LouisvilleFan Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 [quote name='photosynthesis' post='1402971' date='Oct 15 2007, 11:39 AM']You can't really prevent stuff like that from happening. But if it does happen, I'd think that you should consume the fly. One of my good friends was a Eucharistic Minister at her church, and they were using a paper napkin to wipe the chalice. They used to throw the napkin in the garbage afterwards, so she always made it a point to eat the napkin. [/quote] The question concerning the fly or other foreign substance was already answered (wash it in wine, burn it, and wash ashes and wine down the saboreum). But I guess eating the fly isn't wrong either... just unneccessary. The doctrine of Real Presence doesn't require us to do Fear Factor stuff. I'm pretty sure napkins and anything else with wine residue is washed in water to dilute the accidents, which is what your friend could've done instead of eating it. I'm not a Eucharistic Minister though, so someone else probably knows for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouisvilleFan Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Theoketos' post='1203445' date='Feb 23 2007, 05:47 PM']Though at some point, so much can be removed that the Real Presence does cease--as would happen if there were only an undrinkably thin film of wine molecules (or apparent wine molecules) that refuses to form a drop were left in the chalice.[/quote] Is that true? If the wine is apparent, then the Real Presence would seem to remain. Isn't this why porcelain and other substances that absorb liquid are not supposed to be used as chalices? Of course, porcelain is also very fragile, so I guess that's the primary reason not to use it, but I'd have to think that if the inside of the chalice became stained from repeated use that the Real Presence would be there since the substance of consecrated wine is apparent. Edited October 18, 2007 by LouisvilleFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spamity Calamity Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 I clicked "I refuse to speculate" and I wish more people would have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Preferably, someone would shut the offender down with a silenced rifle from the choir loft. That's actually why we have choir lofts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffpugh Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Amen, Winchester. Signed, The Tenor Sniper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffpugh Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 (edited) Double kill-I mean post... Vexing, isn't it? Edited November 15, 2007 by Sacred Music Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1200019' date='Feb 18 2007, 08:48 PM']ty[/quote] your polls get more and more rediculous everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pleural Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 ridiculous... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PopeClementI(MorClemis) Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 hot stuff, I also have a theo degree, but I somewhat disagree. Adding something that does not belong is a grave sin subject to excommunication, but does not invalidate the consecration. If added intentionally, it is illicit, not necessarily invalid. It is invalid if the addition causes the elements to no longer be wheat bread and grape wine, for example, using rice-wheat combo bread and grape juice - that is invalid. By the way, yeast does not invalidate consecration - the Eastern Churches, except for the Armenians all use leavened bread. As to poison added to the post-consecrated Blood, how would this ever occur? If it did occur, how would anyone know until they were ill? [quote name='hot stuff' post='1203498' date='Feb 23 2007, 04:32 PM']Again, I don't disagree with what is being said. However that does not address the intentional act of adding something that does not belong. (i.e. the poison question) If poison, (or koolaid) or any other matter is intentionally added (even without the priest's knowledge) prior to the consecration, it will invalidate it.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PopeClementI(MorClemis) Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 As to killing someone to prevent them from desecrating Our Lord in the Eucharist.. I'll just quote St. John Chrysostom: [i]"Christians above all are forbidden to correct the stumblings of sinners by force...it is necessary to make a man better not by force but by persuasion.We neither have authority granted us by law to restrain sinners,nor,if it were,should we know how to use it,since God gives the crown to those who are kept from evil,not by force,but by choice."[/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groo the Wanderer Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st-annes Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I think it's a pretty ridiculous poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now