Is the Eucharist suppose to be CHEWED at mass?

[misericordie]

MaggieOH:

A priest responded to me on a slightly different question that Jesus said to “Take and eat” NOT “stick out your tongue”.

Again how we receive the Eucharist is a matter of personal preference. In my parish there is a very high proportion of people who receive on the tongue.

MaggieOH

That priest is highly simplistic and seems to have been infected with the all to common RELATIVIST mentality. What he forgot to tell you was: THE APOSTLES AT THAT POINT WERE ALREADY ORDAINED PRIESTS. This is whi Holy Thursday the Mass of the Lord’s supper is when the PRIESTHOOD was established.

 

[misericordie]

MaggieOH:

Like Deacon Ed, I was taught not to chew the host. However, when I have thought about the instruction of Jesus to “take and eat” and that we must “eat my flesh and drink my blood”, I have gradually relaxed and where necessary have chewed the Eucharist that I have received.

However, as mentioned by others, because my parish offers the Blood of Christ, and I partake of this offering, I do find that this supplies enough moisture to allow me to swallow withiout too much chewing.

In overcoming some of the old superstitious attitudes I have not abandoned my belief in what I am receiving when I receive the Eucharist. One can give reverance to Christ through the Eucharist and at the same time follow what Jesus told us, that is “take and eat”, and “eat my flesh and drink my blood”.

MaggieOH

We must be careful with a fundamentalist eisegesis of scripure, as if JESUS AND THE BIBLICAL CHARACTERS spoke english, and some fall into anachrinism, putting OUR way of thinking into the mind of Jesus and the apostles etc.

 

[Fergal]

Deacon Ed: ***“We were misled in our youth because of an exaggerated sense of piety associated with the Blessed Sacrament.” ** *

Hmmmmmm

Exaggerated sense of piety associated with the Blessed Sacrament?

HOLD ON A MINUTE. After Consecration Deacon you well know that what the senses percieve to be bread and wine due to the accidents are in fact no longer so.

BODY, BLOOD, SOUL and DIVINTY??? Presence of the Holy Trinity?

I for one will continue to exaggerate thanks very much.

 

[Bill_A]

Deacon Ed:

Bill,

You write:But I’m not sure what you mean. I will always be a deacon, and I try to give the best advice I can in line with Church teaching. Could you please clarify what you intended to say?

Deacon Ed

I misunderstood. I thought you were in Seminary school. Doh.

I just wish the church wouldnt do a John Kerry Flip FLop on us.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Bill,

Thanks, that clarifies it. I am a permanent deacon (the good Lord saw fit to call me to this, but knew better than to call me to the priesthood!). BTW, since Holy Orders leaves an indelible character, bishops and priests are still deacons too! In fact, for formal occasions the bishop is supposed to wear an “episcopal dalmatic” which reminds him of his role as deacon since the dalmatic is the vestment that is characteristic of a deacon in the Latin Church.

Deacon Ed

 

[Bill_A]

Deacon Ed:

Bill,

Thanks, that clarifies it. I am a permanent deacon (the good Lord saw fit to call me to this, but knew better than to call me to the priesthood!). BTW, since Holy Orders leaves an indelible character, bishops and priests are still deacons too! In fact, for formal occasions the bishop is supposed to wear an “episcopal dalmatic” which reminds him of his role as deacon since the dalmatic is the vestment that is characteristic of a deacon in the Latin Church.

Deacon Ed

I saw my friend Deacon Luis today. He has still not found a seminary. So I offered to Drive him to Emitsburg and I wrote Emitsburgh. He has been working at our local parish for about a year now and still hasnt found a seminary. He said he would like to go next week and I cant wait. I love Emitsburgh and I hate the city. Its so wonderful that I am out of work, something that takes the parish and the diocese a year takes me 5 minutes. I hope he gets accepted.

 

[manualman]

Seems like we’ll have to disagree.

Again, I find that chewing is a more ‘authentic’ form of eating. While, indeed, it seems strange and even seems disrespectful, the whole Incarnation is this way. What became of Jesus’ dirty laundry? Did His umbilical cord blood spill on a stable floor? Surely He beld profusely from His shredded back along the road to Calvary? God Himself became a man and suffered tremendous indignity as a consequence of coming to His fallen humanity.

Over time, I have concluded that He MEANT for the eucharist to be shocking. Scriptures show that many of His disciples were horrified and abandoned Him over the idea of ‘eating his flesh.’ I believe He WANTS us eat (chew, gnaw) His very flesh and blood. Had He been primarily concerned with His dignity, He could very well have chosen some more ethereal manner of conveying to us the grace of communion. But He did not. He choose the eucharist, a way that however carefully performed is not dignified enough to befit the God of the universe. It is acceptable only because HE instituted it. By merely human comprehension it is appalling however it is practiced.

 

[Catholic_Tom]

now what about the argument that the host may get stuck in peoples teeth…they go to brush their teeth, and end up washing out the body of christ into the sink and down the drain…maybe that’s the reason…

 

[baltobetsy]

rlg94086:

I’ve never heard this. Do you know where it is taught? Since Christ taught that his flesh is real food “indeed”, I’ve always assumed his body, blood, soul and divinity enter my digestive system and every cell of my body. I actually pray after receiving that Christ enter every one of my cells. I know that may sound kind of silly, but I really believe we are “filled” with Christ after receiving the Eucharist.

God Bless,

Robert.

The CCC, Number 1377, says:

“The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.”

“As long as the Eucharistic species subsist” means as long as the bread and wine (Body and Blood) continue to have the accidents of bread and wine. Once the digestive process begins (and forgive me for being graphic, but that includes saliva in the mouth dissolving the Host), the species no longer are able to be called bread and wine or recognized as such. So, if a person has let the Host dissolve completely in the mouth before swallowing, that which is swallowed is no longer Christ. The person has held Christ in his mouth for awhile, but has not “eaten.”

I was taught this by the priests of Opus Dei, about 25 years ago. They taught us that if we swallow the Host right away, the Real Presence remains in our bodies for about ten minutes before the digestive process destroys the accidents of bread and wine. Therefore, we should remain in thanksgiving after Communion at least for 10 minutes.

So, I stick with my original advice - chew or don’t chew, as you prefer, but if you don’t chew, do make sure to swallow at least a piece of the Host while it still appears to be bread.

This discussion always reminds me of the joke that it is a greater act of faith to believe that the flat, round, crisp little host is really bread than to believe that it is Christ.

Betsy

 

[rlg94086]

baltobetsy:

This discussion always reminds me of the joke that it is a greater act of faith to believe that the flat, round, crisp little host is really bread than to believe that it is Christ.

Betsy

I like that. I think most converts can definitely relate.

Betsy,

Thank you very much for the information - and CCC reference. Most of what you wrote was completely new to me.

God Bless,

Robert.

 

[MaggieOH]

misericordie:

That priest is highly simplistic and seems to have been infected with the all to common RELATIVIST mentality. What he forgot to tell you was: THE APOSTLES AT THAT POINT WERE ALREADY ORDAINED PRIESTS. This is whi Holy Thursday the Mass of the Lord’s supper is when the PRIESTHOOD was established.

Then you are missing the point of what Jesus said and why. The Apostles were also setting the example for us, and the Scripture itself says “Take and eat…”

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

misericordie:

We must be careful with a fundamentalist eisegesis of scripure, as if JESUS AND THE BIBLICAL CHARACTERS spoke english, and some fall into anachrinism, putting OUR way of thinking into the mind of Jesus and the apostles etc.

There are several senses of the Scriptures. One of the senses of Scripture is the “Literal” sense. This has nothing to do with Fundamentalism, neither does it have anything to do with the language that was spoken.

You have misunderstood my meaning because there was a time when I carried the burden of the things that were taught to me by the dear sisters of my childhood. I am not saying that they were mistaken, but I do recognize that some of the things that we were taught were superstition.

I have always had a love of the Scripture. I moved away from the Church, into nothing, and came back again. I have been on my journey ever since I returned to the Church. I had a good reason for wanting to cast off some of the ideas of my childhood, because they were ideas that had left me with depression and without hope. The reason that I make this statement is a very personal one and I will not divulge it. However, through further study of the Scripture I have grown, not just in my love for Scripture but everything about the Mass and the Sacraments that God has granted to us.

There is such a thing as false piety, and yes there is such a thing as a lack of reverence for the Lord. We have to strike the middle ground in our communion with God. I respect the members of the Opus Dei, as well as the others within my Parish who take the time to genuflect before receiving the Eucharist. If this is an action that is meant to say “Look at what I am doing” then it would be in the same category as the attitude displayed by the Pharisee when he praised himself in front of the Tax Collector. On the other hand, and I see little children copying their parents in genuflecting, if these parents are setting a good and holy example for their children to follow then I applaud them for the fine work that they are doing. On the other hand, there are some of us who cannot genuflect because of the dreaded arthritis in the knees, ankles and feet.

When I speak of casting off the superstition I am also directly addressing the last vestiges of Jansesnism that had pervaded the Catholic Church. If you know your Church history then you realise that at its height the Jansenists refused to take frequent communion because of their heightened ideas about sin and what can only be seen as a false sense of piety.

I see Jesus and the Apostles in a very human way. Jesus was human, not just Divine. What He did for us is absolutely breathtaking. However, in seeing the human side of Jesus I have also been able to throw off some of my own hang ups about getting angry and losing my temper (after all it is not the anger that is the sin, but what one does with the anger that can be sin). I grew up in an atmosphere that anger itself was sinful. I lacked a lot of coping mechanisms because of the way we were taught so many things. It is only through getting to know Jesus, and accepting that he had righteous anger, and more than likely had a good sense of humour that I have been able to cast off all the things that were bordering on superstition as I grew up.

I am not a relativist, and I am definitely not a Fundamentalist since I have a lot of arguments with them.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

baltobetsy:

The CCC, Number 1377, says:

“The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.”

“As long as the Eucharistic species subsist” means as long as the bread and wine (Body and Blood) continue to have the accidents of bread and wine. Once the digestive process begins (and forgive me for being graphic, but that includes saliva in the mouth dissolving the Host), the species no longer are able to be called bread and wine or recognized as such. So, if a person has let the Host dissolve completely in the mouth before swallowing, that which is swallowed is no longer Christ. The person has held Christ in his mouth for awhile, but has not “eaten.”

I was taught this by the priests of Opus Dei, about 25 years ago. They taught us that if we swallow the Host right away, the Real Presence remains in our bodies for about ten minutes before the digestive process destroys the accidents of bread and wine. Therefore, we should remain in thanksgiving after Communion at least for 10 minutes.

So, I stick with my original advice - chew or don’t chew, as you prefer, but if you don’t chew, do make sure to swallow at least a piece of the Host while it still appears to be bread.

This discussion always reminds me of the joke that it is a greater act of faith to believe that the flat, round, crisp little host is really bread than to believe that it is Christ.

Betsy

Betsy,

thank you for this message. Your Opus Dei priest taught you very well, and this is yet another reason why I am inclined towards this movement.

Maggie

 

[misericordie]

Bill_A:

I saw my friend Deacon Luis today. He has still not found a seminary. So I offered to Drive him to Emitsburg and I wrote Emitsburgh. He has been working at our local parish for about a year now and still hasnt found a seminary. He said he would like to go next week and I cant wait. I love Emitsburgh and I hate the city. Its so wonderful that I am out of work, something that takes the parish and the diocese a year takes me 5 minutes. I hope he gets accepted.

A great seminary/order which is solid and faithful IN MARYLAND: www.iveamerica.org the noviciate is in Seat Pleaseant, Maryland, and the seminary is in Cheverly, Maryland.

 

[Prometheum_x]

Catholic Tom:

now what about the argument that the host may get stuck in peoples teeth…they go to brush their teeth, and end up washing out the body of christ into the sink and down the drain…maybe that’s the reason…

(This isn’t addressed specifically to you, Catholic Tom, your question simply prompted my response)

If that is a concern then we should also be worrying about the particles of the host that inevitably scatter into the air anytime the host is touched, particularly when the priest breaks it up at the altar.

As well, how do we know that small particles do not remain in our mouth even when we just let it dissolve/soften there? Perhaps, to ensure that no fragments ever have a chance to escape we should open wide our mouths and the priest should take a small piece and stick it directly into our throats. That would eliminate potential contact with the mouth and greatly reduce the chance that any of it would escape.

 

[Lamb100]

Betsy–this is a sobering thought for me–I usually let It dissolve…so does this mean all this time I’ve only held Christ on my tongue? The Eucharist means so much to me…this is really bothering me. If I chew…I do get particles in my teeth and have considered the problem of some dropping out. (Actually, this is one reason why I really don’t like to sing the hymn after Communion; that, and the fact that it’s such a precious moment it seems sort of wrong to me.) On the other hand, I love the fact that Jesus is still there for a little longer. One time, I’d taken antihistamines, and we received only under the form of bread…it was awesome–the Host stuck to the roof of my mouth for the longest time. Sort of awkward…but I felt it was a rare gift…

I love this rather earthy discussion…I suppose it’s in the spirit of “gnawing”!

 

[baltobetsy]

Lamb, that is how I understand it. Of course, Jesus can do whatever He pleases, and if He sees a whole generation of good-hearted but misinformed people letting hosts dissolve in their mouths with great love and reverence, I’m sure it is possible that He is giving them all the graces they would have received had they swallowed the host while it still looked like bread.

Maybe we should think a little about the whole concept of eating. To eat includes taking into the mouth, chewing (if necessary) and swallowing so that the food goes into the stomach and begins to nourish the eater. I can only think of one exception to this process: hard candy, which is hardly something one takes for nutrition. Jesus tell us “My flesh is real food,” so it seems we should be eating it in the same way as real food, not so much like hard candy.

My solution (ever since childhood) has been to break the host in half and then in quarters with my tongue (sort of by folding), soften it up so I don’t choke on it, and swallow it. This whole process takes very little time. I have not chewed it, so there is no worry about particles in my teeth, but I have swallowed something that still has its usual appearance about it. I think I recall our nuns telling us before First Communion not to chew, but not to dissolve either, although they did not give the whole explanation. We just did what we were told! (Well, most of us, anyway! )

But then we have the problem of the “chewers,” that is, particles stuck in the teeth. Remember, when the digestive juices (including saliva) begin to work on the host, and it no longer retains the appearance of bread, Jesus is gone. This will happen to the particles that remain in one’s mouth, so, no, you won’t have pieces of Jesus stuck in your teeth all day.

My little sentimental thought process goes like this - once I have swallowed the host, Jesus is physically closer to my heart. When a person is in love, he longs to enfold the beloved deep within himself, so, for me, swallowing brings Jesus further into myself and is more satisfying in that human way.

Betsy

 

[rwoehmke]

When I was a child we were taught not to chew. After VatII we were encouraged to chew. I think it was probably a liturgist thing after VatII where some things were said as if they came off the mountain with Moses and the Ten Commandments. I am thinking it was probably one of the plethora of pius practices that we used to follow “under pain of sin.” I understand that Jesus leaves when the host starts to be digested. Being made of starch this would start to take place in the saliva of the mouth which contains an enzyme that breaks starches down into sugars. Interesting topic but I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it.

 

[Lamb100]

Thanks Betsy–that was a beautiful reply, especially the first paragraph. It’s helpful because I am one of those who tends to lose sleep over things like this! :whacky:

I love Jesus so much!

 

[deborah1313]

I am accompanying a friend through RCIA and this past Thursday the subject was Eucharist. The catechist was very specific that you could chew or not chew. Also, that you could receive in the hand or on the tongue. He also said it is very important to show respect for the Eucharist because “we are receiving Jesus”. Isn’t that what this whole discussion boils down to? Showing respect for Jesus in the Eucharist? The GIRM – mentioned on this site, see the whole thing at usccb.org/liturgy/current/revmissalisromanien.shtml – agrees with what that catechist said.

Isn’t what is most important the attitude of my heart? :yup:

deborah1313