Communion By The Hand

[Brooklyn]

In other words . . .

I am not . . . But . . .

Again, it is none of your concern.

I hope you are aware of the Church Teaching that the real presence ceases to be there when the host looses the appearance of bread.

Host dust does not contain the real presence.

One could logically argue (not saying that I am just that the possibility exists) that a crumb also does not contain the real presence as it is not bread but a crumb.

I am not going to get into that though.

The Church allows for CITH. It is not your concern how I receive.

So your “offering” this video is intrusive and a judgement. You are under the impression that I am “uneducated” and receive in this manner without knowing what you know.

What about the priests (and EMHCs) hands who are giving out communion?

I think you’re getting a little hot under the collar. I did not set forth any judgments, only facts. I’ll leave it at that.

Have a good Holy Week.

 

[Melchior_1]

I’m not judging anyone. The Church has validated communion in the hand and therefore I am not speaking against it. ** I am just letting you know** what happens to the host if you do choose to receive in the hand and how to lessen the chance of desecrating the consecrated host.

Just a guess, but I’m pretty sure the Carmelites have let Brother David know what to expect when it comes to receiving the Eucharist.

 

[fredms3]

Sorry, I can’t find where Fr Rutler refuted that alleged quote, but Blessed Mother Teresa’s order, the Missionaries of Charity, declare it ‘inauthentic’ on their website: motherteresa.org/08_info/ReceivingC.html

And the law of the Church is in fact that Communion may be received either on the tongue or in the hand, at least in the OF Mass, except for a handful of dioceses which do not have the indult.

And certainly Church law is that it is the priest/and or Bishop’s prerogative to determine whether there is sufficient risk of profanation (and any method has some risks of profanation) and whatnot to make it prudent to disallow reception in the hand. Such matters are always the sole prerogative of the priests or bishops concerned. Not yours, or mine, or for that matter Blessed Mother Teresa’s.

No problem Lily with that. Anyway, be it a hoax or not will not take the truth of what i’m trying to point out.

The law of the Church is that the Sacred Host be received in the tongue. It is the law before Vatican 2, after it and even to this day. CITH was made an option after Pope Paul VI decreed it: Memoraile Domini dated 1969 May.

I agree that priests were given this prerogative; To see to it that the 2 principles and the 7 rules are followed before the CITH can be allowed.

To be explicit, it is not the Pope, the Bishop or pastor, but only the priest minister who gives Communion, who must make the judgement and who, is course personally responsible to God.

Said priest can commit a mortal sin for giving CITH to even one person who is unworthy.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

To be explicit, it is not the Pope, the Bishop or pastor, but only the priest minister who gives Communion, who must make the judgement and who, is course personally responsible to God.

Said priest can commit a mortal sin for giving CITH to even one person who is unworthy.

This is quite the stretch isn’t it?

And what about the person who receives on the tongue who is also unworthy.
Is that priest guilty of a mortal sin?

Sorry, but until the Church speaks, this is your opinion only.
Please take the beam out of your own eye before you look for a speck in mine.

 

[cargau]

I’m not judging anyone. The Church has validated communion in the hand and therefore I am not speaking against it. I am just letting you know what happens to the host if you do choose to receive in the hand and how to lessen the chance of desecrating the consecrated host.

Webster defines the tem desecrate as:

1. to violate the sanctity of : profane
2. : to treat disrespectfully, irreverently, or outrageously.

I am not sure anyone desecrates the host when receiving our Lord in the hand.I too, side with the wisdom of the Church. I leave everyone’s spiritual relation with the Eucharist to them and God. I have enough to worry about right here…

 

[fredms3]

Thomas is a cool guy and all of that, he wasn’t infallible. Famously, during his life he disagreed with the Immaculate Conception.

A quick Google search will yield several results detailing Mother Teresa’s comments on receiving by the hand, and that the quote attributed to was a hoax. Compare her “quote” with this;

“…The greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself… the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion”

Communion in the hand (allowed practice within the Church) on par with the destruction of innocents?

Right, St. Thomas A, though being called as the 'Angelic Doctor" is not infallible arbiter in matters relating to faith and morals.

Now he definitely believes that the Blessed Mother is indeed the “Immaculate Conception”.

Widespread abortion, contraception, divorce, infidelity among Catholics who receive Communion without confession and repentance. These are the things that do not only destroy peace and love but the most important one — our soul.

What about CITH? If the rules are not followed to the letter, most specifically on the issue of the danger of irreverence or sacrilege to the Sacred Hosts and Particles is Communion is by the hand.

 

[PatriceA]

Right, St. Thomas A, though being called as the 'Angelic Doctor" is not infallible arbiter in matters relating to faith and morals.

Now he definitely believes that the Blessed Mother is indeed the “Immaculate Conception”.

Widespread abortion, contraception, divorce, infidelity among Catholics who receive Communion without confession and repentance. These are the things that do not only destroy peace and love but the most important one — our soul.

What about CITH? If the rules are not followed to the letter, most specifically on the issue of the danger of irreverence or sacrilege to the Sacred Hosts and Particles is Communion is by the hand.

You can have Catholics that receive COTT without going to confession and repentance. Its arrogant to assume that only COTT are going to confession. Its judgemental to assume CITH do not repent of their sins and are not in a state of grace when receiving communion which is exactly the parallel you are trying to make.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

We are back to judging souls and/or accusing others of judging souls.

We can’t discuss practices without this back and forth?

When someone discusses CITH and COTT it’s not about you (person who receives CITH devoutly) nor you (person who receives COTT devoutly). The practices can be discussed objectively.

 

[Melchior_1]

Right, St. Thomas A, though being called as the 'Angelic Doctor" is not infallible arbiter in matters relating to faith and morals.

Indeed. And keep in mind that although we all love him, not all Dominicans are Thomists. Personally, I have a fairly Augustinian outlook, which isn’t out of the ordinary considering that Dominicans live by the Rule of Augustine…
fredms3;9139752:

Now he definitely believes that the Blessed Mother is indeed the “Immaculate Conception”.

Well, of course he does now. He can ask Jesus & Mary directly what the deal is with the Immaculate Conception. One of the perks of being in Heaven.

Widespread abortion, contraception, divorce, infidelity among Catholics who receive Communion without confession and repentance. These are the things that do not only destroy peace and love but the most important one — our soul.

I agree with this, however this has no bearing on receiving via the hand of the tongue, kneeling or standing.

Unless you’re comparing PERCEIVED irreverence with the murder of innocent children and infidelity.

 

[ProVobis]

I agre that there is somehow inconsistency in what we see and what we’re reading from his writings. But that doesn’t mean his with it. He definitely knew the law of the Church regarding the manner of distribution of Holy Communion—that is—by the tongue as done through the many centuries of tradition behind it, as can be gleaned from Memoraile Domini as decreed by Pope Paul VI.

Indeed. Those who only look at pictures don’t see the entire picture. I would regard what the Pope or bishop or priest says in higher regards then how he administers to an individual. He might fear confrontation and he certainly doesn’t want that, so he has to make a judgement call at the last second. Because of the widespread practice of CITH, many never even hearing about COTT, it is unrealistic to expect everyone to suddenly feel comfortable with COTT. I’ve seen an occasional CITH at an EF which does make things difficult for the server holding the paten. The priest in fact may not have even wanted to give CITH but under the circumstances what could he have done, short of creating a scene? I don’t think the moment of communion is where the priests wants to stop and give sermons.

 

[fredms3]

This is quite the stretch isn’t it?

And what about the person who receives on the tongue who is also unworthy.
Is that priest guilty of a mortal sin?

Sorry, but until the Church speaks, this is your opinion only.
Please take the beam out of your own eye before you look for a speck in mine.

Not really. Who is the real judge during Communion, none other but the priest.

The communicant is guilty of mortal sin if that’s the case, The Bible is very clear on that sis.

Opinion? Then why not lift your fingers and try to do some researching.We are not talking of a simple bread sis but the Body of Christ. As it has been said: Ignorance of the law excuses no one.

I’m not against CITH but there are to be followed. Imagine, carrying Christ in my hand…why not…what an experience!!! The problem with this, however, is the danger of committing Sacrilege either by irreverence or by dropping or being unaware of minute Holy Particles remaining in the hand.

 

[Big_Feet]

Opinion? Then why not lift your fingers and try to do some researching.We are not talking of a simple bread sis but the Body of Christ.

Chairity, Brother, Charity!

 

[PatriceA]

Not really. Who is the real judge during Communion, none other but the priest.

The communicant is guilty of mortal sin if that’s the case, The Bible is very clear on that sis.

Opinion? Then why not lift your fingers and try to do some researching.We are not talking of a simple bread sis but the Body of Christ. As it has been said: Ignorance of the law excuses no one.

I’m not against CITH but there are to be followed. Imagine, carrying Christ in my hand…why not…what an experience!!! The problem with this, however, is the danger of committing Sacrilege either by irreverence or by dropping or being unaware of minute Holy Particles remaining in the hand.

Incorrect. The real judge is God, not the priest, and certainly not you or me.

 

[fredms3]

You can have Catholics that receive COTT without going to confession and repentance. Its arrogant to assume that only COTT are going to confession. Its judgemental to assume CITH do not repent of their sins and are not in a state of grace when receiving communion which is exactly the parallel you are trying to make.

I don’t mean that. I just expounded the point made by brother Melchior. If you would notice, we are agreeing on that point.

Whether by CITT or COTT, we are being exhorted by our Holy Mother Church to confess if we commit mortal sins, By doing that, include also the venial sins.

I hope i’ve clarified my position Pat, tnx.

 

[PatriceA]

I don’t mean that. I just expounded the point made by brother Melchior. If you would notice, we are agreeing on that point.

Whether by CITT or COTT, we are being exhorted by our Holy Mother Church to confess if we commit mortal sins, By doing that, include also the venial sins.

I hope i’ve clarified my position Pat, tnx.

But yet you cotinue to use CITH as an example of people being irreverant. Its very clear how you feel about CITH.

 

[fredms3]

Incorrect. The real judge is God, not the priest, and certainly not you or me.

In matters of whether we do the right thing or not ---- no doubt God is the judge. But in the context of what i’m discussing in giving or not giving communion to unworthy communicant then the priest has the final say on that.

 

[fredms3]

But yet you cotinue to use CITH as an example of people being irreverant. Its very clear how you feel about CITH.

What im saying is that there is the danger in committing sacrilege when taking CITH. if taking the Body of Christ is simple as eating bread bought from the supermarket or store, then there’s no need for the Church to be bothered on this.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

In matters of whether we do the right thing or not ---- no doubt God is the judge. But in the context of what i’m discussing in giving or not giving communion to unworthy communicant then the priest has the final say on that.

How, exactly, is a priest to know the state od a person’s soul?

 

[PatriceA]

What im saying is that there is the danger in committing sacrilege when taking CITH. if taking the Body of Christ is simple as eating bread bought from the supermarket or store, then there’s no need for the Church to be bothered on this.

There is danger in committing sacrilege no matter how one receives the Eucharist. Quite presumptious of you to assume that anybody receiving CITH thinks the Body of Christ is just bread bought from the store. That’s offensive.

 

[PatriceA]

In matters of whether we do the right thing or not ---- no doubt God is the judge. But in the context of what i’m discussing in giving or not giving communion to unworthy communicant then the priest has the final say on that.

And do tell just how you think the priest is able to make that judgement just by looking at a parishoner.