Pros and Cons of distributing Holy Communion under both kinds vs. one kind?

[DarkLight]

I’ve been having some difficulties swallowing, and particularly any form of dry foodstuff tends to exacerbate it. Lately I have several times opted to receive from the cup only. It’s just easier to get a little bit of liquid down than it is to try to swallow a dry wafer.

 

[Duesenberg]

I don’t have a problem with parishes offering communion under both kinds. None at all. On the other hand it’s clear that you do have a problem with people even discussing the subject. There’s nothing wrong with people discussing the pros and cons of offering communion under both kinds. I have certainly learned a bit from this thread.

On the other hand, there is a problem with people trying to control/eliminate legitimate discussion. It’s deeply offensive and squelching such discourse does no service to the Church. If it bothers you, simply employ some self control and skip over the posting.

 

[Duesenberg]

I’ve been having some difficulties swallowing, and particularly any form of dry foodstuff tends to exacerbate it. Lately I have several times opted to receive from the cup only. It’s just easier to get a little bit of liquid down than it is to try to swallow a dry wafer.

That’s a very good point. There’s a lot of discussion about the need to provide the chalice for Celiacs, but not for people who simply have trouble swallowing solid/dry matter. It makes me think – how many Catholics struggle as you do, you are not aware that it’s perfectly acceptable to receive Holy Communion under the appearance of wine only?

I made an addition to posting #1 based on your (name removed by moderator)ut. Thank you.

 

[twf]

The chalice is rarely, if ever, distributed in my archdiocese. Logistically it makes things so much simpler.
Our cathedral has 7 well attended Masses each Sunday. Yet very few EMHCs are employed . This is thanks to several factors:

1. Priests in residence at the attached Rectory come in during Communion time to help the celebrant distribute.
2. The altar rail is used… those who wish to receive standing, process up the centre aisle in two lines. Those who wish to receive kneeling process up either side and kneel along the rail. Anyone who has experience the rail knows that it goes much faster…
3. The Chalice is not distributed.

 

[twf]

Adding to my post…I’m not sure that distribution of both forms is common at all globally speaking. More of a US thing? I don’t remember seeing it in Rome. I don’t remember seeing it in Argentina. I don’t remember seeing it in the Dominican Republic. Certainly its not a thing here in Vancouver. But his is anecdotal, so I really am not sure.

 

[Duesenberg]

The chalice is rarely, if ever, distributed in my archdiocese. Logistically it makes things so much simpler.

Our cathedral has 7 well attended Masses each Sunday. Yet very few EMHCs are employed . This is thanks to several factors:

Priests in residence at the attached Rectory come in during Communion time to help the celebrant distribute.
The altar rail is used… those who wish to receive standing, process up the centre aisle in two lines. Those who wish to receive kneeling process up either side and kneel along the rail. Anyone who has experience the rail knows that it goes much faster…
The Chalice is not distributed.

It’s nice to hear that priests assist with communion at your parish. Your comments about altar rails and speed has certainly has not been my (considerable) experience. Nor does it make sense from a theoretical queuing theory viewpoint. It’s good that it works for your parish though.

 

[twf]

It’s nice to hear that priests assist with communion at your parish. Your comments about altar rails and speed has certainly has not been my (considerable) experience. Nor does it make sense from a theoretical queuing theory viewpoint. It’s good that it works for your parish though.

Everyone is already lined up and in place…the minister of Communion can simply go up and down the line without hesitation or waiting for the next person to step up… I’ve always found it faster. Not that I’ve actually timed it. Maybe my perception is wrong. Keep in mind that depending on the size of the altar rail, you might have 50 people kneeling at any given time - rather than a single person “in place” at a given time.

 

[Duesenberg]

Adding to my post…I’m not sure that distribution of both forms is common at all globally speaking. More of a US thing? I don’t remember seeing it in Rome. I don’t remember seeing it in Argentina. I don’t remember seeing it in the Dominican Republic. Certainly its not a thing here in Vancouver. But his is anecdotal, so I really am not sure.

Actually that’s another great question! I really don’t know the answer. I would also like to know how common intinction is outside of the US?

 

[Duesenberg]

Everyone is already lined up and in place…the minister of Communion can simply go up and down the line without hesitation or waiting for the next person to step up… I’ve always found it faster. Not that I’ve actually timed it. Maybe my perception is wrong. Keep in mind that depending on the size of the altar rail, you might have 50 people kneeling at any given time - rather than a single person “in place” at a given time.

I think it could go either way depending on the circumstances. Here locally while receiving standing, it goes very fast – almost like communicants are making a continuous tight u-turn at the minister of communion. Then again if someone decides to kneel (very rare) or has trouble receiving, it can slow down the entire process.

Kneeling at the altar rail can be fast, but not always. Communicants aren’t always quick to take their places or to vacate after receiving. Ministers of communion aren’t always that efficient at bending down, distributing communion and then moving to the next.

I think a great deal depends on the parish and how well everyone is trained.

 

[Horton]

The chalice was not offered in any of the churches I went to in Italy and it wasn’t done at Norte Dame in Paris.

When offered I do receive both but have no issue with receiving the Body of Christ only.

 

[Hereiam]

Perhaps…or was “all” in the literal sense meaning he was speaking to the 12, not the entire world, and hence the priest alone received for years…but in the proper context, receive or don’t, one species is adequate…always consider the literal sense of scripture in addition to the spiritual sense.

 

[Duesenberg]

Perhaps…or was “all” in the literal sense meaning he was speaking to the 12, not the entire world, and hence the priest alone received for years…but in the proper context, receive or don’t, **one species is adequate…**always consider the literal sense of scripture in addition to the spiritual sense.

Very true. One thing from this thread that really resonates with me is the comment made about not receiving the host because it was difficult to consume solid/dry matter. That’s something I had not considered and it makes a lot of sense. I wonder though, how many suffer from this difficulty yet have no idea that it’s permissible to receive communion only under the appearance of wine? Quite a few is my guess.

Further, when talking about intinction, the point is always brought up about those who only want (or can) receive the host. I’ve never heard anyone mention that some can only receive from the chalice (other than Celiac sufferers), so that’s something new for me to consider.