Children MUST receive in the hand at First Communion?

[Br.Rich_SFO]

The school belongs to the parish; the children attend Friday Mass at the parish church and the First Communion Mass will be held on a Saturday at the parish/school church. Blessed Sacrament parish, Blessed Sacrament Church, Blessed Sacrament School. Most of the schools in the city (El Paso, TX) belong to a parish (the school my sister is transferring her daughter to belongs to Our Lady of the Assumption parish.) As I said, the parish has had the school for over 50 years (my sister and I both graduated from this school almost thirty years ago) but now the pastor no longer wishes to have the parish support the school, so he is closing it.

Picture if you will one long building that houses the church, rectory, convent (well, the convent’s gone, but there was one when I attended) and school all in one “strip mall”, with the gymnasium tacked on the back. So basically the parish, school and church are one entity. Sorry if I confused you!

The point I was trying to make was if your sister and her daughter belong to Our Lady of the Assumption parish, even though her daughter attends Blessed Sacrament School. She should be receiving her First Holy Communion in her parish church, Our Lady of the Assumption, NOT the school’s church. That might offer her an option. Schools tried to “take over” the Sacramental preparation and celebration many years ago. The Bishops stepped in and said that the faithful (children) should always receive the Sacramental preparation and celebrate the Sacraments in their parish church, under the care of the proper pastor.

 

[bluerose]

The point I was trying to make was if your sister and her daughter belong to Our Lady of the Assumption parish, even though her daughter attends Blessed Sacrament School. She should be receiving her First Holy Communion in her parish church, Our Lady of the Assumption, NOT the school’s church. That might offer her an option. Schools tried to “take over” the Sacramental preparation and celebration many years ago. The Bishops stepped in and said that the faithful (children) should always receive the Sacramental preparation and celebrate the Sacraments in their parish church, under the care of the proper pastor.

No, no, they belong to Blessed Sacrament parish (that is, that’s the neighborhood they live in) and my niece is attending Blessed Sacrament school, which is due to close at the end of the school year. My sister has already registered her at Assumption for the NEXT school year, but due to regulations regarding parish boundaries, since she does not live in the neighborhood of Assumption church, she cannot transfer the whole family to Assumption parish; therefore, even though her daughter will attend Assumption school, they will still belong to Blessed Sacrament parish. Does that make sense? Frankly, my sister would prefer to have Assumption be their home parish, since the pastor there is more involved with the school and seems to have more interest in the parish as a whole, but she can’t just up and register there without getting permission from her pastor at Blessed Sacrament to transfer to another parish.

At the risk of hijacking my own thread, is it true that one HAS to belong to the parish in one’s own geographical neighborhood, like the way kids have to go to the public school closest their home? You can’t choose which parish you prefer?

Anyway, thanks to all who replied to my original query. My sister will talk to the DRE and the teacher and says that if they can’t come to an agreement, she will tell her daughter that she may receive on the hand this once, but then on the tongue from now on, until she is old enough to make her own decision in the matter. The poor child and her friends are already going through enough turmoil with losing their school so unexpectedly that my sister doesn’t want to make her daughter’s First Communion another bone of contention with the school and parish.

 

[Corki]

The point I was trying to make was if your sister and her daughter belong to Our Lady of the Assumption parish, even though her daughter attends Blessed Sacrament School. She should be receiving her First Holy Communion in her parish church, Our Lady of the Assumption, NOT the school’s church. That might offer her an option. Schools tried to “take over” the Sacramental preparation and celebration many years ago. The Bishops stepped in and said that the faithful (children) should always receive the Sacramental preparation and celebrate the Sacraments in their parish church, under the care of the proper pastor.

I think that is the ideal but not always practical way of doing First Communion. In our parish, for example, you can’t receive First Communion at the parish unless you are attending parish CCE. CCE is a completely redundant waste of time for a child in Catholic school (or homeschooled, for that matter). The school has students who belong to at least 10 different parishes. From the school’s side, they give the parents the option of having the child receive with his/her class at the parish related to the school or at their home parish. But the home parishes make it hard.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

At the risk of hijacking my own thread, is it true that one HAS to belong to the parish in one’s own geographical neighborhood, like the way kids have to go to the public school closest their home? You can’t choose which parish you prefer?

You belong to the parish in whose boundaries you live. You can choose to attend and register at another parish.

Anyway, thanks to all who replied to my original query. My sister will talk to the DRE and the teacher and says that if they can’t come to an agreement, she will tell her daughter that she may receive on the hand this once, but then on the tongue from now on, until she is old enough to make her own decision in the matter. The poor child and her friends are already going through enough turmoil with losing their school so unexpectedly that my sister doesn’t want to make her daughter’s First Communion another bone of contention with the school and parish.

Well, I’d have taken a different approach. Since the choice of how to receive is the communicant’s I’d tell her to go along with with the DRE said but, when she makes her first communion, to stick out her tongue and hide her hands!

Deacon Ed

 

[KCT]

Since the choice of how to receive is the communicant’s I’d tell her to go along with with the DRE said but, when she makes her first communion, to stick out her tongue and hide her hands! Deacon Ed

Would the priest refuse if someone did this?? I’ve often wondered

The same thing happened at my youngest dd’s 1st Communion. The DRE tried to tell parents (at the parent meeting) the kids had to receive in the hand. A couple of moms challenged him, but he stood his ground. It wasn’t until a dad stood up and said, “I’m sorry, but I don’t think you have the authority to make that decision,” that he backed down.

 

[Brendan]

I would not agree that it is OK to disobey the teacher, unless she said to do something morally wrong. The catechism does say we are to obey lawful authority, unless it is something against faith or morals. The fine line between rights and obedience is something I would never encourage a child to cross, especially with a teacher. The child is too young to fully understand the reasons and may make poor choices in the future, and maybe the consequences will be too difficult for her.

Lux

When a person attempts to teach contrary to what the Church teaches, they cease to be a lawful authority on the matter (by definition).

This is not only true for matters of faith and morals, but for matters of discipline as well.

 

[malphono]

bluerose:

Anyway, thanks to all who replied to my original query. My sister will talk to the DRE and the teacher and says that if they can’t come to an agreement, she will tell her daughter that she may receive on the hand this once, but then on the tongue from now on, until she is old enough to make her own decision in the matter. The poor child and her friends are already going through enough turmoil with losing their school so unexpectedly that my sister doesn’t want to make her daughter’s First Communion another bone of contention with the school and parish.

Well, I’d have taken a different approach. Since the choice of how to receive is the communicant’s I’d tell her to go along with with the DRE said but, when she makes her first communion, to stick out her tongue and hide her hands!

I’m with you 100% on that one

 

[maryjk]

Would the priest refuse if someone did this?? I’ve often wondered

The same thing happened at my youngest dd’s 1st Communion. The DRE tried to tell parents (at the parent meeting) the kids had to receive in the hand. A couple of moms challenged him, but he stood his ground. It wasn’t until a dad stood up and said, “I’m sorry, but I don’t think you have the authority to make that decision,” that he backed down.

An old adage that should be attributed to someone much brighter than I

“Don’t take no from someone not allowed to say yes.”

We can turn this into

"Don’t take no from someone not allowed to decide. "

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Would the priest refuse if someone did this?? I’ve often wondered

The same thing happened at my youngest dd’s 1st Communion. The DRE tried to tell parents (at the parent meeting) the kids had to receive in the hand. A couple of moms challenged him, but he stood his ground. It wasn’t until a dad stood up and said, “I’m sorry, but I don’t think you have the authority to make that decision,” that he backed down.

He is not supposed to refuse.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I think that is the ideal but not always practical way of doing First Communion. In our parish, for example, you can’t receive First Communion at the parish unless you are attending parish CCE. CCE is a completely redundant waste of time for a child in Catholic school (or homeschooled, for that matter). The school has students who belong to at least 10 different parishes. From the school’s side, they give the parents the option of having the child receive with his/her class at the parish related to the school or at their home parish. But the home parishes make it hard.

I personally don’t believe that parish CCE, CCD, FF what every you call it is a waste of time for children going to Catholic School. It should not be redundant, but supplemental. Even children who are in a parish CCE, CCD, FF program should also be “home schooled” by the parents. Having your child in CCE, CCD, FF does not relieve the parents of their responsibility to teach their own children and prepare their own children for the Sacraments.

 

[mhazell]

I would not agree that it is OK to disobey the teacher, unless she said to do something morally wrong. The catechism does say we are to obey lawful authority, unless it is something against faith or morals.

However, as far as I am aware, it is the priest **and bishop **that are the lawful authorities, not any lay person ‘in charge’ of teaching anything. Canon law (again, as far as I am aware) makes no provision for lay people being a lawful authority in this regard. The bishop is the lawful authority, and he gives his authority to the parish priest in order that the priest might oversee the parish. Laypeople ultimately (for better or worse–usually better, in my experience!) have little say in the matter.

In any case, as another poster has already said, the teacher has effectively abrogated his or her moral authority in this matter (regardless of whether they had any lawful authority anyway) by mandating communion in the hand when it is every communicant’s right to receive on the tongue if they wish.

Saying that a first communicant cannot receive on the tongue is against both faith and morals as laid out by both the Catechism and the GIRM. The teacher has no authority (absolutely zero authority, in point of fact!) to disregard or disobey the teachings of the Church as promulgated by the Holy See, so they (in this regard) can be freely disobeyed with extreme prejudice towards the actual teachings of the Church. (Thus, one would commit no sin in doing so.)

 

[Brendan]

However, as far as I am aware, it is the priest **and bishop **that are the lawful authorities, not any lay person ‘in charge’ of teaching anything. Canon law (again, as far as I am aware) makes no provision for lay people being a lawful authority in this regard. The bishop is the lawful authority, and he gives his authority to the parish priest in order that the priest might oversee the parish. Laypeople ultimately (for better or worse–usually better, in my experience!) have little say in the matter.)

Exactly, and this is an area where even the local bishop cannot mandate a particular mode of reception, one way or the other.

So I really cannot see where a DRE would get the idea that they have MORE authority in this matter than the local bishop would have.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

When a person attempts to teach contrary to what the Church teaches, they cease to be a lawful authority on the matter (by definition).

This is not only true for matters of faith and morals, but for matters of discipline as well.

Originally Posted by mhazell
However, as far as I am aware, it is the priest and bishop that are the lawful authorities, not any lay person ‘in charge’ of teaching anything. Canon law (again, as far as I am aware) makes no provision for lay people being a lawful authority in this regard. The bishop is the lawful authority, and he gives his authority to the parish priest in order that the priest might oversee the parish. Laypeople ultimately (for better or worse–usually better, in my experience!) have little say in the matter.)

OK, then go to the Bishop, but do not tell the child to disobey her teacher. As I said, this is a difficult situation, but NOT a mattter of faith or morals (as defined by canon law) If the Bishop will not force the issue, nor should anyone else. Receive elsewhere, but do not encourage a child to disobey her teacher.

Lux

 

[FrDavid96]

OK, then go to the Bishop, but do not tell the child to disobey her teacher. As I said, this is a difficult situation, but NOT a mattter of faith or morals (as defined by canon law) If the Bishop will not force the issue, nor should anyone else. Receive elsewhere, but do not encourage a child to disobey her teacher.

Lux

Actually, we (meaning all adults) should not be teaching children to obey someone when that person is teaching something which is wrong. To tell the child that it is acceptable to disobey the Church because “teacher said so” is wrong–even if that lesson is being taught indirectly by example. We should never teach children to obey those in authority when that authority is being abused—do we learn nothing from history?

It is indeed a matter of faith and morals because the teacher has usurped the authority of the Church which mandates that communion on the tongue be always available. The teacher has no legitimate authority to prevent students from receiving on the tongue, and in fact has every responsibility as a catechist to teach the Church’s position that communion on the tongue is the normative way of receiving. Catechists have a moral responsibility to present the teachings of the Church and not their own opinions.

If this child learns now that the opinion of a catechist should be given more deference than the teaching of the Church, what will happen when a catechist teaches that “abortion is a right” or “communion is only symbolic”?

 

[Corki]

I personally don’t believe that parish CCE, CCD, FF what every you call it is a waste of time for children going to Catholic School. It should not be redundant, but supplemental. Even children who are in a parish CCE, CCD, FF program should also be “home schooled” by the parents. Having your child in CCE, CCD, FF does not relieve the parents of their responsibility to teach their own children and prepare their own children for the Sacraments.

I am mildly offended by your comments. I take the responsibility to teach my children the faith very seriously. The Religion classes at school are supplemental to what I teach. The CCE classes are remedial and a waste of time. I used to teach the First Communion class. We spend the whole year getting the kids, most of whom haven’t darkened the door to the Church since they were baptized, up to a minimim level of knowledge before 1st Communion. The kids, like mine, who already know thier Catechism questions and their prayers get to help the others practice. That’s a waste of time and dilutive to the real Religious Ed they receive.

 

[brigid12]

Actually, we (meaning all adults) should not be teaching children to obey someone when that person is teaching something which is wrong. To tell the child that it is acceptable to disobey the Church because “teacher said so” is wrong–even if that lesson is being taught indirectly by example. We should never teach children to obey those in authority when that authority is being abused—do we learn nothing from history?

It is indeed a matter of faith and morals because the teacher has usurped the authority of the Church which mandates that communion on the tongue be always available. The teacher has no legitimate authority to prevent students from receiving on the tongue, and in fact has every responsibility as a catechist to teach the Church’s position that communion on the tongue is the normative way of receiving. Catechists have a moral responsibility to present the teachings of the Church and not their own opinions.

If this child learns now that the opinion of a catechist should be given more deference than the teaching of the Church, what will happen when a catechist teaches that “abortion is a right” or “communion is only symbolic”?

 

[mhazell]

Actually, we (meaning all adults) should not be teaching children to obey someone when that person is teaching something which is wrong. To tell the child that it is acceptable to disobey the Church because “teacher said so” is wrong–even if that lesson is being taught indirectly by example. We should never teach children to obey those in authority when that authority is being abused—do we learn nothing from history?

It is indeed a matter of faith and morals because the teacher has usurped the authority of the Church which mandates that communion on the tongue be always available. The teacher has no legitimate authority to prevent students from receiving on the tongue, and in fact has every responsibility as a catechist to teach the Church’s position that communion on the tongue is the normative way of receiving. Catechists have a moral responsibility to present the teachings of the Church and not their own opinions.

If this child learns now that the opinion of a catechist should be given more deference than the teaching of the Church, what will happen when a catechist teaches that “abortion is a right” or “communion is only symbolic”?

I agree entirely.

If it’s a choice between disobeying the catechist and disobeying Mother Church, I think I know what I would have my child do.

 

[Tsuwano]

The ’ no long dresses and veils ’ ’ thing’ is probably to stop the Children feeling unconfortable in things they don’t usually wear , and therefore very self conscious.

What’s the result of these fancy dresses - parents spend more than they can afford so they can take lots of photographs

This is not a party for children - it’s a very serious occasion

I agree that one’s first holy communion is a very serious and solemn event. It is for this reason I think children should be dressed up in a special way to mark the very special event that is taking place. They should not be wearing clothes they usually wear and should be conscious that what they are experiencing is an extraordinary occassion. A bride and groom do not wear ordinary clothes at their wedding, a new bishop receives an unusual head covering (the mitre) and crosier at his instalation, and graduates from university usually wear gowns and funny cardboard hats to mark their passing from one stage of life to the next. Sure, parents do spend more money buying such clothing for their children at their first communion, but this also emphasizes the significance and extraordinary aspects of the event. As a parent of two small girls, I would gladly spend my hard earned money to honor the first communion of my children. It’s not every day that one receives for the first time in one’s life the very body and blood of our savior.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

If this child learns now that the opinion of a catechist should be given more deference than the teaching of the Church, what will happen when a catechist teaches that “abortion is a right” or “communion is only symbolic”?

I do not agree that liturgical norms are a matter of Faith and Morals as defined by Canon Law. It is a very sad comparison to compare liturgical norms to mortal sins. As I said, if the norms were so important to me, I would receive elsewhere. If what you suggest were true, I would remove my child from the program, and work on having the so-called Catechist removed.

Lux

 

[top_cat]

I agree that one’s first holy communion is a very serious and solemn event. It is for this reason I think children should be dressed up in a special way to mark the very special event that is taking place. They should not be wearing clothes they usually wear and should be conscious that what they are experiencing is an extraordinary occassion. A bride and groom do not wear ordinary clothes at their wedding, a new bishop receives an unusual head covering (the mitre) and crosier at his instalation, and graduates from university usually wear gowns and funny cardboard hats to mark their passing from one stage of life to the next. Sure, parents do spend more money buying such clothing for their children at their first communion, but this also emphasizes the significance and extraordinary aspects of the event. As a parent of two small girls, I would gladly spend my hard earned money to honor the first communion of my children. It’s not every day that one receives for the first time in one’s life the very body and blood of our savior.

Here we find parents frequently go into debt buying more and more elaborate outfits for their children Headresses have reached the dizzy heights of crowns with and I’m not joking ] statues of Mary with a crown made of wee flashing lights .

This particular episode so appalled the Parish priest that the next year all children - boys and girls were issued with Albs - with a blue cincture for girls and red for boys. No veils , crowns were permitted .

First Holy Communions have become for many a Rite of Passage and a Kodak opportunity - not the correct intention