Make up my mind.

[Kathryn]

All? This might just be an American thing.

At every Catholic church I've been to (which have all been in Canada), it's only the celebrant and those assisting in the Mass (usually including the other priests and deacon if present, lay readers, lay extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, those participating in the procession/recession, but not the altar boys/girls) who drink the "blood". Everyone else only receives the "body".

How many Catholic church masses have you attended? And have they been only in Canada?

To be honest, I've never heard of a Roman Catholic Mass where the majority of Catholics did NOT partake of both the Body and the Blood.

From Wiki:

Holy Communion may be received under one kind (the Sacred Host alone), or under both kinds (both the Sacred Host and the Precious Blood). "Holy Communion has a fuller form as a sign when it is distributed under both kinds. For in this form the sign of the eucharistic banquet is more clearly evident and clear expression is given to the divine will by which the new and eternal Covenant is ratified in the Blood of the Lord, as also the relationship between the Eucharistic banquet and the eschatological banquet in the Father's Kingdom... (However,) Christ, whole and entire, and the true Sacrament, is received even under only one species, and consequently that as far as the effects are concerned, those who receive under only one species are not deprived of any of the grace that is necessary for salvation" (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 281-282).
"The Diocesan Bishop is given the faculty to permit Communion under both kinds whenever it may seem appropriate to the priest to whom, as its own shepherd, a community has been entrusted, provided that the faithful have been well instructed and there is no danger of profanation of the Sacrament or of the rite's becoming difficult because of the large number of participants or some other reason" (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 283).
In Eastern Catholic Churches the Eucharist is always received under both species (bread and wine), as was done at Mass also in the West until the opposite custom came into use, beginning in about the twelfth century.[23]
With the change from receiving the Eucharist under both kinds to receiving under the form of bread alone, it also became customary in the West to receive the Host placed directly on the tongue, rather than on the hand, but this was prescribed neither by the Roman Missal nor by the Code of Canon Law.

In modern Catholic practice in Europe and much of the English-speaking world, Communion is offered under both kinds when receiving at Mass. However, Catholicism teaches that Christ is sacramentally (and equally) present under each species, and therefore if a person receives only one species, Christ is fully present and nothing is lacking.[2]

Today, the practice of Communion under both kinds is gaining in popularity throughout Catholicism, and is common in Europe and English-speaking regions.[clarification needed] Regular use of Communion under both kinds requires the permission of the bishop, but bishops in many countries have given blanket authorisation to administer Holy Communion in this way.

 

[fatima_bintu_islam]

Do you really eat and drink the body and blood of Jesus??

 

[Kathryn]

Catholics believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation.

In Roman Catholic theology, "transubstantiation" (in Latin, transsubstantiatio, in Greek μετουσίωσις (metousiosis)) means the change of the substance of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, while all that is accessible to the senses (accidents) remains as before.[1][2]
Some Greek confessions use the term "transubstantiation" (in Greek, metousiosis), but most Orthodox Christian traditions play down the term itself, and the notions of "substance" and "accidents", while adhering to the holy mystery that bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ during Divine Liturgy. Other terms such as "trans-elementation" ("metastoicheiosis") and "re-ordination" ("metarrhythmisis") are more common among the Orthodox.

When at his Last Supper, Jesus said: "This is my body",[12] what he held in his hands still had all the appearances of bread: these "accidents" remained unchanged. However, the Roman Catholic Church believes that, when Jesus made that declaration,[13] the underlying reality (the "substance") of the bread was converted to that of his body. In other words, it actually was his body, while all the appearances open to the senses or to scientific investigation were still those of bread, exactly as before. The Catholic Church holds that the same change of the substance of the bread and of the wine occurs at the consecration of the Eucharist[14] when the words are spoken "This is my body ... this is my blood." In Orthodox confessions, the change is said to take place during the prayer of thanksgiving.
Believing that Christ is risen from the dead and is alive, the Catholic Church holds that when the bread is changed into his body, not only his body is present, but Christ as a whole is present (i.e. body and blood, soul and divinity.) The same holds for the wine changed into his blood.[15] This belief goes beyond the doctrine of transubstantiation, which directly concerns only the transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ.
In accordance with this belief that Christ is really, truly and substantially present under the remaining appearances of bread and wine, and continues to be present as long as those appearances remain, the Catholic Church preserves the consecrated elements, generally in a church tabernacle, for administering Holy Communion to the sick and dying, and also for the secondary, but still highly prized, purpose of adoring Christ present in the Eucharist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation

 

[Xafwak]

Well, the name of the church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That should be a clue.

Yeah, I wondered that, too. I´m not too sure what she meant. I figured maybe some who believe in Jesus being a deity don´t call themselves christians.

But the more you know, the more you´ve used your time on something else than going outside.

 

[benpar1983]

Hi Carol
In my opinion, one should never stop searching for the best, which is why I think your concern is a good thing. I also believe that we should never stop choosing; I mean not Knowing exactly what the truth is, is no reason to sit around and choose nothing.
I personally try to choose something that my values, experiences, etc indicate to be "the most probable" option to be the truth "by far". Sometimes an absolute convincing certainty cannot be achieved without choosing and reconsidering over and over again.
To choose a way of thinking, it's a good idea to temporarily erase your default mindset, as if you're choosing for the first time, and consider every aspect precisely and open-mindedly. One more thing, don't try to prove anything wrong, just look for the right. I hope your mind will be made up as soon as possible.

Good Luck.