Did I desecrate the Eucharist??

I’ll start by saying that I’m scrupulous. I just recently read that one can desecrate the Eucharist in several ways, including using it for a profane purpose, and that desecrating the Eucharist incurs automatic excommunication that only the Pope can lift. Many years ago, as an acolyte (likely at least 17 years old), I finished the Sacred Blood. There was a fair bit of it, and a major element of my motivation was simply to drink alcohol. Now I am concerned that this was a profane use of the Eucharist, that I’ve been excommunicated all this time, and that only the Pope can lift it… I know some people might find this a bit ridiculous, but this is a serious concern for me.

You’re not excommunicated. You were a dumb kid.

also there is an age limitation on the excommunication I don’t know if 17 is under it but it may be.

Acolytes often have to finish the sacred blood; it’s part of the job. Sometimes there is a fair bit left. And yes altar wine can taste nice. None of this is anywhere near constituting a profane use of the sacred blood.

Being an acolyte is a service to our Lord and not the occasion for scrupulous doubts. Talk to your priest about this so you can be at peace.

I think it’s good that your conscience made you think about your past actions being wrong about this and you’re taking it more seriously now. That speaks to your moral character and God bringing out the good in you…:wink:

Since you were ignorant of the law at the time, you are not guilty. Case closed.

Here’s REAL desecration of the Eucharist:
Kuma’s Corner ‘Ghost’ burger features communion wafer as topping
Guyism ‎- by Colin Joliat ‎- 9 hours ago
Chicago restaurant Kuma’s Corner made waves with their blasphemous Ghost burger featuring the body and blood of Christ as toppings.

No, this doesn’t count either. The hosts are explicitly stated as unconsecrated, so it’s not a desecration under the canon. It is, however, tasteless and disrespectful to Catholics.

That said, a burger soaked in wine sounds tasty.

Precisely. You can’t desecrate the Eucharist if the Eucharist isn’t present. In some parts of the world, they eat unconcecrated altar bread with breakfast on special occasions. They, however, do it respectfully, as part of their culture.

What this burger joint did was a major faux pas, and they’ve blown it way out of proportion by refusing to change it, trying to give the money to Catholic Charities, et c.

If they had just dropped it, it would have been much easier.

no, you consumed the blood that is what it was meant for.
now if you deliberately dumped it down the drain that would be desecrating the blood.

The present Catechism of the Church states:
2120 Sacrilege consists in profaning or treating unworthily the sacraments and other liturgical actions, as well as persons, things, or places consecrated to God. Sacrilege is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true Body of Christ is made substantially present for us.

1385 …St. Paul urges us to examine our conscience: “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.” [216] Anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion.

So before talking about culpability we first look at whether the action involved serious/grave matter.

Article 2120 suggests you treated the Consecrated Wine (Jesus) unworthily in the attitude you entertained. There was nothing wrong with your external act (the wine had to be consumed) but your interior act was imperfect and unworthy. However the internal act was not directly against the Consecrated Wine as God. In other words you were more into greed for the alcohol than directly giving God the finger as it were. Some may argue that the very fact of treating the wine as just wine (I wanted the alcohol) is exactly what “profaning” (denying the spiritual) means. If what you did was known to fellow altar servers, and therefore scandalous, I would say it crosses the line and becomes Sacrilege (grave matter).

I would say the matter is a borderline internal act of sacrilege (but probably under the threshhold). Therefore we need go no further as this action, not being of grave matter, cannot be mortal sin. At the most venial.

However if you are scrupulous, though this probably falls short of the grave matter of Sacrilege, it is better to continue the analysis so you may find peace.

The 2nd Catechism article says we must confess all sins of grave matter when we become conscious of them.
So if we assume this is grave matter (doubtful) you have only now come to this possible realisation. That means only now must you confess this past sin and you may not go to Communion until you have done so.

BUT there is another out. If you did not at the time know it was possibly sacriligious, and that was not really your intent, then you are only partially culpable. Mortal sin requires full knowledge and intent, therefore it cannot be a mortal sin.

Personally I do not think this is quite grave matter.
But if you believe it crossed the line I indicated then you should take this to Confession.
Of course you should not flog yourself for the intervening time period before this rose up to the surface. God is not a tyrant.

Of course it will be a good thing for you to take this possible “grave matter” (a technical term) to Confession even if it is only a venial sin (not fully imputable) as most of us here are telling you.

Do you mean altar server? I’m not sure if a 17 year old can be an acolyte.

Anyway, you were able to be excommunicated since you have to be at least 16 to be excommunicated, but if you weren’t aware of the punishment for what you did, then you are not excommunicated. I don’t think what you did constitutes desecration. I thinks it’s irreverence.

As I recall, there was a fellow server who also finished a different cup of the Sacred Blood. I think that also may have been a fair amount, but I can’t speak to his motivation nor did he know mine, though he may have been following my lead.

It was also in general view of the assembly.

The sacred blood must be consumed after communion. And this is done in front of the assembly. You did what was required of you. If you have lingering doubts regarding your internal motivations, discuss them with a priest.

This was common when I was younger

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.