Skip to comments.Religion stoush as questions are raised over communion wine hygiene (Catholic Caucus)
Posted on 11/01/2013 9:51:32 AM PDT by RBStealth
Australia: AN unholy headache is developing for major churches, with questions raised over whether sacramental wine passes hygiene standards.
Former Warrnambool mayor Frank McCarthy, a devout Catholic, is calling for the time-honoured tradition of drinking from a shared goblet during services to be scrapped.
Mr McCarthy said wholesale consumption of wine from the same chalice would not be allowed in any pub or restaurant and queried why churches were given an exemption.
The former businessman said the risk of spreading disease was heightened with a shared cup. The rules and regulations surrounding beverages are pretty clear and no pub or soft drink seller would willingly allow the use of glasses for people to repeatedly drink out of, Mr McCarthy said yesterday.
Imagine if a publican said to four customers Im only going to pour one beer, so youll all have to sip from the one glass.
It just wouldnt happen.
He has raised his concerns with church officials in Warrnambool.
National Council of Priests of Australia chairman Eugene McKinnon said it was not compulsory for Catholic parishioners to drink consecrated wine.
(Excerpt) Read more at standard.net.au ...
Just the case of an Australian Mayor (Catholic) making a lot of noise!
Although I think it smart when a terrible influenza or other communicable disease comes in our midst, then the communicants will need to reevaluate or reduce their risk to disease in appropriate ways.
What???? You mean if a group of people in an Aussie pub wanted to voluntarily pass around a mug of grog and each take a sip from it that would somehow be illegal or perhaps the pub owner would run out and put a stop to it? Nonsense.
how about sharing peace pipe.....ugggh
I won’t take communion from a common cup. Period.
Most people think bacteria.
My brother studied parasitology (not the democrats, the other ones). We once had a lengthy discussion. I never talk parasites (except the democrat ones) with him anymore.
I take communion wine from the cup. If I’m in the first two pews. If there are not any TB infected illegal aliens(Mexican indians) ahead of me. i’m from Southern Calif. If the people ahead of me look healthy. And then again if I’m amongst the first 2, 3 or 4 to actually sip from it, depending on how I feel about the situation.
The local bishop tried to stop the Cup, but the priests said "Have faith! For it is the Blood of Christ which is Pure and Holy and Miraculous."
No one got sick from drinking from the Cup of Jesus` Blood here in 40 years in the Bay Area since I have heard of this attempt to ban it.
No source of disease has ever been traced to the Cup of Jesus` Blood ever here.
AIDS, etc all were scare tactics but no AIDS,etc., was ever traced to the Holy Cup of Jesus` Blood.
Au Contraire, The Blood of Jesus cures people of their diseases thru faith, not spreads disease.
Two of the priests that administered Communion under both forms had AIDS, as they died of later, and not one person caught AIDS from the Host nor the Cup traceable back to these priests. I received Communion for 20 years from one of these AIDS priests and never got AIDS nor nuthin nor anyone in that congregation neither.
These same perverts who are so concerned about germs during Holy Communion couldn’t give a flying you know what about germs, STDs, etc. that they pick up from their unholy communions.
Communion by Intinction
Intinction: “Dipping the bread in the cup
Intinction is an ancient method of taking the elements during Communion. Many people prefer it because there
is not need to drink from the cup after another has done so.
It is one of the four ways approved in the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church for administering Holy Communion under the form of wine as well as of bread: “The norms of the Roman Missal admit the principle that in cases where Communion is administered under both kinds, ‘the Blood of the Lord may be received either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon’ (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 245). As regards the administering of Communion to lay members of Christ’s faithful, the Bishops may exclude Communion with the tube or the spoon where this is not the local custom, though the option of administering Communion by intinction always remains. If this modality is employed, however, hosts should be used which are neither too thin nor too small, and the communicant should receive the Sacrament from the Priest only on the tongue” (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 285b and 287).
“The communicant must not be permitted to intinct the host himself in the chalice, nor to receive the intincted host in the hand. As for the host to be used for the intinction, it should be made of valid matter, also consecrated; it is altogether forbidden to use non-consecrated bread or other matter.”
>I received Communion for 20 years from one of these AIDS priests and never got AIDS nor nuthin nor anyone in that congregation neither.
You do know that Aids is a sexually trasmittable disease, also through shared syringes and blood transfusions.
So no one getting AIDS at your church is not proof of anything, except that parishioners werent sleeping with the priests.
Well, I’m with him, although not for health reasons. Communion under both species (bread and wine) seems to be done primarily in Catholic churches in liberal English-speaking areas, and it started against the regulations and was de facto approved first in the US.
There’s no need for it, it slows down and clutters up the Communion line, and it has resulted in some unfortunate accidents (which I have seen on more than one occasion) where either an elderly parishioner or one of the ditzy “EEMS” drops or spills the chalice.
I rarely see this in Spanish speaking or Southern European countries, except in the most “kumbaya” churches which, alas, exist there too.
So it was a case where deliberately ignoring the rules led to a change in practice. Interesting.
Re germs - One of my family members used to be an EM and was required to consume the Blood remaining in the chalice. Between the phlegm and the germs, he caught strep and other illnesses multiple times in a single year. The possibility of germ transmission is real. Wiping the rim with a cloth as they do between communicants basically just smears the saliva and the germs around.
Theres no need for it,
True. Christ is present in the Sacred Host - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.
When I was a student at American U. (Washington DC) I volunteered as an acolyte. The first Sunday, after church, the priest was upset with me because I had not finished the wine in the chalice. I explained that I was on medication and that alcohol was out of the question. He really got mad then, it was not wine, there was no alcohol... I told him that, the way I understood transubstantiation, it had all the chemical properties of alcohol and I was not going to take my chances. I understood his position, he did not want to finish all chalices, although if he really believed there was no alcohol... Oh, well, it was alcohol when he was drinking but it wasn't if I was drinking!
With all due respect this is a Catholic Caucus where you have just posted and pinged 10 of your best friends.
First of all, I did not catch that this discussion was limited to Roman Catholics. What I saw was a topic of great interest to all sacramental churches, e.g., Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican/Episcopalian, Eastern Orthodox.
Furthermore, I posted an elaborate defense of communion with the chalice, and against the meddling politician. I would think that would be received as a friendly post.
As far as pinging others, again, I did not realize this was a closed caucus.
Finally, if you or the mod has the content of my now deleted post, I would appreciate it if you could send it back to me via freepmail. I put a lot of thought and time into what I wrote.
check out the SF Examiner and Chronicle`s 1980`s 1990`s when AIDS was rampant in the SF Bay Area.
Actually that would be that a few patients have transmitted AIDS to their dentists. ...And that is why dentists now wear masks and goggles whereas in the 60,70’s they didnt.
Although it is possible for a dentist to cut his hand and transmit it to the patient also.
Exposure to blood.
When I became a Catholic 12 years ago, I raised this issue with a Deacon. I was told that the alcohol in the wine killed germs.
In any event, I’ve never picked up anything from the cup.
I think someone lipping the lower rim of the cup, in extreme cases, depending on the virus/bacteria etc, especially if they have a sore on that lower lip can transmit disease.
Also breath on that rim, TB is airborne dispersal, something deposited on the rim has enough time betwen others to infect another. And nobody will be able to correlate where you got it, or when.
Additionally, the alcohol in the wine, is not automatically swabbing the lower rim.
Of course, these are not especially great concerns for very healthy populations, but I’m not sure with illegal immigration in my neck of the woods that we are all a healthy TB free population.
- - - - - - - - - -
Imagine if a publican said to four customers Im only going to pour one beer, so youll all have to sip from the one glass. It just wouldnt happen.
Imagine if the Savior of the world, the Great Physician of body and soul, gave his disciples to drink all from the same cup, his cup, even though they each had their own cup in front of them at the table. That's what did happen:
"And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, 'Drink of it, all of you. . . .'" Matthew 26:27
"And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank from it." Mark 14:23
If the one chalice ("common cup") is good enough for our Lord, it's good enough for me. And it's good enough for the Christian church, since that is the prevailing practice throughout the church throughout history. "Individual cups" are a recent innovation, and they do not derive from the catholic (in the best sense) tradition.
I have been a pastor (Lutheran) for over twenty years, and at the end of the distribution, after everyone else has communed, I consume what remains in the chalice. It has never caused me a problem. Indeed, the holy Blood of Christ is the medicine of immortality for both body and soul!
Besides which, even humanly speaking, the chalice is made of a noble metal, the alcohol has a disinfectant effect, and I wipe the chalice as we go. I think the little individual cups, made of plastic often, and handled on the edges by the Altar Guild, would be more likely to carry germs. And if you're concerned about where the most germs would be exchanged, that would be in the handshake line at the end of the service!
BTW, our parish also has the little individual cups on a tray, which I distribute after first going down the rail with the chalice. I don't make a battle out of chalice vs. individual cups, although in Bible class, etc., I have on occasion encouraged the use of the chalice, and have explained why.
All Good and Invited.
I included that Herpes first but then omitted it- same story no diseases linked to the Cup Of Jesus`s Blood- find me one news account wherein that attributation above is printed anywhere.
I scoured and couldnt find one doorknob or door handle story of one actual door being attributed to a cold or flu.
Must not be true.
dentist gives patients aids
W. Scott Harrington, Oklahoma Dentist, May Have Exposed 7,000 Patients To HIV Or Hepatitis
your attention to detail is lacking here.
Its not transmission from a dentist, its transmission through not very sterilized equiptment.
In the case of Dr. David Acer of Florida, he HAD aids but the medical community is divided over whether he purposively like a serial killer gave it to his patients or whether is was through unsterilized dental instrument that he was using on himself. Its either or, because the medical community is perplexed as they consider dentist to patient transmission to be very rare, complex and hard to accomplish otherwise. But patient to dentist transmission is easily accomplished if the dentist is not wearing a mask or eye gear.
I`ll go for a blonde dental assistant.
When I was in Augusta, I celebrated the funeral of a college age woman who contracted the deadly Meningococcal Disease by drinking after her boyfriend from the same Pepsi can. She looked even worse than the child in this photo who has the same disease. Amputations are done to save the life of someone with this deadly disease.
Drinking from the common chalice was banned in our Diocese last year and for several months because of the fear of transmitting H1N1 flu virus by drinking after someone who carried it. There is a news story from Australia concerning the deadly Meningococcal Disease down under and the Church’s common sense approach to banning the common chalice.
drinking from the cup is entirely voluntarily done...the Eucharist is complete in either or both forms.......please stop telling people whay they can volunteer to do.
Please stop telling me....
Actually I agree with what you said, its voluntary and I didnt/havent advocated for the Church to take it away.
Look through what I wrote, I’m just advocating to others that it is unsanitary and a risk, especially in a more virulent flu season.
...And oh btw, my wife has a compromised immune system, so I’m a bit ahead of the curve.
So please stop telling me...
I’m glad, b117, that you could find no attribution, but the risk remains viable.
RB, since hand to mouth transmission is more to the common cold, one would suspect doorknobs or handles being a pretty good source of transmission even if it hasn’t been studied directly. Transmission of the flu seems primarily airborne although hand to nose contact can do it as well.
Motto: It’s good to wash one’s hands often.
Good Day to You Both.