I learned something last night at our instructional Mass

here is the situation. a priest is conscreating the bread and wine. another priest on the alter with him drops of an apparate heart attack. the priest HAS to finish the euchristic prayer before he helps the other. granted, he will do it faster, but he still has to finish.

the reason? no one is certain when the bread and wine are changed to the body and blood.

never knew that.

slight delay in helping the other priest would make little difference, besides which I would think an altar server or someone from the congregation would go to the stricken priest's aid.

There are so many doctors in my parish that if someone faints in church, three or four doctors will rush to check on the person. So I hope if I ever have a heart attack or stroke, it will be in church!

I wonder if priests are actually taught this in seminary "Rule #87. If another priest has a heart attack at the altar, you must finish the Eucharistic Prayer before helping him" or if it's just the kind of thing theology profs think up. :shrug:

Seriously, who comes up with these scenarios? The Consecration is not a magic spell that has to be consummated or else bad things will happen. What does this have to do with "Do this in memory of me"? This smacks of an up-to-dsate version of the story that if you pierced the Host with a pin, it would bleed.

and he gets a chuckle out of some of the stuff we do in his name. Things like slavery, crusades, et al piss him off, but some stuff gives him a chuckle.

our worship of Him. He has commanded it, after all.

of the Catholic faith. For the benefit of any non-Catholics reading this, the Mass is all about following Jesus's instructions. The host becomes the Body and Blood of Christ, which is why Communion under one species is sufficient. We normally refer to it as the Body of Christ, though, should not refer to it as the host or the bread after the Consecration. The wine likewise becomes the Body and the Blood, though we commonly refer to it as the Blood of Christ and do not have to receive it even if it is offered.

Of course the Body of Christ and the Blood of Christ retain the physical characteristics of unleavened bread and wine, the transformation is spiritual. The Consecration is not a "magic spell" but it is the holiest moment of the Mass. Without it, we could not receive the true Body and Blood of Christ.

It's unfortunate that some nuns used to tell their students that the Body of Christ would bleed if they bit it or stuck it with a pin. They were trying to instill respect for the Blessed Sacrament but should have chosen different words to do so. There was a time in the Fifties and Sixties when Catholic schools were so full that inexperienced young novices were teaching in some places; someone I know was a novice and teaching at the ripe old age of 19.

But there have been reports of bleeding hosts throughout Christian history. The Miracle of Bolsena is one. In A.D. 1263. Peter of Prague, a German priest, made a pilgrimage to Rome. He stopped at the Church of St. Christina there to offer Mass. While he was a holy and devout man, he harbored doubts about the Real Presence -- doubts which were completely resolved when the Host he consecrated during that Mass began to bleed. He rushed to meet Pope Urban IV in Orvieto, bringing the Host with him. The miracle was declared, and the Host is still on display at the Cathedral of Orvieto today. I believe this is the one that has been analyzed in modern times and found to be human cardiac muscle, with the Blood being human blood, type AB.

Catholics are not required to believe in this or many other non-Biblical miracles, of course, but believing in the Real Presence is as important for Catholics as believing in the Resurrection. Protestants do not believe in the Real Presence.


In the Gospel of St. Matthew, which was written about six years after the Ascension, Jesus said:

26 And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body.

27 And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this.

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.


Jesus said the same thing in the other Gospels, using very similar words. He also said that He was the Vine and that we could not reach Heaven without Him.

You would try to suck it instead, and it regularly got stuck to the roof of your mouth. That all
changed after Vatican II, thank goodness.

And if anyone accidentally drops a wafer, you have to eat it, no matter how many feet might have
trodden on that bit of floor. It mustn't ever be thrown away. It hasn't happened to me yet when I've been serving as a Eucharistic Minister, but I've seen it happen to others.

the consecrated Host is that you will undoubtedly get particles stuck in your teeth, which will then be mingled with whatever you eat and drink after Mass. The idea is to receive the Body of Christ on an empty stomach, to let it dissolve completely in your mouth so it is digested before it mingles with any food. It is unsettling when it sticks to the roof of your mouth but it dissolves quickly enough, it just seems like a really long time. The first time it happened to me, I felt a certain amount of panic, then it dawned on me that of course it would dissolve, no matter how weird it felt at the moment.

I wonder if there is a named phobia of getting the Host stuck to the roof of your mouth? There is one for getting peanut butter stuck to the roof of your mouth, it's Arachibutyrophobia. I checked a site about phobias and found a whole lot of weird ones, but none involving getting the Host stuck to the roof of your mouth. Perhaps no one is truly phobic about it. :shrug:

i did when i first started going to communion and then i gagged on it. i refused to go to communion after that until my parents who had a priest talk to me and said it was okay to chew.

have you tried it lately? Just curious because I had trouble swallowing pills until I was in my twenties but now I don't, which is a good thing since I have to take quite a few now, looking at 50 from the other side.

I also used to have Aichmophobia- Fear of needles or pointed objects.

In other words, I hated shots, Probably had something to do with having rabies shots in my belly when I was 2. I can't remember it at all and never have been afraid of dogs, but I was really afraid of needles attached to syringes for years.

This phobia may not be the correct one since it could mean sewing needles or pick-up sticks, but I saw it yesterday in the "A"s on the phobia list site. There is also a phobia that is fear of chopsticks. :shrug:

I probably could try it again. I am just used to doing it my way now for all these years.

The Pirate himself will be 61 on Christmas Day.

(I looked it up but I thought he was at least 60 now.)

There's no real reason to try it but I wouldn't be surprised if your gag reflex has changed. I can swallow huge pills now, speaking of which reminds me to go get out my antibiotics to take before I go to the dentist tomorrow -- they're really huge. Replying to you caused me to remember so thanks!

do you take the anti-bijotics due to a heart mummer? I do and my dentist told me last time that protocol has changed on this and it is unnecessary now. something to look into.

I have lupus and I have mitral valve prolapse, two reasons to pre-medicate. I need to ask my doctors but I'm pretty sure my dentist mentioned this a year or so ago and said I should probably still pre-medicate because of the lupus. Thanks for mentioning it.

I don't know if mitral valve prolapse is also called a heart murmur. I've read a book about MVP but that was years ago so I don't remember if it answered that question.

When I was growing up, it was always kids who'd had rheumatic fever who were said to have heart murmurs. Is that what you have, or MVP, or something else?

I have a history of heart disease in my family to start with and I have been on medicine for a few years now. About two years ago, my doctor discovered the murmer.

What about when it is reduced to its constituent atoms? Do all those atoms float away as minuscule pieces of the Body of Christ?

Those are nasty questions, and pretty stupid ones IMO. I think they result when anyone tries to put too literal an interpretation on Body of Christ.

Let me try a different approach. It is right and proper that we treat the Real Presence with reverence and dignity. However, instead of getting all hung up on how to treat crumbs, remember how Jesus described Himself as the Bridegroom and the Church as his bride. Think of the eagerness and joy, excitement and ecstatic disbelief that the wedding day is finally here of a bride walking down the aisle to her bridge groom. THAT is how we should be approaching the Eucharist. Now think of the many modern brides who get so involved in matching the flowers to the napkins to the tablecloths to the frosting on the cake at the reception that they forget all about the groom. I think too many people, Catholic and Protestant, end up treating the Eucharist that way. We're so busy arguing over the color of the tablecloths or seating arrangements in the hall we forget what the point of the exercise is!

Therefore, unless you're one of those people who dash out of church with the Body of Christ still in your mouth, rather than waiting for Mass to end, and then immediately scarf down food you have stashed in your car, it will not be mingled with food.

Salivary amylase, an enzyme found in saliva, begins breaking down the Host once it's in your mouth. The Host is physically nothing but flour (a carbohydrate) and water, and is broken down into simple sugars, monosaccharides and disaccharides. That's why it tastes sweet as you allow it to dissolve.

In the stomach, the molecules of simple sugars are broken down more, into glucose, and the glucose passes into your blood stream, where cellular metabolism breaks it down and produces the energy that you need to sustain life.


Your attitude toward the Real Presence is disrespectful. You say "instead of getting all hung up on how to treat crumbs," forgetting that those crumbs are parts of Our Lord's Body. We should be very careful how we treat such sacred crumbs.

It is also right and proper that we make the Mass a celebration, not just a "meal," as Protestants do. We are worshipping God, and receiving Him into our bodies and hearts, not just having a little Bible reading and a "memorial meal." We should do this in beautiful surroundings, accompanied by beautiful music. The flowers and the tablecloths on the altar are important, as are the candles and the crucifix.

Planning a beautiful wedding does not mean the bride is necessarily forgetting about the groom. Some weddings are over the top today, outrageously expensive, but that has nothing to do with the reality that a wedding is a sacrament to Catholics and should be considered holy by everyone. Therefore, it is good for a bride, or a couple to plan a beautiful ceremony for her/their marriage.

In the same way, planning a beautiful liturgy is good and does not mean forgetting abut Christ as bridegroom.

many of them are tied to the Blood libel but also because it's a silly miracle. Many progroms started out when someone told a story of a bleeding Host. Why was the Host bleeding? Because Jews had stolen it and somehow attacked it in a sacrilegious ceremony.

I believe in the Real Presence, but I also believe that it is too much a mystery to be reduced to finding type AB blood in a Host. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a lot of Protestants do believe in the Real Presence. In any case, I'm convinced that a lot of the disputes over the nature of the Real Presence are a result of trying to reduce the Mystery to mere words.

All too often over these last few centuries, I believe us Catholics have made an idol of the Real Presence in an attempt to prove that WE had the pipeline straight to God and others didn't. By idol I mean we have claimed to honor the Real Presence without listening to and acting on the words of Jesus Christ. When we bicker endlessly over the exact words and translations of the Eucharistic Prayer, it seems to me that we are reducing our worship to a set of magic phrases meant to placate a concept of God far from Who Jesus spoke of. Would the Jesus who chided the Pharisees approve of our bickering? We forget that Jesus instituted the Sacrament at dinner with his friends. He did not do it by conducting a pageant in a Renaissance court.

Again, in our rush to claim that only WE had the Real Presence, we forgot the other Real Presence in the community; "Whenever two or more of you are gathered in my name, there also am I"

you know what the Church teaches about miracles and apparitions.

You are wrong about Protestants believing in the Real Presence. They do not, it is not taught in any Protestant sect I have ever heard of.

Your frequent complaints about how wrong the Church is, how bad your priest is, how wrong the bishops are, etc., are in violation of our group rules, which apply to Catholics as well as non-Catholics. We have this group as a place where we can escape the criticism we get elsewhere so we don't need it here. Those who post here must play by the rules the original group set up.

Here are the group rules, with emphasis added:

"The DU Catholic and Orthodox Christian Group is for those who wish to hold respectful discussions of Catholic and/or Orthodox Christian beliefs, share faith experiences, post prayer requests, discuss Catholic/Orthodox liturgies, traditions, saints, etc., talk about Catholic education or organizations (Knights of Columbus, Pax Christi, Legion of Mary, the Catholic Worker movement, etc.), or in any way positively explore issues having to do with the Roman Catholic Church or any rite of the Catholic or Orthodox Church. "

Participants need not be practicing members of one of the Catholic or Orthodox rites but should be respectful of the beliefs and structures of the rites, especially in advocating any changes, such as allowing women to serve as priests.

This group is intended to be a venue for those who desire to discuss stated topics and is not intended as a forum to argue against Catholic/Orthodox belief or the Catholic/Orthodox Churches, members, or clergy.

or rather, not the entire Church. We've always argued among ourselves exactly what it means to be a follower of Christ. Check out the argument St Paul had with the apostles about requiring converts to keep kosher! St. Francis was more than a sweet soul who spoke to birds. He was a direct challenge to a Church that had forgotten its way. St. Joan of Arc went to the stake because she placed her conscience above what certain bishops and priests told her to believe. Dorothy Day went her own way instead of waiting for approval. Can you name the bishops of New York that governed the diocese during her life? I certainly can't! John XXIII reminded us that the church is not a museum of antiques but a living garden of life.

This group is intended to be a venue for those who desire to discuss stated topics and is not intended as a forum to argue against Catholic/Orthodox belief or the Catholic/Orthodox Churches, members, or clergy.

You are guilty of doing all those things and need to start obeying the rules like everyone else. People are PMing me about your attitudes and questioning if you are Catholic.

I believe in one God

the Father, the almighty

Maker of heaven and earth

of all that is seen and unseen.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ

the only son of God,

Eternally begotten of the father

God from GOd,

Light from light

True God from True God

Begotten , not made

One in being with the Father

Through him all things were made.

For us men and our salvation,

He came down from heaven,

by the power of the Holy Spirit

He was born of the Virgin MAry,

and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,

He suffered, died and was buried

He rose again on the third day.

and ascended into heaven

and is seated at the right hand of the Father

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead;

and his kingdom will have no end.

I believe in the Holy Spirit , the Lord and giver of Life,

who proceeds from the Father and the Son

With the Father and Son he is worshiped and glorified

He has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church,

the Communion of saints, the forgiveness of sin, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting to come.

Amen.

the Real Presence is not only disrespectful but a transgression of Catholic belief.

You said before that you do believe in the Real Presence. Now you've posted the Nicene Creed, signifying that you believe in what the Creed says, correct?

Now, if you believe that the Eucharist is the Body and Blood of our one Lord Jesus Christ,

the only son of God, Eternally begotten of the father, God from GOd, Light from light True God from True God Begotten , not made One in being with the Father Through him all things were made. For us men and our salvation, He came down from heaven, by the power of the Holy Spirit He was born of the Virgin MAry, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, He suffered, died and was buried He rose again on the third day. and ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead; and his kingdom will have no end.

it is strange that you said in another post: "All too often over these last few centuries, I believe us Catholics have made an idol of the Real Presence."

Saying that we "have made an idol of the Real Presence" is the sort of statement made by anti-Catholic persons, usually Protestants. Jack Chick tracts say things like that.

If you feel we give too much honor to the Blessed Sacrament, you are saying we give too much honor to God. The Blessed Sacrament is the Body of Christ and Christ is God, one of the three Persons of the Trinity. How can we give too much honor to God???

Second, you also asked "What do you think happens to the Host once you've swallowed it???"What about when it is reduced to its constituent atoms? Do all those atoms float away as minuscule pieces of the Body of Christ?"??"Those are nasty questions, and pretty stupid ones IMO. I think they result when anyone tries to put too literal an interpretation on Body of Christ."

I don't know why you asked questions and then said they were "nasty questions, and pretty stupid ones IMO."

I told you what happens after you've swallowed the Body of Christ in another post but let me emphasize that the Body of Christ becomes part of your body, physically supplying your body some energy and spiritually supplying your soul. The spiritual effect is far greater, if you believe in the Real Presence.

Third, if you believe in the Real Presence, how can you think anyone can put "too literal an interpretation on Body of Christ" That really surprises me, coming from a Catholic.

Fourth, and again, you said "instead of getting all hung up on how to treat crumbs," forgetting that "those crumbs" are parts of Our Lord's Body and should be treated with the utmost respect.

Fifth, you also said: "We forget that Jesus instituted the Sacrament at dinner with his friends. He did not do it by conducting a pageant in a Renaissance court."

WHO forgets that Jesus instituted the Sacrament "at dinner" (specifically at the Passover seder) "with his friends" (His Disciples, to be more exact)?

I don't think a Catholic could fail to know that if s/he pays any attention to the readings at Mass. We hear the scriptures about the Passion, Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Ascension read every year; we remember them very specifically from Passion Sunday through all the Sundays of Easter until Pentecost.

Because He is God, we honor Him with all the beauty we can. We are worshipping Him. Most people prefer to worship God in beautiful settings, including Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. It's human nature to give beautiful things to those you love, whether other people or God.

Your phrasing "conducting a pageant in a Renaissance court" could have come straight out of an anti-Catholic tract.

Pageants in Renaissance courts were very beautiful but the Mass is much simpler, although still beautiful. (Some "renovated" churches aren't beautiful at all, however.)

Sixth, you said: "Again, in our rush to claim that only WE had the Real Presence, we forgot the other Real Presence in the community; 'Whenever two or more of you are gathered in my name, there also am I'."

I think all Catholics know that verse but Protestants are the ones who use it all the time. I think you've used it here before and I wonder why you're using a favorite Protestant verse and placing it in opposition to the Real Presence.

Catholics know that we are the Church Militant, but we need our priests, too. They are as much a part of the Church as we are. Without priests, we cannot have the Sacraments, which we need very much.

at the end of the 17th century. The Portuguese took the gold and silver and built incredibly beautiful churches full of baroque carvings. There is gold leaf every where and many gold and silver candlesticks and shrines and monstrances.

But the Portuguese enslaved blacks and indians to dig the gold. The indians and blacks were baptized, but they were not permitted to enter the churches. They were made to stand outside on the church porch during MAss. They could not even see into the gorgeous churches because a windscreen was set up at the door so a stray breeze wouldn't extinguish the candles lit before the Real Presence.

Now I ask you, where was Jesus? Was He only in the Host, enshrined in a gold monstrance made possible only by the forced labor of slaves? Or was He perhaps also outside on the porch with the blacks and indians?

To my way of thinking, the Portuguese had turned the Real Presence into an idol as sacrilegious as the golden calf. They claimed to honor the Christ by means of ritual and beauty, but they forced the Christ living among them to live in horror in pits dugs into the earth. If we focus only on the Host instead of recognizing that the Host joins us all, how are we different than the Portuguese slave masters? How do we serve and honor Him when we strive to prove ourselves superior to others?

The priests who built the churches failed to convince many of the indians and blacks of the love of God. Our Lady of Apericida helped the fisherman and struck the chains from the legs and arms of a slave. She shows the people that God indeed cares for them and brings them to her Son. I think we should follow her example.

you keep going off on new negative topics. This time it's Portuguese slavemasters in the 1600s. This is 2007 and none of us are slavemasters so what's the point, really? They were sinners, so are you and so am I.

They did build a great church and baptize many Indians, so they contributed to the Church despite their sinful natures. They were unaware that slavery was sinful. It was common everywhere and is even justified in the Old Testament, according to some interpretations. It's unfair of us to judge them by today's standards. They were wrong but didn't know it. The Church teaches that if you don't know an act is sinful, you don't sin by committing it.

Perhaps they had the Indians stand out on the porch during Mass because they had not yet been received into the Church and received their First Communion. It was common for centuries not to allow catechumens to attend the entire Mass but to dismiss them after the Gospel was read. We still do that on one Sunday in Lent before adults are received into the Church at Easter, as you know.

I agree wholeheartedly that we should follow Our Lady. Our Lady would be respectful of the Church and its priests, bishops, popes, and saints, and we should all follow her example. If you're going to criticize other Catholics, be fair about it. I appreciate the good contributions that you have made and, putting myself in your shoes, I think you may not have realized how some of your posts have seemed to others.

I am sorry to have had to raise this issue here. I tried to PM you.

then, just as we have the Scriptures and the words of Oscar Romero today. My point was that as these Catholics were patting themselves on the back for the glory , praise and honor they brought to the Real Presence by building such beautiful churches, they blinded themselves to Christ standing in their midst as a slave.When we get preoccupied with niceties of church etiquette, what are we not seeing?

understood nothing I have said so I will not try to have any further discussion with you. May God bless you.

First of all, the Catholic Church has produced a variety of Churches ranging from grand to humble. Also, the purpose of a sacred space is to invoke a sense of the numinous and put worshipers into a state of mind conducive to prayer and reflection. Obviously, the kind of space that achieves this will vary from person to person.

In my case, a guy dressed like a businessman addressing a congregation in a building that looks like an office makes me think of business, not Grace; maybe that's why so many "non-denominational" churches end up being havens of materialism.

Secondly: slave?


When we reject the spiritual value of conscious rituals of worship, what did we see that we didn't like?