Recieving Both Species

[LaPetiteSoeur]

This is something I've been wondering a long time. Some family members have had alcohol problems, and it is best that I never do (people with family members who have addictions--or had--have a higher disposition). Anyway, I was wondering if that is generally ok with religious orders. Does a sister have to take both species of Christ? Or is just the body of Christ ok?

Dieu vous benisse!

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

[quote name='LaPetiteSoeur' timestamp='1291572308' post='2191044']
This is something I've been wondering a long time. Some family members have had alcohol problems, and it is best that I never do (people with family members who have addictions--or had--have a higher disposition). Anyway, I was wondering if that is generally ok with religious orders. Does a sister have to take both species of Christ? Or is just the body of Christ ok?

Dieu vous benisse!
[/quote]

That's a very good question--I'm glad you asked and will be eager to hear others' answers. It's interesting, this is something I've never read about in any post or on any Web site.

My hope would be that any responsible religious Order would make an exception for a member who either was a recovering alcoholic or had a family with a strong disposition to alcoholism. Also, some recovering alcoholics take Antabuse or a similar drug. (I would expect this would probably be less common in a monastery--although we do hear stories of religious who unfortunately develop alcohol addiction). Antabuse makes the person who takes it VERY sick if the person injests alcohol. However, I have no idea what the effect of a small sip of wine would be for someone taking Antabuse.

In my case, I am either allergic to alcohol or my body does not have the enzyme to turn alcohol into sugar. (Since the result is the same, my doctors and I have decided it is not worth doing the tests to try to figure the specific cause.) As a result, I simply don't drink alcohol. And, since I've never bothered to develop a taste for alcohol it is no loss at all. Alcohol makes me immediately sick--I never get the good, relaxed feeling most people get. No surprisingly, I don't miss alcohol at all--It's easy to give up nausea (and worse)! I have found that the tiny sip of Christ's blood at the Eucharist makes no noticeable difference, but if I have an allergy/enzyme problem, that means there are are probably people who have either/both of those conditions MUCH worse than I do.

There are other health conditions, such as hepatitis, and almost any kind of liver disease, for example, that make drinking any alcohol potentially dangerous. I can't imagine that a religious Order would require communion under both species if it would harm a person's heath.

This may be more a question for one of the question forums, but I wonder how much a priest is allowed to water down the wine and still have it be considered "the blood of Christ?" If taking under both species was required or expected, for some reason, could the priest add a lot of water to the wine so that it contained virtually no alcohol and only a tiny "symbolic" amount of wine?

If an Order required taking under both species, despite health issues, that, to me, would be an Order to avoid. IMO, there is a point to religious discipline and obedience, but not if it brings on unnecessary health problems.

This is another question that probably belongs in the debate forum, but, if an individual normally received only the body of Christ, but was in some kind of public ceremony where not taking the blood of Christ would be calling attention to themselves, could they put the cup to their lips, but not actually drink any wine? My common sense says that Christ would understand completely, and even be pleased, for example, if the person was a recovering alcoholic who showed so much self-control. But, some church rules don't always follow what I consider common sense. (That doesn't mean the rules make no common sense. Only that I have never been told the reasoning behind them.)

On a related issue, I have been pleased to read that gluten-free hosts are now available, for people for whom eating gluten causes illness. (Perhaps gluten-free hosts have been available for a long time, but, since I am so new to learning about Catholicism (despite being married to a Catholic for 14 years!), it might be something I have only heard about it recently.

Another thought--somewhat related. And, this issue has been HAS been brought up during disease epidemics. I had mono during my last term of Grad school. I was going to UCLA at the time, and UCLA has an outstanding medical center and medical school, so I had very good and thorough care (unlike some "student health centers.") The doctors questioned me at length as to how I caught mono, because mono is not THAT contagious. At that time in my life, there was literally no situation I could think of where I might have come in close enough contact with a contagious person to have contracted mono. The ONLY circumstance where that might have been possible was taking the blood at church, if someone who took the blood before me was contragious with mono, but did knot know it yet. (Although the priest followed all the usual procedures of wiping the cup and turning it after each communicant.) One of my bosses insisted that it was impossible to catch a disease from the cup, but I didn't know if this was simply her religious faith or if she had some other basis for her answer. Some time I should look up what churches have done during epidemics of diseases more contagious than mono. But, ever since I had mono (which in my case, resulted in some serious side effects) I have been very uncomfortable receiving under both species, even by intinction.

I wonder if religious communities ask a member to receive under only one species if that person is ill with a contagious disease. Or, I assume that the member could ask the priest to administer the body and blood through intinction. But, what if there is a cold or flu epidemic going around a Community, and many members might not even know they are contagious. Does the Superior ask that everyone in the community take communion be taken only one species or by intinction for a time to help prevent the disease from spreading? Colds and flu can be very contagious, and although for most people they are simply an annoyance, for older members or for those with immune system issues, a cold or flu can be very serious or even fatal.

I'm glad you asked your original question. I will be very interested to see the responses. I apologize for making your post even longer by adding (too many!) questions, but they are questions I have thought about before, and not thought to ask.

Edited December 5, 2010 by IgnatiusofLoyola

[CatherineM]

I would doubt you would be required to receive both. I rarely receive from the cup simply because I don't feel confident holding the cup with one hand. I use a forearm crutch with my left hand.

[TeresaBenedicta]

One is never required to receive under both Species. In fact, only after Vatican II was the Precious Blood made available for reception on such a large basis. Even since, it's always been a choice-- since one receives the full Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ in either species.

I can hardly imagine that this would be a problem with any community.

[MithLuin]

Yes, the most important thing is to realize that Christ is fully present in both species - it would be theologically inaccurate to refer to the host as His Body and the cup as His Blood in a way that suggested that his blood was not present in the host or that the wine was not also his body. Etc.

There are people with gluten allergies, which, if they are severe enough, would make receiving the host impossible. In these cases, it makes sense to offer the cup only for that particular person.

A religious community can certainly make allowances/exceptions as needed, but keep in mind that in joining an order, you're supposed to do what they do. While you have [i]a[/i] reason to avoid receiving the Precious Blood, it is by no means a strong reason. A sip of wine no more than once a day does not an alcoholic make, no matter what your family history is. I know a deacon who is a recovering alcoholic who drinks the wine at mass because it is consecrated, and that makes a difference. So, it is quite possible that (if you were to share your concern with a religious order) they would disagree with you.

Basically, I wouldn't worry about this (from any angle), and if it comes up in the future, you can address it with the religious order in question. As a member of the laity, you are of course under no obligation to receive communion from the cup. All four of my grandparents had drinking problems (and I have many other relatives who have been through AA or rehab), so I understand where you are coming from. I also make rules for myself about when and under what circumstances it is acceptable for me to have alcohol. But receiving the Blood of Christ isn't really an issue.


Personally, I avoid the cup if I am sick (or have been around sick people) because I would not want to contribute to an elderly person coming down with something. I [i]know[/i] alcohol is a disinfectant, but the alcohol content in wine is so low that I don't really trust it to work in such a short time. And oftentimes it is not offered at masses I attend. But if it is available, I will receive from the cup. I didn't used to. I remember when it was introduced at my parish, and then...for several years I just never took it. I finally started again....after watching a vampire movie,* of all things. It was painfully obvious that the whole concept (drinking blood to gain eternal life, hello?) is a strange distortion of our doctrine on the Eucharist. I realized that by avoiding the cup, I was (in a small way) ignoring part of what the Eucharist really means, so I wanted to remedy that.

(*Hellsing Ultimate, NOT Interview with the Vampire, which I have never seen)

[Ephrem Augustine]

[quote name='LaPetiteSoeur' timestamp='1291572308' post='2191044']
This is something I've been wondering a long time. Some family members have had alcohol problems, and it is best that I never do (people with family members who have addictions--or had--have a higher disposition). Anyway, I was wondering if that is generally ok with religious orders. Does a sister have to take both species of Christ? Or is just the body of Christ ok?

Dieu vous benisse!
[/quote]

Canon Law, requires the ordained, who celebrates (who concelebrates), to receive both species. Only the ordained is required. A priest who is at mass, or a deacon who is there, but not concelebrating, they are not required to receive.

Fr. Jack Shirley, God Rest his soul, was a recovered Alcoholic, being sober some 40 years. When, in novitiate, we asked him why he receives the wine at Mass, he interjected... "THAT is not WINE, it is the PRECIOUS BLOOD of Christ."

another priest I live with, is a recovered alcoholic, and he just got ordained this year.

Alcoholism is a disease. Fr. Jack taught me a lot. The alcoholic is nearly genetically predisposed to it, and the addiction has created a chemical dependency on that chemical. Not all children of alcoholics become alcoholics, but it is likely, and something to be cautious of. Shame often times contributes to alcoholism, but I think my generation of twenty something drinks rather shamelessly. I think we will end up with several alcoholics who drink merely to escape. And that is really the key. we have to learn how to cope in a way, that when life gets difficult, we have good human support, but we also turn to God in prayer.

I have, at least told myself, or kept as a motto, I drink only to celebrate not to medicate. If I am feeling low, or down for any reason, I stay away from drinking, even if there is some good reason to celebrate. Now if I am feeling decent, or great, and have an excuse to party, I will probably savor whatever it is that I will drink.

so of course, I could, thanks to these two wonderful priests I lived with talk about the spirituality of the alcoholic, but I think I will leave it at this at this point.

[MissScripture]

I wouldn't think you would be required. What would they do if you chose not to? They may encourage it, but I would doubt they would require it. They couldn't even require you take communion every time you go to Mass, because if you're not properly disposed to take it, that would be even more of a sin...




[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1291616067' post='2191161']

There are people with gluten allergies, which, if they are severe enough, would make receiving the host impossible. In these cases, it makes sense to offer the cup only for that particular person.


[/quote]
This is kind of a sidenote, but I do know they make low-gluten hosts for people who cannot have gluten, although I don't know if that makes it okay for EVERYONE who needs to be gluten-free. I also would guess that it's probably quite expensive, since most gluten-free items are, so it may not be something smaller orders would have access to. I have a friend who is not able to have gluten (she has a severe reaction when she does), except for the host (not the low-gluten kind), which I thought was pretty cool.

[Sarah147]

I've been to many orders: contemplative, semi, active, etc. They all had Jesus in the species of Host (consecrated bread). I can't recall any having the Blood (consecrated wine).

In general, I've been told that the Church says you are obligated to at least one, and that fullfills receiving Communion. You don't have to receive both, nor a particular species.

Edited December 10, 2010 by JoyfulLife

[MithLuin]

Certainly canon law does not require it, but I imagine most orders have private rules that apply to all sorts of things, including the reception of communion. For instance, I know of an order that requires that everyone receive on the tongue, because part of their charism is to make reparation for those who do not respect the Eucharist. If they receive in the hand for whatever reason, they have to do penance. It is possible that there is some order out there that would expect you to receive from the cup out of obedience, though I don't know how anyone would know that before you visited.

Basically, don't worry about it, but maybe file it away for questions to ask later when you get to the point of visiting an order.

[incarnatewordsister]

In our congregation we are encouraged but never required. We have a Sister who can not take the body and so she only takes the blood, we have someone allergic to wine and so she does not. I highly douby that any congregation would make you partake of it if you have a good reason not to.