A
annejohno
Guest
Who consumes “left over” Precious Blood? in our parish two EMEs distribute the Precious Blood. After the last parishioner has consumed, the EME finishes what is left in cup. Should it be the priest?
- Status
K
katherine2
Guest
That sometimes can be a significant quanity of the Precious Blood. it would be quite inappropriate to have a rigid rule on this question, particularly given the Precious Blood is not reserved.
D
Deacon_Ed
Guest
No, the EMHC may consume what is left, he or she may offer it to other parishioners to consume, the deacon or priest may consume it. The directives from Rome permit all of these methods of consumption. Ideally, as Katherine2 noted, if there is a lot it should not be consumed by just one person.
Deacon Ed
N
Nota_Bene
Guest
If that’s a possibility then Communion should be offered under one species or by intinction.
Having a “significant quantity” of Precious Blood remaining is unacceptable, except under truly extraordinary circumstances.
N
Nota_Bene
Guest
Deacon Ed:
"Consuming the Precious Blood which Remains
Since the Precious Blood may not be reserved (except in a small amount needed for an actual case of Communion for a sick person who cannot receive the Host), it must be consumed. The priest may engage others in Its consumption, whether concelebrants, deacons or EMCs.
RS 107 (cont.) … Furthermore all will remember that once the distribution of Holy Communion during the celebration of Mass has been completed, the prescriptions of the Roman Missal are to be observed, and in particular, whatever may remains of the Blood of Christ must be entirely and immediately consumed by the Priest or by another minister, according to the norms, while the consecrated hosts that are left are to be consumed by the Priest at the altar or carried to the place for the reservation of the Eucharist.
US Norms for Two Kinds 52. When more of the Precious Blood remains than was necessary for Communion, and if not consumed by the bishop or priest celebrant, “the deacon immediately and reverently consumes at the altar all of the Blood of Christ which remains; he may be assisted, if needs dictate, by other deacons and priests.” When there are extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, they may consume what remains of the Precious Blood from their chalice of distribution with permission of the diocesan bishop."
Nope. It says nothing about parishioners (other than extraordinary ministers) consuming the excess Precious Blood. From EWTN:
"Consuming the Precious Blood which Remains
Since the Precious Blood may not be reserved (except in a small amount needed for an actual case of Communion for a sick person who cannot receive the Host), it must be consumed. The priest may engage others in Its consumption, whether concelebrants, deacons or EMCs.
RS 107 (cont.) … Furthermore all will remember that once the distribution of Holy Communion during the celebration of Mass has been completed, the prescriptions of the Roman Missal are to be observed, and in particular, whatever may remains of the Blood of Christ must be entirely and immediately consumed by the Priest or by another minister, according to the norms, while the consecrated hosts that are left are to be consumed by the Priest at the altar or carried to the place for the reservation of the Eucharist.
US Norms for Two Kinds 52. When more of the Precious Blood remains than was necessary for Communion, and if not consumed by the bishop or priest celebrant, “the deacon immediately and reverently consumes at the altar all of the Blood of Christ which remains; he may be assisted, if needs dictate, by other deacons and priests.” When there are extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, they may consume what remains of the Precious Blood from their chalice of distribution with permission of the diocesan bishop."
K
katherine2
Guest
Nota Bene:
Which I imagine is the agenda of some.
Well, it is always a possibility, so you are setting it up for the cup to always be withheld from the laity.
Which I imagine is the agenda of some.
D
DaveBj
Guest
I’ve seen Deacon Bill on EWTN at times, and hoped he wasn’t driving afterwards. 
DaveBj
DaveBj
O
otm
Guest
Nota Bene:
No, it is much simpler just to consecrate less. Not offering it under both species simply because it is possible that too much could be consecrated is the “baby with the bath water” solution.
N
Nota_Bene
Guest
You’re wrong.
When it’s difficult to determine how much wine to consecrate. Communion is best servered under one species.
It would be terribly difficult for example to serve Communion under both species at St. Pete’s Basilica, and I’m not so sure it’s cool to deliebrately plan to run short…
O
otm
Guest
Nota Bene:
No, it is not that difficult. You are making a problem where one does not need to exist, and your only solution is to do away with it. Any pastor who has been saying Mass for at least 6 months in a parish should have a handle on how much wine needs to be consecrated and be able to adjust. People are generally capable of reasonably accurate estimations; we do it all the time. I have no idea if St Peter’s makes the Cup available, but if they have, then the percentage of those who receive under both species is going to run fairly well as a percentage of the total number present. It is such a non-problem if someone is paying attention, that the error is more likely due to pre-Mass assumptions that don’t get altered as Mass begins.
- Status