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.
Wesrock said:
I’ll follow the norms used by my parish, but I’d be happy to see a return to communion on the tongue while kneeling as a practiced norm. However, that said, what of receiving from the chalice? Same thing?
Click to expand...
Withholding the chalice was a “recent” deviation from church norm.

About 700 years ago, a french heresy (for once, the heresy in question doesn’t seem to be Arianism!) taught that the consecrated wine was only the blood, and the bread only the body, and that the Eucharist was incomplete unless both were received (rather than Christ being complete in both).

As a disciplinary measure to flush out the heretics, the chalice was withheld to flush these heretics out, as they would refuse to receive under just one species.

All to typically, it took centuries to recover from this temporary measure which had become an abuse, and return to the Catholic norm of both species.

Again, the practice in place prior to Vatican II was NOT the Catholic norm.

This had other serious consequences, namely the end of infant communion. Infants generally only received the wine for practical (digestive) reasons.

A few other observations:

*As for myself when at a latin rite liturgy, I receive on the tongue from a priest, but in the hands from laity.

*In the East, standing remains the position of respect, rather than this new-fangled western notion of kneeling as a position of respect as well as the position of repentance (kneeling and genuflection come from kneeling to earthly kings, and the King of Kings surely being entitled to the same). So we are, of course, standing at Communion. The norm is to stand upright, but even with Father on the Ambon, I’m more than a head taller: I bend my knees so that he can reach, not because it’s correct. I see others, though, bending apparently in respect (although of priest or Eucharist, i"m not sure).
  • The Roman peculiarity of unleavened and precut bread, shared by only two of the other three dozen or so apostle churches, AFAIK (Romanian Catholic & Orthodox) has far less crumbs, speaking from experience.
  • I regularly serve in my slavic/Ruthenian/Pittsburgh Metropolia parish. Ideally two servers, one if that’s all available, hold a cloth in front of the chalice to catch. For this usage (and most other Byzantine), the unleavened host (cut to the size of very small croutons) is in the cup, and the priest drops with a small spoon. I suppose about once a month we catch one. (A few months ago, I dropped a purificator over the spot one dropped, and not one but two folks helpfully picked it up to give it back . . . 😱 [no headsmack emoji!]) When doing this myself, I cup my hand and form the cloth to it–but more than once, I’ve thought a blessed catcher’s mitt would be better . . . 🙂
[continued]
 
[continued]
  • I serve at the Melkite mission, too, which is a different matter. For her byzantine, cloth directly below the chin to catch host. The mellitus, though, cut the bread into strips, and the priest intincts from the cup before dropping into the mouth, so dropping the host is rare. however, the cloth is held by two around waist level to catch crumbs [which i didn’t understand before my first service!]
 
anon64350612 said:
I saw many particles left in the hand.
Click to expand...
Indeed, yes, but after the breads had been dropped edge-on, on to a hard surface. How often does that happen? The breads our parish uses would not break that way anyway, as they are practically like plastic, they are so sealed and glossy.

Besides, as another poster has pointed out, the particles were so small that they did not resemble bread The camera had to be brought in really close for them to show up.
 
Last edited:
OraLabora said:
No. They didn’t apostatize from anything. Those faiths developed independently from Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Considering that Islam believes in the virgin birth, holds Mary in high esteem, believes Jesus was a prophet, has a view on the crucifixion with Christ being ‘swapped’ and not dying on the cross etc.

Bearing in mind all of this, is it really probable that about 600 years after Christ died, Islam developed independently from Christianity? It just arose independently rather than growing out of a false view of the Gospel or Church teachings?
 
PeterT - Thank you for the courteous, respectful, and charitable reply. I am very appreciative and it is very helpful. I hope that you have a good day. Jim
 
NickyMaz said:
When Cardinal Sarah gets elected the next pope I’m going to start a company to re-install altar rails in all the churches, anyone want to get in on this great business opportunity?
Click to expand...
I think that this would be mostly likely handled as an unfunded mandate for each parish and other church owners to deal with- and most will just hire local guys or get their men to do the work for free.
 
So, you agree that the Lord is present (body, blood, soul, and divinity) even in a “particle” of Bread and are comparing that “particle” to a hair or flake of skin that fell off the Lord’s physical body?

Dan
 
Hello.

Not sure if I want to weigh in on any direction in this discussion. However, do we all know what communion is actually about? There must be reverence for this awesome gift.
 
The real issue here on a practical level is that just because something is permitted, that does not make it equally good.
 
Last edited:
Brendan_64 said:
Bearing in mind all of this, is it really probable that about 600 years after Christ died, Islam developed independently from Christianity? It just arose independently rather than growing out of a false view of the Gospel or Church teachings?
Click to expand...
Today, we actually know which heretical sect of Christians Muhammed encountered–fromchis descriptions of “Christian” doctrine.

Islam (and mormonism, for that matter) are, among other things, variations of the arianism heresy.

hawk
 
Hereiam said:
Whether for or against kneeling or not, hand or mouth reception, the good cardinal needs to recall that he too is called to obedience, and while he has authority in his diocese, his mandates cannot directly defy church rules which allow for kneeling or standing, or receiving by hand or mouth.
Click to expand...
Required special permission from the Vatican to stand or receive in the hands at all. It is not allowed in all countries. It is not a rule that people can do this things: is allowed as an exception to the established rule that they can NOT.

He is a very obedient and loyal Cardinal to the Catholic Church.
 
Then what do you say that Cardinal Sarah means when he says this?

Let us now look at how faith in the real presence can influence the way we receive Communion, and vice versa. Receiving Communion on the hand undoubtedly involves a great scattering of fragments. On the contrary, attention to the smallest crumbs, care in purifying the sacred vessels, not touching the Host with sweaty hands, all become professions of faith in the real presence of Jesus, even in the smallest parts of the consecrated species: if Jesus is the substance of the Eucharistic Bread, and if the dimensions of the fragments are accidents only of the bread, it is of little importance how big or small a piece of the Host is! The substance is the same! It is Him! On the contrary, inattention to the fragments makes us lose sight of the dogma. Little by little the thought may gradually prevail: “If even the parish priest does not pay attention to the fragments, if he administers Communion in such a way that the fragments can be scattered, then it means that Jesus is not in them, or that He is ‘up to a certain point’.”
Blockquote
Click to expand...
 
Hereiam said:
Whether for or against kneeling or not, hand or mouth reception, the good cardinal needs to recall that he too is called to obedience, and while he has authority in his diocese, his mandates cannot directly defy church rules which allow for kneeling or standing, or receiving by hand or mouth.
Click to expand...
As the Cardinal-Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, his “mandates” (when he makes them) are the rules of the Church.

At the moment, he’s only offering suggestions, so they aren’t binding.

I would suggest that rather than trying to remind the good Cardinal of what he can or cannot do, you first learn what office he holds. If he were to decide to make such a mandate, that would become the law of the Church. He does have that authority.
 
I am surprised that Cardinal Sarah still has a job at the Vatican. He is a conservative traditionalist type way out of step with Pope Francis. I am sure one of the reasons is due to his quite popularity and he
represents a region of the world where Catholicism is growing by leaps and bounds.
 
I accept that…but even given acceptance of your factual based premise, this being an opinion based social media site, i conclude the cardinal is forsaking pastoral behavior for legalism…so, regardless of your opinion, validity of one person’s opinion…whether yours or mine carries no more credibility… so we are free to disagree.
 
Last edited:
As prefect, he may have the ability to mandate things related to the Liturgy. However, he serves at the pleasure of the Pope. And thankfully, the Pope has exercised his authority multiple times now to correct Cardinal Sarah. I think that if the Cardinal were to try and mandate his personal preference for how to receive communion, he would be corrected yet again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top