Wine without Bread


#1

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?


#2

One could, theoretically, do so, by receiving the precious blood alone.

One could not by receiving ’the wine’ alone. Wine is wine. Blood is blood.

Be clearer on how you refer to the body and blood of Our Lord in future.


#3

one is both and both are one


#4

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.


#5

It’s called the precious blood. It is the precious blood. It should be referred to as such.


#6

Yes, one can reccieve the Precious Blood and not the Body of Our Lord.

Some people with celiac disease have to do this


#7

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”


#8

I guess to the legalist that might be so, but the Church also speaks loudly on “accident”.


#9

You mean the accidents of bread and wine remain. :wink: The Church teaches that after the consecration, the bread and wine are in fact no longer present at all.


#11

The Church does not…the natural properties remain; although the supernatural change is non-negotiable .


#12

Oh, the ‘legalist!’ How rigid and legalistic I am being by using the correct terms for the transubstantiated species.


#13

Well this thread got out of topic quickly


#14

And these are called accidents.

We must be careful to distinguish between transubstantiation and the heretical idea of consubstantiation.


#15

and they remain…its akin to the fact that Jesus can be both divine and human…you surely believe that, no?


#16

But the bread and wine, as bread and wine substantially, do not remain. We cannot promote the heretical notion of consubstantiation.


#17

I do not apologise for calling a spade a spade.

Or, more importantly, the precious blood the precious blood.

We’re Catholics. We believe in transubstantiation.


#18

Yes, Our Lord’s entire Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity is present under both species, completely. The traditional practice of only allowing the laity to receive under one species in the Latin Rite Mass was meant, at least in part, to disprove those heretics who argued that Our Lord is not completely present in each species. However, the meaning behind having a twofold Consecration is indeed profound. The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice on the Cross, the continuation of it in a non-bloody manner. Now, since Christ has risen from the dead and ascended into heaven, He possesses a glorified Body and can die no more. However, the separation of the Body and Blood symbolically present with the twofold Consecration portrays death in a very visual manner; when a person’s body and blood are separate, he dies. All of this symbolic meaning is present without prejudice to the fact that the Church teaches that the Eucharist itself is not simply a symbol, but that Christ is actually present.


#20

Yes. Highly recommended for those with acute celiac disease.


#21

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.


#22

I have definitely received only the chalice, in the past. I was having some throat difficulties and some difficulty swallowing, particularly of dry substances.


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.