Drinking from the Same Cup-Health

[TheSeeker2014]

Well I have a question.

I have not been to very many Catholic Churches but I have been to a few services. The ones I have seen, They have one Chalice (I understand that) and is used in the Rite. After the Rite, Everyone drinks from that same cup rather than using the wine from that Chalice and separating it in different tiny cups. Alot of Protestant denominations do separate it out because of health reasons of drinking after alot of people and the possible spread of diseases or some kinds of STDs. (Hep C for example can be spread by drinking after another)
I understand of drinking from the same ‘cup’ but is it necessary not to separate it out afterward the Rite to avoid the spread of diseases? I would still be all the same blessed wine.

Like I have said before, I have not been to many Catholic Churches so if they now often separate it out after the Rite, I have no knowledge. Was wondering about this.

 

[Phemie]

If some parishes do separate it, they do so illicitly. The Cup is meant to be shared. Once consecrated the Precious Blood is never to be poured from the chalice to another container, the danger of spillage is too great.

There have been no confirmed infections from sharing the Chalice, though I’m aware of at least one case where someone with meningitis received Communion at a funeral and those who shared the chalice with her were advised to be checked and receive preventative medication.

 

[johnthebaptist2]

In my church,they Consecrated three chalices along with the main chalice the priest use ,durning Consecration,than the priest gives Holy Eucharists Minister,their chalices,and they wipe the chalice,after each person,that comes too receive, the Blood of Christ… Hope you understand what I mean.

 

[Tomdstone]

Well I have a question.

I have not been to very many Catholic Churches but I have been to a few services. The ones I have seen, They have one Chalice (I understand that) and is used in the Rite. After the Rite, Everyone drinks from that same cup rather than using the wine from that Chalice and separating it in different tiny cups. Alot of Protestant denominations do separate it out because of health reasons of drinking after alot of people and the possible spread of diseases or some kinds of STDs. (Hep C for example can be spread by drinking after another)
I understand of drinking from the same ‘cup’ but is it necessary not to separate it out afterward the Rite to avoid the spread of diseases? I would still be all the same blessed wine.

Like I have said before, I have not been to many Catholic Churches so if they now often separate it out after the Rite, I have no knowledge. Was wondering about this.

In an Eastern Catholic Church in Romania, the priest dips the precious Bread in the consecrated Wine and places it on the tongue of the communicant.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

TheSeeker,

I don’t know if this will help, but beyond the symbolism of sharing the same cup, there’s a very practical reason that we don’t provide the Precious Blood in multiple little cups or glasses.

We believe that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of our Lord and treat the communion elements with great respect. If a host gets broken or dropped on the floor, for example, it isn’t thrown away, it is consumed. If a bit of the Precious Blood remains after communion is finished it is not dumped down the drain, it is consumed. After the chalice is empty, it is not simply washed and put away. First it is rinsed and then that water is consumed as well. Only then can it be washed and cleaned.

Now imagine that instead of two or three chalices to be cleaned this way there are several hundred tiny ones. Someone needs to rinse and clean every one of them. And then what? Since we believe the elements are so precious we don’t “serve” them in plastic or even glass. So every one of those little cups would have to be gold- or silver-plated and stored somewhere between Masses.

The alternative – and it’s a perfectly acceptable one – is to provide the host only, not the Precious Blood. Since you can’t divide Christ, either communion element is his body, blood, soul, and divinity. If anyone receiving communion prefers to receive only the host that is fine, they have fully received communion. (And that is true whatever their reason – health, alcoholism, the taste, or, for the host, gluten intolerance.) But many people prefer the fuller sign of both eating and drinking.

 

[dcud3]

I firmly believe that I am receiving the blood of my Lord from the cup.
I am not going to catch anything from sharing in His precious blood!

 

[TheSeeker2014]

TheSeeker,

I don’t know if this will help, but beyond the symbolism of sharing the same cup, there’s a very practical reason that we don’t provide the Precious Blood in multiple little cups or glasses.

We believe that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of our Lord and treat the communion elements with great respect. If a host gets broken or dropped on the floor, for example, it isn’t thrown away, it is consumed. If a bit of the Precious Blood remains after communion is finished it is not dumped down the drain, it is consumed. After the chalice is empty, it is not simply washed and put away. First it is rinsed and then that water is consumed as well. Only then can it be washed and cleaned.

Now imagine that instead of two or three chalices to be cleaned this way there are several hundred tiny ones. Someone needs to rinse and clean every one of them. And then what? Since we believe the elements are so precious we don’t “serve” them in plastic or even glass. So every one of those little cups would have to be gold- or silver-plated and stored somewhere between Masses.

The alternative – and it’s a perfectly acceptable one – is to provide the host only, not the Precious Blood. Since you can’t divide Christ, either communion element is his body, blood, soul, and divinity. If anyone receiving communion prefers to receive only the host that is fine, they have fully received communion. (And that is true whatever their reason – health, alcoholism, the taste, or, for the host, gluten intolerance.) But many people prefer the fuller sign of both eating and drinking.

I believe I understand. Do not think or call what the Lord has said is clean unclean. Rather receive it with thanksgiving. To say that his blood is unclean because someone has put their mouth on it would be wrong as it is still clean because it is His blood that is blameless. To say that his body is unclean because it has hit the floor is wrong because it is His body that is blameless. If anything it cleans whatever it touches. Diseases are only existent because of sin being existent in this world.

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

I would say receive it with thanksgiving, but also recognize the reality that there could be health issues. If someone isn’t feeling well they shouldn’t receive from the chalice to avoid spreading anything. If someone has a compromised immune system they probably shouldn’t receive from the chalice either. Sometimes during flu season the chalice won’t be offered to avoid spreading illness. The problem, of course, is that it can be spread in so many ways. Shaking hands, handling door knobs, etc., can all be means of spreading germs. I’ve never caught anything that I could attribute to sharing the chalice at Mass, but it could happen. But what are you going to do? A cold or flu might also come from someone at work, at the grocery store, etc.

 

[tee_eff_em]

I believe I understand. Do not think or call what the Lord has said is clean unclean. Rather receive it with thanksgiving. To say that his blood is unclean because someone has put their mouth on it would be wrong as it is still clean because it is His blood that is blameless. To say that his body is unclean because it has hit the floor is wrong because it is His body that is blameless. If anything it cleans whatever it touches. Diseases are only existent because of sin being existent in this world.

On the other hand, Our Lord has told us that his flesh is real food and his blood is real drink. And science tells us that real food and real drink are capable to be vectors of contagion.

The species of wine is not reserved in the same way as the species of bread because it would soon become corrupt. Even the species of bread is not preserved for so long that it might become corrupt.

The eucharist is confected by transubstantiation – Not transformation. The substance is changed, but the accidents remain. Now: What do you suppose allows bread or wine to be a vector of contagion? Its substance? Or its accidents? Do you believe, eg, that bacteria are capable of a metaphysical calculus which you and I are not? That the bacteria can discern the substantial presence of Our Lord’s body and blood and soul and divinity where you and I cannot?

tee

 

[johnmann]

We’re Catholics, not know-nothings. Didn’t know there were still people in this day and age who even have Internet access but don’t believe you can catch something from exchanging saliva.

 

[Seraphim73]

No harm can come from the Blood of Christ. Simple as that. Don’t worry about it.

 

[TheSeeker2014]

On the other hand, Our Lord has told us that his flesh is real food and his blood is real drink. And science tells us that real food and real drink are capable to be vectors of contagion.

The species of wine is not reserved in the same way as the species of bread because it would soon become corrupt. Even the species of bread is not preserved for so long that it might become corrupt.

The eucharist is confected by transubstantiation – Not transformation. The substance is changed, but the accidents remain. Now: What do you suppose allows bread or wine to be a vector of contagion? Its substance? Or its accidents? Do you believe, eg, that bacteria are capable of a metaphysical calculus which you and I are not? That the bacteria can discern the substantial presence of Our Lord’s body and blood and soul and divinity where you and I cannot?

tee

My words you quoted was not necessarily my view but what I was saying was I believe I understand the person’s view I quoted. How I interpenetrated that persons view. I posted it to see if I understood that person correctly. So I cannot answer your questions.

Just trying to figure out why exactly most people do not worry about getting a disease from the chalice. (not necessarily illness such as the flu but something more like Herpes or sores and Hep C) Things like Doorknobs and shaking hands would be illnesses but that can be washed off or you can recover from those things. The mouth of people can easily get an open wound because of biting of cheeks or diseases of the mouth that spread because of open sores.

Call me paranoid but churches often have alot of people.

Just wondering if it was just the church I visited that did not take precautions and most do (such as someone mentioned dipping the host in the wine then giving) or not and why. And/or if there was some scriptural background for not taking precautions or is it something that most people just do not think about?

Or would the alcohol content of the wine kill whatever swims in it?

 

[thequeen]

TheSeeker,

I don’t know if this will help, but beyond the symbolism of sharing the same cup, there’s a very practical reason that we don’t provide the Precious Blood in multiple little cups or glasses.

We believe that the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of our Lord and treat the communion elements with great respect. If a host gets broken or dropped on the floor, for example, it isn’t thrown away, it is consumed. If a bit of the Precious Blood remains after communion is finished it is not dumped down the drain, it is consumed. After the chalice is empty, it is not simply washed and put away. First it is rinsed and then that water is consumed as well. Only then can it be washed and cleaned.

Now imagine that instead of two or three chalices to be cleaned this way there are several hundred tiny ones. Someone needs to rinse and clean every one of them. And then what? Since we believe the elements are so precious we don’t “serve” them in plastic or even glass. So every one of those little cups would have to be gold- or silver-plated and stored somewhere between Masses.

The alternative – and it’s a perfectly acceptable one – is to provide the host only, not the Precious Blood. Since you can’t divide Christ, either communion element is his body, blood, soul, and divinity. If anyone receiving communion prefers to receive only the host that is fine, they have fully received communion. (And that is true whatever their reason – health, alcoholism, the taste, or, for the host, gluten intolerance.) But many people prefer the fuller sign of both eating and drinking.

I could not have said it better. Also if some one only receives the precious blood that is also okay I know several people who do this at my Parish because of celiac desease.

 

[TheSeeker2014]

I could not have said it better. Also if some one only receives the precious blood that is also okay I know several people who do this at my Parish because of celiac desease.

Not to sound argumentative, But what makes it ok just to receive one part and not both?
-very ignorant when it comes to Catholicism.

 

[Phemie]

Not to sound argumentative, But what makes it ok just to receive one part and not both?
-very ignorant when it comes to Catholicism.

You receive the whole Jesus (Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity) whether you receive only under the form of bread or only under the form of wine. Receiving under both form is a fuller sign of the meal, but it is not more Jesus.

 

[thequeen]

Not to sound argumentative, But what makes it ok just to receive one part and not both?
-very ignorant when it comes to Catholicism.

Because the authentic body blood soul and divinity of Christ are present in both the host and the wine the host is the wafer.so whether we are receiving only the host or only the wine or both we are receiving both his body and blood because he is present in both.By the way,What part of Indiana are you from? I am originally from Vincennes.

 

[johnmann]

Just wondering if it was just the church I visited that did not take precautions and most do (such as someone mentioned dipping the host in the wine then giving) or not and why. And/or if there was some scriptural background for not taking precautions or is it something that most people just do not think about?

Or would the alcohol content of the wine kill whatever swims in it?

My Protestant friend whom I took to Mass was also shocked at the use of a common chalice. It’s the norm for Catholic Mass. We’re used to it. Pouring it into other vessels is not permitted. Intinction, which is the dipping, is permitted but not common.

Of course the chances of actually catching anything is pretty low. But it’s not non-existent. Plus, just the thought of drinking something that 20 other people also drank is gross. So I don’t receive the Blood.

 

[TheSeeker2014]

Because the authentic body blood soul and divinity of Christ are present in both the host and the wine the host is the wafer.so whether we are receiving only the host or only the wine or both we are receiving both his body and blood because he is present in both.By the way,What part of Indiana are you from? I am originally from Vincennes.

Central… Hamilton County

 

[SuscipeMeDomine]

Just trying to figure out why exactly most people do not worry about getting a disease from the chalice. (not necessarily illness such as the flu but something more like Herpes or sores and Hep C)

There is some amount of risk. You basically have to trust that someone with a contagious disease will refrain from receiving but there’s no way to know that. There’s a small amount of hygiene involved when the minister gives the cup to someone. They wipe the rim and then turn it a quarter turn before giving it to the next person. You hope that it’s enough, along with whatever the small amount of alcohol can do. You do take a risk when you receive from a shared cup. It is, however, optional to receive that way for someone who prefers not to for any reason.

 

[HelenRose]

Not to sound argumentative, But what makes it ok just to receive one part and not both?
-very ignorant when it comes to Catholicism.

Simply put: it is Church Doctrine that Christ can not be divided and that the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity are present in both the bread and wine. Partaking of one is partaking of the whole Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ.