Receiving the Precious Blood?

[LPS]

Update Post I went to mass and was handed the chalice this time (different eucharistic minister) It went perfectly, so I think the other Eucharistic minister and I just had an awkward exchange of hands.

Personally, I also love to receive under both species. For me, it’s knowing how this imitates Jesus’ actions of handing His disciples first the bread, then the wine.

I’m glad it worked out more comfortably (and sensibly) the next time!

 

[felsguy]

Sometimes when the recipient seems hesitant or unsure, I’ve held on to the chalice in protection of the Precious Blood, just to be certain the chalice was firmly held by one of us and there wasn’t going to be any accidental spillage. It may have been that simple the first time.

Similarly, I usually do not completely let go if it’s a young child receiving, keeping my hand under the bottom while the child grasps and raises the chalice.

 

[MSSheBear]

I have reached out to the Chalice when the EMHC made no move. It usually involved an elderly EMHC who would then hand it to me. I never yanked it from the EMHC.

Once “Father Express” broke a Host in my hand. I ended up licking my hand. Another time a broken Host came with a fragment which I picked up with a finger. I always rub my finger over my hand to feel for fragments. But I never find anything. I think if I did I would seriously consider receiving on the tongue.

 

[otjm]

From the USCCB:

Holy Communion Under Both Kinds

1. From the first days of the Church’s celebration of the Eucharist, Holy Communion consisted of the reception of both species in fulfillment of the Lord’s command to “take and eat . . . take and drink.” The distribution of Holy Communion to the faithful under both kinds was thus the norm for more than a millennium of Catholic liturgical practice.
2. The practice of Holy Communion under both kinds at Mass continued until the late eleventh century, when the custom of distributing the Eucharist to the faithful under the form of bread alone began to grow. By the twelfth century theologians such as Peter Cantor speak of Communion under one kind as a “custom” of the Church.28 This practice spread until the Council of Constance in 1415 decreed that Holy Communion under the form of bread alone would be distributed to the faithful.
3. In 1963, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council authorized the extension of the faculty for Holy Communion under both kinds in Sacrosanctum Concilium:

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. . . .29

1. The Council’s decision to restore Holy Communion under both kinds at the bishop’s discretion took expression in the first edition of the Missale Romanum and enjoys an even more generous application in the third typical edition of the Missale Romanum:

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.30

The General Instruction further states that "at the same time the faithful should be instructed to participate more readily in this sacred rite, by which the sign of the Eucharistic banquet is made more fully evident."31

1. The extension of the faculty for the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds does not represent a change in the Church’s immemorial beliefs concerning the Holy Eucharist. Rather, today the Church finds it salutary to restore a practice, when appropriate, that for various reasons was not opportune when the Council of Trent was convened in 1545.32 But with the passing of time, and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the reform of the Second Vatican Council has resulted in the restoration of a practice by which the faithful are again able to experience "a fuller sign of the Eucharistic banquet."33

(My bold, since this answers the question asked)

 

[Phemie]

Similarly, I usually do not completely let go if it’s a young child receiving, keeping my hand under the bottom while the child grasps and raises the chalice.

Is it common for children to receive from the chalice where you are? Here I never see that, even the altar servers don’t receive under both species. Of course, as I said, only about 25-30% of communicants in our parish receive that way.

 

[StAlphonsusMary]

Goodness me, you got a heart attack?

Yes, the host can be fragmented. Communicants may be too occupied by the situation, sometimes they do not check their hands. I would not give out a broken host. I would chose a perfect host from the ciborium, sometimes two would stuck together, and that’s okay, to give to the communicants.

Haha, I didn’t get a heart attack. I was shocked.

All the best

 

[tee_eff_em]

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.30

(My bold, since this answers the question asked)

Can you specify precisely which *question asked *this passage answers? Thanks.

tee

 

[paperwight66]

Is it common for children to receive from the chalice where you are? Here I never see that, even the altar servers don’t receive under both species. Of course, as I said, only about 25-30% of communicants in our parish receive that way.

In our parish, generally the children all receive from the chalice, yes, as they are taught how before First Communion . I would guess among the rest of the congregation about two-thirds do. We have it at all Masses, including weekdays at 12.

 

[felsguy]

Similarly, I usually do not completely let go if it’s a young child receiving, keeping my hand under the bottom while the child grasps and raises the chalice.

Is it common for children to receive from the chalice where you are? Here I never see that, even the altar servers don’t receive under both species. Of course, as I said, only about 25-30% of communicants in our parish receive that way.

Yes, it’s very common, at First Communions, weekend Masses, and the weekly school Mass. This at a midwest US suburban parish of about 2400 families with an elementary school of about 400.

 

[Phemie]

Yes, it’s very common, at First Communions, weekend Masses, and the weekly school Mass. This at a midwest US suburban parish of about 2400 families with an elementary school of about 400.

Interesting. Here, for the most part, the parents don’t allow their kids to receive from the chalice. For several years they were offered the chalice for First Communion and the parents had to be talked into it. But none ever received from the chalice afterward.

 

[felsguy]

Yes, it’s very common, at First Communions, weekend Masses, and the weekly school Mass. This at a midwest US suburban parish of about 2400 families with an elementary school of about 400.

Interesting. Here, for the most part, the parents don’t allow their kids to receive from the chalice. For several years they were offered the chalice for First Communion and the parents had to be talked into it. But none ever received from the chalice afterward.

I’ve noticed that at our weekend Masses generally all the members of a family tend to do the same thing, that is, all the members of a family choose to receive or all choose not to receive from the chalice. It’s been a while since I was at a school Mass but my hunch is that the most of the children make the same choice that their family does on the weekend.

 

[otjm]

Is it common for children to receive from the chalice where you are? Here I never see that, even the altar servers don’t receive under both species. Of course, as I said, only about 25-30% of communicants in our parish receive that way.

At my parish, some do and some don’t. As Felsguy noted, there is a tendency to follow the parents’ example - and in some circumstances (possibly many), the parents’ specific directions.

 

[otjm]

Can you specify precisely which *question asked *this passage answers? Thanks.

tee

Post 6 and post 12.
Post 6 does not have a question, but the bold is directed to it; post 12 has a question, perhaps rhetorical.

That answers the “precise”; but since it is from the USCCB and not in contradiction with paragraph 55 of Sacroscantum Concilium, I post it because I find that often, people do not really know why the Church has made this change.