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

[laudamus_te]

The story of taking on the tongue because it is “more reverent” really isn’t the real reason for it. Although, it is certainly acceptable also.

Archbishop Ranjith, for one, disagrees with you:
"This gesture has contributed to a gradual and increased weakening of the attitude of reverence toward the sacred Eucharist Species, whereas the previous practice had better safeguarded that sense of reverence."

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Here we are almost 500 posts into the discussion and people are still saying, “My way is better than your way.” Once again, and this has been said by many besides myself, The reverence comes from what is in the persons heart, not whether he or she receives in the hand or on the tongue. People in my parish receive either way and no one tells them that another way is better as each is accepted. Suffice to say, the Holy Father gave it in the hand and on the tongue to people at his masses here in the states. If that is good enough for him, it is certainly good enough for me and should be for you too.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[bobzills]

Once again, and this has been said by many besides myself, The reverence comes from what is in the persons heart, not whether he or she receives in the hand or on the tongue.

To some extent this is true. However, I think that there are some postures which are viewed as more reverent than others.

 

[Auntie_M]

Archbishop Ranjith, for one, disagrees with you:
"This gesture has contributed to a gradual and increased weakening of the attitude of reverence toward the sacred Eucharist Species, whereas the previous practice had better safeguarded that sense of reverence."

I am terribly sorry, but I don’t know an Archbishop Ranjith, and what “gesture” is he actually referring to. May we have a site for this quote?

 

[Auntie_M]

and what do you mean by that?:shrug:

I’m so sorry, I thought I made it clear. For all the Traditionalist out there, taking in the hand is actually the “original” Tradition.

That was all I meant by ("that? )

 

[Auntie_M]

May I throw out another thing to think about…

For those of you who are afraid of germs, etc. on the host.

No worries. You are taking Jesus’s body, He has no germs
even if every dirty little hand in the bunch handled the one you ate, you WILL not eat germs. His body and blood is pure.

You may think this weird or funny, but I actually go to take the Eucharist with the thought…“Lord, just let me have a dirty ole toenail”

 

[Auntie_M]

oops, one more thing to think about

The first communion was taking lying down. Should we all just go up front and lie down? “In keeping with Tradition?, that is”

Or was the first communion actually done as in the painting of everyone sitting at a “table” enjoying a “meal” (The Last Supper). And Jesus handing the bread (by hand) to the apostles, who took it “by hand”

Do you still want to abandon the practice…

If it was good enough for Jesus, but then, I guess it isn’t good enough for us. (sorry, I do have a bad habit of being sarcastic, don’t really mean anything by it though)

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

And still counting
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[JReducation]

Why can’t we allow this discussion to die? It’s turning into a competition: “My way is holier than your way.” This is not about what is holier, but who is worthy.

In the hand or on the tongue does not make one more or less worthy. It does not make one more or less of a believer. Martin Luther celebrated the traditional mass with communion on the tongue and he ended up leaving the Church. Calvin received communion on the tongue and also left the Church.

I know many who received it on the hand and they left too.

The conclusion is that one form is not going to keep more people in the Church than the other. Only one’s response to grace does that.

This thread has outlived its usefulness.

Why can’t we talk about something more important, such as the union of Christ and the soul at communion? That’s worth discussing and sharing insights and experience.

I am noticing that people on CAF are more drawn to the contraversies than to the spiritual life. If you check the number of people who check in on the Spirituality thread and compare it to those who check into these thread the numbers don’t add up.

Why are we so obsessed with the contraversy instead of obsessed with the perfection of the soul, despite the contraversy?

Does anyone else agree that it’s time to let it go and let the Sacred Congregation on the Sacraments do its job and review the policy and let us know what they come up with?

JR

 

[Jeanette_L]

You may think this weird or funny, but I actually go to take the Eucharist with the thought…“Lord, just let me have a dirty ole toenail”

I’m glad I read this after Mass today! I’m afraid I wouldn’t be able to get his image out of my head.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Why are we so obsessed with the contraversy instead of obsessed with the perfection of the soul, despite the contraversy?

For the same reason people tune in to talk radio or Dr. Phil or Opra everyday. Controversy sells. People like to get themselves worked up over stuff, maybe it makes them feel more alive or something. It’s a very sad commentary on the human psyche at times.

Does anyone else agree that it’s time to let it go and let the Sacred Congregation on the Sacraments do its job and review the policy and let us know what they come up with?

JR

I propose it’s always been in our best interest to let those who have been given this ministry do their jobs, trusting that the Holy Spirit will direct as promised, getting us all where we need to be.

In other words, count me in as agreeing.

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

This thread has outlived its usefulness.

Why can’t we talk about something more important, such as the union of Christ and the soul at communion? That’s worth discussing and sharing insights and experience.

Does anyone else agree that it’s time to let it go and let the Sacred Congregation on the Sacraments do its job and review the policy and let us know what they come up with?

JR

AMEN

:clapping:

Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[laudamus_te]

laudamus te:

Archbishop Ranjith, for one, disagrees with you:
"This gesture has contributed to a gradual and increased weakening of the attitude of reverence toward the sacred Eucharist Species, whereas the previous practice had better safeguarded that sense of reverence.

"I am terribly sorry, but I don’t know an Archbishop Ranjith, and what “gesture” is he actually referring to. May we have a site for this quote?

I guess this thread’s gotten so long you’ve forgotten the OP. That’s what I was quoting from.

 

[Auntie_M]

AMEN

:clapping:

Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

ditto:thumbsup:

 

[Leeta]

Do you believe that man is union of body and soul? The Church says we are and experience shows us that. We die, if we are separated from our body. So, when we receive Holy Communion, our gestures are to mirror our heart. So the posture and manner of receiving are very important, because what we do in our body is then repeated in our heart. We are not Protestants who tend to discount and denigrate the role of the body in reflecting and reinforcing our faith and love.
The early Church practice of communion being placed on the right hand and then being reverenced and adored before being carefully consumed by bowing the head down to the hand and taking the host with the tongue is not what is practiced today as ‘communion in the hand’.
Standing is an eastern Church tradition, not a Western church tradition. Why was our Latin tradition in receiving Holy Communion kneeling denigrated and finally almost banned? This is most uncharitable and wrong.
On the Feast of Corpus Christi Pope Benedict had everyone at his Mass in Rome kneel and receive on the tongue! Read what he said. Kneeling and on the tongue is the proper response to the almighty gift of HIs Body and Blood for us unworthy sinners!
Yes, none of us are worthy and kneeling helps US and reminds US of this fact, that we are nothing in comparison to God.
Deacon Ed B, et al, do you believe that Jesus is bodily present in the sacred species? Do you love Him? If so, then you surely don’t want Him to fall on the floor and be trampled or put Him at risk thereof. Keeping our Lord safe should be the priority of every communicant. So what do you have against keeping Him safe? Every drop and every particle is Jesus, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.
Have you ever fed a baby? The least messy way is to place the food in the baby’s mouth, not to let the baby pick it up and smear the food around. Yes, it is humbling to be treated like a helpless baby, but we are in reality less than that in comparison with God. Don’t we have daily temptations to place ourselves at the center of the universe instead of God? Receiving Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue is one more powerful way to train our body and not just our soul to praise and adore and humble itself before our Lord and God is His Almighty presence before and in us.
By the way, Auntie M, there can well be germs on the chalice, because the appearances of wine remain even after Consecration. He promised us His Body and Blood yes, not a sterile and germ-free chalice and appearance.
For these reasons and more, I believe the indult for it will be withdrawn in the next few years. Few realize that communion in the hand and standing to receive are only allowed with a temporary permission which can be withdrawn at any time by the Holy Father.

 

[Auntie_M]

Do you believe that man is union of body and soul? The Church says we are and experience shows us that. We die, if we are separated from our body. So, when we receive Holy Communion, our gestures are to mirror our heart. So the posture and manner of receiving are very important, because what we do in our body is then repeated in our heart. We are not Protestants who tend to discount and denigrate the role of the body in reflecting and reinforcing our faith and love.
The early Church practice of communion being placed on the right hand and then being reverenced and adored before being carefully consumed by bowing the head down to the hand and taking the host with the tongue is not what is practiced today as ‘communion in the hand’.
Standing is an eastern Church tradition, not a Western church tradition. Why was our Latin tradition in receiving Holy Communion kneeling denigrated and finally almost banned? This is most uncharitable and wrong.
On the Feast of Corpus Christi Pope Benedict had everyone at his Mass in Rome kneel and receive on the tongue! Read what he said. Kneeling and on the tongue is the proper response to the almighty gift of HIs Body and Blood for us unworthy sinners!
Yes, none of us are worthy and kneeling helps US and reminds US of this fact, that we are nothing in comparison to God.
Deacon Ed B, et al, do you believe that Jesus is bodily present in the sacred species? Do you love Him? If so, then you surely don’t want Him to fall on the floor and be trampled or put Him at risk thereof. Keeping our Lord safe should be the priority of every communicant. So what do you have against keeping Him safe? Every drop and every particle is Jesus, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.
Have you ever fed a baby? The least messy way is to place the food in the baby’s mouth, not to let the baby pick it up and smear the food around. Yes, it is humbling to be treated like a helpless baby, but we are in reality less than that in comparison with God. Don’t we have daily temptations to place ourselves at the center of the universe instead of God? Receiving Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue is one more powerful way to train our body and not just our soul to praise and adore and humble itself before our Lord and God is His Almighty presence before and in us.
By the way, Auntie M, there can well be germs on the chalice, because the appearances of wine remain even after Consecration. He promised us His Body and Blood yes, not a sterile and germ-free chalice and appearance.
For these reasons and more, I believe the indult for it will be withdrawn in the next few years. Few realize that communion in the hand and standing to receive are only allowed with a temporary permission which can be withdrawn at any time by the Holy Father.

I’m sorry little lady, but if YOU believed that the body and blood is truly present , you would NOT be afraid of germs. Ever hear of the healings the Christ did while on earth? Do YOU believe that He healed people and EVEN brought them back to life? Do YOU believe? The Bible also tells us, that if we eat poison or pick up a viper, believing in His name, we would not be harmed. Do you think drinking from a chalis (with germs) or eating His body (handled by germy people) would be anything less? Yes He did promise us healing…He NEVER said that in taking HIS body and blood that it “might” make us sick if we catch other’s germs. How silly can you get.

As far as the early church’s practice of receiving on the hand =, I guess they never considered that it MIGHT fall to the ground and be Trampled on, this seemed to not be a concern of theirs. You make it sound like whoever takes in the hand is very irreverent and treats the host with such a lackadaisical attitude. I do hope you are not inferring this. Judging others is also like you said " MOST UNCHARITABLE AND WRONG".

Oh my, I see that “them against us” attitude coming out.

I have NOT read any thread from a “NO” that makes accusations they way the traditionlist do. Someone said on one post that this attitude was hurting the church much more than “Kneeling or on the tongue” ever would. I happen to agree. Traditionlist, like you, are dividing our church, with this “WE ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG” thing you all have going on. Get real and get a life
Sweep around your own door step first.

How does that verse go," He who has no sin, let him cast the first stone…". It is a crying shame at all the stones being cast at Rome, at the chair of Peter…at Christ"s vicar!!!

And THAT, little lady, is what I get offended by…

 

[LilyM]

I’m sorry little lady, but if YOU believed that the body and blood is truly present , you would NOT be afraid of germs. Ever hear of the healings the Christ did while on earth? Do YOU believe that He healed people and EVEN brought them back to life? Do YOU believe? The Bible also tells us, that if we eat poison or pick up a viper, believing in His name, we would not be harmed. Do you think drinking from a chalis (with germs) or eating His body (handled by germy people) would be anything less? Yes He did promise us healing…He NEVER said that in taking HIS body and blood that it “might” make us sick if we catch other’s germs. How silly can you get.

Tell this to the many celiacs who get seriously ill from having the Sacred Host - you really think NONE of them believe?

The Eucharist is for our spiritual health, its purpose is not for our physical protection or healing. To presume otherwise is getting dangerously close to superstition. Besides which, the doctrine of transubstantiation states that the physical accidents, properties and substance (which include the ability to get you drunk if you have too much, or cause an allergic reaction if you’re celiac) remain UNchanged.

By the way didn’t Jesus also say something about ‘thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test’ precisely because the Devil told Him that He could leap from the Temple roof and not be harmed? The message you’re giving sounds awfully similar, don’t you think the source might be as well?

Didn’t Jesus also warn us against seeking after signs and wonders? Which magic-charm-like protection against germs or physical illness certainly is.

Sounds like there’s a bit more scripture you need to take to heart.

 

[JReducation]

Tell this to the many celiacs who get seriously ill from having the Sacred Host - you really think NONE of them believe?

The Eucharist is for our spiritual health, its purpose is not for our physical protection or healing. To presume otherwise is getting dangerously close to superstition. Besides which, the doctrine of transubstantiation states that the physical accidents, properties and substance (which include the ability to get you drunk if you have too much, or cause an allergic reaction if you’re celiac) remain UNchanged.

By the way didn’t Jesus also say something about ‘thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test’ precisely because the Devil told Him that He could leap from the Temple roof and not be harmed? The message you’re giving sounds awfully similar, don’t you think the source might be as well?

Didn’t Jesus also warn us against seeking after signs and wonders? Which magic-charm-like protection against germs or physical illness certainly is.

Sounds like there’s a bit more scripture you need to take to heart.

Celiacs should not receive communion via the host. They should be given communion from the chalice, preferably not the same chalice tha the priest uses, since the priest breaks a corner of the host into the chalice.

In my son’s first communion class there was a little boy with this problem. They had a special chalice just for him, without any hint of flour in it.

In another parish I worked in, we had a priest who was a recovering alcoholic, a very holy man. He used grape juice instead of wine in his chalice. The other chalices had wine.

All of these things are allowed in liturgical law. There is no need to put people’s health at risk.

It is true that there have been very few cases reported of people getting sick from drinking out of the same chalice. My deceased wife, who was a physician, once explained to me that there is enough alcohol in wine to kill some milder germs. The key word is milder, I guess. I’m not a physician so I won’t attempt to explain which germs are mild and which are not. I do know that in first aid we were taught to use drinking alcohol to clean wounds if you can’t find regular alcohol.

But that’s getting off the subject.

JR

 

[laudamus_te]

I’m sorry little lady, but if YOU believed that the body and blood is truly present , you would NOT be afraid of germs. Ever hear of the healings the Christ did while on earth? Do YOU believe that He healed people and EVEN brought them back to life? Do YOU believe? The Bible also tells us, that if we eat poison or pick up a viper, believing in His name, we would not be harmed. Do you think drinking from a chalis (with germs) or eating His body (handled by germy people) would be anything less? Yes He did promise us healing…He NEVER said that in taking HIS body and blood that it “might” make us sick if we catch other’s germs. How silly can you get.

As far as the early church’s practice of receiving on the hand =, I guess they never considered that it MIGHT fall to the ground and be Trampled on, this seemed to not be a concern of theirs. You make it sound like whoever takes in the hand is very irreverent and treats the host with such a lackadaisical attitude. I do hope you are not inferring this. Judging others is also like you said " MOST UNCHARITABLE AND WRONG".

Oh my, I see that “them against us” attitude coming out.

Auntie, between you and Leeta, the only “them against us” attitude I see is coming from you.

I’ve heard some ridiculous arguments in favor or Communion in the hand, but yours that the Sacred Species is some sort of magical protector from germs takes the cake! But even more astounding is your contention that the early Church was unconcerned about abuse of the Host!

I have NOT read any thread from a “NO” that makes accusations they way the traditionlist do.

Someone said on one post that this attitude was hurting the church much more than “Kneeling or on the tongue” ever would. I happen to agree. Traditionlist, like you, are dividing our church, with this “WE ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG” thing you all have going on. Get real and get a life
Sweep around your own door step first.

How does that verse go," He who has no sin, let him cast the first stone…". It is a crying shame at all the stones being cast at Rome, at the chair of Peter…at Christ"s vicar!!!

And THAT, little lady, is what I get offended by…

You get offended way too easily, and in the process you misjudge people. You can’t see that your attitude coming through in posts such as this is no better than the “traditionalists” you mock.

Leeta, I thought your post was a good one, I did not see anything judgmental or uncharitable, and your views were calmly presented. My understanding of what you said is that even one single instance of Our Lord being abused is one too many! For your loving concern for Our Lord, you are belittled.

 

[Cara_Serrano]

Wow, this is a long thread on receiving Communion in the hand! The title says that “the hour has come to abandon the practice”, but I haven’t really seen a reason to abandon reception in the hand as long as

1. it is done reverently (as it was at the Last Supper) and
2. receiving on the tongue is also permitted.

Personally I will do whatever my local pastor/bishop decide, but I don’t think this is an either/or debate. Let the Body of Christ be received with reverence and move on!