Archbishop says Stop Communion in the Hand & Move the Tabernacle back

  • Thread starter Thread starter netmilsmom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

netmilsmom

Guest
**From…
212.77.1.245/news_services/press/vis/dinamiche/b0_en.htm
**

ARCHBISHOP JAN PAWEL LENGA M.I.C. OF KARAGANDA, KAZAKHSTAN.
“Among the liturgical innovations produced in the Western world, two in particular tend to cloud the visible aspect of the Eucharist, especially as regards its centrality and sacredness: the removal of the tabernacle from the center and the distribution of communion in the hand. … Communion in the hand is spreading and even prevailing as being easier, as a kind of fashion. … Therefore, I humbly propose the following practical propositions: that the Holy See issue a universal regulation establishing the official way of receiving communion as being in the mouth and kneeling; with communion in the hand to be reserved for the clergy alone. May bishops in places where communion in the hand has been introduced work with pastoral prudence to bring the faithful slowly back to the official rite of communion, valid for all local Churches.”
 
At one time… not to long ago, I was looking forward to this Synod. And then something dawned on me.

Is anything going to change? What does history say about this?

The answer is… probably not. I will just have to continue to pray.
 
I receive on the tongue anyway. The only way I will receive in the hand is if I can’t get in the line of the priest or deacon.
 
40.png
bauerice:
I receive on the tongue anyway. The only way I will receive in the hand is if I can’t get in the line of the priest or deacon.
Click to expand...
You can receive on the tongue from anyone. They must give it to you on the tongue.

Alternatively, here is what I recommend to you: Don’t take communion from a lay person, only a Priest.
 
40.png
GoLatin:
You can receive on the tongue from anyone. They must give it to you on the tongue.

Alternatively, here is what I recommend to you: Don’t take communion from a lay person, only a Priest.
Click to expand...
Why?
 
I returned to Communion on the tongue about three years ago and I have no desire to go back to the hand. In fact, when I was able to receive at the Communion rail on my knees at the Shrine of the Blessed Sacrament in Hanceville, Alabama (Mother Angelica) I felt the true sacredness of the moment. I know Our Lord comes regardless, but receiving Him should never be casual. I think it was started (in the hand) to hurry things up and I think it is too bad that we are in such a rush to get out of Church. Just like people who have been standing through the Eucharistic prayers are complaining about kneeling, it would be very difficult to get people to go back to Communion on the tongue if they have always received in the hand. They will find it awkward and maybe even embarrassing. This again, is from improper formation and it would take strong leadership to initiate and follow through on this. Sadly, there are not many parishes in my area with strong leadership. They tend to let the whims of the people sway them, or even suggest the easier route themselves due to convenience. Sad.
 
In reply to FuzzyBunny116’s post above, lay people handling the Holy Eucharist takes away from the sacredness. Besides, there is often no excuse AT ALL for using Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

I went to a (Novus Ordo)Funeral Mass for a Priest earlier this year. The church was absolutely packed. Several hundred people were there.

Holy Communion was distributed to the congregation by TWO Priests. There were no lay people involved in the distribution!
 
lay people handling the Holy Eucharist takes away from the sacredness.
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t.

The Magesterium has approved of communion in the hand, and some feel that it is a more ancient and time honoured method of receiving communion.

Individual bishops, like those in Kazakhstan, can certainly refuse this indult if they like.

But it doesn’t change the fact that communion in the hand is equally copasetic as to receiving on the tongue.
 
40.png
Kielbasi:
No it doesn’t.

The Magesterium has approved of communion in the hand, and some feel that it is a more ancient and time honoured method of receiving communion.

Individual bishops, like those in Kazakhstan, can certainly refuse this indult if they like.

But it doesn’t change the fact that communion in the hand is equally copasetic as to receiving on the tongue.
Click to expand...
Amen!
 
netmil(name removed by moderator) said:
From…
212.77.1.245/news_services/press/vis/dinamiche/b0_en.htm

ARCHBISHOP JAN PAWEL LENGA M.I.C. OF KARAGANDA, KAZAKHSTAN.
“Among the liturgical innovations produced in the Western world, two in particular tend to cloud the visible aspect of the Eucharist, especially as regards its centrality and sacredness: the removal of the tabernacle from the center and the distribution of communion in the hand. … Communion in the hand is spreading and even prevailing as being easier, as a kind of fashion. … Therefore, I humbly propose the following practical propositions: that the Holy See issue a universal regulation establishing the official way of receiving communion as being in the mouth and kneeling; with communion in the hand to be reserved for the clergy alone. May bishops in places where communion in the hand has been introduced work with pastoral prudence to bring the faithful slowly back to the official rite of communion, valid for all local Churches.”
Click to expand...

YESSSSS!!!
 
40.png
Kielbasi:
No it doesn’t.

The Magesterium has approved of communion in the hand, and some feel that it is a more ancient and time honoured method of receiving communion.

Individual bishops, like those in Kazakhstan, can certainly refuse this indult if they like.

But it doesn’t change the fact that communion in the hand is equally copasetic as to receiving on the tongue.
Click to expand...
It’s true, what you say, and obedience to our Church is important. The fact that they recieved on the hand in the first centuries in some places does not necessarily mean it’s the prudent thing to do now. There are many Cath’s that don’t understand the reverance due to Jesus in this sacrament. As an outward sign, it seems to me that recieving on the tongue is a way of producing a certain disposition in people that look at this holy food as a snack between meals. There are other issues, like at my parish the priest doesn’t “show” the consecrated host during the Agnus Dei.
I don’t know what the value is of a survey that says that the majority of Catholics don’t believe (understand?) in the real presence, and I don’t think recieving on the hand is the cause of this disbelief, but it does seem that a corrective action(recieving on the tongue) toward an already existing misunderstanding, or lack uf understanding would not be a bad thing. But that’s what I think, and who am I? Nothing… He is All

Peace and Love
 
40.png
GoLatin:
In reply to FuzzyBunny116’s post above, lay people handling the Holy Eucharist takes away from the sacredness. Besides, there is often no excuse AT ALL for using Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

I went to a (Novus Ordo)Funeral Mass for a Priest earlier this year. The church was absolutely packed. Several hundred people were there.

Holy Communion was distributed to the congregation by TWO Priests. There were no lay people involved in the distribution!
Click to expand...
A layperson “takes away” sacredness when they touch the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of God?

Utter sewage. With these downright * odd* ideas, no wonder so many “traditionalists” are viewed with such skepticism.
 
netmil(name removed by moderator):
ARCHBISHOP JAN PAWEL LENGA M.I.C. OF KARAGANDA, KAZAKHSTAN.
“Among the liturgical innovations produced in the Western world, two in particular tend to cloud the visible aspect of the Eucharist, especially as regards its centrality and sacredness: the removal of the tabernacle from the center and the distribution of communion in the hand. … Communion in the hand is spreading and even prevailing as being easier, as a kind of fashion. … Therefore, I humbly propose the following practical propositions: that the Holy See issue a universal regulation establishing the official way of receiving communion as being in the mouth and kneeling; with communion in the hand to be reserved for the clergy alone. May bishops in places where communion in the hand has been introduced work with pastoral prudence to bring the faithful slowly back to the official rite of communion, valid for all local Churches.”
Click to expand...
The archbishop’s opinion and $2.75 will get you a coffee of the day (grande) at Starbucks…
 
I’ve only received it on the tongue a few times in my life, but it doesn’t mean I don’t take communion seriously. When I was in college I didn’t appreciate it, but I don’t think taking it on the tongue would have helped.

I take it on the hand for purely practical reasons. I get sick a lot and take it in the hand to prevent the spread (for the same reason I also refrain from the blood). I know that the chances of doing so by the distribution of the host are slim, but I feel better knowing I’m not spreading my germs around the church. 👍
 
It’s my understanding that, in fact, receiving holy communion in the hand was the way it was done in the early church. The church stopped it, as I understand, because of abuses. People were taking the host home, stockpiling them for home rites and other abuses. So, it wes felt that the way to stop the abuse was to place the host directly on the tongue. Now today I have heard of pagens comming into the church and staling the host for later abuse in Pagen ceremonies. So once more we learn that history repeats itself.
 
40.png
Benediction:
The archbishop’s opinion and $2.75 will get you a coffee of the day (grande) at Starbucks…
Click to expand...
Wow. Could you be any more off on this? It’s 2.75 plus tax, buddy. Let’s get it right next time.
 
40.png
Benediction:
The archbishop’s opinion and $2.75 will get you a coffee of the day (grande) at Starbucks…
Click to expand...
But to those of us who have been immersed in moderism, it is pretty refreshing.
Yep, it’s an opinion, but so is the opinion of the modernists that have changed our church.
 
I am all for having the tabernacle behind the altar - every church I have ever been to on a regular basis has had this, and it seems right somehow. Sticking it in a side room somewhere seems wrong to me.

I don’t really care about communion in the hand; if it was no longer allowed I wouldn’t really care but while it is allowed I don’t really care either. I take communion in the hand because it seems more practical when combined with bowing when saying ‘Amen.’ But it’s a minor thing and I’d get used to communion on the tongue again if necessary.

Mike
 
40.png
Benediction:
A layperson “takes away” sacredness when they touch the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of God?

Utter sewage. With these downright * odd* ideas, no wonder so many “traditionalists” are viewed with such skepticism.
Click to expand...
Did anyone ever tell you that it’s not what you say but the way you say it??

Are you related to Chalice, now under review?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top