Drink the Cup?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BrooklynBoy200
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BrooklynBoy200

Guest
Do you need to take communion and drink from the cup? I mean, my parents don’t let me take it now because i’m underage, but when i can, is it ok not to? I’m a bit germaphobic.
 
Absolutely no problem if you never take from the cup (usually known as a chalice) - just the host (blessed bread) is fine.

If you take only one or only the other you still receive the complete Sacrament of the Eucharist.

It’s been a while since I had my First Communion, but I don’t think it was required to take from the chalice even on that one occasion. I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong on that point.
 
It’s supposed to be offered at First Communion, but no requirements.

As far as being “underage”- sacramentally, that’s not a problem. It’s entirely legal to receive the Precious Blood. Babies do it in the Eastern Rite. Children in our parish receive the Blood on Sundays (only time we offer both species, except for Father, of course).
 
You do not need to receive from the chalice in order to recieve Jesus Christ Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, whole and entire. Reception of the Sacred Host is all you need to do.

Ken
 
kleary said:
:mad: :eek: :banghead:
The Church needs an enima.
Click to expand...
kleary said:
You do not need to receive from the chalice in order to recieve Jesus Christ Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, whole and entire. Reception of the Sacred Host is all you need to do.

Ken
Click to expand...
Oh please, it’s ok to call it the ‘sacred’ host but not the ‘blessed’ host? And it’s not ok to refer to it as bread even though the writers of the New Testament did as much? Get a life! :mad:
 
LilyM said:
Oh please, it’s ok to call it the ‘sacred’ host but not the ‘blessed’ host? And it’s not ok to refer to it as bread even though the writers of the New Testament did as much? Get a life! :mad:
Click to expand...
You called it “blessed bread”.

I called it (in everyday English - translated accurately and not by ICEL)

“HOLY[sacred] VICTIM”[host].

Ken
 
LilyM said:
Oh please, it’s ok to call it the ‘sacred’ host but not the ‘blessed’ host? And it’s not ok to refer to it as bread even though the writers of the New Testament did as much? Get a life! :mad:
Click to expand...
In a day and age where 90 percent of Catholics who attend Mass do not believe in Transubstantiation — YOU BET.

Ken
 
kleary said:
You called it “blessed bread”.

I called it (in everyday English - translated accurately and not by ICEL)

“HOLY[sacred] VICTIM”[host].

Ken
Click to expand...
Pardon me for being ignorant of the Latin in that case. Our Lord himself probably wasn’t overly familiar with the language.

St Paul had no problems calling it bread all the same - somehow he still managed to make it clear that it was the Body of the Lord. I imagine the majority of the people he spoke to also had difficulties understanding and accepting the concept of transubstantiation:

1 Corinthians 10:16-17 (Douay-Rheims Version): “The *bread *which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? For we, being many, are one bread, one body”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top