Imagine trying this in an Orthodox setting. I'm reminded of the kerfuffle from the swine flu scare of a few years back (see here). The idea of using plastic spoons or other non-standard methods of distribution was enough cause for much energized debate in Churches both East and West that I can't fathom what would happen if the faithful came up only to find a "dry" chalice.
(USA Today) - What? No wine? The Bishop of Phoenix Thomas Olmsted is crossing wine out of Communion at most Masses, limiting how often the chalice is offered to holy days and special occasions, writes Michael Clancy at the Arizona Republic.
Olmsted bases his unique decision on the Church's new translation of the liturgy for the Mass, called the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, and other church documents, which he says don't really require folks in the pews have wine as part of the Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches that the bread and wine, when blessed by the priest, become the body and blood of Christ.
Clancy writes
The option of offering both bread and wine for Communion has been in place since 1975. Catholics never have been obligated to take both and, until 1975, the practice had been forbidden since the mid-1500s.
The dicocesan press release says
... bread alone makes it possible to receive all the fruit of the Eucharistic grace."
One diocesan priest, Rev. James Turner, told Clancy,
The majority of priests were stunned and aghast at the announcement, and I hear some are planning to meet to see how best to respond. While the bishop has the authority to make this policy change, there is no scriptural, theological or sacramental rationale that makes any sense.
Olmsted is a stickler for Church authority. He was last in national headlines in December when he stripped Catholic credentials off a Phoenix hospital founded by nuns when he disagreed with the hospital's decision to permit an abortion to save the life of a young mother with a life-threatening heart condition.
Clancy points out,
..No other diocese in the country is known to be following suit, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops told TheArizona Republic.
The new Missal -- a more formal, literally translated text and melodies for the prayers, chants and responses in the Mass -- goes into use in the English-speaking world Nov. 27, the first Sunday of Advent. But the diocesan release didn't say how soon Phoenix Catholics could expect to see less of the chalice.
Posts
I'd completely support Bishop Olmsted on this. This isn't an arbitrary decree, but rather a recognition of a legitimate liturgical tradition/discipline within the Latin church. I would also remind those priests "planning to meet to see how best to respond" that they have a duty to obey legitimate authority. I would resist similar attempts in an Orthodox or Greek Catholic setting for exactly the same reasons.
ReplyDeletebtw, thanks for maintaining this blog.
In the traditional Roman rite, or Tridentine Mass, and before. Communion was always under one species. Not like it has been done in the East. No big deal from my point of view. Just less lay people running up to the altar wanting to "actively participate". This also means that this Bishop is beginning to once again embrace tradition. Something the East know all so well.
ReplyDeleteThe Western church has always had issues with the chalice and withdrew it in the 15th Century. Their legalistic minds wouldn't let them come to an agreement; bread and eine separately, bread and wine through a metal tube, bread separate and wine with a spoon, intinction.They just argued about the way it should be given and received until it was withdrawn completely. They never learned to do what the Anglicans/Episcopalians do, Priest gives the Host and Deacon gives the Chalice but maintains control of it. They also gave by intinction if the person wants it directly on the tongue (like me). I know some of the Anglican Use parishes give by intinction on the tongue, don't know how the Western Rite Orthodox do it now days. Those supporting intinction were told it was unbiblical that it says Christ GAVE the chalice to drink. What a thing to get fundamental literalist about! Be glad and rejoice that the Byzantine Churches resolved this issue. You omitted the Bishops statement about too many lay ministers handling the Chalice and just handing it to the laypeople. Even the Maronites give by intinction now.
ReplyDeleteWell, GOD Bless their little pea pickin' hearts!
I'm not arguing with the history of the Western Church and their use of the bread alone. My comment was more about the faithful's response to change. To make this sort of change (reversion) - if reported accurately - out of the blue would (should) occasion a noticeable response.
ReplyDeleteIf we went back to the Constantinopolitan practice of "making a throne with our hands" I would expect a response of some sort as well.
The Roman Catholic Church usually offers a wafer -- and no wine -- at its Holy Communion; the Greek Orthodox Church offers "andithero" or holy bread -- as well as wine -- at its Holy Communion.
ReplyDeleteMost Catholics believe that the wafer also includes the wine from Christ's body. I find it very inconsistent for the Catholic Church to allow the wafer to be the body and blood of Christ on some occasions, while having wine as well as a wafer on other occasions, such as holy days.
The Catholic Church really needs to establish a standard policy on the Holy Communion Sacrament. Either it should have just a wafer at all times for Holy Communion, or it should have both wine and a wafer at all times.
To have it "both ways" -- just a wafer sometimes and a wafer and wine at other times -- tends to lessen the spiritual significance of the Holy Communion Sacrament.
Calling John Hus!
ReplyDeleteI have an Eastern Catholic friend who, due to circumstances of geography, usually attends Latin Mass. He rants that in the East, if a lay person so much as touches the vessels, they are excommunicated until such time as they can do penance. So kudos to the bishop for reducing the "Extraordinary Minister" stuff. As to the species, Latin theology on one species or another being equal developed out of the practice of the Viaticum, the Eucharist for the dying, where only the Host was brought to the sick due to the limits of transporting liquids over long distances. It was decided that this was no less a participation in the Sacramental Mystery than receiving under both kinds, hence the historical indifference to whether anyone receives both.
ReplyDelete