ASK FATHER: Can the priest receive Precious Blood by intinction?
From a reader…
QUAERITUR:
Is it permissible for the celebrating priest to receive communion via intinction? Or must they physically eat the host and drink from the chalice?
Thank you very much for all you do.
I am not sure there is a way to eat and drink other than “physically”. Unless you mean Spiritual Communion! o{]:¬)
You are surely asking about the Novus Ordo.
The General Instruction of the Roman Missal has seemingly conflicting information.
First, it says:
245. The Blood of the Lord may be consumed either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon.
This indicates that intinction is permitted.
The rubrics in the Missal says that the priest, “Deinde accipit calicem et secreto dicit… et reverenter sumit Sanguinem Christi“, which means that he consumes the Precious Blood from the chalice. It is assumed that he does so directly, but it is permitted to use a means, such as the spoon or tube… or a piece of the Host!
However, it goes on to say:
249. If the concelebrants’ Communion is by intinction, the principal celebrant partakes of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the usual way, but making sure that enough of the precious Blood remains in the chalice for the Communion of the concelebrants.
I think that “in the usual way”, means drinking directly from the chalice itself, rather than using a means. That’s the commonsense way of understanding that.
However, GIRM 245 suggests that a spoon, tube or even a piece of the Host could be a usual way.
Hence, I would have to say that, yes, the priest could receive the Precious Blood by intinction. However, in order to follow the rubrics, that would have to be a in a second reception. He would have to, first, receive the Host. After receiving the Host, he would -I repeat, after – receive the Precious Blood in the usual way, or with a spoon, a tube… or by intinction. It is a two step process that should not be reduced to one.
The other part of this question is: Should the main celebrant of a Mass do this? I think not. I think it is a bad “sign”. It’s bad, liturgically, and could be confusing to people.
Of course if the priest is celebrating ad orientem then few or no one would see and it wouldn’t be so bad a signal.
Yet another reason!
