Why is it not necessary to eat the bread and drink the cup?

[danzibr]

John 6:54 seems to indicate you need to do both.

“Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”

 

[Verbum]

Hi Dan,

Jesus is whole and alive in both species. If he was not whole in each species, he would be dead. Therefore, no matter which species you receive, you are eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

The use of both species in the mass, symbolizes the separation of his body and his blood, and therefore his sacrilficial death.

VErbum

 

[danzibr]

Hi Dan,

Jesus is whole and alive in both species. If he was not whole in each species, he would be dead. Therefore, no matter which species you receive, you are eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

The use of both species in the mass, symbolizes the separation of his body and his blood, and therefore his sacrilficial death.

VErbum

Ahh interesting. I hadn’t thought of that. Now my pastor saying Jesus is fully present in both makes sense. Thanks!

 

[Rosinante]

Just to elaborate on Verbum’s post:

From the Catechism:

1373 “Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised from the dead, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us,” is present in many ways to his Church:195 in his word, in his Church’s prayer,*** "where two or three are gathered in my name,"196 in the poor, the sick, and the imprisoned,197 in the sacraments of which he is the author, in the sacrifice of the Mass, and in the person of the minister. But “he is present . . . most especially in the Eucharistic species.”***198

1374 ***The mode of Christ’s presence under the Eucharistic species is unique. It raises the Eucharist above all the sacraments as "the perfection of the spiritual life and the end to which all the sacraments tend."199 In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ ***and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained."200 "This presence is called ‘real’ - by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be ‘real’ too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present."201

1375 It is by the conversion of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood that Christ becomes present in this sacrament. the Church Fathers strongly affirmed the faith of the Church in the efficacy of the Word of Christ and of the action of the Holy Spirit to bring about this conversion. Thus ***St. John Chrysostom declares:

It is not man that causes the things offered to become the Body and Blood of Christ, but he who was crucified for us, Christ himself. the priest, in the role of Christ, pronounces these words, but their power and grace are God’s***. This is my body, he says. This word transforms the things offered.202

and St. Ambrose says about this conversion:

Be convinced that this is not what nature has formed, but what the blessing has consecrated. the power of the blessing prevails over that of nature, because by the blessing nature itself is changed… Could not Christ’s word, which can make from nothing what did not exist, change existing things into what they were not before? It is no less a feat to give things their original nature than to change their nature.203

1376 The Council of Trent summarizes the Catholic faith by declaring: ***“Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation.”***204

1377 The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.205

1378 Worship of the Eucharist. In the liturgy of the Mass we express our faith in the real presence of Christ under the species of bread and wine by, among other ways, genuflecting or bowing deeply as a sign of adoration of the Lord. "The Catholic Church has always offered and still offers to the sacrament of the Eucharist the cult of adoration, not only during Mass, but also outside of it, reserving the consecrated hosts with the utmost care, exposing them to the solemn veneration of the faithful, and carrying them in procession."206

 

[mfrances]

Doctrine of Concomitance: Christ’s body can not be separated from his blood which means that Christ’s full presence is in each element fully.

 

[DaveBj]

I am going to split a hair here – the Church teaches that both flesh and blood are present in either species, so that’s a given, but eating and drinking are two different actions. If I receive only the host, I am receiving both the body and blood, but I am only eating them; I am not drinking.

 

[Actaeon]

Doctrine of Concomitance: Christ’s body can not be separated from his blood which means that Christ’s full presence is in each element fully.

And there’s more to add to this:

The reason that blood was drained from a sacrifice in passover (in judaism) is because they believed that only when blood was fully drained from the body was a sacrifice truly dead (and therefore truly sacrificed).

HOWEVER, Christ as the final Paschal sacrifice died and then rose again. In other words, He is a living sacrifice. That is why there is an oft missed portion of the mass where the priest breaks off a small piece of the Eucharistic Host and drops it into the wine… the Body and the Blood are rejoined together in the sacrament.

Because of this fact (that Christ is a living sacrifice), we recognize that the Body and Blood of Christ are NOT separate entities and cannot, in fact, be separate since Christ lives. As a result, when we take the Eucharist ONLY in the form of the Host, we ALSO receive the Blood of Christ (in fact, we receive Christ in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity)

 

[guanophore]

John 6:54 seems to indicate you need to do both.

“Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”

The title of this thread is misleading. Once the bread and the wine are consecrated, it is no longer an issue of “eat the bread”. The elements have become the Body and Blood.

 

[Megan7]

John 6:54 seems to indicate you need to do both.

“Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”

 

[Holly3278]

As others have said, Christ is present whole and entire in both the species of bread and the species of wine. That said, I do usually receive both species when I go to Mass.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

In the history of the world has there ever been a Mass where there was only enough bread for the priest to receive Christ’s Body and enough wine for the whole congregation to receive Christ’s Blood and the whole congregation received Christ’s Blood and NOT His Body?

What percentage of people who receive the Eucharist as Christ’s Body and not His Blood do so because they are afraid of germs in the common cup?

I guess what I’m getting at is that the real reason that many people take only Christ’s Body doesn’t have anything to do with Concomitance but has everything to do with other reasons.

I wonder sometimes how many people would be upset if the only way they could receive communion was by taking the precious Blood in the common cup?

I also wonder if sometimes the real reason that communion isn’t offered as both kinds is because of the cost of wine.

I have no problem with receiving only Christ’s Body which of course includes His Blood but whenever I’m given a choice I take both kinds.

 

[DaveBj]

snip

I have no problem with receiving only Christ’s Body which of course includes His Blood but whenever I’m given a choice I take both kinds.

^This. Unless I think I might be contagious; then I will skip the cup.

 

[Paul_theApostle]

What about the instructions of Christ and the Priest when they say

"This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.
“And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’”

Are not the instructions of Christ to “Do this” ? and “Drink of it all of you”?

So how can we be following Christs instructions if the Priest doesnt offer any wine for the people to drink?

 

[mileojule]

Therefore, no matter which species you receive, you are eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

 

[DaveBj]

Therefore, no matter which species you receive, you are eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

Correction: no matter what species one receives, one is receiving both the flesh and the blood. However, eating and drinking are two completely different actions.

 

[guanophore]

What about the instructions of Christ and the Priest when they say

"This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.
“And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’”

Are not the instructions of Christ to “Do this” ? and “Drink of it all of you”?

So how can we be following Christs instructions if the Priest doesnt offer any wine for the people to drink?

Receiving under both is the fullest sign, but either is valid.

Besides, no priest “offers any wine” , because once the bread and the wine are consecrated, they become the Body and Blood of Christ. It may do your spiritual growth much more benefit to meditate on this, than become preoccupied by whether the cup is offered.