Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Petrosius

I applaud Vatican II for moving the Church towards reception of both kinds. This is how it was done in the early Church and in every other Church today.

The Scriptures says: “After supper He took the cup, and when He gave thanks He held it up in front of them and said ‘Whatch me as a drink from this...as often as you see Me drink this, watch in remembrance of Me.”

Oh wait, that’s not what Christ said. He said “Drink this all of you.”


19 posted on 09/23/2011 3:12:27 AM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: bobjam

I appreciate receiving communion under both species. Interesting thing at our church is that about 1/2 of the communicants just receive the host. (A friend of mine says she does that because she is concerned about germs from the cup.) My, perhaps judgemental, take on it is that the Blood of Christ gets chosen by those who are a bit more devout, generally, and are taking Communion more seriously than those who take the Host and then saunter away without their hands folded.

Random comment: if you like people watching, check out the communion line, as the people range from holy to clueless.


20 posted on 09/23/2011 7:20:34 AM PDT by married21 (As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: bobjam
I applaud Vatican II for moving the Church towards reception of both kinds.

It must be pointed out that Vatican II did not call for Communion under both species at all Masses but only at special occasions:

The dogmatic principles which were laid down by the Council of Trent remaining intact, communion under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See, as, for instance, to the newly ordained in the Mass of their sacred ordination, to the newly professed in the Mass of their religious profession, and to the newly baptized in the Mass which follows their baptism.
Sacrosanctum Concilium, no. 55.
There is no theological objections, per se, against Communion under both species but there are serious practical problems, especially at large Masses, that cannot be lightly dismissed. Additionally, there has grown a school of thought requiring Communion under both species that has serious theological problems which I have pointed out above. The emphasis on the manner of reception rather than on the WHO of reception weakens our faith in the reality of the Eucharist. The entirety of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is present under the smallest particle of either species. The insistence on Communion under both species as the only valid way to receive attacks this truth.

Many of the practical problems with Communion under both species could be resolved if we were to seriously consider the use of intinction. Many, however, object because:

1) it differs from the manner in which the priest receives,

2) it precludes Communion in the hand, and

3) it goes contrary to what is an overemphasis on the act of drinking which clouds the reality of the person who is received, Jesus Christ.

21 posted on 09/23/2011 8:24:16 AM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson