by c.pio
Question:
Bakit po Ostia lang ang ibinibigay sa mga mananampalataya tuwing Misa at hindi
kasama ang Alak (dugo ni Kristo)? Salamat po. (Why only the Eucharistic Host is given to lay faithful during Mass and
the wine (Blood of Christ) is not included? Thank you) – Carlo, Quezon City
(Author’s
answers was originally written in Tagalog)
Utraquism Heresy
Dominus
vobiscum!
There is nothing wrong with that. Sharing
only the Eucharistic Holy Host can be traced back in apostolic time; they break
the bread and share it to the faithful:
They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to
the fellowship, to the breaking of bread
and to prayer. [Acts 2:42]
Every day they continued to meet together in the temple
courts. They broke bread in their
homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts [Acts 2:46]
On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people
and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.
[Acts 20:7]
But
there was a period in Church history when a group of people began spreading a Heretical
Teaching: The Utraquist (Hussites):
according to them, Man, in order to be
saved, must receive Holy Communion when he wishes and where he wishes under both forms of Bread AND Wine (sub utraque specie**). They hold the
view that communion sub uraque specie
is obligatory "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you
shall not have life in you" [John 6:54] To receive only the Sacred
Host is not "drinking" but "eating" accordingly. The bread,
they said, contained only the Body of Christ and the wine only His Blood. ** sub utraque
specie - the Holy Communion should be administered "in both
kinds" — as both bread and wine — to all the congregation, including the
laity.
The
Church founded by Christ the bulwark and
pillar of Truth under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit responded and
rebutted these heretical Doctrines:
CANON III.-If any one denieth, that, in the venerable
sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each species,
and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema.
On the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist
COUNCIL OF
TRENT
The Thirteenth Session
In
1Corinthians
11:27 it is clearly understood that each specie (whether bread or wine) the body and blood, soul and divinity are both really and
fully present.
27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or
drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.
By
eating the bread/host alone unworthily
according to Apostle Paul, you are guilty in both the body and blood of the
Lord. By drinking the wine unworthily, still again, you are guilty in both body
and blood of the Lord. Hence, 'one species' alone is not invalid or lacking
efficacy.
Christ
himself declared and summarized in John 6:52-58 that (bread/host) could be enough to received his flesh and blood.
52Then the Jews began to argue
sharply among themselves, “How can this
man give us his flesh to eat?” 53So Jesus said to them,
"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man
and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54 he who eats my
flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last
day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56
He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living
Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live
because of me. 58 This is the bread which came down from heaven, not
such as the fathers ate and died; he who
eats this bread will live forever."
So
don’t think that bread/host alone is
not sufficient, because by believing so, you are denying the truth that Christ
was whole and entire under each form.
To summarize this, to opt not to give them both: first(1) to combat the Utraquist Heresy, that posses a wrong teaching that one specie is not enough for salvation and second(2) every single drop of wine is holy, in large congregation this might cause to drip which is considered as sacrilegious act. [1Corinthians
11:27]
By
the way, in some occasion like wedding both bread
and wine are given to the bride and the groom, some Eastern Catholic rites
gave the same to the laity in small congregation. Therefore, whether both or only one specie you
received… they are the entirety of Christ.
If
you want to send another question, feel free.
Thank
you.
c.pio
If Bread alone is sufficient, why do
Priests bother to include Wine during
the Eucharistic Celebration or if Wine
alone will suffice, why Bread is
needed?
Perhaps
we might under the false impression that one
specie is enough in celebrating the Mass. Let us assure that this is false.
It is not valid Sacrament without bread and wine. Both specie (wine and bread) are necessary as Christ during the Last
Supper, because during the institution of the Holy Eucharist, Christ speak of his death... as a Sacrificial Lamb. But the key distinction is this, one
specie is enough to received BOTH the flesh and the blood of Christ.
[John 6:58; 1Corinthians
11:27]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.
Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person.
This is a supervised forum and the Admin of CatholicPoint retains the right to direct it.
We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations