Valid Communion Issue in NJ

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic29
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Steve M.,

The Church is not telling this little girl that she must do something that could kill her. It’s merely telling her (and her parents) that a rice wafer cannot be validly consecrated. Therefore, if a priest “consecrates” a rice wafer the recipient will receive just that – a wafer made of rice flour. Transubstantiation will not have taken place. So that little girl and her mother did not receive Jesus.

This might seem inllexible to outsiders, but every sacrament must have both proper matter (the “stuff” used in the sacrament) as well as proper form (the words and actions of the ritual), not to mention proper intent (that is, intending to do what the church does in that sacrament).

Since Christ is completely present in both the consecrated Wine and the consecrated Host, the little girl could have received him just as completely as other First Communicants by receiving under the form of wine.

The article doesn’t say if there was any medical reason why she couldn’t do that. But I imagine her parents simply felt she had a “right” to have an experience that looked identical to that of the other children’s.
 
40.png
juno24:
The girl in question cannot receive from the cup, either, because the cup also contains small particles of the wafer. In some people with celiac disease, even the tiniest amount of gluten can trigger a terribly painful flare-up of the disease. While for some mildly intolerant celiac sufferers the amount of gluten that is introduced into the wine at the time of co-mingling will cause little or no ill effects, for many it will indeed cause great pain and suffering. I know if I were a celiac sufferer, I would not want to do trial and error to see just how intolerant I were.
Have a great day!
Judy
Click to expand...
The can prepare a chalice just for her, you know-- without the bread present, If I’m correct?
 
:hmmm:

Wait a minute—we need to bring in an apologist on this one. I have been at lots of Masses where several chalices are prepared with wine, and I do not remember the priest putting a particle of the host in each and every cup. If the rubrics only require the priest to put a particle of host in the primary chalice, there’s no reason that a host-less chalice couldn’t be prepared for a recipient who cannot risk receiving the accidents of wheat.
 
I just read an article on this subject (can;t remember where at the moment), but the preferred resolution is preparing an additional chalice with the Precious Blood (sans eucharist) and administering the sacrement as such. Additionally, she may be asked to be the first to receive from one of the secondary chalices.
 
I just read an article on this subject (can;t remember where at the moment), but the preferred resolution is preparing an additional chalice with the Precious Blood (sans eucharist) and administering the sacrement as such. Additionally, she may be asked to be the first to receive from one of the secondary chalices.
 
40.png
Lurch104:
…but the preferred resolution is preparing an additional chalice with the Precious Blood (sans eucharist) and administering the sacrement as such.
Click to expand...
40.png
SALVEREGINA:
The can prepare a chalice just for her, you know-- without the bread present, If I’m correct?
Click to expand...
40.png
GenXSurvivor:
Wait a minute—we need to bring in an apologist on this one. I have been at lots of Masses where several chalices are prepared with wine, and I do not remember the priest putting a particle of the host in each and every cup. If the rubrics only require the priest to put a particle of host in the primary chalice, there’s no reason that a host-less chalice couldn’t be prepared for a recipient who cannot risk receiving the accidents of wheat.
Click to expand...
If that is possible, that certainly would be a wonderful solution to the girl’s problem! I’m no apologist, so I don’t know for sure that it is possible, but it seems like a fair solution. I wonder if it was explained to the parents that the girl might be able to receive communion in this manner.

Have a great day!
Judy
 
Br. Rich SFO:
Hopefully you mean no Consecration of the “bread” takes place, if the Wine is valid matter then possibly Consecration of the wine could take place. One is never to Consecrate one element without the other. However I do not find anywhere I have looked, any indication the other valid Matter or valid Matter Consecrated alone would be invalid, only illicit.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are right. Wine is valid matter, so consecration of the wine could take place. But no consecration of a rice wafer could take place.

I’m sure this has never been done, but could this be a possible solution? Use an unconsecrated rice wafer, intinct it in the precious blood, and place it on the tongue?? Just speculating.

Of course, the rice wafer would in effect break the Eucharistic fast, but that is a canonical matter that could be dispensed.

JimG
 
I just don’t understand why the wafer has to be wheat. The Catholic Church’s attitude toward this seems to undermine the power and love of God. Do you think that if a rice wafer were to undergo the method of consecration, God would say, “Hey! That’s not a wheat wafer! There’s no way I’m turning that into the body of Jesus. I only do wheat!”? It’s like you’re limiting God in the way that you think He’ll only transform a certain kind of wafer. I know that the first time bread was consecrated the bread was wheat, but I’ll bet the priest (Jesus) was barefoot as well. Should we say that consecrations are only valid if the priest is shoeless?
 
There are millions of Catholics that can’t/shouldn’t have wine because the alcohol content might have a side effect with numerous medications, but we see don’t anyone asking that the wine should be replaced with juice.
 
40.png
Lurch104:
I just read an article on this subject (can;t remember where at the moment), but the preferred resolution is preparing an additional chalice with the Precious Blood (sans eucharist) and administering the sacrement as such. Additionally, she may be asked to be the first to receive from one of the secondary chalices.
Click to expand...
For info, the Precious Blood* is* the Eucharist.
 
there are other threads on this topics with even more complete explanations. there is an alternative. people with this disorder receive the sacrament, entire and complete, through the precious blood consecrated in a vessel set aside for them, all the time, all over the world. The parents decided tor reject this option, betraying their lack of knowledge and belief about the Real Presence of Jesus in the sacrament, and their willingness to deny the Eucharist to their child in order to pursue their course of action. The priest who contacted the parents and offered the invalid and illicit host should be removed from his clerical state because he has publicly repudiated the Eucharist.
 
40.png
JimG:
Yes, you are right. Wine is valid matter, so consecration of the wine could take place. But no consecration of a rice wafer could take place.

I’m sure this has never been done, but could this be a possible solution? Use an unconsecrated rice wafer, intinct it in the precious blood, and place it on the tongue?? Just speculating.

Of course, the rice wafer would in effect break the Eucharistic fast, but that is a canonical matter that could be dispensed.

JimG
Click to expand...
Then why not just consume a few drops of the Precious Blood?

We do see some people saying that the wine should be replaced with juice. But I do not see where a small, literally a few drops of Precious Blood could interact with any medication. I personally do not buy into the alcoholics dilemma either. I can’t see sending an alcoholic into a downward spin with one drop of Precious Blood.

Placing anything (other than the Body of Christ) into the Precious Blood would not sit right with me.
 
40.png
patg:
My wife suffers from this malady and believe me, life with this disease is far harder in almost every way than any of you can imagine.

There is no acceptable “low gluten wheat wafer” and contamination from the wheat hosts is a big problem. If Jesus could consecrate wheat bread, I have no doubt he could have just as well consecrated any other type of bread. This seems like one of those silly rules which makes no sense in today’s world. I have a hard time imagining God’s eternal plan being even minutely upset by a different type of grain.

Pat
Click to expand...
Amen. Instead of being so focused on the letter of the law the church in this case might try a little mercy. And maybe the armchair apologists and canon lawyers could just stuff the arrogance and the insistence that this woman is trying to be a “cafeteria Catholic” while we’re at it.
 
What I didn’t like is the way the article is titled. It is totally misleading. Actually the article is misleading. The child is NOT denied communion, but thru her mother, refuses communion.
While reading the article, it became clear that the mother is not fully catechized (new word??), otherwise she will not be writing to Rome. It is not up to the Vatican to change the rules, especially this one. This is from a direct example of Christ’s actions.
However I suppose with all the news about the bishops asking Catholic politicans that support laws directly opposes the teachings of Christ and the Church, I should not be to surprise to see and article from the press that once again misrepresents the Church
I agree this is attitude is representative of a lot of Catholics today
 
**"…Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God." (Mark 10:14)

**
 
Can anyone point to the authority for the proposition that the designated Form and Matter for any of the Sacraments is infallibly taught and unchangeable?

The fact that “Jesus used wheat bread” (which is just an assumption) is not sufficient to settle the matter. There is no evidence that Jesus ever administered the Sacrament of Matrimony or dictated the Form and Matter for Penance (other than instructed the apostles that "who sins you . . . "). It is well accepted that the current practice of private penance first emerged fairly late in Church history. I can recall no mention in Scripture of Jesus Confirming anyone or using chrism or oil in anyway.

We constantly hear that the Form and, more importantly for this discussion, the Matter are unchangeable. But what is the authority for construing this issue as one of doctrine as opposed to practice or discipline?
 
40.png
juno24:
The girl in question cannot receive from the cup, either, because the cup also contains small particles of the wafer. In some people with celiac disease, even the tiniest amount of gluten can trigger a terribly painful flare-up of the disease. While for some mildly intolerant celiac sufferers the amount of gluten that is introduced into the wine at the time of co-mingling will cause little or no ill effects, for many it will indeed cause great pain and suffering. I know if I were a celiac sufferer, I would not want to do trial and error to see just how intolerant I were.
Have a great day!
Judy
Click to expand...
I admit that I have absolutely no background information on the disease, but I really find it hard to believe that the girl cannot receive from the cup. Even with co mingling 99% of the precious blood would have no wheat particles in it.
 
40.png
Esquire:
We constantly hear that the Form and, more importantly for this discussion, the Matter are unchangeable. But what is the authority for construing this issue as one of doctrine as opposed to practice or discipline?
Click to expand...
Well, since the child’s mother has appealed to Rome, I guess we will get an answer to that question.

The Church would certainly be doing the girl no favor by allowing reception of communion in the form of rice, if it is convinced that no transubstantiation could take place. Why be satisfied with rice when you can receive the body of the Lord under the appearance of a drop of wine?

I have the impression that some who are pressing the issue do not really believe that the consecration has any effect whatsoever; consequently it doesn’t matter to them what substance is used, since nothing really happens anyway.

JimG
 
40.png
Juxtaposer:
I just don’t understand why the wafer has to be wheat. The Catholic Church’s attitude toward this seems to undermine the power and love of God. Do you think that if a rice wafer were to undergo the method of consecration, God would say, “Hey! That’s not a wheat wafer! There’s no way I’m turning that into the body of Jesus. I only do wheat!”? It’s like you’re limiting God in the way that you think He’ll only transform a certain kind of wafer. I know that the first time bread was consecrated the bread was wheat, but I’ll bet the priest (Jesus) was barefoot as well. Should we say that consecrations are only valid if the priest is shoeless?
Click to expand...
Then where should we draw the line? It is the way it is because Holy Mother Church says so…YOU don’t necessarily have to understand or even agree, but Jesus said “whatever you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven…” so it is so…

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top