Catholic Online Forum

When genetically modified wheat is used to make the bread that is consecrated at Mass, does transubstantiation happen?

_________________
Anne A.

Yes? As long as it's still recognisably wheat, at any rate...

_________________
Jules Xx


What will become of sinners?

Anne,

Yes.

GM wheat satisfies the requirements of Canon 924.



http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3A.HTM

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Julie, James,

I think the answer here is that genetically engineered wheat is presumed, (or, is it known,) to be substantially equivalent at a molecular level to natural bred wheat, is that right? Or, would it be irrelevant even if G M wheat was an alien life form having already undergone a substantial transformation, unrecognizable as food in the body, but with the appearance of wheat?

_________________
Anne A.

It is a question of ontology; the nature of things. Does wheat which is genetically modified change the substance, the essence of it being wheat, of it being unleavened bread?

As we see in the gluten-free question, some aspects of bread must remain in place in order for it to remain bread. As long as the nature of wheat is not changed, that is, it is not changed into something else entirely, it remains bread.

When a person undergoes gene therapy to address an illness, they do not cease to be human. Likewise, genetic modification of wheat does not cause it to cease to be wheat.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,

First of all, you seem to be confusing or conflating the terms "wheat" and "bread". Of course, all bread is not made of wheat. Also the bread being unleavened has nothing to do with whether is is made of wheat. Bread can be leavened or unleavened whether is is made of wheat or some other grain.

I would submit that changing the genetic make-up of wheat may indeed change its substance. And the more genetic changes that are made, the further away from the original essence of "wheat" it becomes. So perhaps it is a matter of degree. At some point it is not longer wheat, but something new. Exactly where that point is, I have no idea.

Since there does not appear to be a doctrinal answer to this question, maybe this thread should be relocated.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

David,



But GM wheat is nowhere near so great a departure. It simply means modifying the wheat to make it, for example, more insect resistant. No one wishes to make a wheat that is no longer wheat.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

No, I'm not conflating or confusing them. I figured most people knew that the unleavened bread used in communion must be wheat bread. Maybe I was giving people too much credit.

I used the example of bread to illustrate my point that certain accidents (attributes) of a thing must be retained for it to remain that thing.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

How great a departure does it have to be?

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

Where are the Schoolmen when we need them?


Seriously? I once sat in the chaplaincy at university debating whether someone who was half man, half lion could become pope. It was an interesting discussion of 'what makes us human?' and took place before they started messing around with chimera.

In short, I would think this is a situation where common sense prevails. GM wheat still has the characteristics of wheat, even though it may be slightly different genetically. Do people recognise it as wheat without having to read the label? Then it's wheat.

Besides which, most food we eat has been hybridised or genetically modified, if you like, over generations through cross-pollenation and selective breeding.

_________________
Jules Xx


What will become of sinners?

It does not matter to the recipient unknowingly receiving a host of GM wheat nor to the priest unknowingly using a host of GM wheat.

_________________
BobA

It doesn't matter even if they know about it. It's still wheat. If it were unrecognisable as wheat, they wouldn't be able to sell it as wheat. Therefore it's wheat. Therefore it's valid matter.

_________________
Jules Xx


What will become of sinners?

When I look at (or smell, or taste) a host, I can not tell if it is wheat or not. It does not look like wheat to me. If it were made of rice I probably could not tell the difference. So, what makes it recognizable?

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

I'm not sure about this, Julie.

I wonder where the point of not-being-wheat is?

For example: Rye

Suppose rye (or any other related grain) and wheat are hybridized?

They look very much alike, even in pure form. The average, non-agricultrally-educated/experienced individual would be hard pressed to tell the difference.


Wheat


Rye

When, then, does it become something other than wheat?

For instance, examples of animal hybridization are the Liger a cross between a male lion and a tiger, and a Tiglon, the offspring of a male tiger and a female lion.

The hybrids are of neither species of the parent animals.

Wouldn’t at some point, genetically modified (hybridized) wheat become another species? And if the hybrid was of a closely related species, could we tell by appearance?

These questions I ask are mostly for an academic discussion of the issue of hybridization.

My personal belief is that if it looks like wheat and we truly believe it is wheat, then it is wheat.

_________________
In Christ,

Jim B

I will consider your position if stated with firm, well-thought-out, quiet reasoning. Hateful diatribe, ad hominem attacks and shouted rhetoric don't impress.

I suspect that triticale would not be valid for the Eucharist ...

_________________
Kent Wendler

Is it the type of grain which permits transubstantiation or God? Is it the tradition of unleavened bread which makes it licit or the sacrifice of Jesus? Yes we have guidelines and "rules" to follow but so did the Pharisees. When we adore Christ in the Blessed Host is the wafer not the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Son of God? Do you think that Jesus would refuse to live in a piece of rye bread for us? Let us not be tempted to focus and speculate on the physical makeup of the species but who is really there after the consecration. Let us not lose sight of the great love for us that brought about this sacrifice.

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

Jim,

I'm hardly an agricultural expert, but I can tell you they a) look different and b) taste different





Are ligers etc. fertile? Because many 'hybrids' such as mules, although viable for one generation, cannot reproduce further. Just a thought.




The Church says 'wheat.' Why? That's what Jesus used. It's the same reasoning as 'no priestesses.' <opens can of worms>

_________________
Jules Xx


What will become of sinners?

I read great concern, and lawsuits, due to cross pollination between adjacent fields of regular wheat and GM wheat. I think that the ability to cross pollinate is characteristic of plants of the same species. I have not heard of dissimilar grains freely cross-pollinating.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.

Are there not differences in taste and other properties between the varieties of wheat? I think I have seen variety listed as a plus in various pasta ads.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.

GM wheat is altered quite a lot from the original wheat. The percentages of various components have been altered quite a lot, so much so, that there has been a rise in grain sensitivities even beyond celiacs.

I suspect that eventually, the changes will be great enough that the scientific break down of what is IN the GM version and the older style wheat will lead to an investigation and a decision at the proper level of the hierarchy. Meanwhile, any wheat will do because there is nothing specified that would make GM wheat invalid-- until the science clarifies some difference that is determined, by the Church, to matter.

_________________
K. Ann Seeton

"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." --Aristotle (but the concept is found in John Paul II's books The Acting Person and Love and Responsibility as well.)

Quicksilver to Gold
http://hg2au.com

Schultzz,

Yeah.

Do you think God would allow Adam and Eve to eat whatever seemed fine with them?

I thought the link that Jeff provided explains well enough why it's not about 'reasonable' feelings. If Jesus would live in a piece of rye bread for us doesn't that mean that He would be contradicting the authority and power that He gave to the Church?

_________________
Anne A.

I've experienced a fair amount of taste and texture difference from host lot to host lot, I'd never be able to identify a true wheat wafer from any but the most obvious extreme of non-wheat. If it's presented to me by the celebrant as legit it's legit.

_________________
BobA

Objectively, it is not necessarily legit. It is, however, not "your" problem. The fault is the priest's, and he will have to answer to God for the invalid sacrament, not you.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

But you are the one missing out on the Sacrament.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

That is not clear. I do not think there is any contradiction in doctrine to believe that the graces of the sacrament can still be communicated if someone else's sin prevents you from receiving validly.

This answer regarding whether a penitent is still forgiven in the case of an invalid form of absolution is an example where a defect of form does not inhibit the efficacy of the sacrament. Presumably this extends to a defect of matter as well.

In the case of confession, it would be wise to go to confession again just in case. In the case of Holy Eucharist, that would not be strictly necessary.

In a similar question regarding confession, Father Z said...



We know that God always gives graces from Sacraments. We do not know that God does NOT give graces in the absence of the Sacrament.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

I don't think so. God's love extends beyond any privilege. But you have free will to believe what you will. True discernment is holy and requires much prayer and humility and charity. Holy Mother Church guides us to do what is right. Isn't allowing only 1 per cent gluten to accommodate all a "reasonable" gesture?

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

Ultimately, the one initiating the deception would be responsible but I believe everyone acting in good faith would still be awarded the Grace associated with the Sacrament. What does the Church say about such a deception, anyone know for certain? Couldn't open Jeff's link so I don't know what was there, maybe the proof.

_________________
BobA

David,



For wheat to be no longer recognisable as wheat... BUT



Nor should it. It is not wheat; it is bread, bread made from wheat. (And according to the rubrics ideally it should look like bread.)

The psalms tell us that the Messiah will be a priest of the order of Melchizedech, ie that he will offer bread and wine. Bread and wine are the staples of the human diet. Even more beautifully, God supplies the wheat and the grapes which Man by his labour transforms into bread and wine. Christ then transforms them into His own Body and Blood in the perpetuation of the sacrifice of Calvary instituted at the Last Supper.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Dr. Peters comments on Ecclesia supplet. Draw your own conclusions. Certainly no guilt would be imputed to those who believed they were attending a valid Eucharist. However, Dr. Peters appears to argue that the Church could not make up for an invalid sacrament and supply the graces anyway, although God could.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Any Australian can tell you that Man has been modifying wheat for some time now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Farrer

What was once done by selective cross-breeding has now been speeded up thanks to our better understanding of genetics. It still remains wheat.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

I ran across that link and the concept of Ecclesia supplet in my previous research, but didn't want to get into that level of minutae.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

You may have misspelled minutiae, but bringing that to your attention is a good example of its definition.

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

Yes, but I have heard my pastor use that concept (although he didn't use Latin ) to excuse away such issues as when an elderly priest inadvertantly omits a chunk of the words of institution and thus invalidates the Mass. God isn't going to penalize the faithful who attended the invalid Mass and send them to hell for a failure to meet their Sunday obligation. However, whether the faithful received graces from a non-existant sacrament is questionable. As with many concepts in law, this one seems to be misunderstood and misused.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Of course ecclesia supplet cannot excuse a sin, only make up for those innocents affected by the sin.

Does an invalid consecration invalidate the Mass as a whole? Certainly it does not invalidate the fulfillment of the obligation, but is the Mass then ipso facto invalid?

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,

You can't have a Mass without a valid consecration and re-presentation of the Sacrifice. Therefore, if the consecration is invalid, there is no Mass.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

I think you're right, Joe. (And what a relief, if it means dissimilar grains cannot propagate, there should be no fear that future eucharistic breads could be made of "richeat" or "wheaorn." )
I heard it's the same with animals. Years ago in a Philippine zoo, biologists produced a "zebronkey." Maybe two zebronkeys, but never a family of zebronkeys.

_________________
Pax et bonum,
Marie

JMJ

Jeff,



Not only sin, but error as well I would think.

_________________
Dean
Most people's sense of history goes back to breakfast time - Benjamin Netanyahu

Of course.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Schultzz,

I agree with what you're saying about God's love, after all, we have a Redeemer even though God said to not eat the fruit of that tree. But, I thought Canon Law, even the disciplines of the Church, are bound in Heaven, which is why I would think that Jesus is not going to do something that the Church says He doesn't do.

In the link above about the gluten-free question, I gathered that low-gluten is fine, and gluten-free is not bread, but there were persuasive arguments in favor of gluten-free, which would have been reasonable if gluten-free was bread.

_________________
Anne A.

I'm going to share something that is not doctrine in and of itself, but is a matter of understanding what doctrine and theology is.

Theology is the study of God; it is human understanding of what and who God is, and how he operates. But it is, at its core, a human understanding, and is imperfect. Theology describes God, it does not limit or, God forbid, restrict God.

We conclude from Scripture and Tradition that transubstantiation does occur when unleavened bread is the matter for the Sacrament of the Eucharist. We conclude this is true; the definition does not make it true, it simply is describing something we know occurred (at the Last Supper). But we do not know that it the only circumstance in which it occurs; it is simply the only one we know of.

So when the Church defines that, in order for the Sacrament to valid, it must be unleavened bread, and goes on to determine the degree of variation which is permissible, such as the requirement for gluten, the Church is saying when we can know reliably that the Sacrament is valid. The Church is not saying that God is limited by this description; God is capable of making anything happen which suits his Will. Our Lord said that God can raise up children for Abraham from stones, similarly he can confect the Eucharist from whatever matter He chooses. But we only know that he will do so for unleavened bread, so for the sake of clarity and the good of souls, the Church defines that is how we can know God is truly present. And that no other means should be undertaken.

At least, that is how I understand theology and doctrine to be; it describes, it does not limit God.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

Jeff,

A sacrificial Eucharist convected with leavened bread is illicit, it is not invalid - our brothers in the East (both those who are separated and those in communion) do it all the time.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)