Dear Sister, I have posted Catholic teaching on this thread that explains that the consecrated wine in the cup and the consecrated bread both contain the same Body ,Blood ,Soul and Divinity of Christ and partaking in just the consecrated bread or cup are the same.
Both are the Whole Resurrected Christ,The Whole Crucified Christ And Christ Incarnate, Christ who shed His Blood for us. At the point of Consecration God allows us to participate in the ONE NOW with God that is all one event of Christ Incarnate,Christ Crucified, Christ Resurrected.
"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."-Heb 13:8
Perhaps this might help you understand?
I wish you a Blessed Evening
1 Corinthians 11:23-26 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
For some reason, Catholics seem to think that our not accepting their teaching is due to lack of understanding. That is not the case. We understand that the Catholic church teaches that the blood is contained in the body.
We think it's wrong. For one thing, if the blood were not shed, if the blood were still in the body, Jesus would still be alive and there would be no forgiveness of sins.
The blood was shed. It ran out of his body.
We also understand the implications of removing the participation of the cup in the communion service by the communicants. It takes the observance of the blood sacrifice and removes it from being in front of them as it ought.
And it's just downright disobedient to the command and instruction of Jesus Himself.
He told them to drink. Nobody, not the *Church*, not a pope, not a magisterium, has the right or privilege to change what Jesus taught.
we don't not accept the Catholic church explanation because we don't understand it but rather because we DO understand what it is teaching and recognize it as wrong.
Again, this is not a case of me not understanding the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist, nor the reasons for including the cup, then excluding the cup then including it again in some places. I realize that Catholics are expected to believe what they are told to believe and questioning the reason is frowned upon. One more time, the reason this came up IN THIS CONTEXT is simply to draw a distinction between what Jesus says to do in remembrance of Him and what gets done by an organization that claims to BE His one, true church. The irony being that one of the major components of the New Covenant - the blood of Christ - is missing in the observance that the faithful receive. No matter the reasons given for why it might have been changed nor the rationalizations for how it really is all the same anyway with just the bread, the startling truth is the blood is what makes atonement for the soul, makes propitiation for sin, and it has been taken out of the "sacrament" for a long time. We tied that in with how it seems Catholics don't really grasp the critical place of the blood in the satisfactory payment for sins and, instead, somehow view their actions as having to add to it to "expiate" their sins in order to be saved.
If it's all the same really, why then was the cup added back after hundreds of years? If "partaking in just the consecrated bread or cup are the same", what changed the magesterium's mind after VII that now includes the cup if the congregant wants it?