Arguing about how to receive Holy Communion

[otjm]

If, shmif. I am not an Apostle. And my hands aren’t ordained.

.

Hands are not ordained. People are. And in the early Church, reception was in the hand for the non-ordained. You are setting up a straw man.

Having said that, reception in the hand is not the norm; reception on the tongue is. It is perfectly acceptable to not receive in the hand; but using the bit about ordination or Apostleship is not correct. Telling someone else you do not receive because of those issues is to imply that somehow, those issues are correct when in fact they are not. It is not only correct to say that you prefer to receive on the tongue and leave it at that, but it also avoids giving something that is misinformation and could be misconstrued.

 

[Sure]

Hands are not ordained. People are. And in the early Church, reception was in the hand for the non-ordained. You are setting up a straw man.

Having said that, reception in the hand is not the norm; reception on the tongue is. It is perfectly acceptable to not receive in the hand; but using the bit about ordination or Apostleship is not correct. Telling someone else you do not receive because of those issues is to imply that somehow, those issues are correct when in fact they are not. It is not only correct to say that you prefer to receive on the tongue and leave it at that, but it also avoids giving something that is misinformation and could be misconstrued.

Since he’s banned, he probably won’t be responding…good post though!

 

[Markstorm]

“Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people, hence as it belongs to him to offer the people’s gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver the consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Blessed Sacrament], nothing touches it but what is consecrated, hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament. Hence it is not lawful for anyone to touch it, except from necessity, for instance if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency” (SummaTheologica, III, Q. 82, Art. 13).

Doctor’s orders.

 

[otjm]

Doctor’s orders.

He was a brilliant theologian, who also made some mistakes, and he was just that - a theologian. As theologian he could give theological perspective to an issue, but it was and still is ultimately up to the magisterial part of the Church - which he was not a part of - to determine the correctness of a theological position. On this, he was not completely correct, as the Church had and still has the authority to determine how the Host may be received.

And the Church before him, and since him, has seen fit to allow reception in the hand.

It is helpfuleto keep in mind that as brilliant as any theologian may be, they act in the service of the Church and the Magisterium, and it is ultimately the dicasteries in Rome, under the authority and direction of the Pope, who make the rules.

And they ruled otherwise.

 

[lizaanne]

Regardless of people’s personal preferences (which I think are rather irrelevant) postures mean something. Standing means something different than kneeling; CITH will ultimately produce a different effect (good or bad) than receiving on the tongue.

We can’t just take a posture such as standing and declare it (or expect it) to mean the same thing as kneeling;–it doesn’t. Different postures ultimately produce different effects.

I absolutely agree with this. Just as words mean things, so do postures. Bowing, genuflecting, kneeling, standing, sitting - they are all different and convey different attitudes and invoke different attitudes as well. If Jesus were to walk up to me on the street - would I feel just as reverent standing there and shaking His hand as I would if I were to kneel at His feet and lower my head in worship, honor, and humility? Well, no. At least I wouldn’t feel the same in both postures.

And so - because I believe that Jesus is there in the Eucharist, just as if He did walk up to me on the street, I kneel in His presence. Sure - If I am at a parish which does not kneel, I follow their norm, but that is why DH and I are members of a parish which distributes Holy Communion at the rail, on our knees, and on the tongue.

With all due respect to our Holy Father - there* is* a distinct difference. Now, does that mean we fight over it and make it a major issue? No - I don’t hold any animosity to those who feel differently than I, but I certainly do not expect to have a priest glare at me should I decide to receive on the tongue either. That being said, if it were up to me, everyone would ONLY receive kneeling and on the tongue. But I’m not pope and never will be, so it’s only my most humble opinion.

~Liza

 

[Markstorm]

"A priest is a man of God, chosen solely from the world to be a representative of the Son of God… As a man of God, he brings to you the Body and Blood of your Savior.
"I tell you, my brothers and sister, that none shall take in his or her hands the purified Body of your Savior! Only the consecrated fingers and hands of the representative of Christ the Lord shall give and bring this gift to mankind! - St. Theresa, October 2, 1975

“Unfortunately, in many places Communion is distributed in the hand. To what extent is this supposed to be a renewal and a deepening of the reception of Holy Communion? Is the trembling reverence with which we receive this incomprehensible gift perhaps increased by receiving it in our unconsecrated hands, rather than from the consecrated hands of the priest? It is not difficult to see that the danger of parts of the consecrated Host falling to the ground is incomparably increased, and the danger of desecrating it or indeed of horrible blasphemy is very great.” (Dietrich von Hildebrand, The Devastated Vineyard, pp. 67-68)

The Church has granted permission to receive in the hand as an indult, and very cautiously, for a reason. I’ll listen to the saints and theologians on this one.

 

[otjm]

The Church has granted permission to receive in the hand as an indult, and very cautiously, for a reason. I’ll listen to the saints and theologians on this one.

Good. I listen to the saints too, especially some of the Early Church Fathers.

 

[Catholicben]

Hands are not ordained. People are. And in the early Church, reception was in the hand for the non-ordained. You are setting up a straw man.

Having said that, reception in the hand is not the norm; reception on the tongue is. It is perfectly acceptable to not receive in the hand; but using the bit about ordination or Apostleship is not correct. Telling someone else you do not receive because of those issues is to imply that somehow, those issues are correct when in fact they are not. It is not only correct to say that you prefer to receive on the tongue and leave it at that, but it also avoids giving something that is misinformation and could be misconstrued.

I think he meant that “His hands are not anointed”

 

[Catholicben]

Good. I listen to the saints too, especially some of the Early Church Fathers.

Yea. I agree.

 

[Indyann]

I’ve been reading the posts where people are arguing over how to receive Holy Communion and it breaks my heart to see this. I’m even afraid to comment for fear that I will be attacked since it’s happened before. Why fellow Catholics do this to each other, and treat each other uncharitably, I don’t know. But anyways, I wanted to share the following information:

This excerpt is from the book, " 7 Secrets of the Eucharist " by Vinny Flynn; Introduction by Fr. Mitch Pacwa, S.J.; published by MercySong, Inc. in collaboration with Ignatius Press, pg. 12-13:

 "Pope Benedict XVI also discusses this issue of how to receive, emphasizing that, instead of arguing about whether it's better to receive kneeling or standing, in the hand or on the tongue, we need to focus on the spirit of reverence with which the early Fathers of the Church received Communion.

 "First urging priests to 'exercise tolerance and to recognize the decision of each person,' he goes on to ask everyone 'to exercise the same tolerance and not to cast aspersions on anyone who may have opted for this or that way of doing it.'  What is important is reverence:

      "It is quite wrong to argue about this or that form of behavior.  We should be concerned only to argue in favor of...a reverence in the heart, an inner submission before the mystery of God."

Notes, Sources and References, page 111-112:

 " 'It is quite wrong to argue about this or that form of behavior.'  Pope Benedict XVI, God is Near Us, p. 71.  The pope goes on to urge that instead of arguing about the outer forms or rituals of receiving Communion, we 'should be concerned only to argue in favor of a 'reverence in the heart, an inner submission before the mystery of God who puts himself into our hands.'

 "He admonishes us 'not to forget that not only our hands are impure but also our tongue and also our heart and that we often sin more with the tongue than with our hands.'  He explains that, by coming to us in Communion, 'God takes an enormous risk...allowing not only our hand and our tongue but even our heart to come into contact with him.  We see this in the Lord's willingness to enter into us and live with us, within us, and to become from within the heart of our life and the agent of its transformation' (p.71)"

 

[ProVobis]

From a recent bulletin at one of the Chicagoland parishes:

…we would not kneel if this were only bread–we would not kneel if this were only wine…"

saintodilo.org/images/bulletin.pdf

 

[darren263]

Very nice post. This will help possible client to get a quality person.

 

[Layman]

It’s a public rite. It has ritual actions. No one can see your inner reverence.

Why change a RC Diocese over from COTT, kneeling, from a priest to CITH, standing, from a laywoman? How does it help us in our quest for sanctification?

It makes even less sense if you truly believe Christ the King is present in the host.

And why are these CITH threads constantly appearing in the Traditional Catholic sub-forum?
CITH does not exist in Traditional Catholicism. Arguing about which hand to use in the trad. sub-forum? Come on!

Go exclusively to TLMs for three months. Don’t expect ‘magic’ just from going once. Then report back to us.

 

[Indyann]

It’s a public rite. It has ritual actions. No one can see your inner reverence.

Why change a RC Diocese over from COTT, kneeling, from a priest to CITH, standing, from a laywoman? How does it help us in our quest for sanctification?

It makes even less sense if you truly believe Christ the King is present in the host.

And why are these CITH threads constantly appearing in the Traditional Catholic sub-forum?
CITH does not exist in Traditional Catholicism. Arguing about which hand to use in the trad. sub-forum? Come on!

Go exclusively to TLMs for three months. Don’t expect ‘magic’ just from going once. Then report back to us.

Just offering Pope Benedict’s words on the subject. If you want to preach to him, have at it.

Myself, I will abide by his wishes.

 

[Layman]

Just offering Pope Benedict’s words on the subject. If you want to preach to him, have at it.

Myself, I will abide by his wishes.

As expressed, in excerpt, in a book, quoted by a third party?

Also, The Pope hasn’t said: “CITH, standing, is good, go do it, it helps bring us nearer to Christ in this way …”.

I await that day.

 

[MarkThompson]

It’s a public rite. It has ritual actions. No one can see your inner reverence.

Um, God can. Are we focused on God here, or on the random people in the other pews?

 

[giuseppeTO]

Here is the fairly simple explanation, from my perspective and in my opinion, as to why we argue about this.

I was catechised before the Council and prior to the modern changes of the 70’s, especially concerning the Blessed Sacrament. I was taught in Catholic grammar school that Holy Communion was the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ. Hopefully, we can all still agree with that. It was the single most precious gift Christ could leave us. Because it is Christ, we were taught that once confected, it would only be kept in vessels of precious metal and could only be handled by the anointed fingers of a priest. We were taught that each individual speck of the Blessed Sacrament, down to the tiniest of crumbs that collect in the fingers of the priest, are preciously safeguarded so that the priest, once the host is consecrated, must hold the thumb and index finger together on both hands until the final ablutions after Communion. He must learn to perform the intricacies of the Mass, including opening the tabernacle with a key and removing the cover from a ciborium with those fingers together. The only part of our body the Blessed Sacrament should ever touch would be our tongues while we knelt with our tongues out and our head back and eyes closed. And if, by accident, the host touched anything else, like dropping on the Communion Rail or God forbid, the floor, there was a purification rite that priest must perform immediately after Mass with Holy Water and purificator while still vested in alb or surplice and stole.

Mind you, we were not taught for how many hundreds of years the church had this practice, nor did the priests and nuns discuss with us whether early Christians did it any other way. It was sufficient to teach that this was Christ in Body and in Spirit and this is how we treat it.

Since the advent of CITH in which ever posture you choose, we have repeatedly reviewed the hows and whys, and that it is a form specified by the church and as such, is changeable at the discretion of the church.

What underlies the passion, I believe, probably comes primarily from those of us who learned at the the most tender age, the sublimity of the Blessed Sacrament and the way it was handled reflected that sublimity. The day that Eucharistic Ministers were introduced into the church, for me, was one of the days you remember like ‘Where were you when you heard that the Pope was shot’. I was a teenager myself and said “How could this be?”. It was absolutely inconsistent with everything I was taught concerning this most precious of gifts.

In our local diocesan church there is a Sunday evening teen (folk) Mass with teen eucharistic ministers. Of course, I now know the technical and legal answer to “How could this be”. But my heart, based on my Catholic upbringing still asks this question “How could this be?”

That, I believe is part of the reason for the emotion that keeps this argument active and frequently heated.

Hope that helps answer the original question.

 

[Melchior_1]

CITH does not exist in Traditional Catholicism.

I believe you meant “traditional Catholicism”. There’s plenty of Traditional Catholics who receive via the hand.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

And why are these CITH threads constantly appearing in the Traditional Catholic sub-forum?
CITH does not exist in Traditional Catholicism. Arguing about which hand to use in the trad. sub-forum? Come on!

Upon reflection, I think I came up with some ideas that would help answer your question.

I’ve heard COTT supporters argue that when they seem harsh, they are only “correcting the sinner” out of love. Well, the problem is that those on the CITH side or on the “either way” side like myself, also believe that COTT supporters need correction for being judgmental, and so we attempt to do so out of love. Then the COTT supporters apparently start thinking the CITHs are not as interested in being Catholic as they should be, and then CITH takes exception to that and responds harshly.

In effect, I think some of us are like moths drawn to a flame. Even though we could get burned, we have to keep dodging in and out of these arguments. I, for one, am sorry that I was as quick to judge as I was, for two reasons. One, because judgment is bad, and two because I reacted to emotional “bait” that I felt was in a message, rather than the actual content – and it made my response null. Again, I was like the moth darting ever closer.

As much as I used to want to lecture COTT-only people on judgment and intolerance, I also take to heart that if I get defensive, then that is a probably sign that I, myself, have judged. When I get angry and defensive, I have no right to call down another even if they are trying to get me riled up – which they probably aren’t. (the big “I” syndrome)

OK, enough blather for now. I leave anyone interested with an invitation to watch the Star-Bellied Sneetches.

Alan

 

[WatchingMedia]

When you have questions, and want OFFICIAL Catholic answers, go to:
[vatican.va/phome_en.htm](http://www.vatican.va/phome_en.htm)
then type in your search words.

vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/details/ns_lit_doc_20100526_communion_en.html

There is no arguing. The Pope is making “recommendation” which I follow.
It is up to the individual.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ap1KL2D5ae4
Cardinal Arinze

If there is a problem in any Catholic Parish, talk to your Paster.
If the problem continues then go to your Diocese Bishop with the above Documentation.