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

[gurneyhalleck1]

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.

Actually he/she is the one implying****** it and you are the one infering****** it. Inferences are drawn from a person making an implication. Sorry, just the sixth grade teacher in me LOL…

 

[Philothea53]

You don’t take into account the objective reality and truth that occurs with Communion in the hand. Sacrilege occurs when particles are left behind on the hand. You can have all the love you want and the state of the heart perfect, but that is not going to suspend the laws of science and physics.

Studies have shown that Communion in the hand always causes particles of the Sacred Host to be left behind. Pieces of Christ are then later discarted. It is pure sacrilege no matter the dispostion of the recipient. I can verify this since I was an EMHC for many months and this led me to recieve only on the tounge and in part led me to quit.

God is a hundred times more harsh and takes these things more seriously than any priest in the world could.
Ignorance is what covers many Catholics, but woe to those who know the truth about Communion in the hand, bcause they are aware of sacrilege and this danger.

I always wondered about these same things. If it is okay to receive in the hand, why are the hands of the Priest consecrated? Neither our hands nor the hands of EMHC’s are consecrated to touch our LOrd. The crumbs/residue left in our hands end up on end of the pew as we touch it as we return to our seat, in our hair when we push it out of our eyes, etc. The same question goes to whether there should be EMHC’s. If one watches as the Priest consecrates the hosts, he ALWAYS has a paten under or makes sure to rubs his fingers together over the chalice or the ciboria (sp?) whether he SEES crumbs or not. It is only logical to assume that there are crumbs on his fingers after handling the hosts. In fact, Priests are taught to handle the hosts with only one finger and the thumb to lessen the possibility of crumbs remaining. That is also the reason the Deacon, when distributing the hosts among several ciboria will kind of pour them in rather than just grabbing hands full and dropping them in.

(It also bothers me to see an EMHC who has no one left in their own line come to the side of the Priest and pull people out of his line. Sure it helps Communion go faster, but isn’t it always better to receive from he who stands in persona Christi?)

I don’t think you can express too much reverence. In addition, receiving on the tongue helps to alleviate the possibility that some would (as in the recent news) take the Body of our Lord home with them to show their friends or do God only knows what.

 

[MrS]

Originally Posted by seekerz forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
I may be looking in the wrong places, but I’ve yet to see a thread this long examining the state of our consciences when we receive the Lord’s body and blood. Ultimately, that is what is important to God and all else is just trappings.

*I guess that is what happens when the thread was begun with the words and intention of a higher ranking Vatican cleric… and then the thread becomes another arena for those who prefere standing and in the hand to come voice their objection to what was written by the Most Rev. Malcolm Ranjith, the new secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, *

* *

at leasts most of the objections are leveled toward those who prefer kneeling and on the tongue… and not too often against the Pope and others who agree.
* *

.

 

[saint_rafael]

Well I know this is false. I have never had one stray crumb after years. So any study (or poster) that says “always” is more concerned with rhetoric than accuracy.

Many of the crumbs are so small that they are microscoptic. It always the case that microscoptic particles that are not visible, are left behind. Even these small particles that are not visible are still Jesus and constitute sacrilege.

Communion on the toungue, which is still the norm, ensures no particles are left on the outside of the body.
Protestants who do not believe in the real presence could care less about this problem because the host is seen symbolically, which is becoming the case with more Catholics.

 

[lovesMary]

We treat the consecrated host respectfully because Christ is our Saviour, not because losing a particle will actually hurt God. It’s not like cutting off someone’s finger and throwing it in the trash.

I think some people here are a little to literal in regards to the Eucharist, similar to a Fundamentalists approach to the Bible. Yes, we should do all be can to respect and care for the consecrated host, but let’s not agonize over lost molecules!

 

[Philothea53]

Well I know this is false. I have never had one stray crumb after years. So any study (or poster) that says “always” is more concerned with rhetoric than accuracy.

If that were true then why are the Priests hands consecrated to the task? Why after Communion are the vessels PURIFIED and ONLY by a Priest?

I think you are more concerned with arguing the point than considering the possibility you may be wrong.

 

[Miles_Mariae]

I think when our good Lord reads this thread, He shakes His head in exasperation. After all the words of the prophets, after the Gospels and all the Church teachings, it still seems that what is most important to God: the state of our hearts before Him, is being given second place to external appearances.

Of course the state of the heart is important, and when receiving the Eucharist one is to have the correct inner disposition. So now, assuming this to be true, some people are concerned also about the outward expression of reverence. Since the former is already held to be true, discussing the latter does not place the former in “second place”.

It is presumably universally accepted among practicing catholics that the state of the heart, a proper inner disposition, is necessary when receiving the Eucharist. The question is, “how can we do better?” Thus, taking the matter a step further and discussing the outward expression of reverence does not place the outward before the inward. To make this accusation is a fallacy.

Sure posture can reflect the heart, but not always and it is superficial to judge reverence by what we see on the outside.

The matter is not one of judging, but rather enforcing a practice more likely to instill inner reverence.

I may be looking in the wrong places, but I’ve yet to see a thread this long examining the state of our consciences when we receive the Lord’s body and blood.

There are many resources, both online and in print (as well as directly from priests) about how to examine one’s conscience. The necessity of being clean of mortal sin before receiving Communion is a sure teaching of the Church and does not require discussion. This is why long threads about these topics are difficult to find.

Ultimately, that is what is important to God and all else is just trappings.

On the contrary, after seeking the appropriate inner disposition, presenting the proper outward appearance is edifying to those around us, and in turn is likely to aid us in maintaining the appropriate state of the heart.

The important thing is to view the outward and inward as complements, each of the other, rather than as irreconcilable enemies between which we must choose one at the expense of the other. The latter, false view is exemplified by your unfortunate wording in casting external reverence as mere “trappings”.

 

[Philothea53]

We treat the consecrated host respectfully because Christ is our Saviour, not because losing a particle will actually hurt God. It’s not like cutting off someone’s finger and throwing it in the trash.

I think some people here are a little to literal in regards to the Eucharist, similar to a Fundamentalists approach to the Bible. Yes, we should do all be can to respect and care for the consecrated host, but let’s not agonize over lost molecules!

When I say the Rosary, I always cry when I meditate on the Scourging at the Pillar. I can not imagine one human being hurting another in such a manner, especially our Lord. So too with the Crucifixion, imagining what it must have been like when the spikes were being driven into his hands and feet. Does He not deserve every bit of our love and care when we approach His altar?

After what our Lord went through, yes, I do agonize over a MERE particle of His body. The thought that carelessness or a lax attitude would cause any part of His Body to end up on the floor to be stepped on or end up any other place is so sad. We must do everything we can to protect Him in the Eucharist. It’s one of the rare times we can give something back directly to Him.

 

[saint_rafael]

We treat the consecrated host respectfully because Christ is our Saviour, not because losing a particle will actually hurt God. It’s not like cutting off someone’s finger and throwing it in the trash.

I think some people here are a little to literal in regards to the Eucharist, similar to a Fundamentalists approach to the Bible. Yes, we should do all be can to respect and care for the consecrated host, but let’s not agonize over lost molecules!

That’s pure Blasphemy!!

A Mortal sin against God.

We are too literal?! You mean we actaully believe with all our heart that Jesus Christ is present body, blood, soul and divinity? Of coarse! It is the Catholic faith. It is his actual historical body. The same Jesus who walked and talked with the apostles is the same one in the Eucharist. He is as present in the Eucharist as he was 2,000 years ago.

Lost Molecules? You are talikng about Jesus! It is obvious you have lost the Catholic faith and no do not believe in the real presence of our Lord in the Eucharist.

 

[KowboyM]

Oh no. I disagree on returning to the old ways. The beauty of Jesus touching your hand is precious indeed and then for Him to enter the bodys temple that is not ours, but His; glorifies oneself to the likeness of Him and worthy to enter the Kingdom the moment He enters your temple,( if He should be calling you to do so at that moment). It was Gods Will and design that this change was made in the Church, just like the priest facing the people instead of looking at his backside. We must accept that whatever our Holy Father in Rome decides, we must agree to it as coming from God Himself! No questions asked. Amen.

 

[ethelzguy]

Many of the crumbs are so small that they are microscoptic. It always the case that microscoptic particles that are not visible, are left behind. Even these small particles that are not visible are still Jesus and constitute sacrilege.

Communion on the toungue, which is still the norm, ensures no particles are left on the outside of the body.

This is nothing more than ignorant rhetoric.

Does anybody really believe that by receiving on the tongue, that never, ever does a particle fall? Oh please. what bout men’s beards or ties, or womans blouses, etc.

What about all the times the altar boy let the paten sag a little?

Nice rhetoric, but not reality.

 

[Miles_Mariae]

I’m having a hard time visualizing how something placed on your tongue can fall into your beard/blouse. Do you have a hole in your tongue, or perhaps it droops… a lot? If the former, my condolences, and if the latter, may I suggest investing in a tiny little dumbbell and doing tongue-curls next time you are working out?

 

[saint_rafael]

This is nothing more than ignorant rhetoric.

Does anybody really believe that by receiving on the tongue, that never, ever does a particle fall? Oh please. what bout men’s beards or ties, or womans blouses, etc.

What about all the times the altar boy let the paten sag a little?

Nice rhetoric, but not reality.

It is reality. here’s some proof:

fatimacrusader.com/cr83/cr83pg8.asp

A Particle does not fall because the Sacred Host is placed directly on the tongue. It touches nothing else. It is quickly consumened and swallowed and all the particles stay in the mouth for consumption.

The Host does not touch the beard, tie, or anything becuse it only touches the tongue and in contrast when the Host touches the hand the particles stays in the hand.

 

[nice2000]

It is reality. here’s some proof:

fatimacrusader.com/cr83/cr83pg8.asp

A Particle does not fall because the Sacred Host is placed directly on the tongue. It touches nothing else. It is quickly consumened and swallowed and all the particles stay in the mouth for consumption.

The Host does not touch the beard, tie, or anything becuse it only touches the tongue and in contrast when the Host touches the hand the particles stays in the hand.

I enjoy receiving communion by mouth (tongue)

It makes me feel special and respectful to the Lord.

On Sunday, at my new Parish I just joined, I watched as Communion was being distributed and I counted only about a handful of people who received Communion by tongue.

P.S. Joined brand new Parish because it’s closer to my home.
They opened up about five months ago.

 

[DonaNobis_Pacem]

I have received Holy Communion by both methods. Although I usually receive it in my hands with love and reverence, sometimes I like to change it up and will receive on my tongue. I am comfortable with either and appreciate both methods. I’ve never seen someone from my parish treat the consecrated host irreverently or profane it in any way; our Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are trained to be watchful and ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant, and if one happens to drop unintentionally on the floor (yes, a bit of clumsiness is possible, since we are human beings and do make mistakes), the Extraordinary Minister or the priest will pick it up and consume it themselves.

Our parish has never had an altar rail, to my knowledge, even when the current building was constructed and dedicated in the 1950s. Then again, it’s typical of Franciscan church architecture not to include it, as we’re a parish run by the Friars Minor. We’re extremely blessed to have these wonderful Friars, and dare I say, I also feel rather spoiled to belong to such a great parish. They will not refuse Holy Communion to those who wish to receive on the tongue, though we’ve never had anyone kneel.

 

[otjm]

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.

The weeping about kneeling seems more to be an issue of weeping that we can’t have our way in the matter. It is a simple matter of obedience. It is also a matter of will over emotions. And there seem to be a lot of emotions over the matter. There is a difference between the emotion of reverence, and the practice of reverence, which is an act of the will.

 

[ethelzguy]

I’m having a hard time visualizing how something placed on your tongue can fall into your beard/blouse. Do you have a hole in your tongue, or perhaps it droops… a lot? If the former, my condolences, and if the latter, may I suggest investing in a tiny little dumbbell and doing tongue-curls next time you are working out?

I’m referring to the “microscopic crumbs” everyone keeps talking about, not the host itself. And, if they don’t exist, then why are patens needed? I served many a Mass where the priest took the patens and dusted them off into his chalice after Communion.

Your arguments go in circles…

sheesh.

 

[ethelzguy]

It is reality. here’s some proof:

fatimacrusader.com/cr83/cr83pg8.asp

A Particle does not fall because the Sacred Host is placed directly on the tongue. It touches nothing else. It is quickly consumened and swallowed and all the particles stay in the mouth for consumption.

The Host does not touch the beard, tie, or anything becuse it only touches the tongue and in contrast when the Host touches the hand the particles stays in the hand.

This is bunk.

I served many a Mass where, after Communion I handed the still upright paten to the priest and he dusted it off in his chalice. Altar boys were rigidly trained to hold them face up at all times from the time Communion started until after the priest dusted them off.

I recall altar boys being chastised for “letting them sag” more than once.

 

[Miles_Mariae]

I’m referring to the “microscopic crumbs” everyone keeps talking about, not the host itself. And, if they don’t exist, then why are patens needed? I served many a Mass where priest took the patens and dusted them off into his chalice after Communion.

Your arguments go in circles…

sheesh.

…d’ya know what a circular argument even is?

 

[nice2000]

I’m not taking any chances of any microscopic particles of Jesus fallen to the ground.

I will continue to receive communion by mouth for the rest of my life here on earth and hopefully when and if I make it to heaven as well.