Does Recieving Both The Eucharist and The Precios Blood mean Communion was Recieved Twice?

[S_V7]

…?

 

[Newbie2]

No.

Christ is completely present in the consecrated hosts and consecrated wine; he is not divided between the two.

That is why it is valid and licit to receive under either the consecrated host or consecrated wine, although receiving the host is the norm if just receiving one or the other, unless one has medical problems with celiac disease (wheat allergy).

 

[Genesis12345]

You’re not receiving it twice. If you just receive communion, you also are receiving the Body and Blood of Christ, even though the wine is not present (the Blood of CHrist.)

You are only receiving Communion under both species of bread and wine.

But remember when you do receive just Communion, you are receiving both the Body and Blood of Christ.

I just wonder how many viewers actually believe it is the Body and Blood of Christ? It is the same way in the Tabernacle, Christ is present in His entire body. So, actually when you go in a Catholic church, it is like being in heaven since Christ’s presence is in the Tabernacle.

It is the same way with the Holy Trinity, which is very taxing to explain, but our faith has to be very potent to believe in Three Persons in One.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Does Recieving Both The Eucharist and The Precios Blood mean Communion was Recieved Twice?

**The Precious Blood is the Eucharist as well.

If the Host were to break in your mouth, would you be receiving Christ twice?

Are there as many Christs as their are consecrated Hosts on the Paten or Ciborium?

When taking the ablutions, does the Priest or Deacon receive Christ twice?

If in trying to empty the ciborium, the Priest were to give you two hosts, would you be receiving Christ twice?

By the same token, if you receive under both species at the same Mass, you are not receiving Christ twice.**

 

[Digitonomy]

If the Host were to break in your mouth, would you be receiving Christ twice?..

Are there as many Christs as their are consecrated Hosts on the Paten or Ciborium?

By the same token, if you receive under both species at the same Mass, you are not receiving Christ twice.

I think this simplifies things too much - there are indeed restrictions on receiving communion more than twice in a single day, which is the meaning the OP was driving at. By the logic you laid out, there should not be a restriction on receiving communion at a communion service later in the day, since it would be the same Christ from the ciborium at the earlier mass.

 

[japhy]

I think this simplifies things too much - there are indeed restrictions on receiving communion more than twice in a single day, which is the meaning the OP was driving at. By the logic you laid out, there should not be a restriction on receiving communion at a communion service later in the day, since it would be the same Christ from the ciborium at the earlier mass.

Since Holy Communion is a sacrament, it means there must be an outward sign: the Host and Chalice. Receiving Communion involves physical participation in the sign. The Church, in her authority, recognizes this to mean receiving once, under one sign or under both signs (separately or via intinction). With one exception (see below), this means that receiving two Hosts or receiving twice from the Chalice represents two separate acts of receiving the Sacrament.

The exception concerns the reverent consumption of the Precious Body and Precious Blood which remain at the end of Communion; an EMHC who consumes a “left-over” Host, or consumes the last of the Precious Blood from the chalice they were administering, is not receiving Communion again.

 

[bpbasilphx]

I think this simplifies things too much - there are indeed restrictions on receiving communion more than twice in a single day, which is the meaning the OP was driving at.

**That’s clearly not what his question is asking.

However, consider this:

The celebrating priest receives BOTH the Consecrated Host and the Chalice. Does he thereby receive Christ twice?

If he doesn’t, then you don’t.**

 

[Digitonomy]

"Digitonomy:

I think this simplifies things too much - there are indeed restrictions on receiving communion more than twice in a single day, which is the meaning the OP was driving at.

That’s clearly not what his question is asking.

Looking back at the OP, I see that I may have assumed more from the question than is obvious. Perhaps S_V7 can clarify what concern he has about the counting process - the obvious issue in my mind is the restriction on receiving communion more than once in a day.

bpbasilphx:

The celebrating priest receives BOTH the Consecrated Host and the Chalice. Does he thereby receive Christ twice?

If he doesn’t, then you don’t.

I noticed in your first post (#4) you substituted “Christ” for “communion”, and now you’ve done it again. I don’t have the education on this issue to actually debate it, but I have to at least question whether it’s fair to make this substitution when counting.

It’s certainly the same Christ that we receive on every occasion, so in some sense we only ever receive Christ once. Within the context of a mass, I would count any number of pieces or sips of the Eucharist under either species as receiving communion only once for that mass. However, it might be correct to describe a communicant as receiving Christ a second time in the form of wine, all within a single Communion Rite and a single reception of the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

 

[Digitonomy]

Since Holy Communion is a sacrament, it means there must be an outward sign: the Host and Chalice. Receiving Communion involves physical participation in the sign. The Church, in her authority, recognizes this to mean receiving once, under one sign or under both signs (separately or via intinction). With one exception (see below), this means that receiving two Hosts or receiving twice from the Chalice represents two separate acts of receiving the Sacrament.

The exception concerns the reverent consumption of the Precious Body and Precious Blood which remain at the end of Communion; an EMHC who consumes a “left-over” Host, or consumes the last of the Precious Blood from the chalice they were administering, is not receiving Communion again.

When I first read this, it all sounded good enough. But on reflection I don’t think I agree with the counting issue. As bpbasilphx asked, what if the host or other form of bread falls apart? Or if the minister distributes two hosts or particles to you? I would appreciate any documentation that supports your view that receiving more than one piece and one sip counts as a second reception of communion.

Otherwise, it seems to me that while one may violate strict instructions for the distribution and reception of the Eucharist that you have described, it is simply not possible to receive communion more than once in a single Communion Rite. Or put another way, your exception paragraph does not describe an exception to a counting rule - consuming lots of the Eucharist still only counts as one. Instead your exception describes when it is licit to consume lots of the Eucharist.