Communion From Chalice Only

[Mrs_Sally]

This is an interesting question, which no one has answered yet.

I agree with you there is no theological problem with doing so, but I don’t know what is the common practice. I have so rarely been at a mass where the hosts ran out that I have not observed this problem.

My parish does not offer both species. However, in my limited experience with those parishes that do, the priest is usually very careful not to consecrate too much wine. If both species are being offered throughout communion, then when the hosts run out, there isn’t going to be too much consecrated wine left either. Since not everyone receives both species, even when they are offered, it should be possible to continue offering whichever one is left until that runs out too.

One thing we always need to remember with questions like this is that no one except the priest is required to receive communion at Mass. If there are no more consecrated hosts (or wine), than some folks may not receive, but that is not really a problem. And not certainly not something that must be rectified through any unusual methods.

 

[arkwright]

How about we consult the REAL authority on this issue,
.

I do consult the REAL authority . He is my Lord and my God , and He is the one who instituted the Eucharist and commanded what had to be done .

He consecrated the bread which he commanded to be eaten .

He consecrated the wine which he commanded to be drunk .

Then He commanded that this be done in His memory .

What did He command be done in His memory ?

Well in my New Testament the command was to eat of the consecrated bread and to drink of the consecrated wine , and he didn’t say either one or the other . He commanded communion under both species .

 

[Phemie]

My parish does not offer both species. However, in my limited experience with those parishes that do, the priest is usually very careful not to consecrate too much wine. If both species are being offered throughout communion, then when the hosts run out, there isn’t going to be too much consecrated wine left either. Since not everyone receives both species, even when they are offered, it should be possible to continue offering whichever one is left until that runs out too.

One thing we always need to remember with questions like this is that no one except the priest is required to receive communion at Mass. If there are no more consecrated hosts (or wine), than some folks may not receive, but that is not really a problem. And not certainly not something that must be rectified through any unusual methods.

I remember at one Mass the priest ran out of Hosts and he had someone bring him unconsecrated hosts which he intincted in the Precious Blood so that everyone could receive (not enough Precious Blood in the chalice for everyone who was left to drink). Now that practice is strictly forbidden by Redemptionis Sacramentum but that happened before that document was promulgated. Its inclusion in R.S. was likely a response to having it come to the attention of Rome that it was happening in some places.

 

[thomas_jd]

I remember at one Mass the priest ran out of Hosts and he had someone bring him unconsecrated hosts which he intincted in the Precious Blood so that everyone could receive (not enough Precious Blood in the chalice for everyone who was left to drink). Now that practice is strictly forbidden by Redemptionis Sacramentum but that happened before that document was promulgated. Its inclusion in R.S. was likely a response to having it come to the attention of Rome that it was happening in some places.

To ensure that all that wanted to receive Holy Communion, in spite of the mistake of not enough Hosts, he stretched the amount of the Precious Blood via using unconsecrated hosts to deliever a small amount of Precious Blood! Interesting solution.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

I do consult the REAL authority . He is my Lord and my God , and He is the one who instituted the Eucharist and commanded what had to be done .

He consecrated the bread which he commanded to be eaten .

He consecrated the wine which he commanded to be drunk .

Then He commanded that this be done in His memory .

What did He command be done in His memory ?

Well in my New Testament the command was to eat of the consecrated bread and to drink of the consecrated wine , and he didn’t say either one or the other . He commanded communion under both species .

Do you receive every week? Because Jesus didn’t say you HAD TO, you know.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

I do consult the REAL authority . He is my Lord and my God , and He is the one who instituted the Eucharist and commanded what had to be done .

He consecrated the bread which he commanded to be eaten .

He consecrated the wine which he commanded to be drunk .

Then He commanded that this be done in His memory .

What did He command be done in His memory ?

Well in my New Testament the command was to eat of the consecrated bread and to drink of the consecrated wine , and he didn’t say either one or the other . He commanded communion under both species .

That command is fulfilled when the priest eats and drinks. Jesus gave that commandment to the 12 who became priests at the last supper. The priest ***must ***eat and drink when he confets the Eucharist. The rest of us are not obligated to receive communion at all. The church asks us to receive once a year, and frequent communion is recommended, but not because we must fulfill these verses - the priest does that - but for the grace it imparts to us.

 

[Digitonomy]

How about we consult the REAL authority on this issue, the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church, which is quite clear in regard to the OP’s question:

Can. 925 – Sacra communio conferatur sub sola specie panis aut, ad normam legum liturgicarum, sub utraque specie; in casu autem necessitatis, etiam sub sola specie vini

That is fairly clear, if running out of hosts can be considered to create “necessity.”

What is the procedure for this? Does the minister of the bread simply withdraw, leaving the line and the minister of the cup in place?

For that matter, what is the (presumably more common) procedure when the cup runs out - does the minister of the cup return to the sanctuary, or stand there with an empty cup until all remaining have received the Eucharist from the minister of the bread? What if one of the ministers is ordinary, and one is extraordinary? Should the ordinary minister swap duties with the extraordinary minister if his (ordinary minister’s) species ran out first, since the ordinary minister takes precedence over the extraordinary one in distribution of communion?

 

[ConstantineTG]

How about we consult the REAL authority on this issue, the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church, which is quite clear in regard to the OP’s question:

That is the law in the Latin Church.

And from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

From the 19th Ecumenical Council at Trent, 13th Session (11 Oct 1551):

and the Ecumenical Council at Trent, 21st Session (16 July 1562):

That is what Holy Mother Church teaches.

So Canon Law is the real authority and Jesus isn’t?