No More Communion in Both Species

[ANNE_2]

" In the Roman Missal (1975), 14 instances were provided when the chalice could be offered to the laity,” the diocese noted. “From 1975 on, the United States, United Kingdom and Oceania were given experimental privileges for the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds. These privileges expired in 2005 and were not renewed by the Holy See. The new norms issued in June 2011 are what guide the liturgical practice today and in the future.**” **

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=11822&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CatholicWorldNewsFeatureStories+%28Catholic+World+News+%28on+CatholicCulture.org%29%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

catholicnewsagency.com/news/as-norms-for-communion-change-bishops-role-emphasized/

The Norms on the USCCB web site are dated 2001 not 2011.

The real questions are - does anyone have a link to the actual indult, and has it been **extended by the Vatican **?

In my opinion, one of the beauties of the Liturgy and practices of the Mass is its’ uniformity in Parishes/Diocese within the same Country, and since travel is so much a part of world society, it would be best if it could be somewhat uniform throughout the World.

I watch the Mass on EWTN at their site, and the Masses said by the Pope.
Neither offer the people Communion under both species.

 

[MissRose73]

My aunt is a celiac. She only receives from the cup / chalice. If she did attend an Extraordinary Form Mass, I am sure she would ask the priest to allow her to partake of the chalice ahead of time. I am sure others like her have done the same.

I would have no issue with only the host given out if that was enforced. I’ve only been to one parish where the host was the only option that I can recall. I do not remember if anyone was given the cup or not. I’ve not been able to receive from the cup a few times but it was because I was in a long line of communicants to get the host first then the cup was no longer available due to wait time.

 

[centurionguard]

I should have been more specific. I don’t know anything about the Canadian indult because indults are given to different Countries.
In the USA the indult ended in 2005.
We must all be careful regarding speaking about “indults” realizing that all Countries are not exactly the same.
Also, approved practices are different amongst the Rites of the Catholic Church - such as differences between Latin and Eastern Rites.

This thread is about the Latin Rite aka Roman Rite (same Rite as the Pope) and the USA.
Since permission started more than 30 years ago in the USA, most of today’s Bishops did not know that it ended, or when it ended.

In the USA in several areas there has been an abuse of the over-use of “extra-ordinary ministers of Holy Communiont”, lay people who help distribute Communion.
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#_ftnref259

" [156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened."
and
" [157.] If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed.
Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it.
The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons."

I do not know if the indult regarding receiving under both Species, will be given again. But unless and until it is, it has expired in the USA.

The posters are correct who stated that this thread has nothing to do with COTT or CITH.

I should have been more specific. I don’t know anything about the Canadian indult because indults are given to different Countries.

In the USA the indult ended in 2005.

 

[pnewton]

catholicnewsagency.com/news/as-norms-for-communion-change-bishops-role-emphasized/

The Norms on the USCCB web site are dated 2001 not 2011.

From your article:

Phoenix, Ariz., Sep 29, 2011 / 03:08 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The new General Instruction of the Roman Missal allows more freedom for bishops to determine norms for the distribution of communion under both forms within their diocese, said liturgist Fr. John Muir.
“The bottom line is that Communion under both kinds is allowed whenever the bishop thinks appropriate–be those instances few or many,” Fr. Muir told CNA on Sept. 28.

 

[ProVobis]

My aunt is a celiac. She only receives from the cup / chalice. If she did attend an Extraordinary Form Mass, I am sure she would ask the priest to allow her to partake of the chalice ahead of time. I am sure others like her have done the same.

I’d like to see that but it might be difficult. I might be wrong but I think the 1961 rubrics require the priest to consume all of the consecrated wine prior to the Ecce Agnus Dei…

Not only that, the communion formula would need to be changed to: Sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam.

 

[jtodisco]

The letter you linked is from Wisconsin, not the Vatican. Also, it is a Monsignor saying this, not a bishop. Only a bishop is the competent authority to give the norms in his diocese. This is still on the USCCB website:

“The distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds has been the norm for more than a millenium. It began during the first days of the Church’s celebration of the Eucharist in fulfillment of the Lord’s command to “take and eat . . . take and drink.” This practice continued until the late eleventh century when the custom of distributing communion to the faithful under of the form of bread alone began to grow.
The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council restored the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds at the bishop’s discretion. Support for this practice has grown even more strongly with the third typical edition of the Roman Missal:
Holy Communion has a fuller form as a sign when it takes place under both kinds. For in this form the sign of the Eucharistic banquet is more clearly evident and clearer expression is given to the divine will by which the new and eternal Covenant is ratified in the Blood of the Lord, as also the connection between the Eucharistic banquet and the eschatological banquet in the Kingdom of the Father.”

usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/resources-for-the-eucharist/distribution-of-communion/

Exactly.

 

[Orogeny]

I’m no liturgist and I could certainly be wrong, but communion under both kinds is allowed in the current GIRM which was approved by the Vatican in March 2010 (GIRM 281-287). Additionally, communion under both kinds is addressed in Redemptionis Sacramentum which was published by the Vatican in 2004 (chapter IV, 100-107), the year before the indult referred to was set to expire.

Seems to me that if an indult was originally needed, it is not now.

Peace

Tim

 

[ProVobis]

Fr. Z’s blog made a comment about this too.

wdtprs.com/blog/2011/10/diocese-of-madison-wi-to-stop-regular-holy-communion-under-both-kinds-the-indult-ran-out-in-2005/

…After thirty years, something can seem pretty permanent. But it wasn’t. The bishops of our country did apply for an extension of the 1975 in-dult, but that was denied…

 

[runningdude]

[edited]

As for having the blood and body at mass. I don’t mind it but you don’t need both they are the same. It is like receiving communion twice.

Is this a bad thing?

 

[Godfollower]

Quote " In the last couple of decades, Communion under both species (with the congregation able to receive the Pre-cious Blood as well as the Sacred Host) has become routine in our experience.
I knew (as many of you do) that Communion under both species was first introduced, on a limited basis, after the Second Vati-can Council, and that it has become much more common since.
What I did not know was that the widespread American practice of offering both species at most Sunday Masses began here under an indult (special permission) given by the Vatican in 1975, which expired in 2005. " Unquote (See attached for full article “from the Rector”.)

isthmuscatholic.org/documents/2011%2046%20Oct%209W.pdf

What is being done to be obedient to the Vatican in your Diocese ?

My diocese follows the rules of the Church:

1. In addition to those cases given in the ritual books, Communion under both kinds is permitted for

a. Priests who are not able to celebrate or concelebrate Mass;

b. The deacon and others who perform some duty at the Mass;

c. Members of communities at the conventual Mass or “community” Mass, along with seminarians, and all who are engaged in a retreat or are taking part in a spiritual or pastoral gathering.

The diocesan Bishop may establish norms for Communion under both kinds for his own diocese, which are also to be observed in churches of religious and at celebrations with small groups. The diocesan Bishop is also given the faculty to permit Communion under both kinds whenever it may seem appropriate to the priest to whom, as its own shepherd, a community has been entrusted, provided that the faithful have been well instructed and there is no danger of profanation of the Sacrament or of the rite’s becoming difficult because of the large number of participants or some other reason.

In all that pertains to Communion under both kinds, the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America are to be followed (see nos. 27-54).

General Instruction of the Roman Missal ¶ 283 (emphasis added).

Here’s what the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America say:

When Communion Under Both Kinds May Be Given

1. The revised Missale Romanum, third typical edition, significantly expands those opportunities when Holy Communion may be offered under both kinds. In addition to those instances specified by individual ritual books, the General Instruction states that Communion under both kinds may be permitted as follows:

for priests who are not able to celebrate or concelebrate

for the deacon and others who perform some role at Mass

for community members at their conventual Mass or what in some places is known as the “community” Mass, for seminarians, [and] for all who are on retreat or are participating in a spiritual or pastoral gathering (35)
24. The General Instruction then indicates that

the diocesan Bishop may lay down norms for the distribution of Communion under both kinds for his own diocese, which must be observed. . . . The diocesan Bishop also has the faculty to allow Communion under both kinds, whenever it seems appropriate to the priest to whom charge of a given community has been entrusted as [its] own pastor, provided that the faithful have been well instructed and there is no danger of the profanation of the Sacrament or that the rite would be difficult to carry out on account of the number of participants or for some other reason. (36)

In practice, the need to avoid obscuring the role of the priest and the deacon as the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion by an excessive use of extraordinary minister might in some circumstances constitute a reason either for limiting the distribution of Holy Communion under both species or for using intinction instead of distributing the Precious Blood from the chalice.

Norms established by the diocesan bishop must be observed wherever the Eucharist is celebrated in the diocese, “even in the churches of religious orders and in celebrations with small groups.” (37)

Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America ¶¶ 23-24.

Given that I can’t find a copy of this supposedly-expired indult anywhere, I have to ask this question:

Is Madison, Wisconsin perhaps obeying a different Vatican than the one I know of?

 

[Marie5890]

Reverting back to communion under one species only, the Host, would mean that people with celiac disease could not safely receive only the Blood, which is how my sons have chosen to receive. Up until recently, there was no other option for celiacs or people with wheat allergies to safely receive, since a gluten-free host was not valid for consecration. There is a very low gluten host now, made by a group of nuns in Missouri, that is valid, but the procedures for consecration are a little trickier (has to be kept in a pyx, taken to church, given to EMs to place on paten, has to be taken by one minister or the priest for reception, etc.).

I know the most orthodox Catholics don’t want anyone to have the option of both species, but there are people who are glad it’s available.

Thank you. We have several people in our parish who also suffer with celiac disease.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Thank you. We have several people in our parish who also suffer with celiac disease.

But that’s ignoring the fact that they can, in fact, partake of the chalice, even if the chalice is not offered to the general population.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

for one, since this is an opinion thread, I am with Fr. Stravinskis and would advocate communion by intinction administered only by the priest using vessels intended for the purpose, which would eliminate several problems at once that have been troubling for two generations of Catholics.

Just curious: Your opinion would seem counter to the current Church discipline that deacons are Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. I understand that the current GIRM - possibly because of oversight, as discussed in a thread some weeks ago - is not specific on the matter of deacons and intinction. (Nor, apparently, on the matter of deacons and removing ciboria from the tabernacle, strangely.) That said, do you have a concern with deacons distributing the Eucharist?

 

[ConstantineTG]

Thank you. We have several people in our parish who also suffer with celiac disease.

There is a woman in one of our parishes (Byzantine Rite, Ukrainian) who I presume has celiac disease or for one reason or another cannot partake of the Precious Body of Christ. The priest uses a separate chalice for her to receive the Precious Blood of our Lord. Even though it is the norm to give Communion with intincted Hosts in the Byzantine Rite, because of her condition the priest makes special arrangements for her. I can’t see why in the Latin Rite special arrangements cannot be made. Now that I recall it, there is also a woman in my previous RC parish who would come near the sanctuary to receive the Precious Blood from the chalice (so as they wouldn’t have to bring the Cup to the communion line) and she is the only one who receives from the chalice from among the laity.

The Church is merciful and understanding just as her groom, Jesus Christ, is. Rules are only set for ordinary situations but the Church will be flexible enough for the extraordinary situations.

 

[Corki]

Just curious: Your opinion would seem counter to the current Church discipline that deacons are Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. I understand that the current GIRM - possibly because of oversight, as discussed in a thread some weeks ago - is not specific on the matter of deacons and intinction.

Redemptionis Sacramentum is specific on the distribution via intinction.

[103.] The norms of the Roman Missal admit the principle that in cases where Communion is administered under both kinds, “the Blood of the Lord may be received either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon”.[191] As regards the administering of Communion to lay members of Christ’s faithful, the Bishops may exclude Communion with the tube or the spoon where this is not the local custom, though the option of administering Communion by intinction always remains. If this modality is employed, however, hosts should be used which are neither too thin nor too small, and the communicant should receive the Sacrament **from the Priest **only on the tongue.[192]

 

[FAB]

Quote " In the last couple of decades, Communion under both species (with the congregation able to receive the Pre-cious Blood as well as the Sacred Host) has become routine in our experience.
I knew (as many of you do) that Communion under both species was first introduced, on a limited basis, after the Second Vati-can Council, and that it has become much more common since.
What I did not know was that the widespread American practice of offering both species at most Sunday Masses began here under an indult (special permission) given by the Vatican in 1975, which expired in 2005. " Unquote (See attached for full article “from the Rector”.)

isthmuscatholic.org/documents/2011%2046%20Oct%209W.pdf

What is being done to be obedient to the Vatican in your Diocese ?

Bishops I believe need to thread lightly when it comes to eliminating giving the presious blood on a regular/ weekly basis. The laity has come to under the theological fullness or recieving under both species. We also have Jesus own word to take both His Body and His Blood.

 

[roadsend]

Bishops I believe need to thread lightly when it comes to eliminating giving the presious blood on a regular/ weekly basis. The laity has come to under the theological fullness or recieving under both species. We also have Jesus own word to take both His Body and His Blood.

When we receive the Body, we also receive the Blood; thus fulfilling Our Lord’s command.

Perhaps Rome’s unwillingness to renew the indult is somehow linked to the manner in which so many American bishops totally ignored Rome’s directives to reduce the excessive use of “Eucharistic Ministers” (EMHCs).

I just wonder how long this illicit practice will continue and what kind of creative excuses they will dream up to do so.

 

[JerrySeibert]

CITT or COTT aside. Does this mean that my Parish is acting outside it boundaries as we still offer Communion under both species? Like on Sunday and Monday at daily Mass.
Curious as my Pastor seems “So into it” he goes as far as to include information he has gleaned from Encyclical Letters into the Homily. So this is a surprise to me. Wonder what else we don’t know about?

 

[ConstantineTG]

CITT or COTT aside. Does this mean that my Parish is acting outside it boundaries as we still offer Communion under both species? Like on Sunday and Monday at daily Mass.
Curious as my Pastor seems “So into it” he goes as far as to include information he has gleaned from Encyclical Letters into the Homily. So this is a surprise to me. Wonder what else we don’t know about?

Before putting the blame squarely on the priest, better check on what the Bishop of the diocese is doing about it. Also, since this indult expiry seems pretty new to most of us even though its 5 years old, it could mean information dissemination hasn’t been very good about this issue. Maybe it was overlooked.

 

[JerrySeibert]

Before putting the blame squarely on the priest, better check on what the Bishop of the diocese is doing about it. Also, since this indult expiry seems pretty new to most of us even though its 5 years old, it could mean information dissemination hasn’t been very good about this issue. Maybe it was overlooked.

Thank you Constantine, I can always count on you for honesty in responding. Curious? Why non practicing? It would seem someone of your knowledge base you would be a daily church goer. I have often seen your responses and been in awe of your knowledge.