Is wine optional?

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

BfloPolska

Guest
If a person is taking opiate-derived drugs after surgery, can the person omit the wine when taking communion?

Blessed be,
Polska
 
Reception of the Eucharist is equally valid under both species, as long as you take the host you do not have to partake of the precious blood.
 
BfloPolska said:
If a person is taking opiate-derived drugs after surgery, can the person omit the wine when taking communion?

Blessed be,
Polska
Click to expand...
Reception of the Precious Blood is optional by the laity. Only the Priest is required to partake.

Lack of proper catechisis rears its ugly head again.:bigyikes:
 
As has been stated prior —the reception of the Precious Blood is optional. The Church does not mandate for the laity to receive from the Chalice.
 
BfloPolska said:
If a person is taking opiate-derived drugs after surgery, can the person omit the wine when taking communion?

Blessed be,
Polska
Click to expand...
Yes, wine is optional, you do not need to take it, even more so given the drugs in your situation.
 
There are several issues here:
  1. the mass is not valid unless both species are confected.
  2. Wine itself is not absolutely requisite; mustum* may be used instead for certain (limited) reasons.
  3. Only the celebrant(s) is(/are) required to consume the blood of Christ.
however, if the pastor is aware of the issue, and wants to allow, a separate chalice may be prepared with mustum for those with alcohol intolerance. A priest with such intolerance may use mustum in the main chalice, but in areas where it is legal to use wine, wine is still used for the majority of communicants.

Note that, in sme countries, wine is absolutely prohibited; mustum is permitted for general use there.

Likewise, one who is gluten intolerant is not required to recieve the Body of Christ, and my proceed directly to the minister of the cup, if it is offered. The celebrant should be made aware of this ahead of time! In a few rare cases, the celebrant will commune the gluten intolerant separately, and then proceed to the general communion, or do so after the general communion.

-=-=-=-
*mustum is made exactly like wine, but fermentation is stopped very early. It’s legal in Saudi, where wine isn’t. It’s still grapes and yeast.
 
Thanks Aramis, but I don’t think most of that had anything to do with the original question…

Also, to the original poster, you’re receiving Communion, not taking. 😉
 
Jenny_Z said:
Thanks Aramis, but I don’t think most of that had anything to do with the original question…
Click to expand...
The allowance for the use of mustum includes being on opiates.

Which is why i mentioned mustum.
 
THe Host is not only the Body of Christ, but it contains the Blood, Soul and Divinity as well. If you are are recieving only the host you are not short changing yourself, you recieved just as much as one who partook of both. I think some people respond to this that Jesus said take and eat as well as take and drink?
 
I know someone who has to take many strong opiates to control the pain from fibromyalgia, and has NO trouble with receiving under both Kinds.

Furthermore, he was directed by his dr. to have a glass of red wine at night. So far he’s not found one he likes.
 
NewUlm1976_2000 said:
Yes, wine is optional, you do not need to take it, even more so given the drugs in your situation.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with palmas on this one. It is sad that poor catechesis leads the faithful to refer to the Precious Blood as wine after the consecration. It is no longer wine at this point; it is the Precious Blood. Please use the proper terminology. We are not Protestants; we are Catholics. Let us say what we are supposed to believe.

Now, regarding the Precious Blood, it is optional for the faithful. We shouldn’t forget what St. Thomas Aquinas, the Angelic Doctor, wrote regarding how the same Christ is contained, whole and undivided in either Species:
Words a nature’s course derange,
that in Flesh the bread may change
and the wine in Christ’s own Blood.
Does it pass thy comprehending?
Faith, the law of light transcending,
leaps to things not understood.
Click to expand...
Here beneath these signs are hidden
priceless things, to sense forbidden;
signs, not things, are all we see.
Flesh from bread, and Blood from wine,
yet is Christ in either sign,
all entire confessed to be.
Click to expand...
And whoe’er of Him partakes,
severs not, nor rends, nor breaks:
all entire, their Lord receive.
Whether one or thousand eat,
all receive the selfsame meat,
nor do less for others leave.
Click to expand...
Thus, Christ is contained, whole and undivided in either form of Holy Communion. The Church has always taught that from the very beginning.

You are receiving the same living God who walked the earth, healed the sick, founded the Church, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried and rose again. A living body is never apart from the blood that flows through its veins. Therefore, you are receiving the whole and complete Christ.
 
Interesting to note, however, that several of the Eucharistic Prayers reference the “Body of Christ” as “bread” several times after the consecration, and, although the word wine isn’t use, the word “cup” is used to reference the Precious Blood.

Such terminology becomes even more fascinating in a conversation such as this, where it is the accidents of wine that remain that cause the OP to have reservations about receiving the Precious Blood.
 
BfloPolska said:
If a person is taking opiate-derived drugs after surgery, can the person omit the wine when taking communion?

Blessed be,
Polska
Click to expand...
The question has been answered well, but here is another 2 cents…

If the person wishes to receive the Precious Blood, I don’t see any reason why they shouldn’t. There is no minimum amount required. One can take a tiny amount and not cause a drug reaction or relapse. Even enough to wet the lips is fine IMO.

It’s not 190 proof.

Of course if one has the flu or so forth, … but that’s another thread 😉
 
MusicMan said:
Interesting to note, however, that several of the Eucharistic Prayers reference the “Body of Christ” as “bread” several times after the consecration, and, although the word wine isn’t use, the word “cup” is used to reference the Precious Blood.
Click to expand...
The context of those words is important. Also, the English translation might use the word “cup” (for now…) but the Latin word is best translated as “chalice”.
 
peary said:
You can ALWAYS omit the wine when taking Communion. It is optional.
Click to expand...
First of all, please, let’s use the correct terminology. It is no longer wine at this point. It is the Precious Blood. We need to reinforce what we believe and not sound like Protestants.

As I said in a previous post, I agree with palmas in that proper catechesis goes out the window, especially when the Eucharist is concerned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top