Cardinal Sarah: return to Communion directly on the tongue while kneeling

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Some priests actually use your name. Very uncomfortable, but they think they are being nice.
 
When Jesus dipped the bread into wine and gave it to Judas, did he handle the soggy end?

Who would do that?
 
You mean you would dip bread into wine and hand it to someone so they have to try and handle the soggy and falling apart end? What a mess.
 
buffalo said:
Some priests actually use your name. Very uncomfortable, but they think they are being nice.
Click to expand...
I don’t recall a priest addressing me by name when I receive Holy Communion, but a number of Eucharistic ministers have, though (at least in my parish) they’ve been instructed not to.
 
Last edited:
Teek said:
40.png
godisgood77:
St. Cyril of Jerusalem encourages communicants to “make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King.”
Click to expand...
He was instructing priests. Not laypersons.
Click to expand...
That does not seem to be the case given the context: www.newadvent.org/fathers/310123.htm

The earlier sections are full of “you have seen” about clergy during the liturgy. Also, the level of instruction would be bizarrely low for ordained clergy.
 
buffalo said:
Some priests actually use your name. Very uncomfortable, but they think they are being nice.
Click to expand...
This is the norm in the East. The communicant is addressed with “The servant of God Richard receives the life-giving Body and precious Blood of Christ” or similar (“Handmaiden of Christ " for women, although some seem be using servant” for “both”)

I’ve never heard of addressing by name in the west.

hawk
 
dochawk said:
That does not seem to be the case given the context: www.newadvent.org/fathers/310123.htm

The earlier sections are full of “you have seen” about clergy during the liturgy. Also, the level of instruction would be bizarrely low for ordained clergy.
Click to expand...
I will look for a source. I was taught that the earliest hard translations make it clear that the author wrote the five sections considered mystagogical to deacons in his instruction—I hadn’t realized there was any other interpretation. The author is not uniformly believed to be St. Cyril, either, but rather there exists a large body of evidence that they are later editions to the works that are his.

The author tells his audience to make a throne, but also to touch his lips and eyes with the Host and with the Blood. I suppose if we want to follow the advice to receive in the hands, we should follow all of his instructions?

There are earlier quotes from the Fathers that indicate that Communion in the hand had already been discouraged. Several councils forbid it. If it was St. Cyril, and he was not writing to deacons or the ordained, it is still contrary to other sources that say that the laity are not to receive the Lord with their hands.

Thanks for asking about it. I will see what sources I can find. It has been a while, so it may take some investigating.
 
Last edited:
KATRINA_68 said:
It is very disconcerting to see some people pop the Host from hand to mouth, smile, quick wave or give the V peace sign to those in pews who’ve already just received, as the they go by. It also doesn’t seem appropriate for Eucharistic ministers to smile as they hand the Host to receivers. This is a solemn moment! We should be reverent and humble, Communion on the tongue is the acknowledgement “Lord I am not worthy…”
Click to expand...
The official instructions for Eucharistic ministers in my diocese include making good eye contact and smiling at each communicant. And that’s proper, because while it’s a very solemn moment it is also a very joyous moment and is with the utmost inner joy we should solemnly and reverently receive the Most Blessed Sacrament.
 
Teek said:
Show me where the Church has changed the law that communion is received on the tongue by the faithful. Show me where it has been withdrawn as the rule of the universal Church. Yes, we were granted an exception from that rule because of disobedience to the law, but the law itself is in full effect for the universal Church.
Click to expand...
The thing is that communion has been received in the hand by Catholics in the United States and other countries for more than 40 years. Many people have never seen anything else.

To retrain and re-catechize millions of people would be a major, expensive effort which would take up resources that could be used elsewhere. I just don’t see the urgency of this project.
 
Well that’s true, and it would be a significant change for most people. But I can recall in my own parish when we made the change to being able to receive in the hand. It was preceded by three weeks of instruction in the Sunday homily. And though both methods were allowed, there was also a subtle pressure to accept the new method of communion in the hand.
 
In Neocatechumenal communities we used to get a piece of bread in the palm why sitting. It was even distributed by Pope John Paul II that way! What is wrong with that? Now we receive it while standing because of new regulations. Why would kneeling be necessary to taste how good God is?
 
Augustinian said:
The thing is that communion has been received in the hand by Catholics in the United States and other countries for more than 40 years. Many people have never seen anything else.
Click to expand...
I agree. I was really angry and felt entirely mislead when I found out that Communion in the hand and standing were both exceptions to the universal norm. That it had only been allowed since 1977 blew me away. It felt like it must have been how it was always: whichever way you preferred. Growing up my Pastor utilized the Communion rail for weekday Mass, but Sunday Mass was standing or kneeling.

When I went to college at a Catholic university, I had no idea that there was any controversy going on. It was a university that was outside of the diocese I grew up in, so under a different bishop. Blissfully unaware, I went to Communion and knelt, only to have the priest grab my elbow and haul me to my feet and put out the Eucharist by my hands until I confusedly took it in my hands. After Mass I was praying, and the priest, after processing out, rushed back in in a swish of his chasible and demanded to know who I thought I was to disobey the Bishop and cause scandal to the faithful. He said if I thought my piety was important enough to be disobedient then I should not present myself for Communion because that is PRIDE.

I had no idea a Bishop would ever tell
people not to kneel! None, whatsoever. I just knew I was going to receive the Lord, and I loved him, and I was young and athletic and had no reason whatsoever not to kneel. I was 18, and pretty naïve.

After that I was afraid to kneel for 11 years.

When I later found out that Communion standing and in the hand was an exception to the universal law of the Church, and it was allowed under several conditions, one of which was that the faithful were not to be prevented from receiving kneeling and on the tongue, I was shocked.

There began my research into what truly happened, and it is a history of disobedience and dishonesty and disrespect that every Catholic person should be aware of.
Augustinian said:
To retrain and re-catechize millions of people would be a major, expensive effort which would take up resources that could be used elsewhere. I just don’t see the urgency of this project.
Click to expand...
That cost was not counted when the faithful had been receiving on the tongue, kneeling, for 1500+ years. They recatechised and mandated and tore our Communion rails out at great cost and with a great urgency.

It can be done in the other direction for far superior reasons.
 
Last edited:
Teek said:
I was really angry and felt entirely mislead when I found out that Communion in the hand and standing were both exceptions to the universal norm.
Click to expand...
Why get angry over something you have absolutely no control over? Let go and let God!

Just receive the way you want and be done with it.

I’m 60. I’ve learned to pick my battles, and at my age and in my condition there are precious few hills I’m willing to die on. This surely isn’t one of them. Where I can contribute to maintaining tradition such as singing in a Gregorian schola, I do. Where it requires reversing a decision from the Vatican… how do you spell “futile”? Getting Catholics to even show up at Mass is an uphill battle. Lecturing to them that their reverence is inferior because they receive in the hand is hardly likely to make them want to come back.
 
Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut. Perhaps it’s different in Canada? Most in our parishes don’t. Nor do the priests or Deacons. Two EMs in particular do. I have a casual friend who is a Eucharistic minister, will ask her the next time I see her.
 
Tell them to organize neocatechumenal communities. That is the future of the Catholic church. An absolutely reverent form of receiving Holy Communion in the form of a piece of real bread and tasty wine under two species.
 
Teek said:
You said it did not put one forward as better than the other. I replied to that. I did not say that one is wrong, or that the letter Stated one is wrong.
Click to expand...
That letter does not say one is better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top