Mass mess

[vee]

Question. Is it against the rules for a priest to distribute the precious blood while a lay person distributes the precious body?  To me it seems odd that the priest would choose to  do such a thing but that happened today. 

[Nihil Obstat]

I do not know what is and is not permitted legally speaking, but the practice strikes me as inappropriate.

[CatherineM]

Had a priest do this once. He was trying to get more people to take from the cup. 

[dUSt]

Is the body more important than the blood?

[Anomaly]

What?   I've seen this done for many years and I haven't attended regularly in more than 5 years, so I'd guess this has been regularly going on at multiple parishes for the last 10+ years.   The priest tends to distribute the hosts to the EM's and he and one or two EM's handle the 'blood' distribution 

Aren't both supposed to be essentially the same thing, theologically?

[dominicansoul]

I'm confused, because I usually do not receive the Cup.  I only receive the Host even when the Cup is distributed.  I've always thought the Host took precedence.  Not sure where I got that idea...

[He is Risen!]

At most EF masses I've been to, the people receive the host only, not both species (of course the priest consumes both for a valid mass) and the host contains both body and blood (as does the wine) Maybe there was an issue with the lay person spilling the Precious Blood?

[Jubilate Deo]

2 hours ago, dominicansoul said:

I'm confused, because I usually do not receive the Cup.  I only receive the Host even when the Cup is distributed.  I've always thought the Host took precedence.  Not sure where I got that idea...

I don't receive from the chalice, either. I know I receive all of Jesus and not just part of Him when I receive the Host.

[Rosary11]

I wish my church offered the blood of Christ. My church only offers the body.

[Nihil Obstat]

1 hour ago, Rosary11 said:

I wish my church offered the blood of Christ. My church only offers the body.

You consume both the Body and the Blood of Christ regardless of the species under which you communicate.

[vee]

 Another parishioner disagreed with the situation so much that they stepped out of the line and sat back down upon seeing that the priest was not giving the Host.  I would rather recieve from a lay person than to depreive myself totally of the sacrament but maybe he wanted to make a statement    

[hep_rsb]

Maybe the priest was ill and wanted to limit his contact with the hosts people were eating. I have attended a mass where the priest was quite sick, and had EMs distribute both the Body and the Blood. 

[hotpink]

15 hours ago, vee said:

 Another parishioner disagreed with the situation so much that they stepped out of the line and sat back down upon seeing that the priest was not giving the Host.  I would rather recieve from a lay person than to depreive myself totally of the sacrament but maybe he wanted to make a statement    

I have to say, that's a bit extreme.

I often go to Daily Mass where the Priest will let the EM (usually a Brother) distribute the Eucharist and he takes care of the cup.  He discerned a monistary dedicated to the Precious Blood before becoming a diocean priest.  He said that years ago, as a boy, when there were many Priests, it was considered the "lower" task, assigned to the non-celebrant.  He felt a special attraction to being able to distribute The Blood.  He said it gave him a thrill and a passion for the Eucharist and spoke to him in a way that The Body did not.   He had studied plebodomy in college so he also attributed his fascination with The Blood with his own personal interest in regular blood.

Still, he said it often troubled him to the point of tears that many priests have been denied the opportunity to offer The Blood, sometimes for decades on end.

That said, I think he feared retribution should he try that on a Sunday.

[dUSt]

17 hours ago, vee said:

 Another parishioner disagreed with the situation so much that they stepped out of the line and sat back down upon seeing that the priest was not giving the Host.  I would rather recieve from a lay person than to depreive myself totally of the sacrament but maybe he wanted to make a statement    

Why didn't they just receive the Blood from the priest?

[Guest]

At the Last Supper, Jesus consecrated both bread and wine asking that both be done.  I think probably for some the problem might be that for many years pre V2 we received only under the species of bread or the host and find it unable to change and get their head around the fact that Jesus asked that we receive both species (bread and wine) and so The Church (insofar as I am aware) changed that we might receive both species and included the "blood of the covenant" or the wine.  Powerful words underscoring that we are saved by the death of Jesus shedding His Blood.

Both species are the Body and Blood of Jesus.

Quote

 

Matthew Chapter 26  "While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, "Take and eat; this is my body."

Then he took a cup, gave thanks, ¹⁶ and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you,

for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins."

 

 

 

"