Wine without Bread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Treacy17
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Treacy17

Guest
If Jesus’ Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity are present in both the bread and wine, could one just receive the wine without taking the bread?
 
A moot point…The mystery is that after consecration wine is still wine, bread is still wine in the natural sense, but in the supernatural sense after consecration the wine is the precious blood, and the bread is the body of Christ.
 
Yes, one can reccieve the Precious Blood and not the Body of Our Lord.

Some people with celiac disease have to do this
 
I just say “bread” and “wine” because it doesn’t make a lot of sense to say that I’m receiving Jesus’ body, blood, soul, and divinity in Jesus’ blood. Similar to how Paul says, “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be answerable for the body and blood of the Lord”
 
Last edited:
I guess to the legalist that might be so, but the Church also speaks loudly on “accident”.
 
Last edited:
The Church does not…the natural properties remain; although the supernatural change is non-negotiable .
 
and they remain…its akin to the fact that Jesus can be both divine and human…you surely believe that, no?
 
Hereiam said:
A moot point…The mystery is that after consecration wine is still wine, bread is still wine in the natural sense, but in the supernatural sense after consecration the wine is the precious blood, and the bread is the body of Christ.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say it is a moot point. Their substance - what they actually are - has been changed, even if their accident - how we perceive them - remains the same. (This, of course, doesn’t account for the occasional miracle in which the accident is changed as well.) By recognizing that it is literally Jesus’ body and literally Jesus’ blood, we are recognizing that they have been, in actuality, changed into something other than bread and wine.

Perhaps the terminology could have been a bit looser in times past, but given the rise of various heresies, including those still taught by different Protestant groups, it is best to reflect in our language that the bread and wine are no longer substantively present, only Jesus’ body and blood are.
 
I have definitely received only the chalice, in the past. I was having some throat difficulties and some difficulty swallowing, particularly of dry substances.
 
If one has celiac disease and there are no gluten free hosts I assume receiving only the blood would be acceptable?
 
Yes. It’s often done anyway, because the gluten-free hosts aren’t actually completely free of gluten, just low-gluten.
 
There are thousands of other threads about this EXACT subject. Seems like we get a new one every week.
 
Even the Vatican documents refer to the consecrated bread and wine. We don’t need to be holier than thou with folks here.
 
You’re correct but I just noticed how quickly this thread got out of hand
 
Friend,

The accidents remain but not any natural properties. The accidents are only our perceptions the make the Eucharist feel like bread and wine; however, the substance of bread and wine are annihilated and cease to exist. The Eucharist is only His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity under both appearances or species.

Pax Tecum

Philip
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top