“The hour has come .... abandon the practice of Communion standing and in the hand”

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Deacon_Ed_B said:
Yes. Consubstantiation to the Protestants means that they believe in the true presence, body and blood as you have asserted. But it also asserts that the substances of bread and wine remain. The difference is that as Catholics we believe in Transubstantiation, meaning that Jesus is present in the fullness of his body, blood, soul and divinity. The substance of bread and wine do not remain, only the physical accidents i.e., it looks and tastes like bread and wine but is no longer bread and wine. This we call the miracle of Transubstantiation. If a person does not believe this, only think of Creation. God created all that is, with a single thought. and is not subject to the laws of nature, which is his creation. Rather, creation is subject to him, the creator. Consubstantiation itself has long ago been condemned as a heretical teaching by the Church.

Prayers & blessings
Deacocn Ed B
Click to expand...
But the question is whether or not it is OK for a Protestant who does not believe in Transubstantiation to receive Holy Communion?
 
bobzills said:
But the question is whether or not it is OK for a Protestant who does not believe in Transubstantiation to receive Holy Communion?
Click to expand...
I thought the question was whether or not it was time to abandon the practice of Holy Communion in the hand. :rolleyes:
 
bobzills said:
But the question is whether or not it is OK for a Protestant who does not believe in Transubstantiation to receive Holy Communion?
Click to expand...
In checking the code of Canon Law and the CCC, I could not find anything addressing this issue per se. I would think that all that is necessary is for them to believe in the true presence. But I am not certain of this. This decision would be made I believe by the local ordinary. I think we can all agree that it is not a common practice, but rather an exception. If anyone else has more definitive information on this, I would welcome it.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
Is there something inherently evil in receiving Communion in the hand?
 
Cara_Serrano said:
Is there something inherently evil in receiving Communion in the hand?
Click to expand...
No. In fact, if there were nothing beneficial about the practice or * if it were believed to directly and necessarily encourage abuse or irreverence*, the Church would not have permitted the practice in the first place, since another practice without these problems was already in place.

This is only my understanding: For some, there is greater spiritual benefit in receiving directly onto the tongue. Offering reception directly onto the tongue also does not pose as a great of a risk of abuse or irreverence that offering reception in the hand does. This is why receiving Holy Communion directly on the tongue is a right of the faithful, while offering reception in the hand has only been deemed to be a possible option for bishops to allow. Because a less risky option exists, reception in the hand is not deemed to be a right, unless the bishop directs circumstances under which that option shall be offered by obedient priests in his diocese. Again, this is all my understanding of the question.

Since the direct and indirect risk of abuse or cultivation of irreverence is not static, though, but rather changes depending on the culture and time, the question seems to be whether, at this particular junture and in our particular culture, the benefit to those who find one in receiving Holy Communion in the hand outweighs the somewhat greater risk of abuse.

Because allowing the practice may pose the risk of indirect encouragement of abuse or irreverence, mentions of other abuses have been judged apropos, concerning whether the prevalence of these can be linked to the prevalence of Holy Communion being received in the hand…and disagreement about whether these were abuses, after all, and so on…

But then, I may have missed a few posts.
 
I didn’t read the whole thread, but I have a question…It might have already been answered if so I apologize…sometimes the stuff here gets a little too technical, and I ain’t all that bright…😃 so I didn’t wade through all of it

What do you propose people who can’t kneel are going to do if this happens? Oodles of people now have knee replacements, and they can’t kneel if they tried?:confused:

It sounds like it’s more important to some of you, that it looks a certain way, than if people are able to do it:shrug:
 
redrosetea said:
I didn’t read the whole thread, but I have a question…It might have already been answered if so I apologize…sometimes the stuff here gets a little too technical, and I ain’t all that bright…😃 so I didn’t wade through all of it

What do you propose people who can’t kneel are going to do if this happens? Oodles of people now have knee replacements, and they can’t kneel if they tried?:confused:

It sounds like it’s more important to some of you, that it looks a certain way, than if people are able to do it:shrug:
Click to expand...
It is like fasting, or kneeling (or standing) at any other time in the Mass, or anything else. Only those who are actually able are ever obliged. If there is any way to accomodate without violating a real requirement (such as that bread and wine be the species at Mass, for instance), then accomodations are made.
 
redrosetea said:
I didn’t read the whole thread, but I have a question…It might have already been answered if so I apologize…sometimes the stuff here gets a little too technical, and I ain’t all that bright…😃 so I didn’t wade through all of it

What do you propose people who can’t kneel are going to do if this happens? Oodles of people now have knee replacements, and they can’t kneel if they tried?:confused:

It sounds like it’s more important to some of you, that it looks a certain way, than if people are able to do it:shrug:
Click to expand...
Hello. Yes, some things are all about appearances. However, I do believe those that want TLM back, along with the Communion rail are serious in that they believe kneeling is a more reverent attitude for receiving the Holy Eucharist than standing to receive it. My :twocents: worth of opinion is that one can be reverent in receiving the Eucharist whether kneeling, standing, or in the case of illness of the recipient, lying down. Only the one receiving communion knows how much the Eucharist means to them and no one else has the right to judge them. As far as knee replacements, which I haven’t had yet, but am getting close to the time of…if there is a Communion rail, I will just have to stand at the rail. 🙂 .
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
In checking the code of Canon Law and the CCC, I could not find anything addressing this issue per se. I would think that all that is necessary is for them to believe in the true presence. But I am not certain of this. This decision would be made I believe by the local ordinary. I think we can all agree that it is not a common practice, but rather an exception. If anyone else has more definitive information on this, I would welcome it.
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
In the Code of Canon Law on who may receive the sacraments it says that non Catholic Christians who believe in the true presence may receive communion at a Catholic mass with the authority of the Ordinary.

The Ordinary is the Bishop, if it’s a parish or the Major Religious Superior, if it’s a religious house, catholic school or hospital run by a religious order.

JR 🙂
 
JReducation said:
In the Code of Canon Law on who may receive the sacraments it says that non Catholic Christians who believe in the true presence may receive communion at a Catholic mass with the authority of the Ordinary…
Click to expand...
Having the Catholic Faith regarding the Sacrament is only one part of it. The other requirements laid out in canon law are as follows…
  • the non-catholic recipient must be in danger of death (or in the Ordinary’s judgement, some grave and ppressing need must be manifest).
  • the non-catholic recipient must be in a situation where they cannot approach a minister of their own community.
  • the non-catholic recipient must spontaniously ask for the Sacrement(s) on their own.
  • the non-catholic recipient must demonstrate the catholic faith in respect to the Sacrament(s).
  • the non-catholic receipient must be properly disposed.
    Here’s the canon in question…
    Can. 844 §4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgement of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.
    DD
 
DustinsDad said:
Having the Catholic Faith regarding the Sacrament is only one part of it. The other requirements laid out in canon law are as follows…
  • the non-catholic recipient must be in danger of death (or in the Ordinary’s judgement, some grave and ppressing need must be manifest).
  • the non-catholic recipient must be in a situation where they cannot approach a minister of their own community.
  • the non-catholic recipient must spontaniously ask for the Sacrement(s) on their own.
  • the non-catholic recipient must demonstrate the catholic faith in respect to the Sacrament(s).
  • the non-catholic receipient must be properly disposed.
    Here’s the canon in question…
    Can. 844 §4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgement of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.
    DD
Click to expand...
Do all of the above criteria have to be satisfied all at the same time, or only one? And what is meant by proper disposition?
 
bobzills said:
Do all of the above criteria have to be satisfied all at the same time, or only one?
Click to expand...
All at the same time.
bobzills said:
And what is meant by proper disposition?
Click to expand...
I could only guess since it doesn’t specify - but I would take it to be in regards to Holy Communion - in that the person receiving Holy Communion must be baptized and free from all mortal sin.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad
 
I am a 63 year old “cradle Catholic” When we changed to taking the Body of Jesus in our hands, I didn’t like it! When I thought about it and prayed about it, I felt that it wasn’t “all bad”. That being said, I would love to take communion as I did as a child. What I dislike more are the Extraordinary Ministers giving out communion. I was one for over 12 years and somehow the Ladies of the Parish slowly eliminated Men from that role in the parish that I was attending. I didn’t object because I felt and still feel that it takes some of the beauty out of the Euchurist service when I had to serve. The Euchurist should normally be given only as bread and eliminate the lines of people serving at every Mass.
That is just my humble opinion. I live by the saying “Quit griping about your church, if it was perfect, you couldn’t belong.”
 
JReducation said:
In the Code of Canon Law on who may receive the sacraments it says that non Catholic Christians who believe in the true presence may receive communion at a Catholic mass with the authority of the Ordinary.

The Ordinary is the Bishop, if it’s a parish or the Major Religious Superior, if it’s a religious house, catholic school or hospital run by a religious order.
JR 🙂
Click to expand...
I agree with you here, but what I was wanting is the specific number for the Canon involved…
Prayers & Blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
RobGentner said:
I am a 63 year old “cradle Catholic” When we changed to taking the Body of Jesus in our hands, I didn’t like it! When I thought about it and prayed about it, I felt that it wasn’t “all bad”. That being said, I would love to take communion as I did as a child. What I dislike more are the Extraordinary Ministers giving out communion. I was one for over 12 years and somehow the Ladies of the Parish slowly eliminated Men from that role in the parish that I was attending. I didn’t object because I felt and still feel that it takes some of the beauty out of the Euchurist service when I had to serve. The Euchurist should normally be given only as bread and eliminate the lines of people serving at every Mass.
That is just my humble opinion. I live by the saying “Quit griping about your church, if it was perfect, you couldn’t belong.”
Click to expand...
Welcome to the CAF. Good post with common sense in its foundation.

.
 
RobGentner said:
I am a 63 year old “cradle Catholic” When we changed to taking the Body of Jesus in our hands, I didn’t like it! When I thought about it and prayed about it, I felt that it wasn’t “all bad”. That being said, I would love to take communion as I did as a child. What I dislike more are the Extraordinary Ministers giving out communion. I was one for over 12 years and somehow the Ladies of the Parish slowly eliminated Men from that role in the parish that I was attending. I didn’t object because I felt and still feel that it takes some of the beauty out of the Euchurist service when I had to serve. The Euchurist should normally be given only as bread and eliminate the lines of people serving at every Mass.
That is just my humble opinion. I live by the saying “Quit griping about your church, if it was perfect, you couldn’t belong.”
Click to expand...
:clapping: :bowdown2: :amen: :blessyou:
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
I agree with you here, but what I was wanting is the specific number for the Canon involved.
Click to expand...
Can. 844 §4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgement of the diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and pressing need, catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments to other christians not in full communion with the catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the catholic faith in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top