I have only seen Catholics use wafers.
Practicality?
S
Shiann
Guest
Because each wafer is our Lord Jesus, breaking a big loaf of unleavened bread into pieces for communion leaves too much to chance dropping crumbs and disrespecting Jesus Christ.
It is for adoration and respect- not practicality.
It is for adoration and respect- not practicality.
M
metal1633
Guest
I am Maronite Catholic. We use a loaf. Pieces are dipped in the wine for Communion. Wafers are simply the western practice.
T
Teddymartin
Guest
No one dips the host into “wine” It is the Precious Blood of Christ. I don’t know to much on the subject of leavened or unleavened, but it is beleived that Christ used unleavened bread since he was in the order of Melchizedek.
In XC,
Teddy
P.S. St. Thomas Aquinas almost always says best
Two things may be considered touching the matter of this sacrament namely, what is necessary, and what is suitable. It is necessary that the bread be wheaten, without which the sacrament is not valid, as stated above (3). It is not, however, necessary for the sacrament that the bread be unleavened or leavened, since it can be celebrated in either.
But it is suitable that every priest observe the rite of his Church in the celebration of the sacrament. Now in this matter there are various customs of the Churches: for, Gregory says: “The Roman Church offers unleavened bread, because our Lord took flesh without union of sexes: but the Greek Churches offer leavened bread, because the Word of the Father was clothed with flesh; as leaven is mixed with the flour.” Hence, as a priest sins by celebrating with fermented bread in the Latin Church, so a Greek priest celebrating with unfermented bread in a church of the Greeks would also sin, as perverting the rite of his Church. Nevertheless the custom of celebrating with unleavened bread is more reasonable. First, on account of Christ’s institution: for He instituted this sacrament “on the first day of the Azymes” (Mt. 26:17; Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:7), on which day there ought to be nothing fermented in the houses of the Jews, as is stated in Ex. 12:15,19. Secondly, because bread is properly the sacrament of Christ’s body, which was conceived without corruption, rather than of His Godhead, as will be seen later (76, 1, ad 1). Thirdly, because this is more in keeping with the sincerity of the faithful, which is required in the use of this sacrament, according to 1 Cor. 5:7: “Christ our Pasch is sacrificed: therefore let us feast . . . with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”
However, this custom of the Greeks is not unr
In XC,
Teddy
P.S. St. Thomas Aquinas almost always says best
Two things may be considered touching the matter of this sacrament namely, what is necessary, and what is suitable. It is necessary that the bread be wheaten, without which the sacrament is not valid, as stated above (3). It is not, however, necessary for the sacrament that the bread be unleavened or leavened, since it can be celebrated in either.
But it is suitable that every priest observe the rite of his Church in the celebration of the sacrament. Now in this matter there are various customs of the Churches: for, Gregory says: “The Roman Church offers unleavened bread, because our Lord took flesh without union of sexes: but the Greek Churches offer leavened bread, because the Word of the Father was clothed with flesh; as leaven is mixed with the flour.” Hence, as a priest sins by celebrating with fermented bread in the Latin Church, so a Greek priest celebrating with unfermented bread in a church of the Greeks would also sin, as perverting the rite of his Church. Nevertheless the custom of celebrating with unleavened bread is more reasonable. First, on account of Christ’s institution: for He instituted this sacrament “on the first day of the Azymes” (Mt. 26:17; Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:7), on which day there ought to be nothing fermented in the houses of the Jews, as is stated in Ex. 12:15,19. Secondly, because bread is properly the sacrament of Christ’s body, which was conceived without corruption, rather than of His Godhead, as will be seen later (76, 1, ad 1). Thirdly, because this is more in keeping with the sincerity of the faithful, which is required in the use of this sacrament, according to 1 Cor. 5:7: “Christ our Pasch is sacrificed: therefore let us feast . . . with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”
However, this custom of the Greeks is not unr
M
metal1633
Guest
First. Dont contradict me. You speak without knowledge. I said what I meant. If I had meant that the HOST was Dipped into the Blood I would have said THAT.
Enough BREAD dipped into the WINE for the entire congregation is prepared beforehand. BEFORE the Consecration.
Second. What Aquinas said concerning this is only partly relevant. I am a member of neither the Latin nor Greek Rites. I am a MARONITE. That is a Christian of the Apostolic See of Antioch.
And last. Christ using unleavend bread had NOTHING to do with Melchizedek. Christ used unleavened bread because it was the Passover and no leavening was allowed during the Passover. Hence the name “Feast of Unleavened Bread.”
- Status