Do you partake of the precious blood?

  • Thread starter Thread starter walnutleviosa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

walnutleviosa

Guest
If you do not, what are the reasons? (if you don’t mind sharing, that is)
 
No, I do not receive the Precious Blood. Mainly because I attend the EF Masses and only ocassionally the OF. I never receive the Blood at the OF for two reasons; 1 - the entire Sacrament is contained in the Body alone. 2 - I am a recovering alcoholic and I will not put myself at risk.
 
I only partake of the Precious Blood occasionally. Why? Because I receive Jesus - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity when receiving the Host, and too many people today seem to think that they are missing out on something if they receive only one species.
 
I attend the Extraordinary Form so no. But nor do I do so when I am at the Ordinary Form simply because… well I just wouldn’t feel comfortable receiving as a liquid. I don’t consider it to be anything less than the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, I just feel more comfortable with the Host.
 
Both yes and no. At the seminary almost everyone received both, so when I was there last weekend I did. Whenever I bring the blessed sacrament up to my fellow choir members that can’t walk down the steps for communion, I do not receive from the chalice, Because I have the blessed sacrament in the pyx that is in my hand.
 
I think I read in a previous forum something along the lines of receiving communion in both species, primarily in the blood, doesn’t follow tradition in a normal Eucharistic Celebration. The U.S. was given special permission back in the 70s to receive communion in both species; however, I read that this expired back in 2005. Something to probably look up…
 
Joan_M said:
I only partake of the Precious Blood occasionally. Why? Because I receive Jesus - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity when receiving the Host, and too many people today seem to think that they are missing out on something if they receive only one species.
Click to expand...
Me too.
 
**Although I always have in the past - I have been wondering - in the past few months - if I need to bow reverently and pass on the Chalice. After this post I think I will.

The Precious Blood has been offered as a standard. I have begun to understand the flaw in this. Not sure the Precious Blood was ever meant to be seen as the norm for Holy Communion.

Thank you for bringing up this topic! Blessings.**
 
I only receive under both species when I am an Extraordinary Minister of Communion. When I receive as a member of the congregation, I only receive under the one species, and only on the tongue, as that is what I am most comfortable with, and I know that I am receiving the fullness of the sacrament.

Soon, the bishop of our diocese has decreed, we will only receive under the one species as a congregation, as a diocese, with particular exceptions, as is done in the majority of the dioceses in the world.
 
Just the body for me. Why do both? They are both the same spiritually.
 
Usually.

In my diocese it was required by the previous Archbishop that the Precious Blood be offered on Sundays. I’ve been told that the new archbishop is pleased by how reverently he has seen it distributed and I have not heard that he intends to change anything.

I sing in the choir and the choir receives before singing so if the line for the Precious Blood seems to be backed up I usually forgo receiving that week. And obviously if I think I may be coming down with something I don’t receive from the chalice.
 
Yes, I usually do, unless I am not feeling well or if I am at the very end of the line.
 
I drink from the Cup!! I would Be very sad and miss it if it were not available.

Yes, the church teaches that one form is enough ((Christ is present fully and entirely the consecrated host) but this from the GIRM is just as important:
  1. Holy Communion has a fuller form as a sign when it takes place under both kinds. For in this form the sign of the Eucharistic banquet is more clearly evident and clearer expression is given to the divine will by which the new and eternal Covenant is ratified in the Blood of the Lord, as also the connection between the Eucharistic banquet and the eschatological banquet in the Kingdom of the Father.
Drinking from the common Cup is not a frill. Christ commanded us to “take and eat…take and drink.”
 
Anna_Claire said:
I drink from the Cup!! I would Be very sad and miss it if it were not available.

Yes, the church teaches that one form is enough ((Christ is present fully and entirely the consecrated host) but this from the GIRM is just as important:
  1. Holy Communion has a fuller form as a sign when it takes place under both kinds. For in this form the sign of the Eucharistic banquet is more clearly evident and clearer expression is given to the divine will by which the new and eternal Covenant is ratified in the Blood of the Lord, as also the connection between the Eucharistic banquet and the eschatological banquet in the Kingdom of the Father.
Drinking from the common Cup is not a frill. Christ commanded us to “take and eat…take and drink.”
Click to expand...
There is more in the next paragraph.:
  1. Sacred pastors should take care to ensure that the faithful who participate in the rite or are present at it, are made aware by the most suitable means possible of the Catholic teaching on the form of Holy Communion as laid down by the Ecumenical Council of Trent. Above all, they should instruct the Christian faithful that the Catholic faith teaches that Christ, whole and entire, and the true Sacrament, is received even under only one species, and hence that as regards the resulting fruits, those who receive under only one species are not deprived of any grace that is necessary for salvation.[105]
 
walnutleviosa said:
If you do not, what are the reasons? (if you don’t mind sharing, that is)
Click to expand...
I usually don’t. There have been times that I did but as time has gone on I feel it best to take only under the host.

I heard once a priest from EWTN say the reason they only offer the host is because body and blood, soul and divinity are totally present in the host and it would not be good if the blood was spilled and since I almost spilled it twice I now only take the host. I came to understnd their reasons.
 
I do, sometimes. But whether I do or not, I still reverence the chalice with a head bow as I pass, which most people do not.
 
I usually do, if it’s offered. In our parish we don’t always have an EMHC available, particularly at the Saturday evening Mass, so when that happens the Precious Blood is not offered.

If it’s not offered, I don’t miss it but if it’s available I can’t see myself not receiving unless I’m not feeling well. The Precious Blood is there and I won’t walk past and refuse to partake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top