At 08:15 AM 8/17/2004 -0500 Julia Randolph wrote: >But what reason would be given for denying the use of non-wheat bread?
The Church has taught for a very, very, long time that transsubstantiation is only possible through unleavened wheat bread. There is important symbolism in the use of wheat and wine that has been formalized by Catholics. >And does it have to be unleavened? I know that unleavened bread was >used at the original event, but I've attended Eucharist services where >a loaf of real bread was used and torn up, mostly on church camping >trips. Would this be forbidden to Catholics? Yes, this would not be possible in a valid Catholic Mass. As an aside, I'm unaware of Catholics ever being "in a pinch." ;-) >And I've attended a few Catholic masses, and based on my very limited >experience, pretty much nobody got the wine. Did I just attend some >weird churches, or is this common? This was particularly common several decades ago. Today it is more common for both species to be used. As each species is both Body *and* Blood in Church teaching, many traditional Catholics continue to argue that the use of both species is redundant. > And I've been to some >protestant-denomination churches where grape juice, not wine, was >used; is this allowable? Not in the Catholic Church. > If not, what was done during Prohibition? >(I'm interested in finding out what sorts of alcohol was allowed and >under what circumstances during Prohibition; I know the government >allowed doctors to have whiskey for medicinal purposes, my grandfather >having been a doctor for the last part of Prohibition and having had >whiskey in his office to give patients when that was appropriate....) I am sure that there must have been an exception made for Catholics. For example, on the tour of Alcatraz Island the Park Ranger mentions that the most coveted job in the prison was Altar Boy for the Catholic Mass, as the altar boys could consume whatever portion of the Communion wine was left over. >> JDG - Perhaps The Fool should stick to posting about atheism, Maru, and >> leave the Catholicism posts to the Catholics. > >He's entitled to an opinion. And if you argue well, you may convince >others to take your side in a particular debate. Sorry... I momentarily had thought you were the *other* Julia in your response. Anyhow, I reacted so forcefully in part because there is a long history of anti-religious, anti-Christian, and anti-Catholic sentiment on this List. So, I am used to being completely on the defensive in regards to these subjects. The Fool in particular also has a long history of misrepresentations, and I've grown weary at times of attempting to combat them. I am sorry to have extended my frustration in your general direction. JDG _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
