Sacrilege of Grapefruit Juice in Holy Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nathan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nathan

Guest
Can we discuss the legitimacy of using substitutes for sacramental hosts and wine in holy communion? Because on one hand, I have strong conviction that the sacrament should follow Jesus’ words when he says “do this in memory of me”, at the last supper, referencing the specific actions he performed, but on the other hand I have had people that tell me that the bible never mandates communion be administered using hosts and wine. Not to mention, that some Catholic churches are even taking up the practice of using grape juice or similar substitutes makes me question how legitimate my thought process on this is.
Many thanks to all, and God bless.
 
The Bible isn’t - directly - the authority used to determine valid matter for the Mass. That is taught (revealed) through the Magisterium, and references a combination of Sacred Scripture and Tradition.

There is some amount of leeway in valid matter used for the Precious Blood (though always from the vine of grape), but this is something that ultimately comes from the Magisterium. Individual people can’t decide on this and cite Scripture to defend a point of view. That isn’t how it works.
 
Last edited:
I would want to very carefully vet any comments that any Catholic parish is using anything except wine and unleavened bread for the Eucharistic substances. And I do mean very carefully.

The Church has held from its beginning that Christ gave the power to bind and loose, and that has been interpreted to include authority over what is or is not valid for the celebration of a sacrament.

The Roman rite uses unleavened bread; interestingly, at least some of the Eastern rites use leavened bread. Both are accepted within their own rites (that is, a Roman Catholic priest celebrating the Roman rite, either what is knows as the Ordinary Form or the Extraordinary form of the Mass, must use unleavened bread.

The hosts which are generally used can vary in thickness and in color (for example, some are relatively white; some a light tan), but are made only of wheat and water.

Wheat was the grain used by the Jews; and the celebration of the Passover required that it be unleavened. The first Mass was during the Passover meal, which we refer to as the Last Supper. And wine was common in Jewish celebrations, and used at the Passover meal.

As those were the elements Christ used, the Church has done likewise; and based on the “bind and loose”, exercise the authority to limit the elements to those items.

I attend Mass occasionally at our local Trappist abbey; they consecrate a large, tan host which is somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 inch thick and scored so that it is easily divided into pieces which are about 1" or less in diameter. As they are a small congregation and do not have many people attending Mass most of the time, an individual on a weekday might receive part of that host; on weekends they make the smaller wafers available and most visitors receive that. The large host is only weat and water, but due to issues of crumbs, not widely used.

Because of the history of the Eucharist going back to the Last Supper (and thus to the Jewish celebration of the Passover), the history and practice has been to do what Christ did, and use what Christ used. And so the Church holds that other substances do not comply.

As a note, water is used for baptism; so another substance (such as the proverbial soft drink, as the only thing available in an emergency) does not suffice and cannot be used.

And if used, neither grapefruit juice nor Coke would make for a legitimate sacrament.

I suspect you are dealing with Protestants on the issue. The Bible is not the sole source of theology or information; and sola scriptura is nowhere stated in the Bible; that is a rejection of the Catholic Church and a strike out at what the Church terms Tradition (as opposed to tradition). It is likely you will not convince them of the legitimacy of what the Church practices; because they will only accept as authority what is in the Bible (and then they will dispute what constitutes “the Bible”). Further, the Church managed to go for 1,200 + years before someone came up with “sola scriptura”. Amazing that it did not start oh, say about 1,100 years earlier.
 
Nathan said:
some Catholic churches are even taking up the practice of using grape juice or similar substitutes
Click to expand...
Please provide evidence for this statement.

The Church is very clear regarding valid matter for the Eucharist.
 
This was hearsay from a Catholic friend who attended mass while on vacation in another part of the country. It could definitely be an illegitimate claim, especially in light of above comments in this topic.
 
Parishes get the matter used for Mass from approved vendors. It would be extremely unlikely for a parish to ever use invalid matter. You’d basically need to have a disgruntled leprechaun sneak into the rectory and secretly replace the communion wine with something else.

You might hear ten thousand different point of views from any given layman, but none of that is important.
 
Last edited:
I would make another note. Caution. The “American Catholic Church” is not a Catholic (capital C) church. They reject Vatican I, and thus papal authority. I have been to a few of their services. Surprisingly similar liturgy, but often they will use grape juice or “consecrate” both wine and grape juice in 2 separate chalices. Needless to say, that doesn’t “work”.

I won’t go into the “ordained” lesbian priests… suffice it to say, that although the sign says American Catholic Church, it aint.
 
I think the premise is false. No argument beginning with “Where in the bible…” is a valid argument. Not for a Christian. Jesus never wrote a thing on papyrus. He never commended the writing of anything. He did not say that disputes should be referred to the bible. What bible? It has not yet been written. He appointed Apostles and gave them unprecedented power and authority. “He who hears you hears Me” - what could be clearer?

And, the “What would Jesus do?” is also false. It does not matter what He would do - as that is our imagination at work.

What matters is what He did do. He consecrated bread and wine into His Body and Blood.

Done.

Go way back and read Genesis 14. Melchizedek, King of (Jeru)Salem, “brought out bread and wine” and from the Letter to the Hebrrews, we know that Jesus is a Priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.

Double done.
 
Last edited:
Fresh grape juice that has not been treated in a way that changes its nature to stop fermentation is actually valid matter, but it is not appropriate to use in normal circumstances because it does not have all the characteristics of wine. Must or new wine (mustum in Latin) is allowed in certain cases if approved by authority, but is not to be consumed by the entire congregation or other concelebrating priests. Bread must be wheat bread.
 
There is not much to talk about. Using a “substitute” is strictly forbidden as the matter is invalid. Such violations must be reported to the bishop immediately.

Freshly pressed grape juice is permitted, as the natural yeasts make it materially indistinguishable from wine. Pasteurized juice, however, kills the yeast and cooks the grape, thus invalidating the material.
 
Grape juice is just not permitted for communion in the Catholic Church.

Perhaps your friend inadvertently visited a Protestant church on vacation?

Welch’s Grape Juice is a product that was originally invented and marketed to Protestant churches for use in communion.
 
But only for the priest celebrant, not for the congregation. IIRC, someone around these forums mentioned, a while back, that it was being used for the congregation (which isn’t supposed to happen).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top