![sincead33's tweet photo. I will never get tired of taking Lutherans to school. Check your sources before subtweeting me with a quotemine from Gerhard's treatment on this. Gerhard (Conf. Cath., bk. 2, pt. 2, p. 1096) claims St. Albertus Magnus is teaching it is a divine precept to receive in both kinds: "[Albertus] acknowledges that Christ’s words, 'Do this,' commanded the drinking from the cup."
Sed contra, St. Albert explicitly defends communion in one kind in his Sermones De Ss. Eucharistiae Sacramento, Serm. 29, published near the end of his life. He writes:
"It is asked: Why do the people not receive the blood under the species of wine, as the priest does? And the reason for this is threefold. The first is to have a fitting vessel capable of containing so great a blood. The second is to avoid the danger of spilling. The third is to guard against the peril of error... For when the Christian people gather on solemn occasions to receive the Sacrament, they press together around the altar because of their great number, so that the body of the Lord can scarcely be received without fear of dropping it; how much more, then, would there be no avoiding the danger of spilling if they were to receive the blood from the chalice. Hence the Lord, at the Supper, gave to the Apostles, few in number, and as His priests, not only the body under the species of bread but also His blood under the species of wine; whereas to the multitude of people in the desert He distributed bread without drink. The third reason is to guard against the peril of error. For if the simple, untaught people were to receive the blood under the species of wine, they would scarcely believe that it was also under the species of bread — although in truth it is present under both species. For just as under the species of consecrated wine the blood of Christ is present by transubstantiation, so the body is there by concomitance; and just as under the species of bread the body of Christ is present by transubstantiation, so His blood is truly understood to be there by concomitance."
Regarding the original quote, St. Albert is speaking of why we consecrate and celebrate in both kinds even though the whole Christ is present in the bread. Earlier he wrote:
"Since, then, the whole Christ with His blood is sacramentally contained under the species of bread, it would seem that whatever is added under the species of wine is entirely superfluous. But to this we say that after Christ presented His body under the species of bread, He afterward also presented His blood under the species of wine, and commanded that each be celebrated sacramentally in the Church according to the apostolic ordinances. Therefore the Church is instructed by the action of Christ, and celebrates each separately, *making* the body under the species of bread, and separately *making* the blood under the species of wine."
When he says "we receive", as quoted by the OP, he seems to be speaking on behalf of the whole Church, not for every single man (as Gerhard/Protestants would have it). This is evident since he afterwards begins to explain how the cup signifies things that the host does not, as is common with the other scholastics quoted by Gerhard who teach both that (1) receiving in one kind is sufficient, though (2) both kinds is a more complete sign.
Furthermore, in his commentary on the Sentences, d. 12, art. 2, when asking whether both kinds are necessary for the Supper, he doesn't answer that it is a divine precept from Christ. The "best" reason for this, according to him, is the signification of the chalice, which we freely grant:
"I think it should be said that for many reasons this sacrament has been handed down under a double species. [Lists several reasons) All these reasons are plausible. Yet one reason seems better than all the others, namely this: among things united there must be both conjunction and a power that effects union. Since therefore through this sacrament we are united to Christ the Head, there ought to be something in the sacrament signifying our union with Him and something signifying the power that unites.
But union cannot be signified in bread, because it is not a body capable of mingling while remaining in its own species. Therefore there must be a liquid substance to which another tasteless thing may be joined."](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HLdob_sXkAA_yXk.jpg)
Olivia
Online
Lee Elle
@LeeElle1
Joined January 2012
2K Following
336 Followers
15.2K Posts
My American friends,
The Japanese people have reached the limit of their patience.
Due to the rapid increase in Muslim immigrants, we are facing growing demands for Islamic burial rites, fierce opposition to mosque construction, and ever-increasing requests for special accommodations.
Watching the examples from Europe and America, we fear that Japanese culture will be threatened.
That is why we are openly stating that, if necessary, we may even consider expelling Islam from Japan — and we are calling on everyone to respect Japanese culture and laws.
We absolutely do not want a politician like Mamdani to emerge in Japan!
Please support us. 🙏
I will never get tired of taking Lutherans to school. Check your sources before subtweeting me with a quotemine from Gerhard's treatment on this. Gerhard (Conf. Cath., bk. 2, pt. 2, p. 1096) claims St. Albertus Magnus is teaching it is a divine precept to receive in both kinds: "[Albertus] acknowledges that Christ’s words, 'Do this,' commanded the drinking from the cup."
Sed contra, St. Albert explicitly defends communion in one kind in his Sermones De Ss. Eucharistiae Sacramento, Serm. 29, published near the end of his life. He writes:
"It is asked: Why do the people not receive the blood under the species of wine, as the priest does? And the reason for this is threefold. The first is to have a fitting vessel capable of containing so great a blood. The second is to avoid the danger of spilling. The third is to guard against the peril of error... For when the Christian people gather on solemn occasions to receive the Sacrament, they press together around the altar because of their great number, so that the body of the Lord can scarcely be received without fear of dropping it; how much more, then, would there be no avoiding the danger of spilling if they were to receive the blood from the chalice. Hence the Lord, at the Supper, gave to the Apostles, few in number, and as His priests, not only the body under the species of bread but also His blood under the species of wine; whereas to the multitude of people in the desert He distributed bread without drink. The third reason is to guard against the peril of error. For if the simple, untaught people were to receive the blood under the species of wine, they would scarcely believe that it was also under the species of bread — although in truth it is present under both species. For just as under the species of consecrated wine the blood of Christ is present by transubstantiation, so the body is there by concomitance; and just as under the species of bread the body of Christ is present by transubstantiation, so His blood is truly understood to be there by concomitance."
Regarding the original quote, St. Albert is speaking of why we consecrate and celebrate in both kinds even though the whole Christ is present in the bread. Earlier he wrote:
"Since, then, the whole Christ with His blood is sacramentally contained under the species of bread, it would seem that whatever is added under the species of wine is entirely superfluous. But to this we say that after Christ presented His body under the species of bread, He afterward also presented His blood under the species of wine, and commanded that each be celebrated sacramentally in the Church according to the apostolic ordinances. Therefore the Church is instructed by the action of Christ, and celebrates each separately, *making* the body under the species of bread, and separately *making* the blood under the species of wine."
When he says "we receive", as quoted by the OP, he seems to be speaking on behalf of the whole Church, not for every single man (as Gerhard/Protestants would have it). This is evident since he afterwards begins to explain how the cup signifies things that the host does not, as is common with the other scholastics quoted by Gerhard who teach both that (1) receiving in one kind is sufficient, though (2) both kinds is a more complete sign.
Furthermore, in his commentary on the Sentences, d. 12, art. 2, when asking whether both kinds are necessary for the Supper, he doesn't answer that it is a divine precept from Christ. The "best" reason for this, according to him, is the signification of the chalice, which we freely grant:
"I think it should be said that for many reasons this sacrament has been handed down under a double species. [Lists several reasons) All these reasons are plausible. Yet one reason seems better than all the others, namely this: among things united there must be both conjunction and a power that effects union. Since therefore through this sacrament we are united to Christ the Head, there ought to be something in the sacrament signifying our union with Him and something signifying the power that unites.
But union cannot be signified in bread, because it is not a body capable of mingling while remaining in its own species. Therefore there must be a liquid substance to which another tasteless thing may be joined."
![sincead33's tweet photo. I will never get tired of taking Lutherans to school. Check your sources before subtweeting me with a quotemine from Gerhard's treatment on this. Gerhard (Conf. Cath., bk. 2, pt. 2, p. 1096) claims St. Albertus Magnus is teaching it is a divine precept to receive in both kinds: "[Albertus] acknowledges that Christ’s words, 'Do this,' commanded the drinking from the cup."
Sed contra, St. Albert explicitly defends communion in one kind in his Sermones De Ss. Eucharistiae Sacramento, Serm. 29, published near the end of his life. He writes:
"It is asked: Why do the people not receive the blood under the species of wine, as the priest does? And the reason for this is threefold. The first is to have a fitting vessel capable of containing so great a blood. The second is to avoid the danger of spilling. The third is to guard against the peril of error... For when the Christian people gather on solemn occasions to receive the Sacrament, they press together around the altar because of their great number, so that the body of the Lord can scarcely be received without fear of dropping it; how much more, then, would there be no avoiding the danger of spilling if they were to receive the blood from the chalice. Hence the Lord, at the Supper, gave to the Apostles, few in number, and as His priests, not only the body under the species of bread but also His blood under the species of wine; whereas to the multitude of people in the desert He distributed bread without drink. The third reason is to guard against the peril of error. For if the simple, untaught people were to receive the blood under the species of wine, they would scarcely believe that it was also under the species of bread — although in truth it is present under both species. For just as under the species of consecrated wine the blood of Christ is present by transubstantiation, so the body is there by concomitance; and just as under the species of bread the body of Christ is present by transubstantiation, so His blood is truly understood to be there by concomitance."
Regarding the original quote, St. Albert is speaking of why we consecrate and celebrate in both kinds even though the whole Christ is present in the bread. Earlier he wrote:
"Since, then, the whole Christ with His blood is sacramentally contained under the species of bread, it would seem that whatever is added under the species of wine is entirely superfluous. But to this we say that after Christ presented His body under the species of bread, He afterward also presented His blood under the species of wine, and commanded that each be celebrated sacramentally in the Church according to the apostolic ordinances. Therefore the Church is instructed by the action of Christ, and celebrates each separately, *making* the body under the species of bread, and separately *making* the blood under the species of wine."
When he says "we receive", as quoted by the OP, he seems to be speaking on behalf of the whole Church, not for every single man (as Gerhard/Protestants would have it). This is evident since he afterwards begins to explain how the cup signifies things that the host does not, as is common with the other scholastics quoted by Gerhard who teach both that (1) receiving in one kind is sufficient, though (2) both kinds is a more complete sign.
Furthermore, in his commentary on the Sentences, d. 12, art. 2, when asking whether both kinds are necessary for the Supper, he doesn't answer that it is a divine precept from Christ. The "best" reason for this, according to him, is the signification of the chalice, which we freely grant:
"I think it should be said that for many reasons this sacrament has been handed down under a double species. [Lists several reasons) All these reasons are plausible. Yet one reason seems better than all the others, namely this: among things united there must be both conjunction and a power that effects union. Since therefore through this sacrament we are united to Christ the Head, there ought to be something in the sacrament signifying our union with Him and something signifying the power that unites.
But union cannot be signified in bread, because it is not a body capable of mingling while remaining in its own species. Therefore there must be a liquid substance to which another tasteless thing may be joined."](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HLdogABbIAA0-Si.jpg)
Leftist activist Obama-appointed judge Amy Berman Jackson just ruled that SNAP must continue to cover junk food.
According to Amy, junk food like neon-colored pineapples dunked in Kool-Aid and Cheetos are nutritious and taxpayers must continue to foot the bill.
This is the same judge who has been overturned twice so far. She tried blocking the dismantling of Elizabeth Warren’s pet project, the CFPB, and was overturned.
She then tried to block Trump from firing the head of the Office of Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger and was overturned.
Amy was also the judge who sentenced Roger Stone to prison for 40 months.
How is it that the NARCO STATE of Columbia has cleaner elections than CALIFORNIA?
Let me break it down for you:
Columbia HAND-COUNTED 99.8% of their 25+ million ballots in under 3 hours.
Public counting of paper ballots from ID required in-person voting.
For comparison, California has a population of ~39 million, takes MONTHS to count votes, doesn’t require ID, and has millions of mail-in ballots that appear out of thin air.
The Democrats’ problem isn’t “voter suppression” — they are incompetent and fraudulent.
Without their USAID foreign cash pipeline, they can’t win clean elections.
Pass the SAVE America Act now. Shut down the Democrat fraud machine. Restore integrity to our elections.
George Weigel’s theologically illiterate hit piece on the SSPX exposes whom he really serves.
'Only someone who hates the Jews would be so uncharitable as to lie to them about what is needed for salvation.' ✍️ @Radical_Fidelit
https://t.co/bFqVR2M9wX
On the Novus Ordo Feast of St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More
The heresiarch and schismatic Martin Luther was the enemy of St. Thomas More and Cardinal St. John Fisher
Jorge Bergoglio honoured Martin Luther in the Vatican more than once
Who is the schismatic?
yeah, they did.
@JackPosobiec Shoes off is common sense. Don’t want to track dirt into the house
Just so I understand, Muslim rape gangs stole little British girls, put them in "red rooms" then tortured and raped them, some got pregnant and then had miscarriages due to the torture.
And Muslim UK politicians are burying it.
Did I get that right
Major meat processors like Tyson, Cargill and Smithfield are notorious for hiring illegal alien labor. Why haven't we seen raids on these law breakers? @SecMullinDHS
@realDonaldTrump @JDVance
Ubaydullah Hussain is actively working to bring Norway under Sharia law. He says it is the religious duty of every Muslim to strive for an Islamic state, regardless of where they live. He made the remarks in an interview with the Norwegian newspaper VG.
“Sharia is not just beheadings and amputated hands. It is a complete way of life,” he continues.
Sharia and Islam are inseparable. And to anyone who still believes in the existence of “moderate Islam”: it does not exist. How do you moderate a doctrine of conquest?
The irony is that Hussain criticises the West for being economically and morally weak, with rising crime, yet he fails to see that these problems are largely the result of open borders policies that have allowed people like himself into the country. It is his own “people” who dominate the crime statistics.
What is most astonishing about this letter (that even trads are is missing) is that the bishop even doesn't provide evidence this traditional community has rejected Vatican II. It's just the "vibes" he gets from them. (I understand getting those vibes from someone like me, but a quiet indult diocesan community in Kentucky? Come on!)
Anyway, what this means is that there really is no place for Apostolic Catholicism in the chanceries anymore. It also means the mealy-mouthed appeasement model of Trad. Inc. has an expiration date. Most importantly, it means even the most meek trads out there must now either compromise with modernism... or live courageously. No more hideouts.
It is deeply frustrating to learn that funds meant for fire victims were reportedly diverted into Jennifer Newsom’s non-profit. Now, reports show she has personally brought in over $4 million through "Cal Volunteers," an entity created right out of her own office.
While everyday citizens struggle, the system is being used to fund multi-million-dollar personal projects on our dime.
Karen was warned by the last LAFD Chief (whom she fired being honest) that LAFD was dangerously underfunded and couldn't keep LA safe. Karen cut their budget by $17M, then my town burned down. Now, they have to bring in resources from TEXAS to manage a single structure fire.
BREAKING: CA Democrats to raise health insurance premiums on citizens by 97% - so illegal immigrants can get free healthcare! https://t.co/xPIcn1IzDj
An unused Catholic church should be demolished before being sold to Muslims.
Young Catholics gathered at the gates of Georgetown University to protest Fr. James Martin's pro-LGBT "Outreach 2026" conference.
Not only are the event speakers at odds with the Bible, but also against natural law, papal documents, the Fathers of the Church, the Doctors of the Church, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and countless saints.
One of the conference panels is titled: "Celebrating the Transgender Catholic Experience."
In response, 31,000 faithful Catholics signed a petition in protest. TFP Student Action volunteers brought the concerns of those 31,000 Catholics directly to the gates of Georgetown.
Young Catholics say: June belongs to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, not the sin of pride.
In this time of great confusion, silence is not enough.
We have a duty to proclaim the truth with charity and courage.
Today, the voices of 31,000 Catholics arrived at Georgetown's doorstep.
But will Georgetown listen?
How does this happen
Not a single woman or child. Only military-age men.
That’s because they are not refugees. They are soldiers, and this is a religious war of conquest.
Europe needs to wake up.
The clergy is the biggest threat to the Catholic Church currently.
I’m really sick of the Vatican and the Catholic bishops of the US.
All they talk about is social justice mumbo jumbo. They almost never talk about Jesus Christ, the gospel of repentance and salvation, or the importance of evangelizing and converting souls. Just boomer public school white guilt slop 24/7.
Trends for you
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
240.4M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.3M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.7M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
110.1M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.5M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.1M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.8M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
87.4M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
81.2M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
72.8M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.7M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
69.5M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.7M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.7M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.5M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
62.2M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
X
@x
60.8M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
60.5M followers