Want to limit germ spread during communion? christopherchelpka.com
@christopherchelpka Crosscheck. My Bishop had a few words about this:
The Eucharist will be distributed as usual. Parishioners are reminded to approach the Chalice with their mouths wide open, in order to receive the Body and the Blood of our Lord, God and Saviour Jesus Christ. This gift from God is the medicine of our lives. Either we believe that indeed it is the Body and the Blood of Christ or we don’t. In the Orthodox understanding it is and so the Eucharist cannot ever be a vector/method/way of illness or death.
@ReaderJohn what’s the source of people’s conviction about this? Was there a council or synod or something? Seems like Eucharistic Monophysitism.
@jamesdasher It's the united statement of our bishops around the world. I don't know of any exceptions.
@christopherchelpka @readerjohn yeah, people definitely say this stuff. I was asking about the origins of the conviction — that the Eucharist cannot participate in the natural world as understood and explained by germ theory.
E.g., in this view, can the Eucharist get moldy?
@jamesdasher @JMaxB I don’t know the source. Like JMaxB, I have seen it so consistently, with very similar (if not identical) wording, that I have begun introducing it with “It apparently is a dogma ….” (Dogma, of course, being a noble thing when true.)
@jamesdasher @JMaxB Perhaps we should take our Orthodox crypto-scholasticism somewhere other than @christopherchelpka ‘s turf.
@ReaderJohn @jmaxb oh! Of course. And well-phrased: I can already sense a Thomistic accidents/substance disquisition bubbling under the surface.
@JMaxB It really saddens me to hear this. Granted, I come from a very different religious tradition, but it is hard for me to understand how God would prioritize the substance of communion over people’s health. One of the few stories I remember from Hebrew school is about Hillel chopping wood on Shabbat to save a freezing man’s life.
Would it be possible in the Orthodox tradition for a priest to prepare an individual “portion” for each parishioner?
@Bruce et al.: philosophy nerd point of order: “substance” means something different in our materialistic culture than it meant to (St.) Thomas Aquinas or Aristotle. How are you using the term?
@jamesdasher I was going for that the Eucharist becomes the blood and flesh of Christ rather than it being a symbol. Was that the correct usage?
@Bruce either was ok, just wanted to make sure we were having the same conversation! @readerjohn @christopherchelpka @jmaxb
@jamesdasher Thanks for the confirmation. Coming from Quakerism, where spirit is so far elevated above word, I wanted to acknowledge that altering the Eucharist is a much bigger deal than altering any of our traditions would be for us. Many Meetings are even considering moving solely to online video worship for the time being. //@readerjohn @jmaxb @christopherchelpka
@Bruce fair point. You’re right, Orthodoxy generally does take a “both/and” as opposed to “either/or” approach. Which is why it’s been so surprising to hear people say that the Eucharist is wholly Christ, and not also wholly bread and wine. Which is why it sounds Monophysite.
@Bruce "it is hard for me to understand how God would prioritize the substance of communion over people’s health." There's some miscommunication here. The clear teaching is that communion cannot harm a believer's health. Not the same thing, yes?
@JMaxB Well, I guess the question under my question is why God would want us to doubt modern medicine and germ theory. Does Orthodox Christianity accept other aspects of modern science? If so, why not here?
Where does the clear teaching about the miraculous antiviral nature of the Eucharist come from? Is the Body and Blood of Christ not subject to natural law? A teaching that the Eucharist could not be vector/method/way of spiritual illness or death makes far more sense to me. And more in line with my rudimentary knowledge of Jesus's message.
I guess I associate such denial of science with Fundamentalist Protestantism and not Orthodox Christianity. And it makes my heart heavy* to see a religious leader ignore settled science in such a way that could harm parishioners, especially elderly ones. 💙 //@jamesdasher
* Though this is nothing compared to my absolute fury at some groups of Haredi who reject vaccines.
@Bruce @jmaxb i have no idea where the “matter of faith” teaching originated, but I’ve been asking for days. No one seems to know. But people are also very busy rearranging parish affairs, so I suspect the conversations will happen eventually.
But generally, Orthodoxy doesn’t have much to say one way or another about the methods of scientific materialism per se. Orthodox people sometimes have a lot to say, including some hierarchs. But there is not, as there is in Catholicism/Protestantism, a “faith vs. reason” dichotomy.
@jamesdasher “Asking for days”? Maybe 18 hours (judging only from Micro.blog).
I do not know where the seemingly-universal teaching came from. I only know that I've seen no hierarch say otherwise.
It is not the case, though, that the teaching is “you can't get sick from someone else at Church.” Just that the Eucharist won't be the vector.
@ReaderJohn I could as easily (and truthfully) have said “years”. I also engage with people in person, and via other online forums. Here’s an example from a few days ago: twitter.com/dailyorth...
As to vector: this argument seems based on reasoning that could also be used to claim that my lips wouldn’t have gotten dirty if I’d kissed the feet of Christ when he walked the earth.
@jamesdasher Well, I’ve started bowing before icons instead of kissing them and plan to do pretty much the same to people.
I wonder if I'll get defrocked if I say “Namaste” as I bow?