Withholding the cup

[Unquirer]

Hi I'm from TAW, fairly new poster. Can someone please summarize for me when this practice started and the rationale for it? It is something that I haven't been able to reconcile to date and is a barrier for me to better understanding the Catholic faith. Thank you

 

[TuxAme]

What do you mean by "withholding the cup"?

 

[Gnarwhal]

Hi I'm from TAW, fairly new poster. Can someone please summarize for me when this practice started and the rationale for it? It is something that I haven't been able to reconcile to date and is a barrier for me to better understanding the Catholic faith. Thank you

Are you referring to the practice of the Church withholding the chalice from laity? From what I understand, it was done to eradicate the heresy that one must consume the host and the chalice in order to receive communion.

The correct teaching is that the body and blood of Christ are present in both species, and one needn't consume both to receive both.

 

[SashaMaria]

Do you mean the Communion Cup?

If so, most or many Dioceses/parishes in the US permit Catholics to receive both species, at least on Sundays. Every parish Church where I live offers both species. This might not be true in all parishes in the US or in all countries throughout the world.

Catholics believe that Jesus Christ is fully present in both species. One of the reasons the Church started withholding the Cup sometime during or after the Middle Ages was to combat a heresy that said that Communion had to be received under both species to be valid. There were probably other reasons too but I'm not sure why.

 

[Unquirer]

Do you mean the Communion Cup?

If so, most or many Dioceses/parishes in the US permit Catholics to receive both species, at least on Sundays. Every parish Church where I live offers both species. This might not be true in all parishes in the US or in all countries throughout the world.

Catholics believe that Jesus Christ is fully present in both species. One of the reasons the Church started withholding the Cup sometime during or after the Middle Ages was to combat a heresy that said that Communion had to be received under both species to be valid. There were probably other reasons too but I'm not sure why.

Okay thanks everyone for the replys.

 

[Gnarwhal]

Do you mean the Communion Cup?

If so, most or many Dioceses/parishes in the US permit Catholics to receive both species, at least on Sundays. Every parish Church where I live offers both species. This might not be true in all parishes in the US or in all countries throughout the world.

Catholics believe that Jesus Christ is fully present in both species. One of the reasons the Church started withholding the Cup sometime during or after the Middle Ages was to combat a heresy that said that Communion had to be received under both species to be valid. There were probably other reasons too but I'm not sure why.

I would piggyback on this by saying Latin Masses don't offer both species, only the host. But like I said before, Christ's body and blood is present in both.

 

[Glaucus]

The practice is tough to accept because Christ said to take and receive both, not just one or the other. The reasoning is understandable, though.

 

[Mark_Sam]

The (Catholic) doctrine of concomitance says that the whole Christ - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity - is present in either species. The bread is transubstantiated into the Body of Christ, but since Christ cannot be divided up, the "whole Christ" becomes present with the Body. Or more simply put, since the Body contains the Blood, if you receive the Body of Christ (the consecrated Host), then you also receive the Blood of Christ, since the Blood is in the Body.

As many have pointed out, this could be the result of combating the Utraquist heresy, which said that the laity should receive also the consecrated Wine in order for the Communion to be valid. I've also heard that in many places, proper altar wine was hard to come by and very expensive, so it was necessary to withhold the wine in order for there to be enough for all the daily Masses the priests offered.

 

[The Grouch]

By re introducing reception under both species do we not run the risk of the heresy returning?

 

[Glaucus]

By re introducing reception under both species do we not run the risk of the heresy returning?

Most people already take both.

 

[The Grouch]

Most people already take both.

Yes i know. But thats not my point. Unless u mean they think they need to recieve both then that would mean you think the hersey has returned already

 

[Rhamiel]

I think concern over the Precious Blood being in droplets in the beards and mustaches of laity was part of the concern

Also to emphasize that Christ is fully present in both species

 

[chevyontheriver]

By re introducing reception under both species do we not run the risk of the heresy returning?

We have plenty of Catholic people who now don't know that Jesus is actually present in the Eucharist. So worrying about that old heresy is small potatoes in comparison.

I do think that the plague (Black Death) was the big reason for not receiving under both species, and plague is pretty much defeated even if it occasionally pops up in rare instances. So I don't think there is a reason not to any more.

How to straighten out Catholics who don't know their faith WRT the Eucharist - how do we do that? It is a big deal.

 

[Meowzltov]

I understand the reasoning. I accept the doctrine that Christ is fully present, body and blood, in both species. But I don't think you can get around the command to "Do this." The practice bothers me. I'm glad we got rid of it.

 

[The Grouch]

I understand the reasoning. I accept the doctrine that Christ is fully present, body and blood, in both species. But I don't think you can get around the command to "Do this." The practice bothers me. I'm glad we got rid of it.

I am told that the mass bares a close resembelence to the old jewish sacrafice. Is this true? And if so what was the practice within the jewish sacrafice that mirrored the sacred blood and was it recieved by the faithfull of the jews.

 

[Meowzltov]

I am told that the mass bares a close resembelence to the old jewish sacrafice. Is this true? And if so what was the practice within the jewish sacrafice that mirrored the sacred blood and was it recieved by the faithfull of the jews

It does and it doesn't. In most of the Jewish sacrifices, the meat was eaten by the priests. But in the peace offering it was shared by everyone in the neighborhood.

Jews do not eat/drink blood. It is strictly forbidden by Torah. Blood is drained from meat and then the meat is salted to removed additional blood before it is kosher to eat. One of the things Jews find kind of strange and even a little noxious about Catholicism is our claim to consume the blood of Christ, which would be sin in so many different ways to them.

 

[The Grouch]

Just thought there, since historical sacrafical judiasm ceased after the destruction of the temple and replaced with rabincal judiasm in a sense its like the jewish people have been in spiritual exile like in babylon and you open heart are one of the few who have come home to the new jerusalem... thats pretty cool.

It does and it doesn't. In most of the Jewish sacrifices, the meat was eaten by the priests. But in the peace offering it was shared by everyone in the neighborhood.

Jews do not eat/drink blood. It is strictly forbidden by Torah. Blood is drained from meat and then the meat is salted to removed additional blood before it is kosher to eat. One of the things Jews find kind of strange and even a little noxious about Catholicism is our claim to consume the blood of Christ, which would be sin in so many different ways to them.

Is there no equivelent in the old jewish sacrafice.. if so then withholding the cup could be a reflection of the churches historical roots back to the command of god to celebrate the jewish sacrafice

 

[stone]

i've never seen anyone denied.

 

[Meowzltov]

Is there no equivelent in the old jewish sacrafice.

Yes, actually there is. The prophet Hosea instructed that "the words of our lips (prayers) shall be as bullocks (sacrifices)." This is why when we were in captivity in Babylon, we prayed during the times of the day that the Temple sacrifices were made -- it's why Daniel prayed three times a day. It's why Rabbinical Judaism fulfills the sacrificial requirements of the Torah.

 

[Meowzltov]

i've never seen anyone denied.

stone, by denied, we mean that no cup is even brought down to the laity. It used to be the standard practice before Vatican II, and is still the way of things at Latin Masses.