Recieving the Eucharist under both species

[maryjk]

I personally know someone with Celiac Disease who is able to receive the consecrated Host with no problems whatsoever.

Celiacs are told to avoid ALL wheat products.

I wonder about a person that intentionally consumes wheat and has Celiac.

And not having visible signs means nothing. Only a biopsy will tell if they are not being harmed.

 

[maryjk]

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…

benedictinesisters.org/english/site.php

 

[Geremia]

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’).

It isn’t necessary to receive both kinds because a transubstantiated host is Christ’s body inasmuch as wine transubstantiated into His blood is.

From another thread on how there used to be, before the Novus Ordo mass, no blood of Christ distributed to the congregation:

It is not that no wine was consecrated during the Mass, it is just that the blood was not distributed to the congregation. The priest has always received Christ under both forms. The distribution of the Blood was discontinued in order to combat the heresy that the bread became only the Body of Christ and the wine only the Blood. Reception under only one kind was meant to reinforce that each species is fully Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ. In (relatively) recent times, communion under both kinds has been reinstated because it is deemed to be more symbolically whole, although we still recognize that any fragment of a host or drop of Blood is just as metaphysically (theologically/really) full as both kinds together.

Challoner’s annotation to John 6:54 might help, too:

To receive the body and blood of Christ, is a divine precept, insinuated in this text; which the faithful fulfil, though they receive but in one kind; because in one kind they receive both body and blood, which cannot be separated from each other. Hence, life eternal is here promised to the worthy receiving, though but in one kind. Ver. 52. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. Ver. 58. He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. Ver. 59. He that eateth this bread, shall liver for ever.

It is my opinion that receiving communion under one kind is best. It avoids the possible ambiguity that the faithful think that God is “split” between the two species or that somehow one is in communion better with God by receiving both species.