Question: My parish recently returned to Communion under the second species. An extraordinary minister of Holy Communion holds one cup and one cloth and does one wipe after each serve. Most people are still not receiving it for fear of COVID or other illness. Why can’t the Church simply use disposable plastic cups with the wine already in it? The priest could say the same blessing. The empty cup could be disposed of with the passing of germs reduced to almost nothing. (Lanesville, IN)
Answer: What you describe – with the elements of communion pre-portioned in individual disposable packaging – is not uncommon in many non-Catholic Christian communities. However, there are several reasons why this would be inappropriate for Catholic worship.
For context, we need to recall that the Catholic theology of the Eucharist is radically different from the vast majority of Protestant understandings of holy communion. Many Protestant communities occasionally distribute bread and wine (or even grape juice) as a way of simply recalling and remembering Jesus’ last meal and the friendship he shared with his disciples.
In contrast, a core central teaching of the Catholic faith is the doctrine of the “Real Presence,” meaning that bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Christ at Mass when the priest prays the prayer of consecration. In technical philosophical terms, this process is called “transubstantiation,” and because of this, the prayer of consecration is much more radical and impactful than a simple blessing would be.
Because we believe that Jesus is physically, bodily present in the “sacred species” (our term for the bread and wine which have been turned into the body and blood of Christ), we have several laws and customs pertaining to the Eucharist which ensure a sufficient degree of protection and reverence for Jesus’ presence in the Blessed Sacrament.
For instance, it is required that the vessels used during the Eucharist – such as the ciborium, paten, and chalice – be made from worthy and suitable materials. As paragraph 328 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal tells us: “Sacred vessels should be made from precious metal. If they are made from metal that rusts or from a metal less precious than gold, they should generally be gilded on the inside.” Clearly, this directive is incompatible with the use of disposable cups!
Additionally, during the Mass, the priest must take care that every particle of the host and every last drop of the Precious Blood are reverently consumed. This is why, at the end of Communion, the priest “purifies” the chalice, rinsing it with water that he then drinks himself.
Even if disposable materials were allowed, there would be no way to be sure that absolutely all Precious Blood was actually consumed. As a result, it would be impossible not to have some of the Precious Blood wind up in the trash. This would be sacrilege.
It is certainly understandable that some Catholics might long to receive Communion under both kinds, while still having legitimate concerns about germs and the spread of illness. Still, it’s good to keep in mind that few things worth doing are ever 100% risk-free. Most things in this life involve some sort of tradeoff of risks versus benefits.
Catholics who piously desire to receive the Precious Blood should prayerfully consider whether, in light of their own personal health status and spiritual needs, it might make sense for them in their own circumstances to brave the possibility of catching a bug in order to receive from the chalice.
In any case, we should always remember that in receiving the Eucharist under only one species, bread or wine, we nevertheless receive the entirety of Christ – his body, blood, soul and divinity.
Question: When I was a kid, I would often hear adults say, particularly at funerals, that when a long term and chronically ill person finally passed, they would go “straight to heaven,” as God counted their years of suffering as sufficient to pay for their sins, and required nothing further from them. Could you comment? (St. Joseph’s, Indiana)
Answer: Short of a formal canonization process or a clear case of martyrdom, there isn’t any way to know for sure how long or short a particular person’s stay in purgatory will be, much less whether they have been able to skip purgatory altogether.
Purgatory isn’t about “serving time” for sins committed so much as it is a time of purification and becoming ready to enter fully into God’s presence. The degree to which an individual needs this kind of purification is something which is only truly known between that soul and God.
That being said, the Church does teach that suffering in this life can be redemptive. As we hear in one of the prayers which a priest might use to conclude the sacrament of penance: “May the passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and of all the saints, whatever good you do and suffering you endure, heal your sins, help you to grow in holiness, and reward you with eternal life.” It’s clear here that suffering, when patiently endured, can help heal the wounds caused by sins.
So, I think it’s reasonable to hope that a generally virtuous person who suffered through a long illness could have had their time in purgatory at least shortened – though it’s important to still pray for the repose of their soul, regardless.
Jenna Marie Cooper, who holds a licentiate in canon law, is a consecrated virgin and a canonist whose column appears weekly at OSV News. Send your questions to [email protected].