Is this insulting to the Eucharist [photo]

  • Thread starter Thread starter Episcopalian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Anglicans believe in the True Presence. Their churches I’m familiar with have tabernacles and sanctuary lamps.
 
OddBird said:
I’m getting a bit tired from having to explain that again and again, but it’s false to say that of a good number of Protestant denominations, including the Reformed church I work for. If you asked most parishioners what they think they are receiving, they’d tell you “the Body and Blood of the Lord”.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Lutherans and Episcopalians, for sure. There is a lot of ignorance out there about what these churches believe.
 
Thank you.

I was about to say the same thing but you said it a lot better.
 
Please read the post of @Tis_Bearself.

Her post is located just above yours.

The use of this gadget for unconsecrated host is licit and not insulting. Smaller chapels have used it in order to consecrate just the right amount of host for the mass participants.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
We’ve had many past threads on this. It is quite possible for a physical Eucharist to transmit disease.
Click to expand...
True… but all I say is have a little faith.

I just think its a sad day when we get to the point I need to fear receiving the Eucharist from the hand of my priest. Its bad enough they took church away from us for months, we still can’t receive the blood of Christ, Holy water or shake hands… now I need a machine to hand me the Eucharist.

Come on… the thing looks like an upside down Pez dispenser… its silly and ridiculous.

It wouldn’t help Catholics grow in their respect for the Eucharist but that’s just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
annad347 said:
Come on… the thing looks like an upside down Pez dispenser… its silly and ridiculous.

It wouldn’t help Catholics grow in their respect for the Eucharist but that’s just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Have you read @Tis_Bearself’s explanation about how that device is used in Catholic churches – specifically, for unconsecrated hosts?
Tis_Bearself said:
Obviously no Catholic church will use this to distribute consecrated hosts. However, some Catholic churches have used it to allow Mass attendees to place an unconsecrated host onto a plate as they enter, without needing to stick their fingers into a bowl of unconsecrated hosts. The practice of putting one host onto a plate as you enter is done at a lot of smaller churches where they don’t want to consecrate more hosts than are needed. If your church uses this, then as you enter church, you just pick up the machine and squeeze one unconsecrated host onto the plate, which is then taken up to the altar at presentation of the gifts. Since the unconsecrated hosts are bread, it’s not insulting to use the machine to dispense them.
Click to expand...
 
Phemie said:
Anglicans believe in the True Presence. Their churches I’m familiar with have tabernacles and sanctuary lamps.
Click to expand...
Not the same us, at least officially (in reality Anglican belief varies widely). From their Articles of Religion:
XXVIII. OF THE LORD’S SUPPER

THE Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another; but rather is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ’s death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.

Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions.

The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is Faith.

The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.
Click to expand...
 
I’m not sure insulting as opposed to irreverent.

The Eucharist is supposed to be contained in precious metal. This thingamabob is “gold tone”.

I can also imagine fragments forming, and being trapped inside.
 
F_Marturana said:
The Eucharist is supposed to be contained in precious metal. This thingamabob is “gold tone”.
Click to expand...
There are numerous articles with the inventor of this thing talking about how he was creating a precious-metals version in hopes Cattholic churches would buy it.

I think that’s a lost cause, as the vast majority of bishops would forbid use of this thing for consecrated hosts even if it were made of pure beaten gold.

And if a church is just using it for unconsecrated wafers, then plastic is fine, and much cheaper.
 
Last edited:
I don’t see it as inherently insulting and if the risk was great enough, and this was actually effective, I don’t see why it couldn’t be used. Inherently, it’s no different than using a spoon to administer the sacrament.

Vessels are consecrated by the Church for sacred use, and the method of receiving also determined by the Church, so the Church can of course change these things according to the needs of the times and circumstances (as the Council of Trent declared in its 21st session). A different kind of vessel could certainly be consecrated for sacred use.

All that that being said, tradition should be respected as much as possible. Tradition enriches symbols and objects with special meaning, so changing them risks changing the meaning. Changing from a vessel or method of receiving that by tradition communicates respect and reverence to a new method naturally can communicate less respect (which is why most are naturally recoiling from this proposed novel vessel).

However, the Church in many places in recent history departed from established tradition in the method of receiving for pretty much no reason at all, so I’m not sure there’s a reason to oppose this (which at least has a serious motivation behind it: a deadly pandemic) without impugning that prior change on the same grounds.
 
Last edited:
OddBird said:
Have you read @Tis_Bearself’s explanation about how that device is used in Catholic churches – specifically, for unconsecrated hosts?
Click to expand...
Did you read where I said have a little faith?

It’s just my opinion… whether it is Consecrated or Unconsecreated, I just think it’s a sad day when we fear our priest touching the Eucharist.
 
Last edited:
Unconsecrated hosts don’t need any special container other than something to keep them fresh. So a food storage container would probably be even cheaper.
 
F_Marturana said:
Unconsecrated hosts don’t need any special container other than something to keep them fresh. So a food storage container would probably be even cheaper.
Click to expand...
Did you read my post about how this is used with unconsecrated hosts? It’s for germ protection. It has nothing to do with keeping hosts “fresh”.

I’m getting the impression that maybe some who have never attended a small church are not familiar with the process of each Mass attendee putting one unconsecrated host on the plate as they walk into church.
 
Last edited:
I won’t say whether it is meant to be insulting. I just think it’s stupid. The Eucharistic Pez dispenser is not something we will be using in my parish, COVID be darned.
 
annad347 said:
if that machine is being used to prevent the spread of the Corona virus, its insulting to God.
Click to expand...
These are not used by Catholics. Protestants have had various ways of distributing their Lord’s Supper for ages.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top