The appearance of bread

[yablabo]

If one took an unconsecrated host to an elementary school, what is the likely number of children there that would recognize it as bread?

What about to a junior high or high school?

I can remember as a child (four or five years old) not being able to recognize what I was seeing elevated by the priest as the appearance of bread.

I found some information at the USCCB website describing what kind of bread can be used at Mass:

What kind of bread can be used at Mass?

Concerning the bread used for the celebration of the eucharist, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 321, states that, “The meaning of the sign demands that the material for the Eucharistic celebration truly have the appearance of food. It is therefore expedient that the Eucharistic bread, even though unleavened and baked in the traditional shape, be made in such a way that the priest at Mass with a congregation is able in practice to break it into parts for distribution to at least some of the faithful. Small hosts are, however, in no way ruled out when the number of those receiving Holy Communion or other pastoral needs require it…”

The Instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum describes how “the bread used in the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharistic Sacrifice must be unleavened, purely of wheat, and recently made so that there is no danger of decomposition. It follows therefore that bread made from other substance, even if it is grain, or if it is mixed with another substance different from wheat to such an extent that it would not commonly be considered wheat bread, does not constitute valid matter for confecting the Sacrifice and the Eucharistic Sacrament. It is a grave abuse to introduce other substances, such as fruit or sugar or honey, into the bread for confecting the Eucharist. Hosts should obviously be made by those who are not only distinguisher by their integrity, but also skilled in making them and furnished with suitable tools.”

Email us at bcl@usccb.org
Secretariat for Divine Worship | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3060 © USCCB. All rights reserved.

So, the material must truly have the appearance of food. What is the likelihood that anyone off the street recognize an unconsecrated host as food?

If the unconsecrated host, while being unleavened and made purely of wheat, cannot be recognized as either bread or food, is it then doubtful matter?

– Nicole

 

[Corki]

If one took an unconsecrated host to an elementary school, what is the likely number of children there that would recognize it as bread?

What about to a junior high or high school?

I can remember as a child (four or five years old) not being able to recognize what I was seeing elevated by the priest as the appearance of bread.

I found some information at the USCCB website describing what kind of bread can be used at Mass:

So, the material must truly have the appearance of food. What is the likelihood that anyone off the street recognize an unconsecrated host as food?

If the unconsecrated host, while being unleavened and made purely of wheat, cannot be recognized as either bread or food, is it then doubtful matter?

– Nicole

Unconsecrated hosts may not be immediately recognized as bread in a western school setting but they are certainly recognizable as food. The unconsecrated hosts closely resemble many forms of crackers, for example. And in my husband’s home town they sell a snack food that looks oddly like unconsecrated hosts. So, the converse is true.

In any case, it doesn’t go to the validity of the matter. The “recognizability” of the host as food is not something that would make the Consecration invalid.

 

[yablabo]

Unconsecrated hosts may not be immediately recognized as bread in a western school setting but they are certainly recognizable as food. The unconsecrated hosts closely resemble many forms of crackers, for example. And in my husband’s home town they sell a snack food that looks oddly like unconsecrated hosts. So, the converse is true.

In any case, it doesn’t go to the validity of the matter. The “recognizability” of the host as food is not something that would make the Consecration invalid.

I have been many places and never seen a cracker like the hosts used. I am not arguing that you or your husband have seen no such thing, simply that I have not.

I am not presenting any question as to the “form” of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

I am trying to resolve the fact that what I see elevated by the priest does not look like bread to me, does not smell like bread, taste like bread or feel like bread.

Since, after the words of the Consecration are said over valid matter by the correct minister with the proper intent, our Lord is really, truly and substantially present under the accidents/appearance/species of bread and wine, then, if one cannot recognize the appearance as the accidents of bread…is Christ really, truly and substantially present?

For example, if I mixed some wheat flour with some water and baked it in a 1000 degree kiln…and then presented the result to the priest for him to consecrate, could he say that since it is made from wheat flour and water with no leaven that it is valid matter? doubtful matter? or does it have to have the appearance/accidents of bread in order to be bread?

– Nicole

 

[Corki]

I have been many places and never seen a cracker like the hosts used. I am not arguing that you or your husband have seen no such thing, simply that I have not.

I am not presenting any question as to the “form” of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

I am trying to resolve the fact that what I see elevated by the priest does not look like bread to me, does not smell like bread, taste like bread or feel like bread.

Since, after the words of the Consecration are said over valid matter by the correct minister with the proper intent, our Lord is really, truly and substantially present under the accidents/appearance/species of bread and wine, then, if one cannot recognize the appearance as the accidents of bread…is Christ really, truly and substantially present?

For example, if I mixed some wheat flour with some water and baked it in a 1000 degree kiln…and then presented the result to the priest for him to consecrate, could he say that since it is made from wheat flour and water with no leaven that it is valid matter? doubtful matter? or does it have to have the appearance/accidents of bread in order to be bread?

– Nicole

The point I was trying to make, clumsily I guess, was that your personal interpretation of the host as bread (or not) doesn’t matter to the validity of the Consecration.

As for your doubts about hosts resembling other foods, take a look at this post in Wikipedia (I know, but it has pictures )

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wafer

The ones I have eaten (obleas) are not mentioned in the Wiki post but you can find them online. They are popular in Latin America. There’s a Japanese version too.

Your kiln baked carbon crumbs would have the same problem that spoiled wine does. It may have been valid matter at some time in the past but that doesn’t mean it still is.

 

[Kalos]

Interesting question.
What do you think the bread that Jesus used at the Passover table was like? I think you can be quite certain it was like a matzo cracker. A matzo is not even in color. It has stripelike burn marks in it which represent the stripes that were laid on Jesus. It has holes pierced in it that represent how Jesus was pierced for us. [edited]

 

[KarenElissa]

If one took an unconsecrated host to an elementary school, what is the likely number of children there that would recognize it as bread?

Well, when I was received into the Church, some friends came who weren’t Catholic, including my friends 7yo and she asked why the priest was holding up the big tortilla, something that I would most certainly consider bread. So yes, an elementary aged would recognize the host as a type of bread.

 

[Corki]

Interesting question.
What do you think the bread that Jesus used at the Passover table was like? I think you can be quite certain it was like a matzo cracker. A matzo is not even in color. It has stripelike burn marks in it which represent the stripes that were laid on Jesus. It has holes pierced in it that represent how Jesus was pierced for us. [edited]

[edited]

How could the matzo “represent” Jesus’ stripes and wounds if matzo was around long before the incarnation?

 

[japhy]

[edited] Eastern Catholics don’t use wafer-shaped bread, and yet the Catholic faith regarding the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist remains the same.

Whatever the shape, the Church’s belief in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist is evident not only from Scripture but also from writings from the early Church.

 

[japhy]

How could the matzo “represent” Jesus’ stripes and wounds if matzo was around long before the incarnation?

The same way the Passover lamb represented Jesus. It’s prophetic foreshadowing. (I’m not subscribing to [edited] Kalos’ ideas, of course, just answering your question.)

 

[japhy]

There’s a joke in Roman Catholic circles:

There’s two things you have to believe about the bread used for the Eucharist: 1) that after the consecration, it’s no longer bread; and 2) that it was bread to begin with!

 

[Corki]

The same way the Passover lamb represented Jesus. It’s prophetic foreshadowing. (I’m not subscribing to [edited] Kalos’ ideas, of course, just answering your question.)

I still think it’s a bit of a stretch. The Passover lamb represented Jesus but it was the whole lamb. Unleavened bread used for Passover forshadowed the Eucharist but I don’t think the details of the physical appearance of the bread were supposed to to forshadow the marks on Jesus’ body.

Besides, it is machine made matzo that has the dark stripes. Home-made matzo is more speckled than striped. So the stripes would be more of a recollection than a foreshadowing. [edited]

 

[malphono]

Besides, it is machine made matzo that has the dark stripes. Home-made matzo is more speckled than striped.

In the tradition of the Syrian and other Middle Eastern Jews, matzah (or massah) is actually fairly thin but still rather pliable when first cooked, and will last that way for a few hours. When the air hits it, it dries out very quickly, though, and becomes crisp.

It’s rather similar to a type of unleavened Bedouin bread which is probably even thinner and is baked on a hot stone. There is also a leavened bread in the Middle East which is stretched to paper thinness and baked on a metal disk placed over a heat source. Interesting enough, the taste & texture of both the leavened and unleavened varieties is similar when freshly baked. The big difference between the two is that the leavened variety will stay pliable longer. It’s usually folded-up into a sort of “packet” and can be kept for a few days as long as it’s covered and not exposed to the air.

 

[yablabo]

The point I was trying to make, clumsily I guess, was that your personal interpretation of the host as bread (or not) doesn’t matter to the validity of the Consecration.

As for your doubts about hosts resembling other foods, take a look at this post in Wikipedia (I know, but it has pictures )

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wafer

The ones I have eaten (obleas) are not mentioned in the Wiki post but you can find them online. They are popular in Latin America. There’s a Japanese version too.

Your kiln baked carbon crumbs would have the same problem that spoiled wine does. It may have been valid matter at some time in the past but that doesn’t mean it still is.

Thanks, you really aided me greatly in my search. The definition of a wafer was key to solving this issue in my mind…and I put in several hours on this last night after I read your final reply.

Up until last night I had seen a wafer not as a species of bread, but rather as a type of candy product. I see now that it is, in fact, a very thin, very dry biscuit…and that it is not by necessity sweet… The pictures really helped too!

Thank you so much!

– Nicole