Both very good points.
No and yes. Yes, such thinking would be contrary to Church teaching and no, that is not where my logic leads. READ my post. I’m talking about the external sign, not the reality of what we’re receiving.
You mean “…while the ‘sign’ is ‘fuller’…”, right?
Would you mind terribly explaining what problem you think exists in my thinking on this subject (since it is my post #41)?
Large and bright street signs are great, but even the largest and brightest street sign has little value once you know for certain you have arrived at Main St.Yes, I agree in total with what you’ve said.
However, using the streetsign analogy, the bigger and brighter the sign, the more clear the direction to that reality, such reality being ultimately a mystery which we are incapable of fully grasping, no?
I too do not feel a need to receive under both species, but I get something more out of the “experience”, for lack of a better word, when I do. I like to have a bigger, more brightly lit street sign.
It is supposed to lead us to something else. If we have recieved Christ Himself, what else can we be lead to, should be lead to?
No and yes. Yes, such thinking would be contrary to Church teaching and no, that is not where my logic leads. READ my post. I’m talking about the external sign, not the reality of what we’re receiving.
You mean “…while the ‘sign’ is ‘fuller’…”, right?
Yes, I agree in total with what you’ve said.
However, using the streetsign analogy, the bigger and brighter the sign, the more clear the direction to that reality, such reality being ultimately a mystery which we are incapable of fully grasping, no?
I too do not feel a need to receive under both species, but I get something more out of the “experience”, for lack of a better word, when I do. I like to have a bigger, more brightly lit street sign.
It is the BLOOD OF CHRIST, not ‘wine’.
I think we should defer to our bishops on what constitues a compliance with our Lord’s instruction in this instance. In many countries, including my native Poland, the Precious Blood was never offered to the faithful. I experienced it for the first time in the U.S., though I still don’t partake.
Actually, it’s the species of wine.
This is so sad that the church in Phoenix can do something like this. What can one say to this turning away from Jesus’s wishes and from the early (real) tradition of the Latin rite. The first time I received communion under both species in the Latin Rite was at my high school graduation in 1968. What a wonderful memory and a wonderful grace. Communion under both species has continued to be a great grace and gift. It has truly helped me to understand the real meaning of the mass. What is the purpose of not giving communion under both species? Here in Michigan, receiving communion both species is an accepted and expected practice. Unfortunately our parish was assigned an order from Europe who immediately let us know (explicitly) that they are more holy than we Americans. They promptly took communion under both species away from us. We all felt such a loss. We were actually told that communion under both species was only for the Apostles and that we all have to return to how it was before the Second Vatican Council. The bishop is aware of their heresy but continues to keep them because he needs priests. The church is really entering a dark period. We are having a defective translation of the mass which is arkward at best and unintelligible in parts pushed down our throats. Now there are leaders in the Church who want to take away the great gift that Jesus gave us in receiving both his Body and Blood. I am sorry, I am not a second class Christian or person. During the wonderful Second Vatican Council, it was the eastern rite bishops who pushed the Latin rite bishops to return to our ancient tradition of giving communion in both kinds. We need someone like that now. Isn’t there some bishop somewhere who will speak the truth about what is happening to the Church. By the way, extraordinary ministers of the Eurcharist are a wonderful thing. It is great to see how reverent they are. Certainly far above what many priests were when I served the latin mass in grade school.
Receiving under both species is a good thing. I understand your problem when they denied you both species, and if your Bishop allows it, you should talk to the CDWDS. But receiving both species isn’t necessary. Just the consecrated bread or the consecrated wine will do just fine, as you still receive Jesus’ body and blood, soul and divinity.
Do you know about the utraquists?
Most likely, you can still arrange to receive by consecrated wine if you have celiac disease. The priests and bishops would understand. If not, then it’s time to contact the CDWDS.