From Father Nate - Reception of the Blood of Christ at Mass

Dear Friends in Christ, 

In recent months, Cardinal Cupich has once again allowed, at the discretion of the pastor, for the reception of the Blood of Christ at Mass, but prior to doing this and being in this time of the Eucharistic Revival, Fr. Simon asked that a few questions be addressed that might arise concerning this. 

We find reception of the blood of Christ to have always been a part of the Mass. The Lord Jesus himself gave the command to eat his body and drink his blood. We find in a description given by St. Justin to the Emperor Antoninus (138-61) that reception of the body and blood was a part of the Eucharistic liturgy. Throughout history though, we find at times for various reasons including hygiene or the spread of disease, reception of the chalice was suspended. By the Middle Ages it became common practice to withhold reception of the chalice, reserving it specifically to the priest celebrating the liturgy.

The Catholic Church teaches and has consistently taught that the whole Christ is present in either species and so one receives the whole Christ in either form. It wasn’t that one received more and one received less. Our Lord is present, body, blood, soul and divinity, under the appearance of bread and /or the appearance of wine, which we as Catholics call the doctrine of concomitance.

The Second Vatican Council reaffirmed the doctrine of concomitance while permitting communion under both species. Shortly after the council, the Church went even further in the General Instruction to the Roman Missal (GIRM) encouraging reception of communion under both species, because “…the sign of the Eucharistic banquet is more clearly evident and a clearer expression is given to the divine will by which the new and eternal Covenant is ratified in the Blood of the Lord…”

Some Clarifications:

1. In the practice of receiving Holy Communion under both forms, is it necessary to receive both? And by not receiving both am I doing something wrong or receiving less?
  2. What about germs?

While we do believe the Eucharist is the blood of Christ, the accidents or properties of wine remain. The Eucharist still has the appearance of bread. The Eucharist still has the appearance of wine. Hence, the anti-microbial properties of alcohol remain. Still, out of Christian Charity, the request is that even if you desire to receive the blood of Christ, if one is not feeling well that they refrain from reception of Holy Communion from the chalice.

3. What about intinction? (the dipping of the host into the precious Blood) 

Intinction is not permitted for a number of reasons. 

The first would be the care that we wish to give the Holy Eucharist. The precious blood might drip on the carpet or onto the hand of the communicant. There is a beautiful reflection offered from a 4th Century work known as the Jerusalem Catechesis which speaks of this care owed to the Lord. It instructs, “be watchful that nothing is lost. If you WERE to lose part of it, it would be like losing one of your own members. If someone were to give you some flakes of gold, would you not guard them carefully to see to it that you did not lose any, or suffer a loss? Should you not watch more carefully over an object more valuable than gold or precious stones lest you lose a crumb of it?” You and I know that the smallest particle of the host, and the smallest drop of the precious blood is Jesus, part of the reason why the priests, after Holy Communion take the time to purify their chalice while the faithful patiently wait and hopefully make their prayers of thanksgiving. We humbly ask that, if you choose to receive from the chalice, please do not intinct.

The second reason would be hygiene. When someone intincts, they put their hand into the cup from which others will drink.

4. Why does the priest sometimes receive by intinction?

First, the priest is required to receive under both species. He has no option.

The priest must communicate himself, and self-communication and intinction is only permitted for the priest celebrant and con-celebrants, if there are any. The reason for this is that the Eucharist is a gift-given and not a possession taken. Robert Cabié argues in his work the “Church at Prayer,” in a sense the priests “are one with the altar.” The priest has been set aside for this purpose, not as an honor or privilege but as a service. The church attaches great significance and importance to human mediation as an integral part of the sacramental sign, in other words, one human being giving the Eucharist to another. This is the reason that the Office of Divine Worship of the Archdiocese asked that, as the reception of the chalice is reinstated, the reminder be given that intinction is not allowed. “We receive Christ, we do not take him on our own.”

Beginning next weekend, here at Queen of All Saints, there will again be the option of receiving the Blood of Christ at Mass. You and I know in this time set aside for a “Eucharistic Revival” that the love, the care, the priority we give to the celebration of the Eucharist, speaks to our love for the Lord, who is really, truly and substantially present here in Sauganash.

I hope these things help! 

Wishing you every blessing this week!

Fr. Nate