Those in a church that consecrates both species of Communion, Do you receive the Precious Blood? - Page 3

[PatienceAndLove]

not to nitpick, but EM = Eucharistic Ministers = priests and deacons

EMHC = Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion = lay people

the two are NOT interchangable terms since lay people are not ordained, and the Ordinary Eucharistic Ministers must be ordained.

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove 

not to nitpick, but EM = Eucharistic Ministers = priests and deacons

EMHC = Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion = lay people

the two are NOT interchangable terms since lay people are not ordained, and the Ordinary Eucharistic Ministers must be ordained.

Uh, in my parish Eucharistic Ministers = Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.
 

[Bluegoat]

Originally Posted by Trigger 

Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove 

not to nitpick, but EM = Eucharistic Ministers = priests and deacons

EMHC = Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion = lay people

the two are NOT interchangable terms since lay people are not ordained, and the Ordinary Eucharistic Ministers must be ordained.

Uh, in my parish Eucharistic Ministers = Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.
 

It is common to use the terms interchangably, but it isn't correct.

You guys need a Manual of Catholic Abbreviations to keep you all in line.

[PatienceAndLove]

Originally Posted by Bluegoat 

Originally Posted by Trigger 

Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove 

not to nitpick, but EM = Eucharistic Ministers = priests and deacons

EMHC = Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion = lay people

the two are NOT interchangable terms since lay people are not ordained, and the Ordinary Eucharistic Ministers must be ordained.

Uh, in my parish Eucharistic Ministers = Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.
 

It is common to use the terms interchangably, but it isn't correct.

You guys need a Manual of Catholic Abbreviations to keep you all in line.

:-P

[kgreen]

This is my only reason for this post.

Salus animarum prima lex--The salvation of souls is the first law.

This video is will open your eyes to what we have lost. Please take the time to watch it (perhaps with a hanky or two!)

All faithful Catholics should know how we got to where we are today (including the discrepancies and disagreements on this very forum between Catholics who are called to extend loving charity to one another.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR5XT2Vtn6w&feature=&p=F0C3BA5EAF211266&index=0&playnext=1

[Trigger]

I like the music and the laying on of hands.

The clowns, though?  Not so much.  Too scary.

[lilyka]

Originally Posted by CherryBomb 

  Most importantly, most are obviously uncomfortable administering on the tongue, and some outright refuse (and woe to you if you have the audacity to kneel down to our Lord!  ) 

I was curious if there is an official teaching in the Roman Catholic Church about kneeling or how one should approach the priest to receive?

We are not allowed to kneel and we are not even supposed to cross ourselves once we step up to receive  (for fear of hitting it and spilling). We are supposed to approach with our hands crossed over our chest or at our sides and allow the helpers to hold the napkin to our chin (the napkin stretched form the cup to our chin to catch anything that might drip and then wipes our lips...and some people are worried about a communal cup lol ).

[Trigger]

Great article from Fr. Roger Karban: Drink from the cup

 The outward sign [Jesus' disciples] were willing to [carry on the work that was bringing about His death] was their drinking from His cup — the cup that symbolized the unique covenant He had made with Yahweh at His baptism, the agreement He would soon seal with His blood.

Presuming [Fr. John] Meier is correct, every time we receive from the eucharistic cup, we’re experiencing the equivalent of an “adult baptism.” We’re publicly stating our commitment to carry on the work of Jesus.
 

[Trigger]

 From my study book, What Every Catholic Needs to Know About the Eucharist (Michael Kwatera, OSB, Resource Publications, Inc. 2008):

 Our eating and drinking together makes this a meal of unity.

 

... It was the deisre to foster this essential experience of unity that gave rise to the welcome service of laypersons as extraordinary ministers of holy communion.

 

...

 

It is true that Jesus Christ is received whole and entire under the form of bread alone.  But communion from the cup is allowed and encouraged at every Mass in order to highlight the sense of Eucharist as a meal [both eating and drinking] ...

 

Holy communion has a more complete form as a sign when under the forms of both bread and wine.

Edited by Trigger - 1/6/11 at 1:21pm

[PatienceAndLove]

I don't think anyone will argue that it is a more complete sign,  but it is not required.

[Trigger]

Nobody here ever said it is required to receive the Precious Blood in the Catholic Church.  I don't understand why this has been brought up again?

[xekomaya]

Lilyka - Pre-Vatican II/1968, communion was always received kneeling at the rail, on the tongue. If there were altar cloths available, the communicant placed their hands under and lifted it towards themselves similar to the napkin you have - although wiping your lips is not expected.  At a Latin Mass one always receives kneeling (unless the person cant) on the tongue, but at the Novus Ordo Mass, frankly, it is a free-for-all. Most personal forms of piety are accepted - genuflecting, kneeling, standing, receiving on the tongue, receiving in the hand, stepping aside and facing the tabernacle before consuming the host and probably more I'm forgetting. Crossing the arms over the chest is generally the sign for Catholics that they wish only to receive a blessing.

[Trigger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lilyka 

I was curious if there is an official teaching in the Roman Catholic Church about kneeling or how one should approach the priest to receive?

This is a fairly "traditional" source, so hopefully nobody needs to question the info.

http://www.catholic.com/library/liturgy/cag_changes.asp

 “The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm. When receiving Holy Communion, the communicant bows his or her head before the Sacrament as a gesture of reverence and receives the body of the Lord from the minister” (160).

 

Obviously, not all recipients of Eucharist will dsplay such outward reverence, but hopefully it is within their hearts.

Also ... this norm applies when receiving the Host from an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist as well (since not everyone receives directly from a priest).

[Trigger]

Just came across this wonderful reflection in the Lenten "Little Black Book" (Little Books of the Diocese of Saginaw, Inc. c. 2010), regarding The Communion Rite:

The cup has particular meaning.  In Gethsemane, Jesus prayed, "Father, if You are willing, take this cup away from me."  The cup of suffering wasn't taken away.  But by accepting it, Jesus found the path to life.

When I stand before the cup and say "Amen," I'm saying, "Lord, I accept, as You did, whatever sufferings cannot be taken away.  I trust, as You trusted, that God will somehow make this something good.  And I trust that if You are with me, I can do it."

[Bluegoat]

I don't personally see any good reason not to communicate everyone in both species.  As I understand it, not doing so was originally a practical solution in areas where it was very difficult and expensive to obtain wine.

[PatienceAndLove]

"Amen" means "so be it". It was no "special meaning" when one is receiving the Precious Blood.

And it is my understanding that the "little black book" is theologically questionable because of the author.

[Bluegoat]

Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove 

"Amen" means "so be it". It was no "special meaning" when one is receiving the Precious Blood.

And it is my understanding that the "little black book" is theologically questionable because of the author.

I think that was a personal comment on what the individual means when he or she says Amen in that context.

[Trigger]

Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove 

"Amen" means "so be it". It was no "special meaning" when one is receiving the Precious Blood.

And it is my understanding that the "little black book" is theologically questionable because of the author.

Which "author" are you referring to?  The reflections are based on the writings of Bishop Ken Untener - he was a "controversial" bishop due to his "liberal" views on a number of hot topics.  But have you ever actually READ the Little Black, Little White, or Little Blue books?  I'm guessing no, because they are not theologically "unsound"; they also contain wonderful tidbits of trivia/information, and thought-provoking reflections.

I suggest that you actually read the material before making a judgement based on ... well, someone else's narrow-minded judgement.  Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater,and all.
 

Originally Posted by Bluegoat 

I think that was a personal comment on what the individual means when he or she says Amen in that context.

 I've noticed that "doctrinal" Catholics tend to miss the nuances in theological reflection.  When you see faith in strictly black and white terms, IMO you miss a lot.

[PatienceAndLove]

deleted

[Bluegoat]

Originally Posted by Trigger 

 I've noticed that "doctrinal" Catholics tend to miss the nuances in theological reflection.  When you see faith in strictly black and white terms, IMO you miss a lot.

I think P&L understands theological reflection, I think she just misunderstood the context of the comment.  It's not hard with just a tiny bit that's being repeated somewhere else.