Holy Communion

[Paul_theApostle]

The Council of Florence approved the use of either kind of bread in 1439, so the use of leavened or unleavened bread is a question of licit-ness, not validity.
The council stated, “We have likewise defined that the body of Christ is truly effected in unleavened or leavened wheaten bread and that priests ought to effect the body of our Lord in either one of these, and each one namely according to the custom of his Church, whether that of the West or of the East”

To use the driving analogy, it is the law of driving on the right side of the road (law), not the practice of driving at all (valid).

Latin Rite is not permitted to use unleavened bread by its Canon Law, but if a Latin priest use leavened bread it’s still transsubstantiated to the Holy Eucharist, although he may get reprimanded for ignoring the Canon Law.
The Eastern Rite and Orthodox have their own Law and they use leavened bread.

Is that all you have objection for? Leavened or unleavened bread? Both are still bread taht is made from wheat and flour and Wheat-bread that was use for the Last Supper. Whether leavened or unleavened does not change the validity of the Holy Eucharist. Do you believe in and accept doctrine of the Real Presence? If so, observe your liturgical law according to your rite (whichever it may be). If not, why fuss about leavened or unleavened when you do not even care.

The Orthodox add the use of Unleavened bread by the Latins as one of the innovations that further seperate Rome from Orthodoxy.

The Orthodox also do not recognise the Sacrament of Holy Communion as well as the other Sacraments of Rome.

Ive been a part of both Churches,i do feel ive experienced Gods presence in the Eucharist at Rome,but i am prone also to following the Orthodox position that the Sacraments of Rome are In-valid.

Maybe the Orthodox do accept the Sacraments of Rome nowadays im not sure,i know they have agreed on Statements of Faith in our days,

But as a person who was Baptised and Chrismated by the Orthodox after recieving it firstly at Rome and having seen it done to many other Catholics at the Orthodox Church,i have the tendency to believe that the Orthodox Church doesnt believe that the Sacraments of Rome have any meaning or effect to the people.

If when confirmed at Rome a person does actually recieve the Gift of the Holy Spirit,why would the Orthodox Church perform Chrismation again to Grant that soul something it already had recieved?

 

[MACHIU]

Well, you are bringing up a difference of opinions and theology that separated the 2 big Churches over the past millennium. I doubt any of us in the forum combined can settle these differences over a thread in a forum.

What I (and others) written is the Catholic Church’s position over the use of leavened and unleavened bread (I do not speak for the Catholic Church officially, this is basically the points in laymen’s term) . You can argue different points all you want, but we Catholics are sticking with Rome unless there are 100% undisputed evidence that the bread that Jesus used was definitely leavened bread.

Your original post asked about:

Is it in fact bread? i see that we do not use a loaf of bread like what we eat at lunch,

Im trying to say sometimes i doubt its really Christ in the Sacrament because it doesnt look like normal Bread and at the last supper im visualising Christ using large loafs of bread.

Or maybe because its really small and how can the Whole of God who created the universe be present in such a small thing?

I think all the replies has been more than explaining why Roman Catholics do what we do and EO do what they do.

But then you ask about sacraments in general, baptism, confirmation etc etc. As poster 1ke had replied, “That is not the questioned you asked.”, I say stick to one subject please. If you have questions about other Sacraments of the Church (not Sacraments of Rome), then please do so on a different thread.

In the end, I pray for you so you may find the wisdom you seek for.

God Bless.

 

[Paul_theApostle]

Well, you are bringing up a difference of opinions and theology that separated the 2 big Churches over the past millennium. I doubt any of us in the forum combined can settle these differences over a thread in a forum.

What I (and others) written is the Catholic Church’s position over the use of leavened and unleavened bread (I do not speak for the Catholic Church officially, this is basically the points in laymen’s term) . You can argue different points all you want, but we Catholics are sticking with Rome unless there are 100% undisputed evidence that the bread that Jesus used was definitely leavened bread.

Your original post asked about:

I think all the replies has been more than explaining why Roman Catholics do what we do and EO do what they do.

But then you ask about sacraments in general, baptism, confirmation etc etc. As poster 1ke had replied, “That is not the questioned you asked.”, I say stick to one subject please. If you have questions about other Sacraments of the Church (not Sacraments of Rome), then please do so on a different thread.

In the end, I pray for you so you may find the wisdom you seek for.

God Bless.

As the Posts come forth after the OP the topics sometimes change,i have seen it happen reading other threads so i thought it was okay to do so,(move away from the OP)

I didnt even remember that i posted about doubting the Consecration,ive just been posting on many threads the last few hours i forgot

I doubt Romes Sacraments because the Orthodox Church doesnt believe in them,and ive attended Orthodoxy over time.

 

[1ke]

Paul,

You were baptized in the Catholic Church and attended long enough to also receive eucharist and confirmation.

So, please explain why you then sought to become a member of the Orthodox Churches through baptism, chrismation, and eucharist. At what age, and under what circumstances, did you seek out the Orthodox Churches?

And, why do you continue to go back and forth between the two (which is not allowed by either Church)?

I don’t understand what influenced you to start down the path away from the Catholic Church and towards the Orthodox? Perhaps knowing how this all happened will help us understand why you are now more heavily influenced by what the Orthodox Churches are saying and why you are doubting the validity of the Catholic Church and her Sacraments.

You seem to be lost somewhere between the two, doubting both, and that is BAD for you spiritually. You need to make your decision. Are you Catholic or are you Orthodox? And then, once you have decided, you need to fully practice that faith. But, also keep in mind that you can become an Eastern Rite Catholic if you want to follow the liturgical traditions of the Divine Liturgy.

 

[Paul_theApostle]

Paul,

You were baptized in the Catholic Church and attended long enough to also receive eucharist and confirmation.

So, please explain why you then sought to become a member of the Orthodox Churches through baptism, chrismation, and eucharist. At what age, and under what circumstances, did you seek out the Orthodox Churches?

And, why do you continue to go back and forth between the two (which is not allowed by either Church)?

I don’t understand what influenced you to start down the path away from the Catholic Church and towards the Orthodox? Perhaps knowing how this all happened will help us understand why you are now more heavily influenced by what the Orthodox Churches are saying and why you are doubting the validity of the Catholic Church and her Sacraments.

You seem to be lost somewhere between the two, doubting both, and that is BAD for you spiritually. You need to make your decision. Are you Catholic or are you Orthodox? And then, once you have decided, you need to fully practice that faith. But, also keep in mind that you can become an Eastern Rite Catholic if you want to follow the liturgical traditions of the Divine Liturgy.

Thanks for your forward manners,

As i havn’t despaired lately over my confusion ,i realise Prayer and Reading can benefit me and having faith that God enables us to overcome any difficulty we may experience,i have even in the last 24hrs re-affirmed my Orthodox Faith that i have been practicing over some years now,but we can only learn and progress through difficulty or confusion it it arises.

Sorry if i dont answer your some of your questions directly,but i notice you are trying to help although through some study i have already recieved some guidance and consolation with questions or concerns ive previously posted in the last 24hrs.

Im comfortable with the Orthodox Faith although i admit Ethnicity within Orthodoxy is difficult to deal with at times with myself being of Italian Background.

I still have a difficulty understanding why Sts Cyril and Maximus and St Augustine in what i have read accept and support the Filioque ,where as for example the Orthodox recognise an 8th Ecumenical Council with St Photius and the Fathers of the Roman Church condemning it once and for all as a heresy.

I searched for God in time of need some years ago and at the time the Orthodox Church
was a place i harboured my soul into to participate in Church life and for my salvation.

I have also in the most recent past experienced a return to the Roman Church and recieved consolations and elation and relief from distress or sins.

Pax

 

[steve_b]

Just saying You were right ,my question was about valicity

Do you know why the EO prefer the leavened ,if thats not what Christ used?

Or do the Orthodox believe He used leavened?

Since Jesus asked the apostles to prepare a passover meal for them all, and passover bread is unleavened, it’s most probable that the bread Jesus used was unleavened. Jews took particular care in removing all leavening agents from the home prior to this feast. And in order to keep bread from rising naturally, because mixing flour and water if left alone for a day,will start to ferment causing the mixture to rise. So to keep that from happening, they baked the bread immediately after mixing.

Having said that, the West chose to keep that tradition of unleavened bread, while the East chose leavened. Therefore, unleavened is licit in the Latin rite, leavened is licit in the Eastern rite. Both forms are valid matter.

The EO as you know use leavened.

 

[steve_b]

I still have a difficulty understanding why Sts Cyril and Maximus and St Augustine in what i have read accept and support the Filioque ,

The confusion on the EO part of the Catholic Church position on the Filioque, is over the term “proceeds”

The EO have no problem with "Father through the Son". They don’t like "Father and the Son".