Communion givers must hate me

[Nap66]

I really didn’t know this was such a sensitive topic. I’ll know in the future not to open this can of worms. My goal was simply to provide information. I feel I’ve done this and I hope it’ll be useful to the OP.

Yes, apparently it is a sensitive topic. To me it was just an observation that I am the very small minority at communion doing it “the old fashioned way” and that some communion givers IMO seem hesitant to present communion to ME on the tongue. The info you presented is quite interesting and I remember in the 80’s when I left the church that the debate on receiving communion in the hands was just starting. Phew! Thank God I missed it back then.

 

[Saxum]

To me it was just an observation that I am the very small minority at communion doing it “the old fashioned way” and that some communion givers IMO seem hesitant to present communion to ME on the tongue.

Some people want you to believe that communion in the hand is the ‘old fashioned way’ but it’s not; it’s actually the ordinary way to receive Communion. Unfortunately, people believe that Communion in the hand is the normal way. A lot of people have been taught to receive Communion this way; when I was prepared for my first communion, nobody told me communion on the tongue was an option. My nephew made his first communion this year and the priest denied him communion on the tongue. I witnessed it myself. That’s why I find it odd that people accuse me of trying to control people; I’ve only seen people being forced to receive Communion in the hand!

 

[Nap66]

The occassional time, when the priest pauses for a second or two. I think this is because he is in a ‘roll’ in giving out communion.

Thanks THT! You are so right. It’s the “on a roll” thing. It’s like, hand, hand, hand, hand, hand,… whoa nellly!.. where’s the hand, oh, tongue, hand, hand, hand, … But seriously, sometimes I feel nervous receiving communion on the tongue because I am the only one (literally I watched my line and I was the only one). I feel like I will be yelled at someday when it’s required to take it in the hand and I didn’t get the memo.

 

[Katie777]

Op, I don’t think that anyone hates or judges the way you choose to receive Jesus.

They probably are just not used to it in your parish.

 

[Jerusha]

??? The Host on the tongue is highly unlikely to fall, because It absorbs the saliva so quickly that It sticks to the tongue. It would have to be intentionally pushed off by the teeth in order to be dropped.

For a female, there is one way to maintain the rhythm of the communion line. Cover. Even if it is a doily, which is what I use. Loud and clear.

 

[Irishmom2]

And we’re off…

 

[Mary_Ellen]

Regarding the rhythm of the minister of Holy Communion, I think the previous posters are right on! I generally don’t experience that problem much as I’m the cantor or in the choir and receive at the end of the line so the minister(s) are used to me and my habit of receiving on the tongue. Only rarely do I “surprise” an EMHC who expects me to receive in the hand.

Receiving on the tongue is my choice and I make no judgment on others who receive OTT or ITH. It is a vulnerable and humbling position for me and I need all the humiliation I can get. I read once it was like being fed like a baby bird by its parent: somehow that image changed my perspective and I’ve received on the tongue ever since.

 

[DignumEtJustum]

When I was a kid and saw people, generally elderly, receive on the tongue I intensely wondered why. It seemed so strange to me. Now I will only receive from a priest and on the tongue. I’m glad to have come to understand. Who cares what anyone else thinks? You are receiving according to the norms of the Church.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I don’t know who flagged Clare’'s post or if it was edited after being flagged, but if someone flagged it in its current form, that’s a gross misuse of the flagging “community moderation” system.

With respect to hand or tongue, I would hope we don’t let this divide us as honestly to me it seems a small issue. Our tongue made of flesh is as unholy and grubby as our hand made of flesh. The concern is mostly that people drop or carry away the Host. As I understand it, communion in the hand is permitted by indult, that is, exception, in countries where it was being done already, so while I don’t condone criticizing others for their preference, it is true that the indult could be withdrawn and it’s not the default way of doing things.

I generally receive in the hand. It’s easier. I am capable of switching back to tongue, as I did for years as a child before the indult, any time the Church wishes, but hopefully someone will train the ministers so I don’t feel like a slot machine at the casino.

 

[Saxum]

I don’t know who flagged Clare’'s post or if it was edited after being flagged, but if someone flagged it in its current form, that’s a gross misuse of the flagging “community moderation” system.

I didn’t mind Clare’s post at all. I’m an ardent believe in free speech even if it ruffles some feathers. One has to be expect criticisms and disagreements when one expresses strong opinions. I say let’s open the market place of ideas and bring on the debate (charitably of course).

 

[Wesrock]

For me, reception of the Eucharist on my tongue is a private devotional practice. I’m not saying it is for everyone, I’m not saying it should be. It’s just something I prefer to do as I see it spiritually beneficial for myself. I don’t insist on it all the time. If I’m receiving from an EMHC I feel more comfortable receiving in the hand (though I know any well-trained EMHC should have no problem placing it on the tongue).

 

[nodito]

Communion in the hand was born out of disobedience.

This is not entirely true.

“In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King.” St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Doctor of the Church

 

[bquinnan]

I have to admit, as an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion (fancy term for “Communion giver”), I prefer administering the chalice to the host because I feel so awkward about putting something on someone’s tongue. I have noticed that our parish’s Hispanic community still frequently prefers to receive on the tongue.

No question, it is your right to receive on the tongue, and if I’m not willing to give someone Communion in that way, then I shouldn’t be in that role. It’s just my own issue to deal with. Personally, it seems to me that once you have EMs distributing the Eucharist, it’s no longer coming straight from the hand of the priest anyway, so I don’t see the point of receiving on the tongue from an EM. Perhaps the recipient’s arms are full because he or she is carrying a kid or something. Maybe it’s concern over the crumbs of the Eucharist getting stuck to one’s fingers, which would be a reasonable concern, and the EMs who distribute the host do rinse their fingers afterward in a bowl that is poured out into one of the special drains at our parish.

But, really your reasons aren’t my business. Being willing to place the host on someone’s tongue is in the job description.

 

[Saxum]

I discussed this quotation earlier in the thread by providing a link to an article written by Dr Taylor Marshall. It’s authenticity is doubtful. Check out the sources I’ve provided.

 

[Mattapoisett64]

As someone who has had the privilege of distributing Communion for the last 18 years - and who grew up in the 1950’s and well remember “on the tongue,” I think the key problem is with the people, not the Special Ministers - very few people open their mouths wide enough, extend their tongue far enough, or wait long enough for the Host to be placed. Honestly, there are some parishioners who approach Communion like snapping turtles - I’m lucky to keep all my fingers. There are parishioners who open their mouths the height of a coin slot. The good sisters used to teach how to do it correctly, but that’s a vanished world.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

This!! 1000 times, this!!!

As an EMHC, I agree 100% with what you say here. If the fault lies anywhere, it is usually with those who receive on the tongue.

And, FWIW, I have seen patens be used in both the EF and OF, and I agree that they are more for show than for protection. I have personally seen a dropped host hit the paten, bounce off and end up on the floor anyway. It also caused the altar server to try and “catch” the host, and they ended up hitting the next person in line with the paten. It was not a good day, all around.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Point taken that some people don’t open wide enough, although I’d also fault the “overhand” style of placing the host that some of the ministers have used. Virtually every priest I’ve received from on the tongue used “underhand” - thumb and forefinger holding host with thumb on top and hand under the Host, and it avoids the “slot machine” gesture as well as perhaps providing an extra bit of protection for the host to land in his hand if it should be bumped or slip. If, on the other hand, the person is holding the host in thumb and forefinger with the forefinger and hence, the hand on top, then the whole business seems to be more awkward.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Communion on the tongue is far better. Books have been written on this subject. It is an historical fact that Rome did not want communion in the hand but had to allow it because people refused to obey. The practice started as an abuse, continued in disobedience, and makes sacreligious acts possible.

Communion on the tongue is far better. You said it. Admit it.

 

[Saxum]

Communion on the tongue is far better. You said it. Admit it.

What’s your point? It is better. The Church agrees. That’s why it’s the law. Communion in the hand is a special exception to the law. It is better because it protects Our Lord from profanation.

That said, communion in the hand is now lawful and you’re free to follow the exception to the rule. Personally I think it’s better to follow the rule rather than the exception.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

So, no profanation happened before the 1960’s?

Look, do what you want, but what you need to do is stop setting your opinions up as if they were correct and the Church is now wrong.

I am not sure if that is what you mean to do, and I will give the benefit of the doubt, for now.

But you are the one who keeps bringing up the disobedience factor and setting it up that the Church just gave in, even though it didn’t want to. Is that how you really want to paint the Magisterium to those who might not be Catholic, or to those who are struggling in their faith?