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

[Auntie_M]

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.

Yes, I happen to believe that Christ can still do miracles and can still heal. There are cases upon cases of “healings”. There is nothing magical about that. Taking the body and blood of Christ is no way near of anything that is “tempting” Christ. Don’t see how you could even compare the two.

You can ask another “Do you believe…” (as you did to the Deacon) and attack someone else for saying the same thing?

There are very few things I “get my dander up on”, but it seems that you can certainly bring that out in people.
.

 

[MrS]

Wow, this is a long thread on receiving Communion in the hand! The title says that “the hour has come to abandon the practice”,
…
Let the Body of Christ be received with reverence and move on!

As the OP, I hope to just clarify that three dots signify more words belong where the 3 dots were placed. To avoid misrepresentation, I again post the entire quote in post #1:

to wit:

Among his comments in the Preface:…

• **“The hour has come to review and, if necessary, abandon the practice of Communion standing and in the hand” **
• “speaking of Communion in the hand, it must be admitted that the practice was improperly and quickly introduced"
• **"**this practice is decreasing and those responsible not only demand that the faithful receive the Holy Eucharist standing, but even eliminate all kneelers, forcing the faithful to remain standing"
• “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."
• **"**defend it in the midst of dangerous distortions of the faith that this situation continues to create."
  Please review this before posting comments that only lead to US vs THEM.

It it fine to claim your disposition of heart is reverent and sincere. I would not accuse anyone, even a Deacon , of being wrong about this.

But the point being made by the author of the Preface, and the point I had hoped would surface in this thread is this:

Not only is your choice of posture a reflection of yourself, but it is an example to others as well. A profound sign of reverence often gives others something to think about. That is too often NOT the case with communion in the hand.

I attended a funeral this weekend for a Catholic who often admitted to me that she was not real concerned with or involved with her faith.

With the exception of her sister and one son, the reception of communion … in what I would term a lax Catholic parish … made me want to cry. Young kids watching their parent receive so casually and then doing the same or less … obvious non Catholics joining in (and taking a host by hand) … the priest distributing as if he was dealing cards.

But they all held hands and sang Amazing Grace.

I did not mean to create an argument about US vs THEM. I only hoped that the real words from the Preface would encourage posters and viewers alike to perhaps agree that

“The hour has come to review and, if necessary, abandon the practice of Communion standing and in the hand"

It does not suggest we abondone communion on the tongue or kneeling… both of which are worthy of the Lord… and IMHO, are more worthy of example to fellow Christians… Catholic or not… and a worthy expression of our faith and belief in the Real Presence.

.

.

 

[Leeta]

Auntie M,

I fail to see where I condemned you. I was trying to shed a little light on the subject, that’s all. Presenting facts is condemning you?
I am not concerned about germs or wheat for myself (maybe for some others though who are allergic) at all, but the fact is that the appearance of bread and wine remains, although totally and actually the Body and Blood of our Lord. It is the teaching of the Church. Read some of the CA tracts on this.

People generally do not receive Communion in the hand like they did in the first centuries of the early church. The Host would always be placed in the right hand and the left acted as a primitive ‘paten’. People reverenced the Host lying on their hand for (and this could take a minute or more apparently) by making a profound bow and oftentimes ‘blessing’ themselves with the Host by touching it to their eyes and forehead and mouth while bowing, before taking the Host with their tongue, not their other hand, from the right hand. See St. John Damascene, De Fide, 4,13in PG 94, 1149.
The present practice arose out of disobedience in the Netherlands in 1968 and spread to parts of Germany. Watch how folks receive Communion in the hand today-the Host in the left hand, the other hand picks up the host. There is seldom a sign of reverence made. The hands are not licked clean of crumbs of the Host or purified in any way. That is why I ask, does anyone believe what the Church teaches that Jesus is present in every visible crumb of the Host, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity? The above disregard, which may seem a very small thing, denies this true teaching.
If one believes this is the Body and Blood, how come this belief is not shown in actions and gestures? Jesus wants us to believe and love him in the Sacred Host. I think you do want to love Him. Please do so, but I mean no condemnation.
The responsibility lies with the bishops and Cardinals who failed to teach and enforce the rubrics and the doctrines of the Church all these last years and to the present day. They are intimidated or have grown weak in their own belief.
That is the effect of habitual gestures, postures and actions which deny the reality of the words being said. You can try to fight this weakening of faith, of course, more power to you. But for most folks it is nigh impossible since we are a unity of body and soul.
Again, I mean no offense.

 

[laudamus_te]

That is the effect of habitual gestures, postures and actions which deny the reality of the words being said. You can try to fight this weakening of faith, of course, more power to you. But for most folks it is nigh impossible since we are a unity of body and soul.

I am living proof of the damaging effects of Communion in the hand. I was born pre-VII and had 9-10 years of my life in the TLM before the NO was foisted upon us, virtually overnight. I was raised in a good Catholic family. I attended Catholic schools, grades 1-12. But in my 40s, I had somehow acquired the belief that the host and wine were only symbolic of Christ’s Body and Blood. I have no idea how I came to this terrible apostasy. It was not something I was conscious of; it was not something that I was led into believing by my pastors. My parish was a fairly normal (i.e. not overtly liberal) one. I have concluded that it was a slow and imperceptible poisoning of my faith through Communion in the hand. But I don’t believe that it was the only factor. A lax, irreverent atmosphere in the church most certainly was a major contribution to my weakening faith. I literally saved my life by fleeing to a local SSPX chapel, and the realization of what had become of my faith hit me smack in the face. Since leaving that church (which I had grown up in, by the way) the new pastor has mandated the standing posture from the Our Father through to the last person to receive Communion. I can only imagine what condition my faith would be in today if I had stayed, but I’m pretty sure it would be completely ruined.

I am convinced that Communion in the Hand can lead to loss of belief in the real presence. Archbishop Ranjith and other prelates believe likewise. If one single soul is lost because of this practice, that is a devastating loss and victory for the devil. Does Communion on the tongue eliminate the chance of abuse of the Blessed Sacrament? No, obviously not. But isn’t it a rather defeatist attitude to say “Oh, well, you can’t eliminate the chance of abuse or loss of faith… let’s create more chances!”

Anyway, this is my explanation for my position on this topic. If anyone doesn’t agree with me, amen, so be it, but please don’t try to argue with me.

 

[otjm]

I would love to see the communion rail back in place, hands folded in reverence. I really don’t kow why the rail was taken away, but if it was to make communion go faster, it was for the wrong reason. Spending an addidtional 2 minutes in church might be a good thing.

Mom of 5

Communion actually goes slower with the individual recipient going up, bowing, and receiving. It is amazing, when a priest is in a hurry, how quickly he can zip down the line of the altar rail.

 

[lovesMary]

I recently went to a lively teen oriented Mass in another town. What genuine energy from the Holy Spirit was present there! I met some of the teens who had so much more enthusiam for Christ than in my much more traditional and ‘reverent’ parish, where no one smiles at one another, and observes much more strict and old fashioned ettiquette.

I’m a rather inhibited person, but it was great to see the young people raise their hands to the Lord and joyously worship him!

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

It is amazing, when a priest is in a hurry, how quickly he can zip down the line of the altar rail.

And this was one of the pre Vatican II abuses.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[lovesMary]

And this was one of the pre Vatican II abuses.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

I don’t see any special virtue in giving communion as quickly as possible.

 

[otjm]

And this was one of the pre Vatican II abuses.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

I was an altar boy then. However, I have seen a certain amount of speed recently in a parish where they use the altar rail. It is sad to see the priest holding the host, say “The Body of Christ” and start to put it toward your mouth before you can get the word “Amen” out. some didn’t even respond as they already had their tongue out. I am sure they felt it was more reverant. I have mixed feelings on the point.

 

[otjm]

I don’t see any special virtue in giving communion as quickly as possible.

I don’t either.

One of the complaints about EMHCs is that it speeds up Communion; but that is a matter of perspective. It may speed it up for the entire congregation; but it will also slow it down for the individual communicant. I am not promoting EMHCs, but I tire of the issue of “speed”, as I have seen speed where it should most definitely not be - between the priest and the communicant.

 

[SnorterLuster]

And this was one of the pre Vatican II abuses.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

Deacon, what was the abuse? Speed? Was there a pace for giving Holy Communion spelled out like 30 people a minute? You kind of lost me with that statement. As long as the priest says the words and administers the Sacrament, what is the abuse?

 

[Deacon_Ed_B]

Deacon, what was the abuse? Speed? Was there a pace for giving Holy Communion spelled out like 30 people a minute? You kind of lost me with that statement. As long as the priest says the words and administers the Sacrament, what is the abuse?

If you would have heard them discuss how fast they could “take care of communion”, you would understand where the abuse was. They were to say in Latin, "Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi, custodiat animam tuam, et vitam etenumam. Amen (don’t critique the spelling). It was said so fast that you could hardly understand a single word they were saying. Thats where the abuse came in. Reverence was totally lacking in speed.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B

 

[lovesMary]

I just don’t get what’s so reverent about kneeling vs standing. Standing is traditionally a sign of respect, for instance when the judge enters the courtroom, when a lady enters a room, etc.

Kneeling is difficult for many people who are elderly or overweight, or have joint problems. Standing is only difficult for a small minority.

 

[Miles_Mariae]

I just don’t get what’s so reverent about kneeling vs standing. Standing is traditionally a sign of respect, for instance when the judge enters the courtroom, when a lady enters a room, etc.

Kneeling is difficult for many people who are elderly or overweight, or have joint problems. Standing is only difficult for a small minority.

Standing at attention usually involves moving from a sitting position to a standing one. It communicates respect, but not supplication or obedience. For example, if you walk up to someone and then remain standing, are you communicating respect? Not really. If you are sitting, and someone comes in (or leaves) and you stand, then you are communicating respect. This is why walking up during procession and remaining standing does not really show reverence.

Now, your question is what makes kneeling more reverent than standing. This seems to have a very intuitive answer, since kneeling has been used in cultures around the world to communicate respect and submission. In theory, perhaps it is because it lowers the person doing the kneeling. Perhaps it is because it puts the person in a more vulnerable position. Honestly, it’s not a question easily answered in words. Think about it, though… it’s “down in adoration falling” and not “remaining in adoration standing”.

 

[KingAlfred]

The Vatican Publishing House, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, has just published a book by the Most Rev. Athanasium Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganda (in Kazakhstan), called Dominus Est. Reflections from Central Asia on Holy Communion. The Preface of this book is written by the Most Rev. Malcolm Ranjith, the new secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments,

Among his comments in the Preface:…

• **“The hour has come to review and, if necessary, abandon the practice of Communion standing and in the hand” **
• “speaking of Communion in the hand, it must be admitted that the practice was improperly and quickly introduced"
• **"**this practice is decreasing and those responsible not only demand that the faithful receive the Holy Eucharist standing, but even eliminate all kneelers, forcing the faithful to remain standing"
• “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."
• **"**defend it in the midst of dangerous distortions of the faith that this situation continues to create."

---

I hope not. Receiving communion on the tongue in church is very unhealthy. I already forego the wine for that reason.

 

[ethelzguy]

Standing at attention usually involves moving from a sitting position to a standing one. It communicates respect, but not supplication or obedience. For example, if you walk up to someone and then remain standing, are you communicating respect? Not really. If you are sitting, and someone comes in (or leaves) and you stand, then you are communicating respect. This is why walking up during procession and remaining standing does not really show reverence.

Now, your question is what makes kneeling more reverent than standing. This seems to have a very intuitive answer, since kneeling has been used in cultures around the world to communicate respect and submission. In theory, perhaps it is because it lowers the person doing the kneeling. Perhaps it is because it puts the person in a more vulnerable position. Honestly, it’s not a question easily answered in words. Think about it, though… it’s “down in adoration falling” and not “remaining in adoration standing”.

So, is it a matter of “reverence”, or “submission” ?

When we pray on our knees we are submitting ourselves to God. When we receive Holy Communion, we are RECEIVING the Body and Blood of Christ, not “submitting”. The submitting comes prior to the Communion procession…on our knees…“Lord, I am not worthy…”

 

[Miles_Mariae]

I think I used the word “submission” once and that was in conjunction with respect “respect and submission”. Yes, the idea is to communicate deep respect (i.e. reverence), and perhaps “humility” would have been a better choice than “submission”. Nonetheless, my point stands. There is a certain respect that is communicated better by kneeling than remaining in a standing position.

 

[Aramis]

So, is it a matter of “reverence”, or “submission” ?

When we pray on our knees we are submitting ourselves to God. When we receive Holy Communion, we are RECEIVING the Body and Blood of Christ, not “submitting”. The submitting comes prior to the Communion procession…on our knees…“Lord, I am not worthy…”

Actually, no matter the posture, we are supposed to be both respecting and submitting.

In the Byzantine Tradition, communion is received standing, and has been since at least as far back as 400 AD, when described by Bishop (St.) John Chrysostom, whose codification of the Divine Liturgy is still definitive to this day.

Heck, the entire liturgy is typically standing, except in certain westernized uses.

Good enough for the Saints to stand aright, and stand in awe…

 

[Cara_Serrano]

If there is too much “speediness” at the Communion rail or irreverence at the standing line, that is the fault of the one administering the Sacrament, not the communicant. No matter how quickly or irreverently I am given Holy Communion, I show my reverence and adoration for the Lord when I return to my pew. It is then, while I’m kneeling, that He receives my full love and attention, regardless of what others have done before me.

 

[AverageJohn]

Out of all of the things God does for us out of love, all the suffering, the insults, the abuses, and being a prisoner for the sake of loving us. All we can do is weep about how we should not have to kneel. That is shameful to even argue such a thing, This is Our Lord, the holiest of holy, and out of love we will not kneel!? Suck up your tears of pride and offer them for Christ crucified upon the cross, In at that we are even worthy enough to relieve him of even a second of the weight of his cross.