Intinction

[GilWright]

On Sunday, there was a shortage of EMHCs at the largest of the masses in the parish. Normally, I stay with the altar servers but in this case I was given the Precious Blood. The last mass-goer that approached me was holding a Host in his hand ready to intinct. I covered the Chalice with the purifier and asked the person to consume the host. The response was a strange look and then he moved away (still holding the Host). As I was about to ask him to consume (or return it), I recognized him as a priest (not local to the parish) so I said nothing.

Here is the question: if I had recognized him, should I have offered the chalice for intinction? Why or why not?

P.S. I believe I know the answer but I am not sure how many others out there do and you may find yourselves in the same situation one day...

[Stephen Spiteri]

As far as modality is concerned - how Communion is distributed if Intinction is permitted in that particular parish or archdiocese - it is the priest celebrating the Mass who "dips" the host in the wine, not the communicant.


287. If Communion from the chalice is carried out by intinction, each communicant, holding a communion-plate under the chin, approaches the priest, who holds a vessel with the sacred particles, a minister standing at his side and holding the chalice. The priest takes a host, dips it partly into the chalice and, showing it, says, Corpus et Sanguis Christi (The Body and Blood of Christ). The communicant responds, Amen, receives the Sacrament in the mouth from the priest, and then withdraws. - IV. Some General Norms for All Forms of Mass, General Instruction of the Roman Missal, par. 287; http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter4.shtml

[DavidObeid]

Fr. John Zhulsdorf from the well known Catholic Blog WDTPRS (http://wdtprs.com/blog/) (What Does The Prayer Really Say) has an idiot proof principle for all things liturgical: Say the Black Do the Red. In other words, we should only say and do that which is set down in the liturgical books.

In that case, even though a Priest who is celebrating (or concelebrating) may self intinct, he may not if he presents from the congregation. The scandal, let alone the liturgical aberration, is reason enough to forbid it.

[Stephen Spiteri]

I should probably add that if Communion by means of Intinction is not "offered" in the parish in that particular manner (and it's very rare to find a parish that does so these days; I believe the matter is dealt with on an archdiocesan level), then the communicant must consume the host prior to consuming the cup if they too desire to receive the cup, and then again the cup should only be offered to a communicant if it is absolutely necessary (e.g. if a communicant has a high intolerance to wheat and cannot consume the bread).

[cmnunis]

I should probably add that if Communion by means of Intinction is not "offered" in the parish in that particular manner (and it's very rare to find a parish that does so these days; I believe the matter is dealt with on an archdiocesan level), then the communicant must consume the host prior to consuming the cup if they too desire to receive the cup, and then again the cup should only be offered to a communicant if it is absolutely necessary (e.g. if a communicant has a high intolerance to wheat and cannot consume the bread).

I can't comment on the Canon Law relating to this because you're right, it differs from diocese to diocese. In the Melkite Rite, we practise intinction, which is in some way, a variation of the typical Byzantine practice of communing with the spoon. I don't see this as abuse in anyway, but from my experience with the Latin Rite in Malaysia, they don't administer the Blood because in their logic, if you've received the Body, you've then received the Blood in it.

[GilWright]

Wow. Good answers.

In this diocese (archdiocese), the bishops explicitly requested that it be handled as I did (cover the chalice and ask the communicant to consume). At the time it was a big deal in the local parish because of the number that were doing it and because the EMHCs felt they were not in a position to "refuse" communion via the chalice because that was a kind of judgement. That was resolved by getting the instituted acolytes to handle the chalice - they were seen (rightly or wrongly) as being more authoritative which led to less confrontations.

Those who complained ended up with the then parish priest or myself and we both used the same response (from the diocesan letter) - we explained that communion is a "gift, freely given" not something you take.

As mentioned above, the GIRM allows intinction in certain circumstances. I am aware of at least two scenarios - the concelebrating priests (I have seen this at a huge mass with many priests present - the chalice is left on the corporal on the altar and the priests take it in turns from both sides of the altar - the corporal will collect any drops) and when the priest (or deacon) intincts and then places it on the tongue (a platen should be used to catch drops).