Jesus said “Eat and drink” , so I prefer the option to receive under both kinds .
- Status
H
HeDa
Guest
Right before the Agnus Dei, the priest breaks the consecrated host in two and then puts a little piece of one of the halves into the chalice. This symbolises that the Body and Blood of Christ are one and united. (Remember when Jesus was hanging on the cross when blood and water ran from Jesus side were separated from the body.)
The prayer said by the priest is (freely translated into English as I don’t have access to the English translation at the moment): “May the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, joined in this chalice, give us the eternal life.”
The prayer said by the priest is (freely translated into English as I don’t have access to the English translation at the moment): “May the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, joined in this chalice, give us the eternal life.”
T
thistle
Guest
So YOU think you know better than the Church??? Wow! There are things I could say but would likely be sanctioned by the moderators!
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
We Catholics do not rely solely on Sacred Scripture. We also rely on Sacred Tradition. Our Church is guided by the Holy Spirit.
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
You would do well to read CAF rules before mounting much more of an attack on the Magisterium
U
Uriel1
Guest
Did Galileo attack the magisterium ?
Why do you think I am?
Did you even read what I wrote in 33 above?
I said that I follow the magisterium completely. I have no agenda other that to see if anyone can pick up on what Jesus told us to do with cup (we all know that) and why he wanted us to do so
Remember Matt 7:1 my friend
Caritate non ficta
R
Roseeurekacross
Guest
Galileo has nothing to do with this conversation and this topic. And you are not Galileo.
Stop abusing Sacred Scripture like this.
Stop abusing Sacred Scripture like this.
U
Uriel1
Guest
Galileo is relevant because he did NOT attack the magisterium, just told them they might be wrong. I haven’t done this but have followed the magisterium completely.
You, my friend have accused me, without cause. Matt 7:1
Caritate non ficta
E
Elf01
Guest
Your other posts say something different.
I follow Church teaching:
Jesus is fully present under either kind - so receiving under one kind is sufficient.
However both kinds are a more complete sign and given the option receiving under both species is my preference.
V
Vico
Guest
Actually: body, blood, soul, and divinity are either and both.Theo2:
Well, that’s not quite what he said, is it ?
He said that the bread was His body, and that the wine was His blood.
The church has determined that His body AND blood are in either or both species
The church has determined that the sign is more complete in receiving both species.
1 Corinthians 11:27-29
Last edited:
U
Uriel1
Guest
Fully agree but you may have missed something about the wine/bloodUriel1:
I follow Church teaching:
Jesus is fully present under either kind - so receiving under one kind is sufficient.
However both kinds are a more complete sign and given the option receiving under both species is my preference.
U
Uriel1
Guest
Right on, but I think you may have missed something about the wine/blood
V
Vico
Guest
In the earlier lines is arton (bread) and potērion (cup). Latter are sōmatos (body) and haimatos (blood). The word for body is soma in that very last line.Uriel1:
Right on, but I think you may have missed something about the wine/blood
P
philipl
Guest
No taking just the host is the same as taking both. taking both may make you feel better, but it doesnt add anything to communion
U
Uriel1
Guest
The Church teaches that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ at the consecrations, and that Christ is present “body and blood, soul and divinity” in both items. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Para. 1390) notes:
Since Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species, communion under the species of bread alone makes it possible to receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace. For pastoral reasons this manner of receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common form in the Latin rite.
The “pastoral reasons” referred to by the Catechism include easy distribution of Holy Communion, particularly to large congregations, and protecting the Precious Blood from being profaned. Hosts may be dropped, but they are easily recovered; the consecrated wine, however, is more easily spilled and cannot easily be recovered.
Still, the Catechism goes on to note in the same paragraph that:
“. . . the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly.” This is the usual form of receiving communion in the Eastern rites.
(name removed by moderator) quoted the above. Did you not read the thread? Caritate non ficta
Since Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species, communion under the species of bread alone makes it possible to receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace. For pastoral reasons this manner of receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common form in the Latin rite.
The “pastoral reasons” referred to by the Catechism include easy distribution of Holy Communion, particularly to large congregations, and protecting the Precious Blood from being profaned. Hosts may be dropped, but they are easily recovered; the consecrated wine, however, is more easily spilled and cannot easily be recovered.
Still, the Catechism goes on to note in the same paragraph that:
“. . . the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly.” This is the usual form of receiving communion in the Eastern rites.
(name removed by moderator) quoted the above. Did you not read the thread? Caritate non ficta
S
stpurl
Guest
We’re still not getting you. What exactly is your ‘beef’ with the US bishops and thinking they ‘missed something?’
Linking yourself with Galileo (who, by the way, was in fact WRONG in some of his theories) appears to present you as the rational ‘voice’ who, some time later, is found to have been (by some elements) "unfairly accused’ and who is also presented (by some elements) as an example of the Church ‘missing something’ and pronouncing incorrectly on things it ‘should have known’.
You’ve been answered over and over. Both is not ‘better’. Fuller in a presentation sense, may be available to some or many, but need NOT be chosen as the Lord is not divided into separate 'BODY/Bread" and “Blood/Chalice” but Body AND blood, Soul and divinity, in both.
The mere fact that you’re nattering on about ‘both being better’ shows IMO the wisdom of the Church who probably centuries ago was dealing with people who were declaring that if a person didn’t receive BOTH, they weren’t ‘getting it all’. Sadly, it seems that the Church bishops underestimated the human intellect (as well as its spirit of obedience) in thinking that Catholics were ready to see Christ’s Eucharist under both species as a ‘fuller SIGN’ and not go off the deep end AGAIN thinking, “OMG we have to have BOTH or we aren’t getting it ALL”.
Loud sigh.
Linking yourself with Galileo (who, by the way, was in fact WRONG in some of his theories) appears to present you as the rational ‘voice’ who, some time later, is found to have been (by some elements) "unfairly accused’ and who is also presented (by some elements) as an example of the Church ‘missing something’ and pronouncing incorrectly on things it ‘should have known’.
You’ve been answered over and over. Both is not ‘better’. Fuller in a presentation sense, may be available to some or many, but need NOT be chosen as the Lord is not divided into separate 'BODY/Bread" and “Blood/Chalice” but Body AND blood, Soul and divinity, in both.
The mere fact that you’re nattering on about ‘both being better’ shows IMO the wisdom of the Church who probably centuries ago was dealing with people who were declaring that if a person didn’t receive BOTH, they weren’t ‘getting it all’. Sadly, it seems that the Church bishops underestimated the human intellect (as well as its spirit of obedience) in thinking that Catholics were ready to see Christ’s Eucharist under both species as a ‘fuller SIGN’ and not go off the deep end AGAIN thinking, “OMG we have to have BOTH or we aren’t getting it ALL”.
Loud sigh.
T
Theo2
Guest
From the New American Bible, Revised Edition:
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, 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.” (Mt 26:26-28; cf. Mk 14:22-24, Lk 22:17-20, 1 Cor 11:23-25)
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, 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.” (Mt 26:26-28; cf. Mk 14:22-24, Lk 22:17-20, 1 Cor 11:23-25)
U
Uriel1
Guest
You make false assertions my friend
I have no link with Galileo
I use Galileo simply to show that the magisterium don’t always get it right
If they had, why do we have so many child abuse cases in the USA Catholic Church?
May the Lord open your eyes; He will, but you must first want to see
Caritate non ficta
U
Uriel1
Guest
Theo2,
You have it - Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body,” and then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be poured out for you and for many (qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur) for the forgiveness of sins.”
We surely eat his body, but when we drink the cup we are reminded that it is not just for us, the Communicants, but that the cup that was poured for many, and that we are tasked in drinking that cup to do the Lord’s work. That is precisely why the sign is more complete
Last edited:
S
Shakuhachi
Guest
Both species gives the senses a fuller experience. if I am not offered the cup I miss the sensations.
- Status