Why do so few Catholics drink the Precious Blood at mass?

[Catholic_Dude]

Here is a topic I havent seen here yet.
It is about all those people who receive the Body of Christ, but not the Blood of Christ.

I will admit, when I first came in heart and soul I didnt drink out of the Cup for “fear” of “germs”. But as I thought about it and read the Bible and stuff I came to the conclusion how much I was missing and how Jesus said to drink his Blood as well as eat.
The fear of germs was eclipsed by how powerful Communion really was. I realized how little faith I had by worrying about germs instead of concentrating on our Lord.

Also I always hear that line “If you take it under one kind it counts as both”. Whats the point? If a person has a reaction to wine then God wont hold it aginst them, but to outright deny the Cup doesnt sound right. I see way too many people denying the Cup, young and old. This is never talked about.

Any comments? Why do you or dont you drink the Precious Blood?

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Backwash.

“Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts…”
—CCC #1377

 

[Nota_Bene]

Catholic Dude:

Here is a topic I havent seen here yet.
It is about all those people who receive the Body of Christ, but not the Blood of Christ.

I will admit, when I first came in heart and soul I didnt drink out of the Cup for “fear” of “germs”. But as I thought about it and read the Bible and stuff I came to the conclusion how much I was missing and how Jesus said to drink his Blood as well as eat.
The fear of germs was eclipsed by how powerful Communion really was. I realized how little faith I had by worrying about germs instead of concentrating on our Lord.

Also I always hear that line “If you take it under one kind it counts as both”. Whats the point? If a person has a reaction to wine then God wont hold it aginst them, but to outright deny the Cup doesnt sound right. I see way too many people denying the Cup, young and old. This is never talked about.

Any comments? Why do you or dont you drink the Precious Blood?

Dr. Bombay hits the nail squarely on the head…

I’ll add that ~85-90% of those who receive Holy Communion at my parish receive under both species.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Dr. Bombay:

Backwash.

“Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts…”
—CCC #1377

Also, more likely to spill, drop, dribble, etc. The Precious Body is less prone to accidents by clumsy receivers.

Scott

 

[Lucania]

In the Church I belong, only the Priest drinks the Precious Blood. In another Parish that I go to on occasion (it’s closer) they offer it to all. I don’t partake , mostly out of habit but since you asked, I will be honest and say that I don’t drink after anyone period. Like right now I have the beginnings of a cold, sniffles and such. While I would not partake under those circumstances I cannot be sure that others use the same caution. I think it goes back to my childhood! I can hear my Dear Mother say, “Don’t share your drink or drink after ANYONE-you’ll get GERMS! !”

 

[Kielbasi]

But as I thought about it and read the Bible and stuff I came to the conclusion how much I was missing and how Jesus said to drink his Blood as well as eat.

That’s an incorrect viewpoint, if you’ll take a gander at the catechism and the canons of the Trent council which addressed this protestant error.

The reason why most Catholics don’t isn’t just “fear of germs” but fear of sacrilege. Older and some not-so-old Catholics were never really trained to receive in both species, particularly out of an open chalice while standing.

 

[Nota_Bene]

Lucania:

In the Church I belong, only the Priest drinks the Precious Blood. In another Parish that I go to on occasion (it’s closer) they offer it to all. I don’t partake , mostly out of habit but since you asked, I will be honest and say that I don’t drink after anyone period. Like right now I have the beginnings of a cold, sniffles and such. While I would not partake under those circumstances I cannot be sure that others use the same caution. I think it goes back to my childhood! I can hear my Dear Mother say, “Don’t share your drink or drink after ANYONE-you’ll get GERMS! !”

That’s just plain silly. And paranoid.

 

[Nota_Bene]

Kielbasi:

That’s an incorrect viewpoint, if you’ll take a gander at the catechism and the canons of the Trent council which addressed this protestant error.

The reason why most Catholics don’t isn’t just “fear of germs” but fear of sacrilege. Older and some not-so-old Catholics were never really trained to receive in both species, particularly out of an open chalice while standing.

How much “training” does it take?

 

[Timidity]

Catholic Dude:

It is about all those people who receive the Body of Christ, but not the Blood of Christ.

It is absolutely impossible to partake of one without the other. Yes, I know what you meant, and I wish you would just say that instead of spreading old heresies.

I hope that didn’t come off as particularly short tempered. My most humble apologies if it did.

 

[kmktexas]

Why do you or dont you drink the Precious Blood?

I receive both the Body and Precious Blood of Christ at Mass. However, I usually receive them under only one species - the Host.

Why? Well, I used to receive under both species when offered. Then I started teaching the First Communion class at CCE. The idea that both Body and Blood are present in each species is harder for a seven year old to grasp than transubstantiation itself. I realized that I had, probably subconciously, started thinking of the two species as the Body (host) and the Blood (wine) as if they were seperate. So I started receiving under just the one species as a personal reminder.

For the last several months, I have been living the expat life in South America. Offering both species at Communion is not common here. In fact, I have never seen it done.

Now one Church I attend for daily Mass sometimes back in Texas offers Communion by intinction. That is a custom that I really like. Very reverent and visually symbolic.

 

[kmknapp]

Couldn’t tell it was supposed to be few from my parishes!

It’s between 85-90% most of the time, reducing to 60% or so at the height of sniffle season. Considered bad form to recieve from the cup (or the host placed on the tongue) when one might have something communicable …

karen marie

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I see I got some people offended. Aint trying to start something.

The masses I have been to at different places there is 50% partaking pf the Blood.

I see that so many people cling to the Host-only as their source of both, but I fail to see why the Cup should be thrown out. Whats the reason for the Cup? I was at St Patricks in NYC a few years back and they didnt even offer the Cup from what I could see, so if you arent offered it than its no big deal.

I have some questions for some who posted

Scott:

Also, more likely to spill, drop, dribble, etc. The Precious Body is less prone to accidents by clumsy receivers.

I dont know what to say. Then the Cup shouldnt be offered if the people are too clumsy.

Kielbasi

That’s an incorrect viewpoint, if you’ll take a gander at the catechism and the canons of the Trent council which addressed this protestant error.

The reason why most Catholics don’t isn’t just “fear of germs” but fear of sacrilege. Older and some not-so-old Catholics were never really trained to receive in both species, particularly out of an open chalice while standing.

Could you give me something to read that Trent or the CCC talks about, Im open, Im seeking the answers here. Also you say “isnt just”, well so I was onto something in my original post. About the age thing, how many truly believe that Christ is really present? An open Chalice? I have been to Masses where the Priest gives out communion by intinction and I loved that, but hardly anyplace I have seen does that. The bottom line for me is that there is Bread and Wine, two separate things, one united Christ in both. If I was looking to follow a Protestant heresy I would be complaining that I couldnt have grapejuice instead in my own little dixie cup and that minors shouldnt be drinking alcohol.

Timidity

It is absolutely impossible to partake of one without the other. Yes, I know what you meant, and I wish you would just say that instead of spreading old heresies.

You know what I meant? I dont know what you mean, do you agree with taking both? Did I say something bad? To the best of my knowledge I am not and would not intentionally say anything to attack the Church, I have to hidden agenda.

Kmtexas:

I receive both the Body and Precious Blood of Christ at Mass. However, I usually receive them under only one species - the Host.

Why? Well, I used to receive under both species when offered. Then I started teaching the First Communion class at CCE. The idea that both Body and Blood are present in each species is harder for a seven year old to grasp than transubstantiation itself. I realized that I had, probably subconciously, started thinking of the two species as the Body (host) and the Blood (wine) as if they were seperate. So I started receiving under just the one species as a personal reminder.

This is the post that prompted my reply. This isnt an attack, but your teaching kids what? Either the priest is drinking out of a Cup at the altar AND eating a Host or hes just eating a Host.
I am uneasy about teaching a kid that the Priest just said “Then He took the Cup…and said drink this this is my Blood…”, but go ahead and just eat the bread. Especially for a kids First Communion, they must take both! As for grasping transubstantiation, thats a difficult concept for anyone to truly grasp. If anything borders on heresy, which I am not referring to you as doing, it would be the old fashion Protestant argument that kids shouldnt be Baptized or receive Communion until they are “mature” enough. Us Catholics dont believe that Protestant trash. Again this isnt an attack on you, you were the only one who wrote more than 3 lines and I applaud that.

Heres a good one: Why dont more people only recieve the Blood instead of the Host if both contain the fullness of Christ?

At the end of the day taking both seem ideal to me. I also said in my first post that at first I didnt because I was scared of germs, but I realized that that was a flawed understanding of what I was partaking in.

 

[kmktexas]

Kmtexas:

Quote:

I receive both the Body and Precious Blood of Christ at Mass. However, I usually receive them under only one species - the Host.

Why? Well, I used to receive under both species when offered. Then I started teaching the First Communion class at CCE. The idea that both Body and Blood are present in each species is harder for a seven year old to grasp than transubstantiation itself. I realized that I had, probably subconciously, started thinking of the two species as the Body (host) and the Blood (wine) as if they were seperate. So I started receiving under just the one species as a personal reminder.

This is the post that prompted my reply. This isnt an attack, but your teaching kids what? We teach the children that Christ is present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in both species. Either the priest is drinking out of a Cup at the altar AND eating a Host or hes just eating a Host. **In order for Mass to be valid, the priest must commune under both species.**I am uneasy about teaching a kid that the Priest just said “Then He took the Cup…and said drink this this is my Blood…”, but go ahead and just eat the bread. **I don’t know why you would be uneasy. We are a parish that is about 50% Hispanic. The families travel frequently to Mexico where Communion is usually offered only under one species and Communion in the hand is very rare (I don’t think they have the indult there). We try to give them teaching that covers the universal Church, not just our local parish. We explain where there are choices such as receiving in the hand or on the tounge and receiving under one or both species. But we also explain that these choices are not available everywhere. ** Especially for a kids First Communion, they must take both! Must?? We tell the kids they can receive from the cup if they wish but it isn’t required. In many parishes, the First Communion Mass is so large that they only offer the host. This is what they did and the reason given at my neice’s FHC. I don’t think kids were even offered the cup at First Communion until about 20 years ago. As for grasping transubstantiation, thats a difficult concept for anyone to truly grasp. If anything borders on heresy, which I am not referring to you as doing, it would be the old fashion Protestant argument that kids shouldnt be Baptized or receive Communion until they are “mature” enough. Us Catholics dont believe that Protestant trash. Again this isnt an attack on you, you were the only one who wrote more than 3 lines and I applaud that. No, we don’t believe the Protestant “trash” about the Sacraments of initiation. We live in the Bible belt and many kids are assailed about their faith from a very young age here. We work very hard to give them knowledge that they can use to explain the Sacraments even on an elementary level.

CD, please understand that my choice to receive for the time being under just one species is a personal reminder to myself, not a lesson for the kids in my class.

 

[Michael_s_Sword]

I have never belonged to a parish that offered the Precious Blood on a regular basis. Even in visiting parishes while traveling I can’t remember it being offered. I am pleasantly surprised that so many of you are able to receive regularly.

 

[tee_eff_em]

Catholic Dude:

Heres a good one: Why dont more people only recieve the Blood instead of the Host if both contain the fullness of Christ?

Because it is their prerogative to receive under one species, and when they do choose to receive only a single species, it is normative to receive the species of bread. The GIRM states:

1. When Communion is distributed under both kinds,
   …
   Any of the faithful who wish to receive Holy Communion under the species of bread alone should be granted their wish.

I find no similar grant should anyone wish to receive under the species of wine alone. (Though with the recent attention to those who suffer Celiac Sprue disease, I also know of no one being refused the species of wine alone)

tee
(who is, frankly, shocked that anyone is keeping count of how their brethren are approaching the sacrament)

 

[katherine2]

Scott Waddell:

Also, more likely to spill, drop, dribble, etc. The Precious Body is less prone to accidents by clumsy receivers.

Scott

I’m proud to day in my parish, the baffoon element is small to non-existing.

On the other hand I remember in a chapel a few of us receving only from the Chalice because of practical reasons

 

[st_felicity]

Dr. Bombay:

Backwash.

“Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts…”
—CCC #1377

Sit up front and be FIRST! (or almost first–the EME or priest is first)

 

[st_felicity]

kmktexas:

…Mass sometimes back in Texas offers Communion by intinction. That is a custom that I really like. Very reverent and visually symbolic.

I thought that was supposed to be done only by the priest… I’ll have to check my GIRM…

I think the dribble element might be really big if that was wide spread.

 

[kmktexas]

Yes, the intinction must be done by the priest or deacon (I think an EMHC can do it too) but anyone can receive this way. You cannot self-intinct - take the Host and dip it yourself into the cup. A priest can distribute Communion this way.

At the parish where I go for Mass that I was describing above, the Priest uses an intinction set. It is a plate for the Hosts with a cup in the middle. The plate itself serves as a paten, although the norms indicate that a paten can be held by a server.

Here is a pic:

religious-supplies.com/browseproducts/Intinction-Set-All-Gold-Plated.HTML

 

[chevalier]

Consecration doesn’t remove the possibility of contracting disease. It’s enough to have one person with a disease transefarable through saliva and you have a problem.

I only drink after family or friends and when I know they aren’t ill.

The minister could dip the Host in the cup before administering it to the faithful and I have received like this once or twice, but it hasn’t happened in any church I’ve attented for several years.