I dunno, there was that time somebody left the host in a cave for three days and when they went back, they couldn’t find it.
Canon law has something to say on the subject regarding Catholics who interfere with the Host, and it’s serious stuff:
- A *latae senteniae * penalty is incurred automatically upon the commission of an offence, as opposed to a ferendae sententiae penalty which actually has to be imposed.
Thanks, Cunctator. So, someone who allows a consecrated host to be lost (or improperly disposed of) is automatically excommunicated. A cleric who allows such a loss to occur may be involuntarily laicized. Do I understand correctly?
I’m not a canon lawyer. I can’t comment with any authority on the interpretation and application of the Code. **Bricker ** may well know. But I’d suggest that allowing a host to be lost, while careless, isn’t quite as serious as throwing it away or deliberately taking it for sacrilegious purposes. There has been quite a lot of talk in Catholic circles in Sydney about this very issue in recent weeks. The Pope is currently here for this week’s World Youth Day celebrations and a congregation of about 500,000 is expected for the final mass on Sunday at Randwick racecourse. With a crowd that large it seems almost inevitable that some of the hosts will go astray.
If the priest goes to the hospital, maybe. But the usual procedure is for some of the hosts at Mass to be set aside in a little gold carrying case, consecrated with the others, and then taken to the hospital or home of the invalid by a volunteer member of the congregation. After everyone receives communion, the priest will say “Will the minister for the sick please come forward”, or something to that effect, and give the little case of hosts to that person, who then takes it to the sick folks who weren’t able to come. In such a situation, it’s at least conceivable that the hosts could be stolen (with or without the car: The case is made of precious materials, so it might be enough bait for a thief by itself).
Just thought I’d throw in a couple of data points from other Christian denominations - they don’t necessarily have the same understanding of communion as Catholics do*, but their handling of it might be of interest.
The UK Methodist rule book (or whatever it is properly called) dictates that surplus bread and wine ‘should be disposed of respectfully’. This is often interpreted to mean that it should be consumed by those ministering the sacrament.
In the C of E church I currently attend, there’s a bloke counting people on the door as they arrive and the supply of bread/wafers and wine is measured so as to not greatly exceed demand. Usually at least a few people don’t take communion though (and I’m sure there must be a contingency built into the numbers), so there’s always a bit left over - which is consumed by the vicar/curate in charge - in fact, there’s a little ritual in which the cups are rinsed and the water used for rinsing is also consumed.
There is also, built into the wall, a little alcove with a door in which consecrated bread/wafers and wine may be stored, to be taken out to people unable to attend. I expect this little cupboard has a proper term to describe it - everything else does.
*Actually, I think the distinction commonly cited may not be as black-and-white as all that.
As I understand it, Catholic doctrine doesn’t actually describe the host as turning into a little nugget of Jesus-meat, but rather that it acquires all the essential properties of the body of Christ - even though it would still appear to be a little disc of starch if examined by any empirical method.
If I’m right in that understanding, that’s not actually very different at all to the Church of England and indeed other protestant denominations too.
Why would they? The crowd at World Youth Day in Santiago over 10 years ago was bigger and this wasn’t a worry at all 
Chronos, the case doesn’t need to be made of precious metals. The carrier shouldn’t lose contact with it, though. Unless he’s in an accident or gets robbed at gunpoint, he simply shouldn’t be able to lose it.
Mangetout, the little cupboard where the consecrated Hosts are stored is the sacrarium. AFAIK, the C of E and the RCC have the exact same theology regarding the Host (the legalisms and customs can be different, the definition of what happens at consecration is not).
Thanks.
Yes - apparently, the terminology used by many Protestant churches (including the C of E) is often worded so as to appear to reject the (perhaps often misunderstood) Catholic view of transubstantiation, however, I can’t see any particularly big differences in what they say about it - only the way they say it.
Rather similar to the consequences if you barge into a GQ thread simply to exclaim for the eleventy-billionth time that religion is bunkum, evidently.
Especially important when discussing imposition of penal sanctions under canon law is the understanding of some overriding principles.
No one can be punished unless the offense is committed with malice or a culpable state of mind. A deliberate violation of the law can trigger the penalty associated with the law, but an accidental violation, or a violation that occurs as the result of lack of due diligence, is only liable if the law explicitly specifies that it includes lack of due diligence.
So – someone who deliberately and with malice allows a consecrated host to be lost or improperly disposed of incurs an excommunication. A cleric who deliberately and with malice allows a consecrated host to be lost or improperly disposed may face the loss of the clerical state.
If you have evidence to the contrary, by all means, post it. I gave a factual answer based on the available evidence–there should be consequences for that? And if you think so, then you know what to do.
You said:
That’s a correct answer to the question posed in the OP. I don’t believe you should get slammed for offering it in GQ. (Although in the interests of completeness, we could add to the discussion as follows…)
If a host was inadvertantly lost, then, as you suggest, there are simply no consequences, regardless of whther you believe the bread is simply bread, or has some changed property.
A host that was lost deliberately, through malice, does have some consequences: under canon law, the person responsible may incur an excommunication – clearly not a matter of “no consequence at all.”
But since the context of the question was error or accident in losing a host, your answer is correct.
We just took communion yesterday at church, and as I watched the minister symbolically break a loaf of bread in half and then saw the trays with bread already cut for communion, I wondered what gets done with the loaf (whose only purpose was symbolic, it appears)- and then I imagined the minister making a sandwich with it. And I kind of chuckled to myself. Maybe the loaf isn’t considered blessed in the same way as the actual pieces were…
OK, so we know that there is a punishment for losing the host, but what I believe the OP was asking, and certainly what I was asking, is what happens to the host itself. Do the priests have any way to, for lack of a better term, void the transubstantiation like you would do if someone stole your checkbook or credit card? Or is there, according to the Catholics, just a piece of the body of Jesus out there somewhere with nothing anyone can do to get it back?
A crack team of seraphim and archanges (led by Metatron, Lord of the Bull Host of Heaven) is dispatched to locate the lost host, carry the offending parishoner bodily to Hell, and for good measure massacre the populate of the city in which the offense happened, killing all men and boys, as well as women who have lost their or are considered ugly, down to the baby born yesterday. Comely virgins are spared for rape.
The sacrarium is the sink that’s used to dispose of consecrated bread and wine if it cannot be consumed (and isn’t lost!). The special cupboard is a tabernacle, Hebrew for “tent” IIRC. It’s meant to help us recall the tent that the Arc of the Covenant was carried in. Other Eucharist vocab:
Paten: the plate the Body is served on
Chalice: the cup the Blood is served from
Ciborium: the covered bowl that the Body is stored in when in the tabernacle…a bit like Tupperware for Jesus
Purificator: the napkin used to wipe the chalice with; Note: priests will generally give you a funny look if you refer to the purificator as a “wipey thing”
Pyx: the little gold pillbox used to carry the Body in when taking Eucharist to the sick
For what its worth, it would be easy to purposely a consecrated host if you are a member in decent standing at a church. At my last parish, I met with the priest after joining to ask a couple of questions about the church. One of them was if I could take the Eucharist to my sister who was frequently ill. He gave me a pyx, showed me where the keys to the tabernacle were kept, and made sure I had a quick training on proper procedure for bringing Eucharist to the sick. When my sister wasn’t feeling well and wasn’t able to attend Mass, I simply went up to the tabernacle after the closing hymn as people were leaving and before the tabernacle was locked and took a host from the ciborium and put it in my pyx. I imagine that if someone had a pretty gold pillbox and did the same thing, they could steal a host with no questions asked.
With few exceptions (mostly just parishes that don’t have a physical building for their church), consecrated hosts are kept in a ciborium in the tabernacle. This is why Catholics genuflect before entering their pew. The tabernacle is usually behind the alter and they are supposed to be kneeling to Jesus. Like I said, it really isn’t hard in most churches to get into the tabernacle and get a host. Look good intentioned and they’ll trust you.
It seems like the most common way for consecrated bread and wine to get lost though wouldn’t be through someone stealing it, it would be the crumbs or the drops on the purificators. There is a movement within some parishes to receive the Body only on your tongue. Some people worry that small crumbs of the Blessed Sacrament may be lost when people receive in their hands and then transfer the Blood from their hand to their mouth on their own.
As far as the purificators, I used to live in the Catholic house at my university. Church linens got thrown in our washing machine. I saw the wine stains on the purificators. Logic says that if you believe the wine is the Blood of Christ, then the Blessed Blood got washed away in my washing machine. If that’s not lost Eucharist, I don’t know what is. I think that people probably just try not to think about it too much.
I’ve probably not replied too much to the OP. I’m sorry for that. It does address the topic of lost Eucharist and how it could be stolen or lost, so I hope that’s good enough.
In my church (United Church of Canada), any leftover bread or grape juice after communion gets placed in the adjacent graveyard, as it is consecrated ground. For the birds to eat, I guess. . .
Well then, in what respect did your answer address the question:
?
I’ll be waiting right here.
Sorry, got a case of “false friends” there. In Spanish the box is sagrario.
and MissMossie, it’s altAr
I don’t think that was Catholic. Protestants often do things differently. In Catholic Mass, unleavened bread would normally be used*, and it would be blessed specifically, not set aside. And not all of them believe they are actually inviting the power of God into their bodies.
*IIRC, you don’t have to use unleavened bread, but it’s related to the Jewish Passover ritual, which is when Jesus and co. had the Last Supper. Which is also really the First Supper. AFAIK, every Catholic church in the U.S. uses unleavened bread, and most will worldwide.