D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
Always remember the triangle in the upper right corner of a post is provided to allow you to instantly contact a moderator about a post you deem harassment or rude or violates a posting rule
Before I retired as a professor of theology, I had whole lectures on this topic
This isn’t a matter of insignificance, liturgically or theologically; it’s crucial that point be acknowledged. The article you cite is correct. Ab initio, it would have been unthinkable for the liturgical assembly not to do as the Lord had commanded…“take and eat” then “take and drink”
The Church Fathers give important reflections on the importance of receiving both species. The change comes with the medievals. In part it’s practical, in part it derives from theological conclusions emphasised by Scholasticism; it was a path of least resistance (or so it seemed)
Fortunately, the Churches of the East never took this path and this is a tribute to them
More problematic, frankly, was that at the time of the Reformation, when the People of God were rightly pointing out problems needing redress, an authoritarianism was used that history has shown was ill considered
Pope Benedict spoke well of this in a letter to every Catholic bishop in 2007
*Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church’s leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden. *
Fortunately, the assembled bishops of the world, at Vatican II, didn’t hesitate to take urgently needed action against past decisions. As they wrote in Sacrosanctum Concilium
*1. This sacred Council has several aims in view /…/ to adapt more suitably to the needs of our own times those institutions which are subject to change; to foster whatever can promote union among all who believe in Christ /…/ The Council therefore sees particularly cogent reasons for undertaking the reform and promotion of the liturgy
- Wherefore the sacred Council judges that the following principles concerning the promotion and reform of the liturgy should be called to mind, and that practical norms should be established*
Thus embarking us upon a path of urgently needed aggiornamento, taking part in the ecumenical movement that is the inspiration and gift of the Holy Spirit, and liturgical reform
*50. The rite of the Mass is to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as also the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested, and that devout and active participation by the faithful may be more easily achieved
- The treasures of the bible are to be opened up more lavishly, so that richer fare may be provided for the faithful at the table of God’s word. In this way a more representative portion of the holy scriptures will be read to the people in the course of a prescribed number of years*
One can in no way understate that importance of the availability of Communion under both species at the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice. Not only is the Lord’s directive more faithfully complied with but there are many underlying aspects that are rightly pointed to in the theology of the Eucharist. The Eucharist as meal which is intrinsic. The elements as real food and real drink. The common priesthood of the laity as a compliment to the ministerial priesthood
*55. That more perfect form of participation in the Mass whereby the faithful, after the priest’s communion, receive the Lord’s body from the same sacrifice, is strongly commended.
The dogmatic principles which were laid down by the Council of Trent remaining intact, communion under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See, as, for instance, to the newly ordained in the Mass of their sacred ordination, to the newly professed in the Mass of their religious profession, and to the newly baptized in the Mass which follows their baptism*
It is more perfect theologically to receive from elements consecrated at the Mass at which the communicant participated – this would be a basic premise in the theology of sign – and it is more perfect to receive both species. Those who cannot do not, thereby, fail to received the gift of the Lord’s communication of Himself but they have not received it by partaking of the Eucharistic elements in the way He constituted the sacrament. This was a key element that the Council Fathers had in mind in paragraph 55, which is a corrective
Theology of sign is far from of minimal import – it’s actually at the very heart of sacramental theology according to the definition that a sacrament is a sign which achieves that which it signifies which stands side by side with the other classic definition that a sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ that gives grace
