Mass mess

[Jubilate Deo]

1 hour ago, BarbaraTherese said:

At the Last Supper, Jesus consecrated both bread and wine asking that both be done. 

...

Both species are the Body and Blood of Jesus.

And since both species are the Body and Blood of Jesus, people like me who receive the Host and not from the chalice, along with all the people who attend the EF of the Mass who also receive under one species, receive both the Body and Blood that way. No worries.

I personally would feel uncomfortable touching the chalice with my unconsecrated hands, just like I would be uncomfortable receiving the Host in my hands.

As for the "drink from it, all of you," that you mentioned, it's important to remember that those who were with Jesus at that moment were priests.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Jubilate Deo

[Guest]

Insofar as I am aware, The Church allows option and choice in the matter of receiving Holy Communion under both species or only one species.  Says it all for me insofar as others receiving Holy Communion are concerned.  

[Jubilate Deo]

40 minutes ago, BarbaraTherese said:

Insofar as I am aware, The Church allows option and choice in the matter of receiving Holy Communion under both species or only one species.  Says it all for me insofar as others receiving Holy Communion are concerned.  

I believe so, too. My post wasn't to point fingers at anyone who chooses to receive under both species. I just personally don't, although I believe I did for my First Communion.

[Jubilate Deo]

“There is no Divine precept binding the laity or non-celebrating priests to receive the sacrament under both kinds (Trent, sess. XXI, c. i.) (c) By reason of the hypostatic union and of the indivisibility of His glorified humanity, Christ is really present and is received whole and entire, body and blood, soul and Divinity, under either species alone; nor, as regards the fruits of the sacrament, is the communicant under one kind deprived of any grace necessary for salvation (Trent, Sess. XXI, c., iii).”

" When one travels all over the world, Catholics in most countries only receive the Holy Host.  That is because these countries never ever received permission (indult) to also give the Chalice to the people.  Most American Catholics will be very surprised to find out that, when attending Holy Mass at the Vatican, you will only receive the Holy Host. "

http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2014/05/20/only-the-priest-receives-both-forms-of-holy-communion-at-traditional-catholic-latin-mass/

I don't know very much about this website, but the quotes are relevant here.

[Guest]

I first received Holy Communion long before V2 when we received only under the Sacred Host (I am 71years of age).  After V2 when it was legislated we could receive under both species, I received from then on under both and continue to do so and was very happy, over the moon in fact, when we were able to do so.  In Australia, again insofar as I am aware, reception of The Blessed Eucharist under both species is widely effected under certain conditions.  I am aware, however, that one receives the Body AND Blood of Jesus under one or other of the species and I have my own personal reasons (as stated above) for receiving under both species.  I never take any notice at all who does or does not, too wrapped up in my own reception.

I do find the wine particularly strong and if I suspect it might cause me to cough (as strong wine sometimes can), then I receive only the Sacred Host.  Sometimes my mouth is quite dry from medication and that will cause me to cough with strong wine.

We all probably have differing reasons for receiving either one or both species and all are probably worthy in some way, providing the Doctrine is understood, which ideally it will and should be and for sure.

Interesting Vatican Document all ideally should read HERE on Holy Communion and reception of same

Rather often, I think, it becomes apparent that adult education in The Faith is inadequate, even in the most important matter of all i.e. reception of The Blessed Eucharist and the related Doctrine.  There is a difference, a vast difference, between culpable and inculpable ignorance.

 

Edited May 12, 2017 by BarbaraTherese

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Jubilate Deo said:

My post wasn't to point fingers at anyone who chooses to receive under both species.

Thank you.  I did realise you were stating your own personal position and not pointing a finger at anyone 

[Nihil Obstat]

5 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

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.

 

"

 

I am sure you do not mean to imply that the Latin rite prior to the 1960s was being disobedient to Christ's instructions at the Last Supper...

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I am sure you do not mean to imply that the Latin rite prior to the 1960s was being disobedient to Christ's instructions at the Last Supper...

No way - and thank you for raising the point and allowing me to clarify.

"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."  Matthew Ch16 HERE

 I know The Church's traditional interpretation re the forgiveness of all personal sins, but I have a very personal one for myself calling me to obedience to The Church in all things.  The traditional interpretation is extremely powerful, overwhelmingly so, when I consider mortal sin bears the penalty of Hell and The Church has the power from Christ to remove that penalty.....astounding and amazing, speechless!

 Prior to V2 changes in the l960's The Church confined reception of The Blessed Eucharist under the one species of Bread.  I might have desired to receive under both, but obedience to The Church is always prime and has the casting vote as I bow to a far superior wisdom than I could ever be gifted.   Post V2 The Church embraced reception of The Blessed Eucharist under both species of Bread and Wine for the faithful as well.  At Mass, the celebrant receives both species and that is in the name of all the faithful. 

We studied in depth (with a priest from diocesan offices) The Gospel of Matthew in my final year in college, and I came away from it with more questions than I had answers.  V2 for me personally was a breath of fresh air and relief with answers to my questions gradually unfolding.

"For modern generations, the Council of Trent may not have been mentioned in their doctrinal formation which emphasizes that "nothing is lost by the body being received by the people without the blood: because the priest both offers and receives the blood in the name of all, and the whole Christ is present under either species" (Summa Theologiae, III, q. 80, a. 12, ad 3)." HERE

 

Edited May 12, 2017 by BarbaraTherese

[Jubilate Deo]

3 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

Thank you.  I did realise you were stating your own personal position and not pointing a finger at anyone 

Oh, good. Sometimes tone is a tricky thing on the internet.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Jubilate Deo said:

Oh, good. Sometimes tone is a tricky thing on the internet.