Children recieving from the cup

[coyote]

puzzleannie:

It is an entitlement, the GIRM clearly specifies that the faithful are to be offered both the Body and Blood of the Lord, and that includes all the faithful who have been admitted to first holy communion. “The Church” determines the age for communion. An EMCH is not “the Church” neither is a pastor who is arbitrarily barring otherwise properly disposed persons from the sacrament as the Church intended. This is indeed an abuse and must be brought to the intention of the Bishop. If the pastor and EMHC’s are so poorly instructed as to the nature of the Precious Blood that they somehow think it is wine and therefore inappropriate for children they need to go back to Remedial CCD.

:clapping:

Jesus did say, “Unless you eat my flesh AND DRINK MY BLOOD you will have no life in you.” didn’t he?

Didn’t he also tell the Apostles, " Take this ALL OF YOU AND DRINK OF IT. This is the cup of my blood…"?

Please refer me to the passages where Jesus says, “Children may not drink from the cup.” or where he says “Take this and drink from it, unless you have already had the bread or don’t want anymore wine.”

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

palmas85:

My point was that in that diocese the Bishop may have made the determination not to offer the chalice to children under a certain age, and he may have delegated that authority to the parish level and the pastor may have told the Extraordinary Ministers no chalice to the children. If the Bishop has the authority to regulate the distribution of Holy Communion, which the does, it would seem that he could have that option. That is of course unless there is a provision in Canon Law that specifically regulates that.

I looked in the Code of Canon Law and and the GIRM, and saw nothing that said if the chalice was offered to one it had to be offered to all.

Could it have been that far from a ministers ad hoc decision, he was acting in accordance with the directive of the local Bishop? After all, the child was not denied Holy Communion, he received Holy Communion. If the child had been denied both forms of communion, I would have no problem at all, the minister would be definitely wrong. But the child did in fact receive, he was not deprived of any graces from the sacrament.

As I asked is there is a povision in Canon Law that specifies that all who request the chalice must be given it and can the Bishop regulate that aspect of it?

I’m not trying to argue. I just want clarity on this issue due to the apparent misunderstanding that surrounds it in the minds of many.

I believe that the Bishops decree is to allow Bishops to offer if they choose the Chalice to the laity in their diocese. I believe it is “offer or not to offer”. It does not provide for offering only to certain people at a public Mass. There is a document that does say if a person (no age specification) presents themselves to a minister of Holy Communion at a public Mass they are to be given Holy Communion. So if a 12 year old presents themselves to a minister of the Cup during a public Mass they are to be given the Sacrament. The EMHC cannot refuse them the Sacrament!

 

[palmas85]

Br. Rich SFO:

I believe that the Bishops decree is to allow Bishops to offer if they choose the Chalice to the laity in their diocese. I believe it is “offer or not to offer”. It does not provide for offering only to certain people at a public Mass. There is a document that does say if a person (no age specification) presents themselves to a minister of Holy Communion at a public Mass they are to be given Holy Communion. So if a 12 year old presents themselves to a minister of the Cup during a public Mass they are to be given the Sacrament. The EMHC cannot refuse them the Sacrament!

Then I guess I’ll have to do some more digging. As I read it, the Bishop has the authority to regulate reception. In this case the chiild was NOT refused communion, he was refused only the the chalice , which may have been according to diocesean guidelines. We don’t know. So I need to find out if the Bishop has that authority.

The question remains open Brother, no one has provided documentation to support the position that the Bishop does not have the authority to regulate the practice. It looks to me like he could, but it would have to be applied diocese wide, unless he was able to delgate that authority to the individual parishes. Maybe I’ll post this question to the canon law people either at EWTN or the Diocese here in San Diego and see what they say.

I’m intrigued by this.

 

[palmas85]

:clapping:

Jesus did say, “Unless you eat my flesh AND DRINK MY BLOOD you will have no life in you.” didn’t he?

Didn’t he also tell the Apostles, " Take this ALL OF YOU AND DRINK OF IT. This is the cup of my blood…"?

Please refer me to the passages where Jesus says, “Children may not drink from the cup.” or where he says “Take this and drink from it, unless you have already had the bread or don’t want anymore wine.”

That is not the issue. We all know that the body and blood are fully present under both or either species and that both are complete in every respect. We’re trying to find out if the Bishop has the right to regulate the practice and if that is the reson the child was denied or if it was an abuse on the part of the minister of communion.

It is clear that the Bishop can regulate reception or non reception of the precious blood, but we don’t know how far that authority extends. Thats all. If you can point us in the right direction please do.

 

[euphoniac]

I don’t believe that anyone is entitled to the cup, and that was not the point of my original post.

At our parish the EHCM’s who are distributing the precious blood do not stand very close to the ministers who distribute the body. Therefore, this minister could not (or I should say very likely did not) see if this child recieved the Eucharist yet, and did not ask. A child presented himself to her for Holy Communion and she denied him. This was not, however, her choice and I don’t want to vilify this woman for doing what she was told. Apparently all of the EMHC in our parish are instructed not to give the cup to children.

My question then is: is this practice acceptable, namely, offering the cup to some communicants, but not all? My question is not whether anyone is entitled, per se, but rather a question of, if you do it for some, should you have to do it for all (regardless of age, etc.). Brother, do you know the name of the document that states you can not deny Holy Communion to anyone (I do remember reading something along those lines at some point) ? I will also try and find out through our Archdiocese if there has been some kind of Archdiosan-wide decision by the bishop in this matter.

Thanks for all the responses so far.

 

[MusicMan]

I found some further information in the USCCB document: Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Species

Instructions 46 and 47 hold our solution, especially #47:

1. It is the choice of the communicant, not the minister, to receive from the chalice .

1. Children are encouraged to receive Communion under both kinds provided that they are properly instructed and that they are old enough to receive from the chalice.

This appears to be a legally binding document, approved by Rome, and referenced in the GIRM.

Just what does the document mean, though, when it says “that they are old enough to receive from the chalice?”

 

[muledog]

puzzleannie:

It is an entitlement, the GIRM clearly specifies that the faithful are to be offered both the Body and Blood of the Lord, and that includes all the faithful who have been admitted to first holy communion. “The Church” determines the age for communion. An EMCH is not “the Church” neither is a pastor who is arbitrarily barring otherwise properly disposed persons from the sacrament as the Church intended. This is indeed an abuse and must be brought to the intention of the Bishop. If the pastor and EMHC’s are so poorly instructed as to the nature of the Precious Blood that they somehow think it is wine and therefore inappropriate for children they need to go back to Remedial CCD.

Slow down, there. The pastor is in charge of avoid any possibility of sacriledge during the distribution. That is why he can forbid Communion in the hand, even if the bishop has approved it.

In a responsefrom the Congregation for Divine Worship that also appeared in Notitiae, Cardinal Arinze stated that "the celebrant priest, if there is a present danger of sacrilege, should not give the faithful communion in the hand, and he should make them aware of the reason for way of proceeding."

I would say this is also appropriate for those people that might present a danger of sacrilege if they receive from the cup.

As I said before, ask the priest and see what he says. Let us know what you find out.

 

[puzzleannie]

go back to OP and stick to that situation, an 11-12 year old child refused the cup, a child presumably has been receiving for a few years, not a celiac patient, no obvious danger of sacrilege, during a Mass when the chalice was offered, EMHC (not pastor) arbitrarily denying the cup to this person. Do not go off track by discussing communion in the hand, hypothetical cases, etc. Look at the case discussed. OP apparently questioned the practice (which is the obvious first step when an abuse is suspected) and was apparently told the reason is children in this parish are not offered the chalice until confirmation because: “children should not be drinking wine.” this betrays a lack of understanding of the nature of the Precious Blood, not a fear of sacrilege. It also betrays a lack of understanding of the sacraments of initiation.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

muledog:

Slow down, there. The pastor is in charge of avoid any possibility of sacriledge during the distribution. That is why he can forbid Communion in the hand, even if the bishop has approved it.

In a response from the Congregation for Divine Worship that also appeared in Notitiae, Cardinal Arinze stated that "the celebrant priest, if there is a present danger of sacrilege, should not give the faithful communion in the hand, and he should make them aware of the reason for way of proceeding."

I would say this is also appropriate for those people that might present a danger of sacrilege if they receive from the cup.

As I said before, ask the priest and see what he says. Let us know what you find out.

This concerned people taking the Host and pocketing it, then taking the Blessed Sacrament out of the Church. This would be kind of difficult to do with the Chalice. The case in California a year or so ago. When the Bishop stopped offering the Chalice to the Faithful for several weeks because of the Flu. I think other diocese also did the same. But it wasn’t based on age. No one received from the Chalice except the priest which is required for validity of the Mass.

 

[palmas85]

puzzleannie:

go back to OP and stick to that situation, an 11-12 year old child refused the cup, a child presumably has been receiving for a few years, not a celiac patient, no obvious danger of sacrilege, during a Mass when the chalice was offered, EMHC (not pastor) arbitrarily denying the cup to this person. Do not go off track by discussing communion in the hand, hypothetical cases, etc. Look at the case discussed. OP apparently questioned the practice (which is the obvious first step when an abuse is suspected) and was apparently told the reason is children in this parish are not offered the chalice until confirmation because: “children should not be drinking wine.” this betrays a lack of understanding of the nature of the Precious Blood, not a fear of sacrilege. It also betrays a lack of understanding of the sacraments of initiation.

Actually in this case it appears that it is the policy of that particular parish not to offer the chalice to children. The poster has indicated that. If so then I’m pretty sure, not completely, that the pastor cleared this with the Bishop, who apparently has the authority to regulate this practice, or the Bishop has delegated that authority to the pastor of each parish…

As to the part about children not drinking wine, I agree in part and disagree in part. True, the Precious Blood is present uinder the appearance of wine, but if you drink enough of it you will get drunk. It still has the chemical composition of wine. The church does make allowances in this regard for priests who are known alcoholics.

But I think the question still remains does the Bishop, who as the ultimate authority in this matter have the ability to regulate the distribution in this fashion. From what I have been able to find out it looks like he does…

 

[MusicMan]

palmas85:

Actually in this case it appears that it is the policy of that particular parish not to offer the chalice to children. The poster has indicated that. If so then I’m pretty sure, not completely, that the pastor cleared this with the Bishop, who apparently has the authority to regulate this practice, or the Bishop has delegated that authority to the pastor of each parish…

As to the part about children not drinking wine, I agree in part and disagree in part. True, the Precious Blood is present uinder the appearance of wine, but if you drink enough of it you will get drunk. It still has the chemical composition of wine. The church does make allowances in this regard for priests who are known alcoholics.

But I think the question still remains does the Bishop, who as the ultimate authority in this matter have the ability to regulate the distribution in this fashion. From what I have been able to find out it looks like he does…

I don’t know that it’s necessary to worry over a child having a sip of wine. Even the rubrics are clear that the faithful aren’t supposed to consume a large amount of the Precious Blood. No child who has been properly instructed is going to get drunk from a sip from the cup.

You ask the real question – does the Bishop have the authority to regulate this that discriminatingly, and can he delegate it to the parish pastor? Denying the Precious Blood only to young people who haven’t been confirmed does seem to be at odds with the USCCB document I quoted above.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

palmas85:

Actually in this case it appears that it is the policy of that particular parish not to offer the chalice to children. The poster has indicated that. If so then I’m pretty sure, not completely, that the pastor cleared this with the Bishop, who apparently has the authority to regulate this practice, or the Bishop has delegated that authority to the pastor of each parish…

As to the part about children not drinking wine, I agree in part and disagree in part. True, the Precious Blood is present uinder the appearance of wine, but if you drink enough of it you will get drunk. It still has the chemical composition of wine. The church does make allowances in this regard for priests who are known alcoholics.

But I think the question still remains does the Bishop, who as the ultimate authority in this matter have the ability to regulate the distribution in this fashion. From what I have been able to find out it looks like he does…

What people are not getting here is that a Bishop can regulate this in his diocese and can delegate this to pastors. However what is being regulated is if the chalice is or is not offered to the faithful at public Mass. Not is it offered or is it not to faithful of a certain age. It is either offered or not, period.

 

[SMHW]

palmas85:

Actually in this case it appears that it is the policy of that particular parish not to offer the chalice to children. The poster has indicated that. If so then I’m pretty sure, not completely, that the pastor cleared this with the Bishop, who apparently has the authority to regulate this practice, or the Bishop has delegated that authority to the pastor of each parish.

Even if the Bishop has approved this policy it seems very arbitrary. It just seems bad policy to allow some people to receive the Precious Blood but not others just because of how they look. And unless the priest, deacon, or EMHC is asking for proof of age how can this be anything other than based on looks? Do you deny the Cup to all those who look to be under 10, 12, 16, 18, 21?

What about those children who HAVE been confirmed? Any latin rite child who was baptized after reaching age seven is probably confirmed.

What about adults who have made their First Communion but have never been confirmed? Are they allowed to drink from the Cup?

 

[palmas85]

Br. Rich SFO:

What people are not getting here is that a Bishop can regulate this in his diocese and can delegate this to pastors. However what is being regulated is if the chalice is or is not offered to the faithful at public Mass. Not is it offered or is it not to faithful of a certain age. It is either offered or not, period.

Well Brother, as I asked you before, could you please point out where it says that. I’ve searched just about everything I can find, and cannot come up with any authorative document that states that.

 

[palmas85]

MusicMan:

I don’t know that it’s necessary to worry over a child having a sip of wine. Even the rubrics are clear that the faithful aren’t supposed to consume a large amount of the Precious Blood. No child who has been properly instructed is going to get drunk from a sip from the cup.

You ask the real question – does the Bishop have the authority to regulate this that discriminatingly, and can he delegate it to the parish pastor? Denying the Precious Blood only to young people who haven’t been confirmed does seem to be at odds with the USCCB document I quoted above.

I agree totally, it does seem arbitrary and maybe even unfair. But at the same time if the Bishop has the authority he can certainly do it. I would really like to know the answer to this one. I know that it has been posted here that if the chalice is offered it must be offered to all, but I can’t find any documentation to support that.

As far as kids not drinking a lot, I saw a young man, teenager actually drain the cup on one occasion, laugh uproariously and leave the church.It turned out he apparently had made a bet with some friends. I think it good to remember that not everyone has the purest of motives in receiving communion. Several months ago there was a thread on this forum concerning a girl I believe, that had taken a consecrated host home with her with the express intent to desecrate it.

I am in no way am trying to put this young man down and believe that his motivation was pure and it actually makes me glad that young people do want to receive Holy Communion. It is a great sign that maybe some of the trials and tribulations the church has been going through are easing up a bit.

I’m just interested to know if it is legal to have such a policy.

 

[MusicMan]

We’re kind of retreding here over ground we’ve already covered. We know that the GIRM gives the Bishop the authority to regulate norms for the reception of the Eucharist under both species. The question is how far does that authority go? Br. Rich is telling us that it only goes so far as whether or not the chalice can be offered, and no further. Others are arguing that the Bishop has broader authority in the matter.

This is what GIRM 283 says on the matter:

The Diocesan Bishop may establish norms for Communion under both kinds for his own diocese, which are also to be observed in churches of religious and at celebrations with small groups. The Diocesan Bishop is also given the faculty to permit Communion under both kinds whenever it may seem appropriate to the priest to whom, as its own shepherd, a community has been entrusted, provided that the faithful have been well instructed and there is no danger of profanation of the Sacrament or of the rite’s becoming difficult because of the large number of participants or some other reason.

In all that pertains to Communion under both kinds, the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America are to be followed (see nos. 27-54).

As I’ve already pointed out, #47 of the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America wants children to be encouraged to receive the Precious Blood when offered to the faithful, but only when they are old enough to receive from the chalice.

Based on this and the GIRM above, I would conclude that the Diocesan Bishop DOES have the authority to determine an age when it is appropriate for children to receive from the chalice. It does NOT, however, appear that the priest has the authority to set an age limit for reception from the chalice, nor does the Bishop have the authority to give the priest faculty to do so.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

SMHW:

Even if the Bishop has approved this policy it seems very arbitrary. It just seems bad policy to allow some people to receive the Precious Blood but not others just because of how they look. And unless the priest, deacon, or EMHC is asking for proof of age how can this be anything other than based on looks? Do you deny the Cup to all those who look to be under 10, 12, 16, 18, 21?

What about those children who HAVE been confirmed? Any latin rite child who was baptized after reaching age seven is probably confirmed.

What about adults who have made their First Communion but have never been confirmed? Are they allowed to drink from the Cup?

I would guess those Confirmed 9 to 12 year olds from other diocese would need to bring a note from their pastor stating that they were confirmed? Yes some diocese do Confirm in 5th and 6th grade. Do they present it to thje EMHC during Holy Communion or to the priest before Mass?

 

[palmas85]

MusicMan:

We’re kind of retreding here over ground we’ve already covered. We know that the GIRM gives the Bishop the authority to regulate norms for the reception of the Eucharist under both species. The question is how far does that authority go? Br. Rich is telling us that it only goes so far as whether or not the chalice can be offered, and no further. Others are arguing that the Bishop has broader authority in the matter.

This is what GIRM 283 says on the matter: As I’ve already pointed out, #47 of the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America wants children to be encouraged to receive the Precious Blood when offered to the faithful, but only when they are old enough to receive from the chalice.

Based on this and the GIRM above, I would conclude that the Diocesan Bishop DOES have the authority to determine an age when it is appropriate for children to receive from the chalice. It does NOT, however, appear that the priest has the authority to set an age limit for reception from the chalice, nor does the Bishop have the authority to give the priest faculty to do so.

I think we’re in agreement here. I think probably what happened is that the Bishop or the Pastor wanted to avoid any chance of profanation , sacrilige someone receiving unworthily or who was not fully aware of what was going on. It handles pretty sloppily. I don’t think there was a real intentional abuse involved.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

palmas85:

Well Brother, as I asked you before, could you please point out where it says that. I’ve searched just about everything I can find, and cannot come up with any authorative document that states that.

I’m looking for it. The statement came out when the Bishops were considering refusing Holy Communion to certain candidates. There was also the new report that Clinton received Holy Communion. The Bishops explained that no one who publically approaches Holy Communion is to be denied.

Canon 912 says, “Any baptized person who is not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to Holy Communion.”

 

[palmas85]

Br. Rich SFO:

I’m looking for it. The statement came out when the Bishops were considering refusing Holy Communion to certain candidates. There was also the new report that Clinton received Holy Communion. The Bishops explained that no one who publically approaches Holy Communion is to be denied.

Canon 912 says, “Any baptized person who is not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to Holy Communion.”

Then according to Canon 912 every missalette, missal and catechism in existance must be wrong, because they all clearly state that only Catholics are to receive communion and it cannot be extended to those outside of the faith. Perhaps the prohibited by law statement refers to being in communion with the Catholic Church?