Communion by Intinction, was what this person did OK?

[Mark1970]

I serve in my parish as an EMHC. Last night I was responsible for the Precious Blood at the Saturday night Mass, my station was about 20 feet away from the priest and EMHC with the Hosts. Right at the end, a communicant came for the Precious Blood, when he came to me he was still holding the Host, which he dipped into the Precious Blood and consumed the Host. The communicant may belong to a Syro-Malabar rite community that attends Mass in my parish; however this was a Roman-rite Mass.

I mentioned the incident to the Pastor after Mass, he wasn’t bothered by what happened and said that this practice is observed at the Vatican. He indicated that there is nothing wrong with what this person did, and that anybody who says differently is incorrect.

I did some research on the Internet and my research indicated that, in the Roman rite, communion by Intinction is permitted. But the priest has to be the one who dips the Host in the Precious Blood and gives it to the communicant – the lay person isn’t allowed to do if for themselves and neither is the EMHC. Does anybody know anything about this, and what is correct?

 

[FrDavid96]

[103.] The norms of the Roman Missal admit the principle that in cases where Communion is administered under both kinds, “the Blood of the Lord may be received either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon”. As regards the administering of Communion to lay members of Christ’s faithful, the Bishops may exclude Communion with the tube or the spoon where this is not the local custom, though the option of administering Communion by intinction always remains. If this modality is employed, however, hosts should be used which are neither too thin nor too small, and the communicant should receive the Sacrament from the Priest only on the tongue.

[104.] The communicant must not be permitted to intinct the host himself in the chalice, nor to receive the intincted host in the hand. As for the host to be used for the intinction, it should be made of valid matter, also consecrated; it is altogether forbidden to use non-consecrated bread or other matter.

[173.] Although the gravity of a matter is to be judged in accordance with the common teaching of the Church and the norms established by her, objectively to be considered among grave matters is anything that puts at risk the validity and dignity of the Most Holy Eucharist: namely, anything that contravenes what is set out above in nn. 48-52, 56, 76-77, 79, 91-92, 94, 96, 101-102, 104, 106, 109, 111, 115, 117, 126, 131-133, 138, 153 and 168. Moreover, attention should be given to the other prescriptions of the Code of Canon Law, and especially what is laid down by canons 1364, 1369, 1373, 1376, 1380, 1384, 1385, 1386, and 1398.

Those words were personally approved by St. John Paul the Great in 2004.

Self-intinction, which is what you described, is objectively grave matter, a grave abuse against the dignity of the Mass. That’s not opinion. That’s the position of the Church. The words “objectively to be considered among grave matters” means precisely that this is not subject to anyone’s interpretation, nor it is subject to circumstances. It is a grave abuse.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

 

[JimG]

If I understand correctly, the proper way to receive communion by intinction is to receive from a priest who is usually using a special chalice designed for that purpose. It allows him to pick up a host, dip it into the chalice, and place it on the communcant’s tongue.

 

[Memaw]

If I understand correctly, the proper way to receive communion by intinction is to receive from a priest who is usually using a special chalice designed for that purpose. It allows him to pick up a host, dip it into the chalice, and place it on the communcant’s tongue.

Your right and that’s the ONLY way a lay person can receive Communion that way. The pastor need to read up on that carefully. God Bless, Memaw

 

[glendab]

This question came up the other Monday at our after Monday Morning Mass Meeting. One of the EMHCs had the same thing happen to her once and I told her that it was very wrong for anyone to self-intinct and that if she was ministering the cup again and someone tried, she should place her hand over the chalice and prevent them. No one self-intincts but the Priest and that isn’t done in the regular NO Mass at all. It is specific to other Rites so she really shouldn’t even ever see anyone do it. I’ve seen Priests visiting from other Rites who when at the Altar will intinct for themselves, but this is rare.

Glenda

 

[Brendan_64]

That isn’t permitted. Lay-people should not do this.

When the Host is given it should be consumed there and then. For them to walk over and simply dip it in the chalice is not right. And the fact that someone can just walk off with the Host like that is not good at all. What’s to stop that person retaining the Host and walking back to the pews without consuming it?

 

[Mark1970]

Self-intinction, which is what you described, is objectively grave matter, a grave abuse against the dignity of the Mass. That’s not opinion. That’s the position of the Church. The words “objectively to be considered among grave matters” means precisely that this is not subject to anyone’s interpretation, nor it is subject to circumstances. It is a grave abuse.

Thanks for your reply, also to the other responders. In practice, is there anything more I could have done, apart from voicing my concerns to my Pastor - even though he said they were unfounded? I don’t want to get into any kind of dispute with my Pastor, but i felt that I had the responsibility to do something.

 

[Mark1970]

That isn’t permitted. Lay-people should not do this.

When the Host is given it should be consumed there and then. For them to walk over and simply dip it in the chalice is not right. And the fact that someone can just walk off with the Host like that is not good at all. What’s to stop that person retaining the Host and walking back to the pews without consuming it?

That’s what I was concerned about as well, and one of the reasons I mentioned it to the Pastor after Mass, unfortunately he didn’t seem to pick up on that aspect of my concern and just focussed on the intinction side of things, saying that what the communicant did was OK.

 

[1ke]

Thanks for your reply, also to the other responders. In practice, is there anything more I could have done, apart from voicing my concerns to my Pastor - even though he said they were unfounded?

You could have placed your hand or the purificator over the chalice, simply waiting and not offfering the chalice, politely until the communicant consumed the host.

 

[Brendan_64]

Thanks for your reply, also to the other responders. In practice, is there anything more I could have done, apart from voicing my concerns to my Pastor - even though he said they were unfounded? I don’t want to get into any kind of dispute with my Pastor, but i felt that I had the responsibility to do something.

If I was you I would draw the priests attention to Redemptionis Scarmentum 104 “The communicant must not be permitted to intinct the host himself in the chalice, nor to receive the intincted host in the hand”.

Therefore a lay-person cannot self-intinct and may only recieve an intincted host on the tongue, with the Host having been intincted by the priest.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

I would send the priest an e-mail saying as such, with a the link to Redemptionis Sacramentum.

We should not avoid disputes with our priests if we feel something is wrong. Personally I think that the reluctance to enter into disputes with our priests leads to us turning blind eyes to abuses. When we are called to give an account of our actions, I’m not sure that a defence of, “I didn’t want to upset my parish priest” would carry that much weight.

You could have placed your hand or the purificator over the chalice, simply waiting and not offfering the chalice, politely until the communicant consumed the host.

To be fair to the EMHC he probably wouldn’t have expected this to happen and it will probably have happened too quickly to prevent it. This has happened my wife who is also an EMHC.

 

[Mark1970]

Would the paragraph from Redemptionis Sacramentum equally apply if the Communicant was a non-Latin Rite Catholic? He appeared to belong to the Syro-Malabar community that worships in my parish, one things my Pastor insisted upon last night was that his actions were consistent with many non-Latin rite Catholics, I would like to cover all eventualities in this!

 

[phil19034]

only a priest or bishop may do intinction himself. When receiving via intinction, all others must receive on the tounge directly from the priest.

 

[phil19034]

Would the paragraph from Redemptionis Sacramentum equally apply if the Communicant was a non-Latin Rite Catholic? He appeared to belong to the Syro-Malabar community that worships in my parish, one things my Pastor insisted upon last night was that his actions were consistent with many non-Latin rite Catholics, I would like to cover all eventualities in this!

Perhaps one of our Syro-Malabar Catholic members can provide insight. While the priest is 100% correct that many of the Eastern Rites use intinction, I don’t think self-intinction is ever allowed, and if so, is not allowed in the Roman Rite or other Latin Rites. In the Roman Rite and other Latin Rites, intinction must be received on the tounge, from the priest. Only a priest or bishop may self-intinction

 

[FrDavid96]

Would the paragraph from Redemptionis Sacramentum equally apply if the Communicant was a non-Latin Rite Catholic? He appeared to belong to the Syro-Malabar community that worships in my parish, one things my Pastor insisted upon last night was that his actions were consistent with many non-Latin rite Catholics, I would like to cover all eventualities in this!

Yes. It would apply equally. Not that R.S. applies to them directly (most of it does not), but since it is a Latin Rite Mass, R.S. applies.

Eastern Catholics do not self-intinct.

Intinction is certainly the Eastern custom. Perhaps the (Latin) pastor is trying to be sensitive to their customs, without understanding the details.

One option for you might be to speak with the Malabar priest, and very politely explain what you saw. This could be a matter of the Malabar layman trying to follow his own custom of intinction, and the Latin pastor trying to be accommodating; but different issues are being confused.

Since intinction is not typical in the Latin parishes: unless one lives in an area that’s heavily Eastern, the priest might never have heard about intinction—and might not know about that particular paragraph in RS. All he knows is that the Malabars do it, he wants to make them feel welcome, and so he allows it. He might not know the details. He might genuinely be unaware of the difference between intinction and self-intinction.

Perhaps the Latin and Malabar pastors can discuss this with each other and find some kind of solution. Since they worship at your parish church, this is probably an issue what will come up very often. It would be good for them to work out something that respects both traditions and both liturgical laws.

 

[Thomas48]

Intinction, is the only method for receiving the Eucharist during the Holy Qurbana of the Syro Malabar Church. Most commonly, we receive the bread, walk over to the Eucharistic Minister holding the wine, then dip it into the wine, like Mark explained what he saw at Holy Mass. Sometimes the priest will dip the bread into the wine and the lay people will receive the Eucharist on the tongue. At most parishes we actually have a combined chalice and paten (basically a large paten with a chalice crafted into its center), this makes it more efficient to receive the Eucharist with intinction.

In the Syro Malabar Church, intinction does not have to be done by the priest, its done on a regular basis by both lay people and the priest. We do not have the custom of consuming the bread, then walking over to the chalice and drinking from it. If you notice in the videos, both the priest and the lay people intinct. What I have noticed is, if self-intinction is not done at Latin Parishes, most of us Syro Malabar Catholics (myself included) will not go up to drink the wine, its just seen as out of the ordinary.

youtube.com/watch?v=5GW2q71EQxg
(See 56:35)

youtube.com/watch?v=HlyNNTglxX4
(See 1:07:18)

 

[Mark1970]

Intinction, is the only method for receiving the Eucharist during the Holy Qurbana of the Syro Malabar Church. Most commonly, we receive the bread, walk over to the Eucharistic Minister holding the wine, then dip it into the wine, like Mark explained what he saw at Holy Mass. Sometimes the priest will dip the bread into the wine and the lay people will receive the Eucharist on the tongue. At most parishes we actually have a combined chalice and paten (basically a large paten with a chalice crafted into its center), this makes it more efficient to receive the Eucharist with intinction.

In the Syro Malabar Church, intinction does not have to be done by the priest, its done on a regular basis by both lay people and the priest. We do not have the custom of consuming the bread, then walking over to the chalice and drinking from it. If you notice in the videos, both the priest and the lay people intinct. What I have noticed is, if self-intinction is not done at Latin Parishes, most of us Syro Malabar Catholics (myself included) will not go up to drink the wine, its just seen as out of the ordinary.

youtube.com/watch?v=5GW2q71EQxg
(See 56:35)

youtube.com/watch?v=HlyNNTglxX4
(See 1:07:18)

Thanks for your reply, I have noticed that some of the Syro Malabar Catholics will drink from the Chalice, but from what you say, it sounds as though the Communicant on Saturday was just following his tradition, taking it into a Latin-Rite Mass.

This makes me wonder whether from the Latin-rite point of view whether it is acceptable to carry a tradition from one rite to another like this? It seems we have a situation where something is permitted in one tradition but not in another, and yet is being carried across.

 

[Psalitte]

As I understand it, for Latin Catholics, self-intinction, which a form of self-communication, is absolutely forbidden. But if this person was Syro-Malabar, then it might be a different issue, though I wish there was more clarification on what people belonging to differen “sui iuris” Churches should do in regards as to which customs to observe when they’re at one of their non-native Liturgies.

 

[Mark1970]

As I understand it, for Latin Catholics, self-intinction, which a form of self-communication, is absolutely forbidden. But if this person was Syro-Malabar, then it might be a different issue, though I wish there was more clarification on what people belonging to differen “sui iuris” Churches should do in regards as to which customs to observe when they’re at one of their non-native Liturgies.

I agree, I also think there needs to be clarification. The situation in my parish is that the Syro Malabar rite community has a Mass in their rite one Sunday every month, in our church, and the rest of the time they seem to attend the Latin-rite Mass. If the self-intinction method described by a previous posted is being followed in the parish at the Syro-Malabar rite Mass, then perhaps members of that community are assuming - or have even been told - that they can carry the practice across to the Latin rite Mass. Truth is I don’t know, but if this is the case, it may explain why my Pastor told me that the practice is OK when I brought it up with him on Saturday. But there definitely needs to be clarification due to the possibility of causing confusion, and the possibility that Latin-rite parishioners may see this practice and also start receiving Communion in this way - which, as I understand from previous replies, would be forbidden acording to RS.

 

[acarlson]

Thanks for your reply, also to the other responders. In practice, is there anything more I could have done, apart from voicing my concerns to my Pastor - even though he said they were unfounded? I don’t want to get into any kind of dispute with my Pastor, but i felt that I had the responsibility to do something.

I had this happen to me once. Caught me off guard! I was advised - should that happen again, as we were a VERY small community, so it was likely I’d see this person again - just to put the purificator over the top of the chalice and ask the person gently to consume the host first.

 

[Memaw]

I had this happen to me once. Caught me off guard! I was advised - should that happen again, as we were a VERY small community, so it was likely I’d see this person again - just to put the purificator over the top of the chalice and ask the person gently to consume the host first.

If Father knows they come to your church at times, he should make the proper announcement to clarify the situation. Their Pastor should instruct them too. God Bless, Memaw