Why not distribute unconsecrated bread and wine at Mass to those unable to take part in the Eucharist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hokomai
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey thanks everyone for some really interesting and though-provoking and educational replies to my OP. I got a real insight into how people in the eastern traditions feel about things, and about the range of attitudes in the western Church.

:tiphat:
 
Hokomai said:
I am not on an opposing side. I do not oppose people holding beliefs. I am interested in belief. I personally try to avoid believing, as distinct from ‘concluding’ based on facts but have no objection to other people doing so.
Click to expand...
Oh, I hardly think you’re either Axis or Ally in this one. You’re more like… Marvin the Martian.
On the other hand, I may have been assigned by the international organization of masonic new-age communist muslim protestant satan-worshipping folk mass-going liturgical dancing atheist cafeteria ex-Catholics to systematically destroy the Church by long and meandering threads on really obscure points on CAF. Who can tell? 🤷
Click to expand...
Atheists and the irreligious never really seemed like the sorts to join clandestine cultuses just to destroy a religious institution. It much rather seemed they’d rather take it apart brick by brick by themselves.
 
TarkanAttila said:
Atheists and the irreligious never really seemed like the sorts to join clandestine cultuses just to destroy a religious institution. It much rather seemed they’d rather take it apart brick by brick by themselves.
Click to expand...
Unless Anonymous is planning a DDoS attack on this place? :eek:
 
LilyM said:
If memory serves, at least some of our Orthodox and Eastern Catholic brothers do distribute unconsecrated bread after their liturgies. No confusion at all that I can tell, certainly no higher incidence of improper communions either. :shrugs: and it is a nice friendly gesture towards those who cannot receive, makes them feel still part of the body.
Click to expand...
That would be the Agape meal.
Somewhat appart from the Mass itself.
If. Your and old Italian like myself you can
remember huge Sunday meals were almost anyone was wecome. I believe this custum of sharing is a remnant of.the earlier Christain Practices.
 
gus said:
That would be the Agape meal.
Somewhat appart from the Mass itself.
Click to expand...
The Agape Meal, truly separated from the Divine Liturgy celebration, is not really the same thing being discussed here.

My mom is half Italian, and I do miss Sunday afternoon dinners the way we used to have them, when our families were all close by …
 
DaddyGirl said:
Same here.
And I’m trying to understand how this process came to be as it is today.
I understand what happened at the passover supper Jesus had with his apostles and what the eucharist means in the Catholic church today.

But what I still don’t understand, and hope someone can explain, is how it came to be that only some people can take part in it and others cannot.
In the gospels, when Jesus is handing out bread and wine, he sounds very inclusive about it all.
“Do this in remembrance of me…”
and,
“…this is for many…”
(paraphrasing)

So at what point and how did it come to be that some Christians–but not others–can take part in the Eucharist…and and what point/how did it come to be that the ones who took part had to follow several specific steps beforehand in order to “earn” it? (if that is the correct wording?).
Click to expand...
Earn it probably isn’t the right word actually. :o We can’t earn Christ. Aterall, before communion we say, “Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof.” However, as I said before, we the Eucharist is God giving himself entirely to us. How can we “take him” when we aren’t willing to accept him with our full heart and be willing to give ourselves to him in return?
Someone who does not believe the Eucharist is Jesus does not accept him entirely,nor are they giving themselves back to God. How can they when they don’t even know its God? They must also be in full communion throught the Church (through baptisim and by being the state of grace)for the same reasons. How can we be in communion with him throught the Eucharist if we aren’t in communion with him through our lives.

As well, though Jesus does not state the exact rules surrounding who can recieve,St Paul does elaborate:
1 Cor. 11:27-29
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

On top of that we have Church teaching. Jesus did give authority to the Church and therefore we should obey her instructions.
 
I find it funny how 200 years ago we wouldn’t have been having this discussion. (Well, of course not, we wouldn’t have been alive.) What I mean, though, is, 200 years ago, there was never any question about open communion. It simply was never done by anyone - Protestant or Catholic - until recently, and for a simple reason: if you did not believe what the church distributing the bread and wine believed, you didn’t partake in their communion. To be in communion is to believe in one accord. And on many things, most of all the Eucharist, a Calvinist is in disagreement with a Catholic. And that used to be taken quite seriously.

Perhaps this is what happens when people forget that the creeds they recite and beliefs they hold are claims of truth (rightly or wrongly). And if that bread and wine is claimed to be the Body and Blood of Christ, but you don’t believe such a thing to be possible, why would you want to partake in that which you don’t believe, until you do believe?
 
I’m currently in RCIA classes. If there were a line for the “unconsecrated”, I would continue to do as I do now. Stay in my seat, kneeling position, praying for a time in the near future when I can receive the “real host”. Attending a separate line would seem very purposeless. Praying, would have purpose.
 
TarkanAttila said:
I find it funny how 200 years ago we wouldn’t have been having this discussion. (Well, of course not, we wouldn’t have been alive.) What I mean, though, is, 200 years ago, there was never any question about open communion. It simply was never done by anyone - Protestant or Catholic - until recently, and for a simple reason: if you did not believe what the church distributing the bread and wine believed, you didn’t partake in their communion. To be in communion is to believe in one accord. And on many things, most of all the Eucharist, a Calvinist is in disagreement with a Catholic. And that used to be taken quite seriously.

Perhaps this is what happens when people forget that the creeds they recite and beliefs they hold are claims of truth (rightly or wrongly). And if that bread and wine is claimed to be the Body and Blood of Christ, but you don’t believe such a thing to be possible, why would you want to partake in that which you don’t believe, until you do believe?
Click to expand...
👍
 
LilyM said:
If memory serves, at least some of our Orthodox and Eastern Catholic brothers do distribute unconsecrated bread after their liturgies. No confusion at all that I can tell, certainly no higher incidence of improper communions either. :shrugs: and it is a nice friendly gesture towards those who cannot receive, makes them feel still part of the body.
Click to expand...
Don’t they call that Coffee Hour? 😃
 
ByzCathCantor said:
Dormition Liturgy-Distribution of the Antidoron 2010 (source: St. Elias UGCC - Brampton, ONT, Canada)

NOTE: This is done at the end of the Divine Liturgy, after the final blessing. There is no “separate line” during or immediately after the distribution of the Holy Eucharist.
Click to expand...
The distribution of antidoron varies. Some are at the end of the Liturgy, some are during the distribution of the Eucharist. The OCA parish I have visited sets out two baskets of bread and two cups of wine for the faithful to consume right after receiving Communion. Technically anyone who is present, Orthodox or not, can go to the baskets and take bread and drink from the cup. Some jurisdictions make people eat and drink blessed bread and wine or water right after receiving to ensure the entire Eucharist is consumed, and also to ensure that the person indeed consumes the Eucharist.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
Indeed, but I purposely cited Eastern Catholic usage only.
Click to expand...
But what St. Elias does doesn’t necessarily mean other EC parishes follow what they do. As varied as it is with the Orthodox Church, it is as varied in the EC Churches.
 
ConstantineTG said:
But what St. Elias does doesn’t necessarily mean other EC parishes follow what they do. As varied as it is with the Orthodox Church, it is as varied in the EC Churches.
Click to expand...
I don’t know of any ECCs of Byzantine-Slav tradition that distribute Antidoron regularly and in the same way as is done in Eastern Orthodox churches of similar origin. Please let us know if you are specifically aware of such.
 
ByzCathCantor said:
I don’t know of any ECCs of Byzantine-Slav tradition that distribute Antidoron regularly and in the same way as is done in Eastern Orthodox churches of similar origin. Please let us know if you are specifically aware of such.
Click to expand...
You can ask 5Loaves as she attends a Russian Catholic parish. If they are following the OCA to the letter, then they would probably be bringing out the antidoron during the distribution of the Eucharist.
 
ConstantineTG said:
You can ask 5Loaves as she attends a Russian Catholic parish. If they are following the OCA to the letter, then they would probably be bringing out the antidoron during the distribution of the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
That could be - I’ll PM her if she doesn’t see this and post. Even if they use the OCA Liturgikon, they may still use the Slav Euchologion (Trebnyk) for blessing of bread and oil in connection with this practice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top