More Dangerous than Covid-19 DR. EUGENIA CONSTANTINOU30/05/2020 In his article of May 25, 2020, “A Note on the Common Communion Spoon,” Fr. Alkiviadis Calivas attempted to provide some justifications for eliminating use of the common spoon for Holy Communion. What he ultimately presented were the values of the world or the reasoning of Western Christianity under the cloak of Orthodox theology. Orthodoxy has always been flexible, but it has also been uncompromising in certain areas, including our core belief about Communion and our Orthodox phronema, our mindset, which is distinct from all other Christian groups. Isolated examples of past historical practices and rational arguments were utilized to justify eliminating the common communion spoon in the article. But the same types of arguments can be employed to justify or rationalize eliminating virtually every traditional practice and moral position of the Church. A greater threat exists than Covid-19: the undermining of our convictions and damage to the faith. What we need from our hierarchs and our priests at this moment is spiritual leadership, rather in than presenting “logical” arguments which surrender to the “slavery of our human reasoning,” as the communion prayer to the Theotokos states. We know that originally all of the faithful received the Body in their hand and drank the Blood directly from a common chalice. The article suggested that because use of a common spoon was not always the practice of the Church, a local church can decide on its own initiative to substitute some other practice. The article noted that use of the spoon was instituted about a thousand years ago to protect the Holy and Precious Body of the Lord from being dropped carelessly by the faithful and to facilitate reception of both elements when only one priest was liturgizing. It is important that we realize the rationale for the introduction of the common spoon: it protected the sacrament from desecration and facilitated its effective distribution. That change reinforced in the minds of the faithful the extreme sacredness of the Holy Gifts. But these new methods suggested as possible substitutes for the common spoon – such as multiple spoons or disposable spoons – do not follow that phronema at all. Rather, they are being proposed to alleviate the fears among some of the laity, when doing so would actually inure to the detriment of the faithful by affirming their fears that Holy Communion can convey illness. The Church has always held that Holy Communion can never be the source of illness and to undermine that core belief is more dangerous and more deadly than Covid-19 because nurturing such doubts impacts our eternal salvation. The evil one is dancing with delight because by allowing the inference that Communion can convey disease through the spoon, the Church itself is instilling doubt, doubt which the devil will cultivate and will eagerly seek to extend to other areas of the faith. The article noted that the Penthekte Synod’s canon 101 forbade the faithful from bring small gold receptacles to receive the communion rather than receiving it directly onto their hands. People thought they were honoring the communion by placing it on a “precious” material like gold. The canon forbade that practice, not because the council was affirming that we should not use a spoon or some other “instrument.” The phronema behind the canon was to affirm that nothing is more precious, a more worthy receptacle of holy communion, than the human person. Christ is not honored by our gold or our spoons but when we receive him with the right attitude, “with the fear of God, with faith, and with love,” as the call to the chalice reminds us. The canon affirmed the supreme value of the human person. For us God actually became man, therefore Holy Communion can never be an agent of illness, whether it is received on a spoon, or in the hand, or directly from the chalice. God became man – not simply to die on the cross or to rise from the dead. He became man to become flesh and blood so that we could physically receive His very Flesh and Blood. It is impossible, impossible, that we could become ill either by communion itself or through the instrumentality by which we receive it. When God became man, He sanctified our human nature by uniting it to His divine nature. His divinity was not altered by its union with the humanity. How can the spoon which communes the faithful not also be sanctified? If we human beings, with our sins and failings, are sanctified by receiving communion, how can the spoon an inanimate object with no sins not be sanctified and be an agent of disease? The article, however, attempts to distinguish the sacrament itself from the instrument used to deliver the sacrament to the faithful. Fr. Calivas defends the doubtful or fearful believers, saying that these people do not question the sacred character and identity of the Holy Gifts, “only the reliability of the instrument” used to deliver them. But if they believe in the sacred character of the Holy Gifts, as he maintains, let the clergy lead them, let the theologians encourage them, to take one more step: to have confidence in the spoon as well. But instead, some clergy and theologians are encouraging doubts which no human measures will ever entirely eliminate. The article portrays as insensitive those who defend the Orthodox faith by supporting the common spoon. He describes them as “dismissive” and presenting “an air of superiority” because we insist that Communion cannot convey illness because Communion is “the medicine of immortality.” Fr. Calivas admits that it “may be true” that Communion cannot convey disease, but “the medicine of immortality” and similar statements “are not sufficient to calm the fears and concerns” of some people. But those are not recent statements by rogue individuals exerting an “air of superiority.” Such statements are what the Church, the holy Scriptures, the Fathers and the saints, have always taught and what our communion hymns declare: “Taste and see that the Lord is good.” “Receive the Body of Christ. Taste of the fount of immortality.” “I will drink from the cup of salvation. I will call upon the name of the Lord.” Our communion hymns are not merely poetic sentiments to be discarded as meaningless because some people are afraid. Our assertion that Holy Communion can never be the vehicle for transmission of disease, regardless of the method by which it is received, has been proven true through the 2,000 year history of the Church. That is what is being “dismissed” here! What should the Church encourage? On what should the Church take its stand? On faith or unbelief? On Holy Tradition or human fear? Fr. Calivas unfortunately suggests that receiving Communion could convey disease, “as if the act of communing is void of…. the limitations of the created order,” he writes. The article expresses sympathy for people who do not want to be exposed to “unnecessary risks” and that “people want to feel safe, listened to, and protected by their Church.” Human fear is real and we should be sensitive to people’s concerns. The Church always cares about and wants to protect the faithful. The churches were closed for weeks and we are continuing to follow hygienic practices, such as wearing masks and social distancing, but the Church will never alleviate all fears nor should we ever compromise our holy Faith in a misguided effort to do so. The article attempts to distinguish between the sacrament itself and the manner in which it is received, suggesting that one cannot become sick from the sacrament but possibly from the spoon. Are we to believe that the One emptied Hades of the dead is incapable of prevailing over a virus because it is on a spoon? What nonsense is that! Whether it is received on a common spoon or not, the most sacred Mystery of the Church can never be the vehicle of illness. At the very institution of the Eucharist, Christ was certainly aware of viruses and germs. He knew that there would be pandemics and plagues in the future, but nonetheless the Lord – apparently recklessly, without love or concern for humanity, and against all scientific advice or rational thought – dared to pass around a common cup! That was how Christians received the sacrament for hundreds of years before the use of a common spoon.: one chalice. After the faithful have received the Holy Gifts, that which remains in the chalice is consumed by the priest. Fr. Calivas noted that he has consumed the remaining Communion thousands of times in his over sixty years as a priest. By this he undermines his very argument: he has never become sick from that practice even though he consumed the chalice after administering communion to thousands of people with a common spoon. In fact, there has never been a single case in which a person can be demonstrated to have contracted any illness from Holy Communion. On a few occasions, I have watched my husband lick communion off the floor of the church when a drop inadvertently fell. I have even seen him vigorously suck a drop of communion up from carpet when the church floor was carpeted – the floor, on which hundreds of shoes had stepped, shoes which had been out in the germy world. Imagine that! There is the priest, in his vestments, on his knees, sucking the carpet or licking the communion from a hard floor. He never became ill. That is not just an act of sentimental piety but an act of faith and reverence, a faith which we need to encourage and support at this time, not seek alternative procedures which would undermine it.