Isn't it Time to Devise a Better Way to Receive the Precious Blood Other Than the Common Cup?

[Doc2be]

I think this whole argument can be settled by a little reading into the General Instruction for the Roman Missal

1. Sacred vessels are to be made from precious metal. If they are made from metal that rusts or from a metal less precious than gold, then ordinarily they should be gilded on the inside.

Dixie cups/shot glasses/anything breakable, would never and should never contain the precious blood or body of our Lord and Savior. Heaven forbid someone should drop the cup and it shatter all over…spilling Christ’s blood all over the floor…it is just bad. Plus you can not use clay because it is porous and will “soak” up the blood of Christ and that is also bad.

I do not see this practice changing or should it be changed.

Also,

Wine is fermented by bacteria but it is completely harmless to you…you have more bacteria on and inside your body than you have your own cells.

Wine does contain Alcohol which does help kill bacteria and disinfect things…not a great amount but it is there…

The wine is mixed with water, but how much a tablespoon? Not much dilution…just a note.

Hope this helps.

 

[MissMichal]

Besides the value to the Precious Blood (of which there is a lot), I get a lot out of the common cup, and it was one of the things that impressedme before I became Catholic. Drinking from the common cup is one of the signs, to me, that we are all one Body of Christ. I find the common cup very powerful and I would definitely not like to see it go away.

 

[George_C]

Even without the Swine Flu pandemic looming, I just can’t see why the current method of the common cup (chalice) couldn’t be improved upon.

There is no pandemic! At any given time, millions of people worldwide have the common cold and no one bats an eyelash. A thousand people get a nasty strain of the flu and billions panic like it’s the black plague.

STOP IT! It’s embarrassing.

Everyone read this: articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/04/29/Swine-Flu.aspx

I am not buying this Mannlicher Carcano for one second and neither should you. The mainstream media is basically the unpaid public relations arm of the federal government. Stop reading it.

Not one person at Mass today refused the Precious Blood! And I will bet my next paycheck that they won’t get sick.

Let me ask you this, my friends: did any of the Apostles refuse the cup and say “oh, no… I might get siiiiiick!” when Jesus handed them the cup of wine said, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many?”

NO!

 

[OriginalJS]

As long as we are on health issues, how about doing away with handshaking when passing the peace. We could bow to each other instead just like we bow to the host before receiving and when reciting the creed.

 

[OriginalJS]

T
Not one person at Mass today refused the Precious Blood! And I will bet my next paycheck that they won’t get sick.NO!

George, I wonder where you go to Church. In every Church I have been in in the past ten years or so, of those receiving communion only a minority receive the Precious Blood. I don’t think “refusing” is the word I’d choose; they just walk on by.

 

[turtleoompa]

Today during the homily our priest told us per direction of the Bishop we are to not hold hands during the Our Father ( he also said we should not be doing this anyway ), no hand shakes with the sign of peace, no wine to be consecrated for the people, and no receiving on the tongue until the flu thing is under control. It is strange why we don’t do this during the regular flu season which is much more lethal than this pig flu.

 

[RobbyS]

My parish uses intinction. It has been well-received.

I think this is the best method. People need to recall the scholastic distinction between substance and accidents. There is nothing magical about the Eucharist.

 

[Sugabee43]

We had intinction in our parish until we got a different pastor. I personally love it, mainly because my unanointed hands never have to touch the Host (they don’t anyway since I always receive on the tongue), and it means that the church naturally needs less EMHCs; that’s why they’re called Extraordinary!!!

 

[244Rocket]

I’d prefer intinction or little paper cups.

 

[Newbie2]

Pure wine is a disinfectant! It kills all bacteria and germs that enter it!

Nope. While the alcohol in wine is able to kill some of the bacteria and viruses, it is for the most part an ineffective disinfectant. Besides, these germs can be transmitted by the side of the cup where the lips touch but where the wine does not touch.

First the wine is mingled with some water, so it’s not pure.

It’s a bacterium, I believe, that converts wine into vinegar. (I may be mistaken here.)

And wine is NOT a viricide.

Yeast is responsible for the fermentation of the grape sugars.

Dixie cups/shot glasses/anything breakable, would never and should never contain the precious blood or body of our Lord and Savior.
Wine is fermented by bacteria but it is completely harmless to you…you have more bacteria on and inside your body than you have your own cells.

.

There are more than a few parishes that use glass chalaces and yeast does the fermentation, not bacteria. Bacterial contamination makes wine (and beer) go bad.

*"…you have more bacteria on and inside your body than you have your own cells." *

 

[AHapka]

I just can’t see why the current method of the common cup (chalice) couldn’t be improved upon. I’m sorry but the thought of drinking out of what may have 50 people’s saliva in it is not very appealing. This is not a one species vs two species debate. Of course, there is always intinction. But that wouldn’t gain favor with the communion in the hand crowd.

Because it’s not our job to sit around and think of what “improvements” we could make to the Mass. That’s what protestants did and continue to do, and look how many denominations there are now. The Holy Father and the Congregation for Divine Worship are empowered with deciding how Mass is to be offered. It is our job as Catholics to be obedient to our religious superiors and use the options they provide for receiving Holy Communion.

The fact that intinction isn’t in “favor” with a particular crowd is irrelevant. The Church is not a democracy. Otherwise ABC would be allowed and we’d no longer have to follow some of the more “burdensome” commandments.

 

[A.Pelliccio]

Returning to reception under the one species would alleviate such issues.

 

[Holly3278]

No, I say keep the common cup. Receiving from the same cup symbolizes are unity with each other.

 

[CKNICKERBOCKER]

Faith means that we believe that if it is God’s will, it doesn’t matter what danger lurks before us, we will be protected from harm. The problem is we forget to practice our faith and end up worrying.

 

[Seatuck]

Nope. While the alcohol in wine is able to kill some of the bacteria and viruses, it is for the most part an ineffective disinfectant. Besides, these germs can be transmitted by the side of the cup where the lips touch but where the wine does not touch.

Yeast is responsible for the fermentation of the grape sugars.

There are more than a few parishes that use glass chalaces and yeast does the fermentation, not bacteria. Bacterial contamination makes wine (and beer) go bad.

*"…you have more bacteria on and inside your body than you have your own cells." *

Glass chalices are not permitted.

 

[dominicandinah]

I’d prefer intinction or little paper cups.

By doing so leaves a lot of room open for a direct or indirect violation of the Blood of Christ. I’d rather not have the Blood available for a time than to take the chance of unintential or intential abuse of It.

 

[JJHIII]

Even without the Swine Flu pandemic looming, I just can’t see why the current method of the common cup (chalice) couldn’t be improved upon. I’m sorry but the thought of drinking out of what may have 50 people’s saliva in it is not very appealing. This is not a one species vs two species debate. Of course, there is always intinction. But that wouldn’t gain favor with the communion in the hand crowd. Aren’t there any Eastern Rite church traditions or other ecclesial community practices that could be employed instead? How about separate tiny spoons similar to what the Orthodox use. Or, how about the separate tiny little cups like the Lutherans use? I think some of the reasons against these practices have to do with purification of the vessels/utensils. But it seems like if someone came up with a practical way to do the purification, why shouldn’t the Latin Rite Church adopt something different?

This depends on if you believe that the wine is truly the blood of Christ. We all know that it is so why worry about germs and illnes from the Cup? People were healed by just being in His shadow! We can drink a part of Him! If you have faith that His blood can heal you, or at least prevent you from cathing an illness from the Chalice, then there should be no problem

 

[Aramis]

The normative Byzantine method is intinction by immersion of the precious body, which is then retrieved with the spoon, and dropped or flicked into the mouth of the communicant, almost always without contact with the communicant by the priest or spoon. Should the spoon make contact, it’s immediately wiped with the purificator. And the purificator is held under the chin; far more effective than a patton.