|
Hi, Francesco —
You said:
A Protestant
said:
If Jesus said to ALL to drink his
blood, why do we, as Catholics, receive
only the consecrated host/bread?
I perfectly understand
that when we receive Communion under
one species,
we receive the whole Body, Blood
and Divinity of Christ
First, in many place the Eucharist
or Blessed Sacrament IS distributed
in BOTH the consecrated host (body)
and consecrated wine (blood). The
decision on whether to distribute
the Blessed Sacrament under one OR
two species is left to the local
bishop.
He would know what is pastorally
best for his flock.
You said:
the question
was more related to
"following an order of Jesus",
if he tells us to drink His Blood.
Are scriptural and patristic writings
that defend this Catholic practice?
Catholics DO "follow the order
of Jesus" but once again, guided
by the Holy Spirit, the local bishop
can decide when the Eucharist should
be celebrated under one OR two species.
Remember:
- If you receive ONLY the precious
blood, you still receive the Body,
Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our
Lord, though what you receive
is in liquid form.
- If you receive ONLY the consecrated
host, you still receive the Body,
Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our
Lord though what you receive is
in solid form.
Once again, when the Christian reduces
Tradition down to just what is taught
in the Written Word, they miss out
on the Oral Tradition that has been
passed down through generation of
saints that is just as binding on
the Christian: Our Lord says in Luke's
Gospel:
"He who hears you HEARS ME."
Off the top of my head I don't know
of any patristic sources that would
give support for receiving the Blessed
Sacrament under both species. My
colleague may know.
You said:
Regarding 1 Corinthians
chapters 10 and 11. Protestants understand
the body and blood of Christ in 1
Corinthians 11:27 as referring to "the
Church as body and blood of Christ" not "the
bread and wine as the body and blood
of Christ".
Is this interpretation valid? If
not, why not?
No, this is not a valid interpretation
the way they are interpreting it.
St. Paul is recalling an Oral Tradition
that is binding on all Christians
to receive the Body and Blood of
Our Lord in the Blessed Eucharist.
Look at the text Francesco. Nowhere
in verse 27 is the word church mentioned!!
But note that in verse 30, those
who ate and drank without discerning
the Body and Blood of Our Lord got
weak and ill. Certainly if the Eucharist
was a symbol, as Protestants claim
John 6:52-72 is talking about, there
is no reason for them to become weak
and ill. A symbol cannot make a person
weak and ill.
27 Whoever, therefore,
eats the bread or drinks the cup
of the Lord in an unworthy manner
will be guilty of profaning the
body and blood of the Lord. 28
Let a man examine himself, and
so eat of the bread and drink
of the cup. 29 For any one who
eats and drinks without discerning
the body eats and drinks judgment
upon himself. 30 That is
why many of you are weak and ill,
and some have died. 31 But if
we judged ourselves truly, we
should not be judged. 32 But when
we are judged by the Lord, we
are chastened so that we may not
be condemned along with the world.
33 So then, my brethren, when
you come together to eat, wait
for one another
(1 Corinthians 11:27-33)
Side note: Though the interpretation
you have given is not a valid "literal
interpretation" of the Biblical
text, there is a lot of validity
from a Catholic theological view
point. What do I mean?
The Church in a real sense is made
up of members who are "the ONE
Body and Blood of Christ". Because
participating member partake in the
Eucharist, we are "the Church" BUT
in the same way a body cannot do
anything without a head. the Body
of the Church represented by those
that partake in the Eucharist cannot
do anything apart of the Holy Father:
it's visible head on earth (though
also a part of the body), and the
ultimate Head in Heaven, Jesus.
Hope this helps,
Mike
|
