Recieving the Eucharist under both species

  • Thread starter Thread starter Flopfoot
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stmaria said:
I have never seen this done and I have to admit it doesn’t seem right to me but the church now allows the wine to be taken with a spoon or sucked through a tube.
Click to expand...
It’s not sucked throught the tube, but rather the tube is used as a dropper.

The priest will insert the tube into the chalice and cap one end with his finger, the tube is then held over the recipients mouth and the priest releases his finger. The Precious Blood then falls into the mouth of the recipient.

The is most commonly used in the Eastern Catholic Churches to give the Eucharist to infants and young children.

The only ‘regular’ use it has in the Roman Rite is to bring the Sacrament to those too sick to swallow the species of Bread.
 
I was merely trying to express that i was not offended by the question. If this is considered yelling or impolite, i will surely stop.
 
Brendan said:
It was not unheard of to recieve by Intiction in the TLM.

When my mother was growing up in Ireland, she said it was customary for the Eucharist to be offered intincted on High Holy Days, such as Christmas and Easter, and on days with a special Eucharistic significance such as Holy Thursday and Corpus Christi.

That was Ireland in the 40’s…
Click to expand...
Talked to my mother again about this.

It seems that intinction was also how she and her siblings recieved First Holy Communion.
 
denver_faithful said:
I was merely trying to express that i was not offended by the question. If this is considered yelling or impolite, i will surely stop.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t complaining about yelling…NO is shorthand in this forum for Novus Ordo, so your sentence could be read as Novus Ordo harm, Novus Ordo foul!

I don’t think that’s what you meant. 😉
 
thanks very much for clearing that up i still have problems with some of the abbreviations and will avoid using all caps so that no one mistakes emphasis for an abbreviation:thumbsup:
 
Flopfoot said:
Hi
What are the opinions of traditional Catholics on whether a church should give the faithful the option of receiving the Eucharist under both species; and whether, if it is available, we should receive under both species?
(By the way, I do know that we’re not required to receive under both species and nor are we banned from doing so - this question is not about absolutes, but about opinions / which is ‘better’).
Click to expand...
I think that because christ is fully present in both I am fine with the church teaching that you may recieve only one of the two, but in my honest opinion, I feel weird about it because Jesus instituted eucharist with both species, and I think he did that for a reason, so whenever I take eucharist, i always take both, and if both aren’t available I wouldn’t recieve. It would just be weird for me. Just because when he talks (jesus) about eucharist he states that yuo must “eat his body and drink his blood.” I’m not saying I disagree with what the church says, I ust personally feel weird about it. Ball itm y protestant background that we never ate just bread, but we always, always, always did both, even if it was just a symbol. Or maybe it was because it was just a ymbol in my church I’ve been starved all these years 😉
 
Delphinus85 said:
I think that because christ is fully present in both I am fine with the church teaching that you may recieve only one of the two, but in my honest opinion, I feel weird about it because Jesus instituted eucharist with both species, and I think he did that for a reason, so whenever I take eucharist, i always take both, and if both aren’t available I wouldn’t recieve. It would just be weird for me. Just because when he talks (jesus) about eucharist he states that yuo must “eat his body and drink his blood.” I’m not saying I disagree with what the church says, I ust personally feel weird about it. Ball itm y protestant background that we never ate just bread, but we always, always, always did both, even if it was just a symbol. Or maybe it was because it was just a ymbol in my church I’ve been starved all these years 😉
Click to expand...
Oh my—then your signature-- (once you go Vatican, you won’t go back again)-- is apparently not holding all that true for you. You see—it is the Church Herself that has instituted Holy Communion under one species. If you personally “feel weird” to the point of not receiving communion–because both are not offered—that denies the your statement that you don’t disagree with the Church.
 
Walking_Home said:
Oh my—then your signature-- (once you go Vatican, you won’t go back again)-- is apparently not holding all that true for you. You see—it is the Church Herself that has instituted Holy Communion under one species. If you personally “feel weird” to the point of not receiving communion–because both are not offered—that denies the your statement that you don’t disagree with the Church.
Click to expand...
you know what? I’m done with these stupid forums. People like you make me sick. Someone asks for my opinion, I give it, then someone uses it as an opportunity to insult me and my faith, or trying to tell me I am somehow less than them. You make me sick. I am fed up with this. Here’s a thought, maybe instead of insulting other people’s faith because they think differently then you, while not breaking any law of faith, you can actually SEEK JESUS and stop being judgemental, and putting down people to feel better about yourself. This is a sick place and I am through. I figured catholics would at least respect each other with all the hammering they take from protestants, but I guess I was wrong. Sharing my faith with catholics is no better than doing so in my protentant school, even catholics are willing to tell me I am not a good christian and going to hell. You all make me sick.
 
Delphinus85 said:
you know what? I’m done with these stupid forums. People like you make me sick. Someone asks for my opinion, I give it, then someone uses it as an opportunity to insult me and my faith, or trying to tell me I am somehow less than them. You make me sick. I am fed up with this. Here’s a thought, maybe instead of insulting other people’s faith because they think differently then you, while not breaking any law of faith, you can actually SEEK JESUS and stop being judgemental, and putting down people to feel better about yourself. This is a sick place and I am through. I figured catholics would at least respect each other with all the hammering they take from protestants, but I guess I was wrong. Sharing my faith with catholics is no better than doing so in my protentant school, even catholics are willing to tell me I am not a good christian and going to hell. You all make me sick.
Click to expand...
As you give your opinion — so do I. Guess what–I am fed up too.
Fed up–with people who insinuate that the Church is wrong not to mandate both species. You went as far to say—you would not receive communion — if both are not offered. That is an insult to who we as Catholics are.
 
I don’t get it–the apostles received Both Kinds–in the early days of the church people received by hand.

I’m not saying that that means those ways are the only way to go but don’t tell me that either is intrinscially wrong.

I still think that reception on the tongue by intinction from the priest while kneeling is the best way to go.

Bring back the altar rails!
 
Here we are without the M.P. but we’re trying to change the TLM already. Maybe we should just leave well enough alone.
 
BobP123 said:
Here we are without the M.P. but we’re trying to change the TLM already. Maybe we should just leave well enough alone.
Click to expand...
I agree. If/when the motu proprio is announced, no changes will be made to the TLM. In fact, the changes were already made - in 1970. It is called the Mass of Paul VI. The whole point of the MP is to allow greater use of the TLM, not to change it again.
 
BobP123 said:
Here we are without the M.P. but we’re trying to change the TLM already. Maybe we should just leave well enough alone.
Click to expand...
But where is anyone proposing changes to the TLM?

As I pointed out above, the offering of intinctied Eucharist was not unknown at the Tridentine Mass.
 
You really shouldn’t be angry at people when they try to point out something that you said is contradictory to something else you said, you should be glad that they care enough to tell you what they believe and why!
:eek:
 
denver_faithful said:
You really shouldn’t be angry at people when they try to point out something that you said is contradictory to something else you said, you should be glad that they care enough to tell you what they believe and why!
:eek:
Click to expand...
Perhaps not, but how you say it is as important as what you say. There are young members on these forums who are just learning the Faith, and are trying to do so earnestly. I think it is important to resist the urge to condescend. That is why those silly smilies are so important. I love them:) 😃 😉 👍
 
Windmill said:
I think there are pro’s and con’s.

Pro’s:
for those who have wheat allergies or celiac’s disease, this lets them participate.
Click to expand...
I think this is one of those things that each person has to decide for themself. But just to let everyone know, there is an convent of Benedictines (I think that is the correct order) who have come up with a host that is almost gluten-free. (It is the gluten in the wheat that causes the problem for those of us with Celiac Disease). These hosts have been approved by the Church–I don’t have the URL for their website right this minute, but if anyone wants it, just let me know and I’ll look it up…
 
Delphinus85 said:
I think that because christ is fully present in both I am fine with the church teaching that you may recieve only one of the two, but in my honest opinion, I feel weird about it because Jesus instituted eucharist with both species, and I think he did that for a reason, so whenever I take eucharist, i always take both, and if both aren’t available I wouldn’t recieve. It would just be weird for me. Just because when he talks (jesus) about eucharist he states that yuo must “eat his body and drink his blood.” I’m not saying I disagree with what the church says, I ust personally feel weird about it. Ball itm y protestant background that we never ate just bread, but we always, always, always did both, even if it was just a symbol. Or maybe it was because it was just a ymbol in my church I’ve been starved all these years 😉
Click to expand...
But if you truly understand and believe the truth that Christ is present, whole and entire, in the Sacred Host, you should not feel “weird” at all. I think you are depriving yourself unnecessarily if you do not receive when both species are not offfered. I’m sure your protestant background is responsible for your feeling this way, but if you are a Catholic now, you must trust the universal teaching of the Church.
 
NMJenny said:
I think this is one of those things that each person has to decide for themself. But just to let everyone know, there is an convent of Benedictines (I think that is the correct order) who have come up with a host that is almost gluten-free. (It is the gluten in the wheat that causes the problem for those of us with Celiac Disease). These hosts have been approved by the Church–I don’t have the URL for their website right this minute, but if anyone wants it, just let me know and I’ll look it up…
Click to expand...
I personally know someone with Celiac Disease who is able to receive the consecrated Host with no problems whatsoever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top