Host only?

#21

FYI, Intinction is the normative way of receiving Holy Communion in our parish.

Was it disallowed past 2006, if so, that really was contrary to Vatican instructions.

0 Likes

#22

At my old parish, it was host only, as well. It was explained to us that it is far more likely tfor someone to spill the Precious Blood and not be able to completely clean it up, especially if the church has carpet.

0 Likes

#23

I asked the father. He gave me a detailed answer.

He told me sometimes they give the Precious Blood too but it is more common to give Host only and their main concern was to protect Precious Blood from spilling. He told me that he felt sorry for I did not get Precious Blood in Baptism not because it is not complete but because I felt bad about it.

He asked my ideas about:
Getting Precious Blood too (I told him if it is possible intinction)
Getting it on knees or as standing (I prefer on knees, never done it though)
Getting it to hands or mouth… (I never touched it myself since I feel I’m unworthy to touch it with my hands, most people take it with hands, I am not judging I just do not feel like it…)

I spoke with him and we will see if they will change anything.

I feel really bad for calling them “lazy” as if it is not important… Devil has his own ways I guess.

0 Likes

#24

It was before 2006…around 1999 I think.
But…that Bishop is long gone to his reward, and the current Bishop has not reinstated it. I don’t think they have Intinction anywhere in our Diocese.
Peace

0 Likes

#25

=AugustinusD;11613364]Hello,

I have two parishes close to me. One ofthem şs Armenian Rite. Priest over there distribute Eucharist in both forms by dipping the host in wine.

The Church where I go all the time and baptised is giving host only (Roman Rite).

My problem is Armenian Catholics are like 3-4 times more crowded then us and get to receive in both forms and we receive only hosy with 10-20 people…

It makes me sad because they did not offered me wine even in my First Communion.

I know in CCC it says we recieve full grace from host or blood only but it also says it is more complete when received on both forms.

Why they do not dip host in wine in my church? It is only 10-20 people. Maybe priests are a bit lazy? Should I ask them if they can do it?

No :slight_smile: dear friend.

The CC has always taught that the ENTIRE Christ is present in each species separately.
Therefore the entire Christ is contained in the sacred Host.

The addition of both does not by itself to Christ completeness, nor would it be necessarily
be a source of additional grace if received under one form, in the State of Grace and reverently."

God Bless you,
Patrick

0 Likes

#26

Augustinus,

Even though in my head I know that Christ is fully present in the Host alone, I miss the inclusion of wine when it is not offered. When I was a child in Catholic school, I often wondered why we didn’t receive both. It’s practically the only thing I like about the new Mass.

I have never received in the hand either. It just doesn’t feel right. The Host is majestic; to receive in the hand seems to lessen the majesty.

God bless you,
Lainie

0 Likes

#27

=Lainie Rullo;11671824]Augustinus,

Even though in my head I know that Christ is fully present in the Host alone, I miss the inclusion of wine when it is not offered. When I was a child in Catholic school, I often wondered why we didn’t receive both. It’s practically the only thing I like about the new Mass.

I have never received in the hand either. It just doesn’t feel right. The Host is majestic; to receive in the hand seems to lessen the majesty.

God bless you,
Lainie

My friend; are you an INFORMED Catholic? Do you really understand the Mass?

God Bless you,
Patrick

0 Likes

#28

What do you think is more important? Displaying knowledge or shutting out a person because he has feelings that are different from your own?

He is working with his priest, there is nothing wrong with letting him know that I understand how he feels. What I said regarding my feelings about receiving the Wine is the absolute truth. I do like receiving Christ under both species.

The parts of the Cathechism quoted by other posters don’t say that those Catholics who prefer to receive both the Bread and the Wine are misinformed or breaking any rules.

I understand and now Augustinus understands that we are receiving the full sacrament even when Wine is not offered. There’s nothing to preclude our wishing that wine was offered at every Mass.

0 Likes

#29

I would question whether you are an informed Catholic as well. You refer to the Most Holy Body and Blood of our Lord as mere “bread and wine”. This signals a misunderstanding of Who the Eucharist is. We do not take bread and wine in Holy Communion. They are transubstantiated by the consecration of the priest. They are no longer bread and wine when they reach our mouths.

0 Likes

#30

I had thought that most of us had a basic understanding of the Eucharist. I will not make that mistake again.

Thank you for your help.

0 Likes

#31

Although no one can fault your for your piety in regard to the host, but hosts as we know them were not used until around the middle of the 11th century. Prior to that, the Church used various forms of liturgical breads, that were literally, breads, and handled as such. The Apostles certainly received with their hands, as did Christians for centuries. The hosts became a way to prevent abuse and all the other things that people of the day were fearful about. (crumbs…reserving the Eucharist, etc.). The topic of Communion bread is a fascinating topic to read about.

0 Likes

#32

Thank you, pianistclare, you’ve certainly made it fascinating.

0 Likes

#33

=Lainie Rullo;11673250]What do you think is more important? Displaying knowledge or shutting out a person because he has feelings that are different from your own?

My choice? Neither:)
But truth has to be truth. Agreed? My position SEEMS to me to be objective, while yours borders in this instance on a subjective position.

[quote]He is working with his priest, there is nothing wrong with letting him know that I understand how he feels. What I said regarding my feelings about receiving the Wine is the absolute truth. I do like receiving Christ under both species

And there is NOTHING wrong in doing so. But I thought the question was one of necessity; not preference:rolleyes:.

The parts of the Cathechism quoted by other posters don’t say that those Catholics who prefer to receive both the Bread and the Wine are misinformed or breaking any rules.

Because they are NOT on either case.

I understand and now Augustinus understands that we are receiving the full sacrament even when Wine is not offered. There’s nothing to preclude our wishing that wine was offered at every Mass.

That is a position held by many:)

God Bless you,
Patrick
[/quote]

0 Likes

closed #34
0 Likes

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.