4 ms·

This is a fairly tough nut to crack, because the FDA in these United States does not have any requirement for winemakers to put ingredients on their label. So y

This is a fairly tough nut to crack, because the FDA in these United States does not have any requirement for winemakers to put ingredients on their label. So you have the situation where you really have no idea what's in the wine, or how it was made, beyond a few disclaimers such as "contains sulfites". So, like this archbishop has mandated, you can choose only wine that is especially certified for sacramental use, which means that the makers pledge they're following Canon Law in making the wine. But, again, this is a self-certification, and it means you're trusting the makers when they say what the ingredients are. They're still not regulated, they're still not mandated to have a label. I also learned, from commenters, that some wines are specifically made to be invalid matter, such as Kosher wines, which are boiled, and cane sugar is added, and so they deliberately invalidate the wine so that Catholics cannot use it for the Eucharist, which I suppose would be sacrilegious in the opinion of many Jews. This also relates to the makers of altar bread, which of course can't really be purchased in a grocery store and so it's always made especially for sacramental use. There has been a marked rise in the use of "low-gluten hosts" for those with Celiac disease or gluten allergies. The Catholic Church has weighed in on this, and has specifically said that there must be gluten in the host in order to be valid matter. So there are altar bread manufacturers who make host out of potato, or rice flour, and while Episcopalians and Lutherans may be OK with this, Catholics are not, and so pastors must be careful that their "low-gluten hosts" are not "gluten-free". Just to confuse the matter, an extremely low-gluten product can be marketed as "gluten-free" according to FDA rules, so enjoy the confusion. I have seen Catholic parish bulletins advertising "gluten-free hosts" and I just cringe, because they're basically saying "we use invalid matter for our Eucharist!" even if they really are using that approved, low-gluten altar bread. And there are nuns who proudly make the stuff just for that reason.

anamexis 3y ago
Your comment made me curious so I did a bit of research - kosher wines are not boiled or adulterated for the purpose of making it unsuitable for Eucharist. Rather, according to ancient Jewish tradition, if kosher wine is boiled (which is called Mevushal wine), it remains kosher even if handled by non-Jews. This is in contrast to uncooked kosher wine, which loses its kosher status if handled by non-Jews.
- kodah 3y ago
  I'd love to hear from someone that knows but afaik most things Kosher derive from ancient food safety where provenance was also part of safety.
  - tubs 3y ago
    Two reasons. There were some alleged cultist/idolatry practices involving wine that would cause it to become non kosher so it’s easier to just blanket ban anything handled by a goy. I think boiling makes it unusable for those same rituals. It’s also to discourage fraternising (especially romantically) with goyim.
- mavhc 3y ago
  This should be an indie puzzle video game
- mistrial9 3y ago
  this is interesting, but it seems like a cover for old feuds over commercial food services to pious people. In the USA there was a specific, constructed and lawful means to end "pious people captured by commercial efforts masked as piety" and secondly, a constructed reform within religious communities, to move past this sort of obvious, power and profit motivated supply chain control. Not all places or people have been motivated to include themselves in these reforms, of course.
- cwzwarich 3y ago
  Actually, you're both right. One of the explanations (albeit, not the only one) given for why boiled wine remains kosher if handled by non-Jews is that it's considered unacceptable for non-Jews to use in idolatrous rituals.
obiefernandez 3y ago
Gluten is indeed the protein in the wheat, so I guess not having at least some would impede transformation of the host into flesh. Makes total sense.
vharuck 3y ago
I think the Jewish community took the best method for knowing if a product is kosher: set up their own agencies that permit identifying marks on packaging if standards are met. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosher_certification_agency https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosher_certification_agency The Catholic Church would do well with this, considering member churches often follow centralized decisions. A certifying agency in each diocese should work well.
- pyuser583 3y ago
  There was a fascinating article that seems to have gone down the internet’s memory hole: Eucharistic bread was made by religious communities. Then a for-profit corporation began competing with the nuns, and using brutal tactics was able to get a monopoly on supplying Eucharistic bread. In any case, there’s no need for certification because there are so few sellers. It’s a specialized product. It’s not like priests are picking it up at the store.
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    Actually, some of the sisters (the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration) made a remarkable comeback around 2004, when the need for extremely-low-gluten altar bread arose. They devised and refined a formula, cleared it with all legitimate Church authorities, and began marketing it to a very niche but expanding market, and they have enjoyed very good success. https://www.benedictinesisters.org/articledetail.php?id=434&start=0&status=1&m_year=2017 https://www.benedictinesisters.org/articledetail.php?id=434&...
MandieD 3y ago
Episcopalian here: we're more than ok with gluten-free wafers - not figuring out how to offer gluten-free wafers to someone whose health will be harmed by consuming even a small amount of gluten (anyone with celiac, for starters) is shoving them away from Jesus' (and not our) table. Given the last few years, a lot of people are, for good reasons, hesitant to sip out of a cup a bunch of other people just drank out of, no matter how carefully the person handling the chalice wipes it, and we're rational enough to understand that 19% alcohol Port really isn't killing anything, so wafers safe for everyone are necessary. My parish deals with it the easy way: we just do gluten-free wafers for everyone, and our priest reminds us not to intinct (dip) the wafers if we'd rather not drink the wine, as intinction is far worse than sipping for sharing germs... hands are filthy.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  That is very easily accomplished in any Roman Catholic church by simply offering them a sip of the Precious Blood. Your slur of "shoving them away from Jesus' table" is a strawman.
WWLink 3y ago
You go to a mass. The church serves you grape juice and rice crackers. Just once. Do you think after you die, at the pearly gates, you're going to get sent to hell for "consuming invalid Eucharist?" That... just... takes things to a whole new level. This idea of "Commercial goods with a catholic church seal of approval!" seems to go directly against at least a few of Jesus' teachings.
- tptacek 3y ago
  The idea isn't that you get in trouble for taking invalid communion, but rather, that particular communion doesn't count; you participated in one fewer eucharists than you thought you had. (I think, but am not totally sure, that this is a fringe tradcath belief, and that for the overwhelming majority of Catholics (including the clergy), this doesn't matter at all; if you felt it counted, did it in good faith, &c, it counted.
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    > (I think, but am not totally sure, that this is a fringe tradcath belief, and that for the overwhelming majority of Catholics (including the clergy), this doesn't matter at all; if you felt it counted, did it in good faith, &c, it counted. This is in no way a "fringe" belief. As you can see by this archbishop's statement (he is no "fringe tradcath") Catholic clergy take validity very, very seriously. Now there some other cases recently concerning Baptism. There was a priest who, it turned out, was never baptized at all, and therefore had never been a priest. The Church officials had to release a statement and notify everyone who was affected (because he wouldn't have been able to celebrate the Eucharist, etc.) and of course the priest was baptized and then properly ordained. Then in yet another case, there was a priest in Arizona (and apparently also a deacon in Michigan) who had performed baptisms for nigh on 20 years using an invalid formula. The formula was invalidated by his use of "we" instead of "I". That's right, it was the wrong pronoun and it made all the difference in the world. The bishop of Phoenix released a statement to inform everyone affected that their baptism was, in fact, invalid, and they'd need to have this ceremony repeated. However, the bishop of San Diego said it wasn't really a big deal and not to worry too much about it. So yes, there is some variance about this, and there are clerics who say it doesn't matter, but I'd say that the latter bishop is an outlier, because that attitude doesn't really comport with Catholic law and doctrine. In fact I think it's harmful to tell invalidly-baptized people that it doesn't matter, because in another diocese 20 years from now, it may really really matter. The formulas and the definition of valid matter have been distilled down to very simple elegant definitions over the years. It is definitely not difficult, for example, to bake altar bread that meets the simple definition of validity, because it's very exclusive and simple. Likewise, the words in the formula can be very simple. The priest must say "I absolve you" in the Confessional (in some language) or it doesn't work! In fact, that's all he has to say! The priest must say "This is My Body... This is... My Blood" or it's not the Eucharist! These rules seem oh so simple and uncomplicated, but it always seems like some ad libber can get in there and bollocks it up.

anamexis 3y ago

Your comment made me curious so I did a bit of research - kosher wines are not boiled or adulterated for the purpose of making it unsuitable for Eucharist. Rather, according to ancient Jewish tradition, if kosher wine is boiled (which is called Mevushal wine), it remains kosher even if handled by non-Jews. This is in contrast to uncooked kosher wine, which loses its kosher status if handled by non-Jews.

kodah 3y ago
I'd love to hear from someone that knows but afaik most things Kosher derive from ancient food safety where provenance was also part of safety.
- tubs 3y ago
  Two reasons. There were some alleged cultist/idolatry practices involving wine that would cause it to become non kosher so it’s easier to just blanket ban anything handled by a goy. I think boiling makes it unusable for those same rituals. It’s also to discourage fraternising (especially romantically) with goyim.
mavhc 3y ago
This should be an indie puzzle video game
mistrial9 3y ago
this is interesting, but it seems like a cover for old feuds over commercial food services to pious people. In the USA there was a specific, constructed and lawful means to end "pious people captured by commercial efforts masked as piety" and secondly, a constructed reform within religious communities, to move past this sort of obvious, power and profit motivated supply chain control. Not all places or people have been motivated to include themselves in these reforms, of course.
cwzwarich 3y ago
Actually, you're both right. One of the explanations (albeit, not the only one) given for why boiled wine remains kosher if handled by non-Jews is that it's considered unacceptable for non-Jews to use in idolatrous rituals.

obiefernandez 3y ago

Gluten is indeed the protein in the wheat, so I guess not having at least some would impede transformation of the host into flesh. Makes total sense.

vharuck 3y ago

I think the Jewish community took the best method for knowing if a product is kosher: set up their own agencies that permit identifying marks on packaging if standards are met. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosher_certification_agency https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosher_certification_agency The Catholic Church would do well with this, considering member churches often follow centralized decisions. A certifying agency in each diocese should work well.

pyuser583 3y ago
There was a fascinating article that seems to have gone down the internet’s memory hole: Eucharistic bread was made by religious communities. Then a for-profit corporation began competing with the nuns, and using brutal tactics was able to get a monopoly on supplying Eucharistic bread. In any case, there’s no need for certification because there are so few sellers. It’s a specialized product. It’s not like priests are picking it up at the store.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  Actually, some of the sisters (the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration) made a remarkable comeback around 2004, when the need for extremely-low-gluten altar bread arose. They devised and refined a formula, cleared it with all legitimate Church authorities, and began marketing it to a very niche but expanding market, and they have enjoyed very good success. https://www.benedictinesisters.org/articledetail.php?id=434&start=0&status=1&m_year=2017 https://www.benedictinesisters.org/articledetail.php?id=434&...

MandieD 3y ago

Episcopalian here: we're more than ok with gluten-free wafers - not figuring out how to offer gluten-free wafers to someone whose health will be harmed by consuming even a small amount of gluten (anyone with celiac, for starters) is shoving them away from Jesus' (and not our) table. Given the last few years, a lot of people are, for good reasons, hesitant to sip out of a cup a bunch of other people just drank out of, no matter how carefully the person handling the chalice wipes it, and we're rational enough to understand that 19% alcohol Port really isn't killing anything, so wafers safe for everyone are necessary. My parish deals with it the easy way: we just do gluten-free wafers for everyone, and our priest reminds us not to intinct (dip) the wafers if we'd rather not drink the wine, as intinction is far worse than sipping for sharing germs... hands are filthy.

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
That is very easily accomplished in any Roman Catholic church by simply offering them a sip of the Precious Blood. Your slur of "shoving them away from Jesus' table" is a strawman.

WWLink 3y ago

You go to a mass. The church serves you grape juice and rice crackers. Just once. Do you think after you die, at the pearly gates, you're going to get sent to hell for "consuming invalid Eucharist?" That... just... takes things to a whole new level. This idea of "Commercial goods with a catholic church seal of approval!" seems to go directly against at least a few of Jesus' teachings.

tptacek 3y ago
The idea isn't that you get in trouble for taking invalid communion, but rather, that particular communion doesn't count; you participated in one fewer eucharists than you thought you had. (I think, but am not totally sure, that this is a fringe tradcath belief, and that for the overwhelming majority of Catholics (including the clergy), this doesn't matter at all; if you felt it counted, did it in good faith, &c, it counted.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  > (I think, but am not totally sure, that this is a fringe tradcath belief, and that for the overwhelming majority of Catholics (including the clergy), this doesn't matter at all; if you felt it counted, did it in good faith, &c, it counted. This is in no way a "fringe" belief. As you can see by this archbishop's statement (he is no "fringe tradcath") Catholic clergy take validity very, very seriously. Now there some other cases recently concerning Baptism. There was a priest who, it turned out, was never baptized at all, and therefore had never been a priest. The Church officials had to release a statement and notify everyone who was affected (because he wouldn't have been able to celebrate the Eucharist, etc.) and of course the priest was baptized and then properly ordained. Then in yet another case, there was a priest in Arizona (and apparently also a deacon in Michigan) who had performed baptisms for nigh on 20 years using an invalid formula. The formula was invalidated by his use of "we" instead of "I". That's right, it was the wrong pronoun and it made all the difference in the world. The bishop of Phoenix released a statement to inform everyone affected that their baptism was, in fact, invalid, and they'd need to have this ceremony repeated. However, the bishop of San Diego said it wasn't really a big deal and not to worry too much about it. So yes, there is some variance about this, and there are clerics who say it doesn't matter, but I'd say that the latter bishop is an outlier, because that attitude doesn't really comport with Catholic law and doctrine. In fact I think it's harmful to tell invalidly-baptized people that it doesn't matter, because in another diocese 20 years from now, it may really really matter. The formulas and the definition of valid matter have been distilled down to very simple elegant definitions over the years. It is definitely not difficult, for example, to bake altar bread that meets the simple definition of validity, because it's very exclusive and simple. Likewise, the words in the formula can be very simple. The priest must say "I absolve you" in the Confessional (in some language) or it doesn't work! In fact, that's all he has to say! The priest must say "This is My Body... This is... My Blood" or it's not the Eucharist! These rules seem oh so simple and uncomplicated, but it always seems like some ad libber can get in there and bollocks it up.