Do you have to drink the blood of Christ even if drinking bothers you?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sidetrack
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sidetrack

Guest
Let’s say that someone has a family member with a drinking problem and out of reaction to that they do not drink any alcohol at all.Would they still have to drink the blood of Christ when they reach legal drinking age?.If they do not is that a significant concern?.Also I remember hearing once that the wine used at Mass is diluted since it has to be given to so many people.Is this true?.
 
No one is required to receive the Blood of Christ.
If your parish offers the option, that’s a good thing in my opinion, if it does not, that is OK too!🙂

You receive the full Body, Blood, Soul & Divinity of Jesus in both speices, bread and/or wine. You do not gain any more holiness from partaking of both, and you do not get any less if you can only partake of one and not the other.
 
No

Christ is complete and full in each Eucharistic species.

It is not diluted, it is to be mixed with water as it was done during the Last Supper. Its purpose is not to dilute it (or maybe it was in the past. But thats how Christ did it, thats how our priest does it for no other reason).

Also, know that the Precious Blood is given to children, especially in the East. As babies are given Communion, they are given a small amount (drops) of the Precious Blood when they cannot consume solids yet.
 
sidetrack said:
Let’s say that someone has a family member with a drinking problem and out of reaction to that they do not drink any alcohol at all.Would they still have to drink the blood of Christ when they reach legal drinking age?.If they do not is that a significant concern?.Also I remember hearing once that the wine used at Mass is diluted since it has to be given to so many people.Is this true?.
Click to expand...
No, you do not have to drink it, unless you’re a priest celebrating Mass. For most of the last 500 years or so, the cup was never offered to the laity at all.

And no, the wine that is used is not diluted. Before the consecration, the priest adds a small amount of water to it as part of the rite, but this is usually just a couple of drops, hence not a significant change to the overall alcohol content. And it is true that, in certain cases with approval, a priest who cannot consume alcoholic wine may celebrate with mustum, which is a type of wine created by stopping the fermentation process very soon after it begins, and contains very little or no alcohol. I don’t think mustum can be offered to the congregation, however.

But, again, there is no requirement to receive under both species. Each contains the entire Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. Your family member’s situation is just the reverse case of someone with a severe gluten allergy, who cannot eat bread and can only receive under the species of wine. Not a problem.
 
sidetrack said:
Let’s say that someone has a family member with a drinking problem and out of reaction to that they do not drink any alcohol at all.Would they still have to drink the blood of Christ when they reach legal drinking age?.If they do not is that a significant concern?.Also I remember hearing once that the wine used at Mass is diluted since it has to be given to so many people.Is this true?.
Click to expand...
The wine becomes the Blood of Christ. It’s not possible for it to cause any harm. The person in question has absolutely nothing to fear.

In Christ
Joe
 
josephdaniel29 said:
The wine becomes the Blood of Christ. It’s not possible for it to cause any harm. The person in question has absolutely nothing to fear.

In Christ
Joe
Click to expand...
Not so. In fact, in the pontifical form of the traditional Latin Mass, there’s a special rite called the pregustation, in which some assistant (traditionally the sacristan, I think) tastes the wine before it is consecrated to make sure it is not poisoned – since the bishop must drink it after it is consecrated, and doesn’t want to be killed if it is indeed poisoned.

In other words, it’s quite possible for the Precious Blood to cause harm, and there’s a whole traditional rite to avoid the chance of the bishop’s being poisoned by it.
 
MarkThompson said:
Not so. In fact, in the pontifical form of the traditional Latin Mass, there’s a special rite called the pregustation, in which some assistant (traditionally the sacristan, I think) tastes the wine before it is consecrated to make sure it is not poisoned – since the bishop must drink it after it is consecrated, and doesn’t want to be killed if it is indeed poisoned.

In other words, it’s quite possible for the Precious Blood to cause harm, and there’s a whole traditional rite to avoid the chance of the bishop’s being poisoned by it.
Click to expand...
However, that occurs in Italy, where such shenanigans are well known historically, and resound to the intermixing of theology and politics dating back to the days of Constantine, a point that seems far more important (if one can abuse that word so) to various and sundry individuals and groups “on the Continent”.
 
Remember that the accidents of the host and of the Blood of Christ (acknowledge that both the body and blood exist under either form, but using this for convenience) remain even though it is no longer bread and wine. To that extent…alcoholics, depending on their doctor’s or medical practitioner’s recommendations, should not receive from the chalice—so yes, it is still possible for the accidents of the Body and Blood of the Lord to cause harm.

I should also add that for those who prefer this option, it is perfectly licit, when the host and the chalice are administered separately, to receive from the chalice exclusively. But that may just cause confusion when returning to your pews and you forget who you were next to. 😉 But this is completely off topic since the OP asked about abstaining from the chalice, not drinking from it. But just so that everyone knows that the option is out there.
 
MarkThompson said:
Not so. In fact, in the pontifical form of the traditional Latin Mass, there’s a special rite called the pregustation, in which some assistant (traditionally the sacristan, I think) tastes the wine before it is consecrated to make sure it is not poisoned – since the bishop must drink it after it is consecrated, and doesn’t want to be killed if it is indeed poisoned.

In other words, it’s quite possible for the Precious Blood to cause harm, and there’s a whole traditional rite to avoid the chance of the bishop’s being poisoned by it.
Click to expand...
I know many an Alcoholic who receives the Blood of Christ every Sunday with no adverse affects. Have a little faith my brother. 😉
 
This all is assuming that the chalice is offered to the people at a particular Mass…which is in no way a given (see the General Instruction of the Roman Missal)…
 
Just as a side of note. You don’t have to be at least the legal drinking age to consume the Blood of Christ. Most places have exceptions of for religious practices for minors to consume alcohol. And even if they don’t, I believe God trumps Cesar.
 
sidetrack said:
Let’s say that someone has a family member with a drinking problem and out of reaction to that they do not drink any alcohol at all.Would they still have to drink the blood of Christ when they reach legal drinking age?.If they do not is that a significant concern?.Also I remember hearing once that the wine used at Mass is diluted since it has to be given to so many people.Is this true?.
Click to expand...
only the celebrant is required to drink the Precious Blood. The laity are not required to receive Holy Communion at all, except once a year in the Easter season, although frequent communion for those in the state of grace is worthy and highly recommended. The concept of legal drinking age is irrelevant because civil laws specifically exempt sacramental wine. The wine is not diluted. A drop or two of water is added to signify that the divine Son of God took on our humanity. It is doctrine that the Precious Blood retains all the physical properties of wine after consecration, that is the “accidents” while its substance, its real nature, has been changed and has become, as has the consecrated bread, the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity entire and undivided of the Lord.
 
Most of the parishes I,ve been a member of, only give you the HOST,at commuion, at
other parishes, they stand to the side if you wish too drink the wine.
But as for me, I beleive that I,am rceiving the BODY & BLOOD of CHRIST totually
in the concerated HOLY HOST of JESUS.
GOD BLESS :harp:
 
Of course not. Both the Bread and the Wine become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord. What you could always do, if you’re so inclined, is to take the cup and hold it to your heart, then give it back. I’ve heard of several recovering alcoholics doing this. You might weird out an EMHC if they don’t know what’s going on, though.
 
At my church the wine is offered at every mass. I always drink from it unless I’m sick. It just seems more polite to not drink from a communal cup if I have something communicable, like a cold or something. And we are taught that you get the whole deal with only the host or only the wine.
I say pray about it and do what you feel God is directing you to do, even discuss it with your priest if it will help your peace of mind.
God bless!
 
It’s still alcohol. There’s no platelates or hemoglobin. You can believe that it is but when I try to believe that a mountain is a chinchilla, it’s still a mountain
 
acarlson said:
Of course not. Both the Bread and the Wine become the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord. What you could always do, if you’re so inclined, is to take the cup and hold it to your heart, then give it back. I’ve heard of several recovering alcoholics doing this. You might weird out an EMHC if they don’t know what’s going on, though.
Click to expand...
Why should an alcoholic do this if it turns into ‘blood’? You make no sense
 
Damien_haha said:
Joe, you are stupid
Click to expand...
No. From a Christian perspective, Joe is correct.

If examined, the Blood would probably have the chemical makeup of wine, but the Christain reality is that it’s no longer wine at all.

Of course, you’re allowed to think where you want about this and those that have faith in this, but perhaps less pejoratives would be kind.
 
You should still be willing to entertain others opinion and perspective. If is has the same chemical properties as wine, how is it blood unless Jesus was one hell of an alcoholic?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top