Small particles of the host - why no concern?

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the OF, the paten is a small gold plate on which the host is placed at the offertory. At EF Masses, the host is placed and later broken on the corporal. In both forms, care is taken in folding and unfolding the corporal to ensure that any particles of the host remain folded inside. The wider plate with handles used at Holy Communion at EF Masses is properly called a patina. If there is a church in the London area that would like a patina, we have three and only use one about every 5 years when we have an EF funeral Mass.

The main purpose of the patina is to catch the host if it misses the communicant’s tongue. In many decades of serving at Mass, I have only known this to happen once. There is little risk of particles falling from the host whether Holy Communion is given on the tongue or in the hand. Congregational hosts are not normally broken. In the unusual event that there are not enough hosts, the priest or Eucharistic Minister may break them, but does so inside the ciborium so that any loose particles are contained.

Our present understanding of the properties of matter is that minute particles of any solid pass into the air and later settle as dust. Similarly small amounts of wine are lost through evaporation, allowing us to smell it. The Church’s teaching on the real presence is that it only exists where the sacred elements are recognisable as bread and wine, not as dust and vapour.
 
Last edited:
Not entirely on the topic of particles, but at the Church I grew up at in the 90s patens were used, and it wasn’t a “trad catholic” church. I would like to see them more often.
 
Last edited:
No, showing a picture of Jesus bloody and trampled on because people are receiving Holy Eucharist in a manner allowed by the Church, that the poster doesn’t like, is rhetoric and hyperbole.
 
Last edited:
Beryllos said:
Is there really such a thing as inadvertent sacrilege?
Click to expand...
I said “inadvertent” because I wished to allow for the fact that it is not deliberate. I would hate to think that any recipient of communion would ever say “yes, I see it, I know that is the Body of Christ, but I don’t care, I’ll just let It fall on the floor, or on my clothes, or what have you”.
nightshade said:
This is OP’s concern, in a graphic cartoon.
Click to expand...
That is exactly right. This is precisely what happens when visible particles of the host go unnoticed or disregarded. Yes, it’s offensive to have the matter depicted this way. But this is the reality of what happens. Having the Body of Our Lord subjected to trampling, or whatever else could happen to a particle of the Body, is offensive.
CilladeRoma said:
It is what the Church in the US has allowed, with the OK from the Vatican.
Are all those against it OK with going against what Rome has said is an option?
Sorry, there is only one Magisterium, and it’s not people on the internet.
Click to expand...
Not to split hairs, but the “Magisterium” is the teaching office of the Church. No doctrine or dogma is involved here. This is a disciplinary matter — what was once not allowed has become allowed. The Pope could change this tomorrow. Read what Cardinal Sarah said. He might well be the next Pope. What then?
nightshade said:
According to the Church you are only ever required to go to confession once a year at Easter.
Click to expand...
Is there a discipline or canon law that says this? I realize that there is, when one is conscious of having committed a mortal sin. But if you have not committed a mortal sin in that year and beyond, does the obligation still exist? Again, where does it say this?

Having said this, it is horrible practice to refrain from going to confession any more frequently than once a year (or less). I don’t advocate infrequent confession — once a month is not too often and might not be often enough — but where is the law that makes annual confession mandatory for everyone?
 
Reality can be offensive, I suppose. No one is contesting what is permissible by the Church.
 
Last edited:
Iworshipthegod said:
Because it’s really not a big deal.
Click to expand...
I’ve been blessed to be raised in a very devout Catholic home with an extended Irish Catholic family which includes Priests, nuns and a Bishop. I don’t ever recall having it impressed on me that people were walking all over Jesus because of host crumbs. What was impressed on me was the deep significance of receiving the Body of Christ. When we came away from Mass, Mum would always speak about it in a really joyous way and that impressed on us the real effects of grace and gratitude in what we had just received. It’s so foreign to me how people could come away from Mass feeling like Jesus got trampled on or whining and complaining about how irreverent everyone else was. That to me is what is irreverent.
 
Titivillus said:
I read no such thing in those documents?
Click to expand...
Whilst it doesn’t say in B & W that since 1969…

Considering the numbers of Bishops who opposed Communion in the hand being introduced according to the document - then surely after reading that, doesn’t it stand to reason that in the intervening years Communion in the hand has become the norm?
 
Yes that is true. But if you do your own research you’ll see from polls taken, that a lot of Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence, for a variety of reasons, one of which is that this wasn’t emphasized.

I’m most happy to welcome you into our Catholic Family!
 
I think that would take some serious intervention by the Holy Spirit.
 
CilladeRoma said:
This is offensive to me, and to any one I know who has seen it.
Click to expand...
I don’t think of it as offensive so much as I think of it as bad art.
CilladeRoma said:
Receiving in the hand is not some new novelty, it was done from the beginning, just like receiving from the cup.
Click to expand...
I get what you’re saying but of course those against CITH point out that the apostles who first received in the hand were actually ordained.
 
The Communion Plate is used at every parish I know of in my part of the world.

With commercially manufactured hosts, it is very rare for there to be particles that fall to the Communion Plate. The Plate comes in handy should a host be dropped, but, even that is rare. In 10 years of serving, my son caught a falling host twice.
 
Can you acknowledge that different people have different manifestations of reverence? The OP talks about this experience being “gut wrenching”. That’s probably not the right demeanour to carry out a job as you’ve described here. Other people may not feel gut wrenched but are still very aware of reasons why the blessed sacrament needs the utmost respect.

My daughter recently did a uni speech on Vincent van Gogh. When he was a young man studying to become a Priest, he was required to carry out the charism of that order which was to help the poor. He found it so unbearable that he could go home to a bed and food each night leaving poor where he found them, that he began to live like them. His superiors had to eventually reject him for ordination because his demeanour although very empathetic with the poor, was not a good one for serving them.

It’s not reasonable to expect all people to display reverence in the same manner.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top