Communion in Hand at the Last Supper?

[DebatingDebator]

Question for those people who seem to defend the practice of Communion in the hand.

A person receives CITH, and then goes back to their seat without even the slightest look on their fingers or palms for fragments of the Blessed Sacrament.

Do you realize that the bolded out action in the above statement is actually wrong?

DebatingDebator

 

[ProVobis]

Kind of. I figure the amount lost is never zero, so we can only change the quantity that is lost. Therefore I don’t worry about it, as long as it is some miniscule amount we can’t see.

Given the right circumstance and the right tools, you would be able to see it. Fr. Z showed how much is actually worn off every time it is touched. You could always use fluorescent technology to see them too.

But if you really think it’s no big deal, try going to a coin show and pick up an uncirculated (or any rare) coin in your hand. Those guys can see every rub in every coin and I guarantee that you’ve dropped the price of your coin by just touching it. And isn’t the Body of Christ worth more than the most expensive coin?

Point is, the less it is touched, the better.

 

[ProVobis]

Perhaps it is impossible to prevent the loss of a little of the Blessed Sacrament.

Which is why traditionally the paten is used and the hands of the priests are washed with wine and water into the chalice after he distributes communion.

I think you said that somewhere, though.

 

[DebatingDebator]

Which is why traditionally the paten is used and the hands of the priests are washed with wine and water into the chalice after he distributes communion.

I think you said that somewhere, though.

yes, i will be posting a great deal of patristic evidence in support of the traditional practices wrt the Blessed Sacrament. When I finish work

 

[MarkThompson]

It’s not “more Catholic” friend; it’s GREATER reverence. It’s not about us’ it’s about God.

But you’ll entitled to do as you want.

Love and prayers,

I agree, it’s not “more Catholic” either way, though that doesn’t have much to do with whether the term “take” or “receive” is better, or with whether one term describes Communion in the hand and the other Communion on the tongue, as you proposed.

And I have to disagree that “*t’s not about us’ it’s about God” – it’s about both us and God, specifically about how we reverence him and how we stand before him. Communion, like redemption, is an act of relationship, that can only be contemplated in the context of a relationship, and no relationship can be understood without reference to both parties.

And thanks for your permission to do as I want. I’ll just go ahead and continue receiving on the tongue, then. *

 

[choy]

does one become a lesser practice just because its a indult?

 

[Layman]

I just want a proponent of CITH to explain how it benefits we Roman Catholics spiritually to changing from receiving Him, kneeling, on the tongue, from a priest, to standing, into their hands, from the hands of a laywoman.

Funny thing to do at a public rite of worship of the Creator of All Things.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I just want a proponent of CITH to explain how it benefits we Roman Catholics spiritually to changing from receiving Him, kneeling, on the tongue, from a priest, to standing, into their hands, from the hands of a laywoman.

Funny thing to do at a public rite of worship of the Creator of All Things.

In some parishes, it probably results in Communion time being shorter and not much else. In others without priests, a laywoman may be able to deliver Communion. Same way with home bound.

I’d like to know, spiritually, what we are missing out from the Sacrament by receiving CITH.

Alan

 

[Layman]

Easy. We lost a chance to show humility before Christ The King at the central rite of worship of our religion.

“Lord, I am not worthy to receive you …”

Also, changing over to CITH, standing, from a laywoman suggests we are somehow, now, more holy or that the Host is less so and the priest just a presider instead of an ‘Alter Christus’: “This is My Body …”

 

[DebatingDebator]

Question for those people who seem to defend the practice of Communion in the hand.

A person receives CITH, and then goes back to their seat without even the slightest look on their fingers or palms for fragments of the Blessed Sacrament.

Do you realize that the bolded out action in the above statement is actually wrong?

DebatingDebator

Just to re-ask the question to Alanfromwichita, ncjohn and others.

 

[ProVobis]

In some parishes, it probably results in Communion time being shorter

Like they have somewhere else more important where they need to be?

I’d like to know, spiritually, what we are missing out from the Sacrament by receiving CITH.

Alan

From a psychological point of view, eating from your own hands shows independence. Unlike a baby being fed or a newly-wed couple exchanging cake or late seniors being fed at nursing homes, one basically rejects outside help and says to Christ “That’s okay, I can feed myself, thank you.” And this is supposed to be spiritual?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Like they have somewhere else more important where they need to be?

Maybe they need to get to coffee and donuts 5 minutes sooner?

From a psychological point of view, eating from your own hands shows independence. Unlike a baby being fed or a newly-wed couple exchanging cake or late seniors being fed at nursing homes, one basically rejects outside help and says to Christ “That’s okay, I can feed myself, thank you.” And this is supposed to be spiritual?

Interesting take on it. I guess it depends on whether the Body of Christ is considered spiritual “milk” or “solid food” as to whether one attitude is preferential over another.
1 Cor 3:1-3:

Brothers, I could not talk to you as spiritual people, but as fleshly people, as infants in Christ. I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were unable to take it. Indeed, you are still not able, even now, for you are still of the flesh. While there is jealousy and rivalry among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving in an ordinary human way?

Heb 5:12-14:

Although you should be teachers by this time, you need to have someone teach you again the basic elements of the utterances of God. You need milk, (and) not solid food. Everyone who lives on milk lacks experience of the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those whose faculties are trained by practice to discern good and evil.

Alan

 

[ProVobis]

Interesting take on it. I guess it depends on whether the Body of Christ is considered spiritual “milk” or “solid food” as to whether one attitude is preferential over another.

Tell that to a newly married couple when they exchange cake. “Milk” in form of a “cake”? That’s a good one.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Tell that to a newly married couple when they exchange cake. “Milk” in form of a “cake”? That’s a good one.

 

[Layman]

Another odd thing: The priest is supposed to take great care with the Host; careful with his hands, brushing the crumbs from the paten into the chalice …

Then Mrs. Goodlady hands one to Mr. Goodman.

Why change to that, if Jesus is present in the Host?

 

[PJM]

=choy;6738106]so the OF is superior to the EF
thanks for clarifying that

VERY CLEVER RESPONCE! BUT, were you correct?

God intitles you to hold your own view.

According to the 2008 PEW Report [comparing Mass attendance from 1970 to 2007]…

1970 had nearly 75% of self professed Catholics regularlly fulfilling Sunday and holy day oblications. By 2007 that numner had dropped to below 25%. Additionaly those going to Confession droped from about 65% to 10%.

If you find humor in these stats, attribuitable more to the Novus Ordo and it’s “we are the Church,” mind set… then you see and understand things I simply cannot comprehend.

 

[ncjohn]

Just to re-ask the question to Alanfromwichita, ncjohn and others.

Not sure why you’re asking me that question since its answer is both obvious and irrelevant. For the record, yes of course I know it would be wrong to leave visible particles in a position to just fall on the floor.

Also for the record, I am neither for or against CITH. I’m just sick and tired of the holier-than-thou crowd believing they can or should impose their subjective preferences on people and making their ridiculous judgments about people based on something the Church defines as an entirely legitimate choice.

I’ll repeat it one more time. The practice was the norm in the Roman Church for centuries and has been the unabated practice in some Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church from the beginning and to this day. There are many legitimate spiritual, theological and historical reasons commending it, just as there are for COTT. Both have been the norm at different times. Both have solid tradition behind them. The Church has given us the option.

I personally don’t give a rat’s patootie how it came back into being. However it happened the Church has approved it and stood by that approval. I just don’t buy for a second the argument that they did it to prevent revolt or to prevent a “greater evil”. If they want to revoke that approval tomorrow I’m fine with that. I have received communion in probably every way possible within the Roman rite and as long as I get to receive it I will in almost all cases follow whatever the norm is for the parish where I am attending so as not to draw anyone into judgment unnecessarily.

We each have the right to our pious and devotional practices from among what the Church offers and approves. None of us has the right to judge anyone else’s practices nor does anyone owe anyone else any apology or explanation for how they choose to honor God. You may not agree with their choice. You may not understand how they could come to the conclusion they did. That is irrelevant though as it’s none of your business.

Quite frankly I find it abysmal to see how many come here to even bring such things up, much less some of the totally non-Christian comments that are offered about our brothers and sisters. The degree of arrogance over such subjective choices is simply stunning to me. I’ve seen the gamut of true abuses, both pre and post Vatican II and this type of thing just isn’t even in the ballpark of things to be talking about. It’s nothing more than idle gossip, not much different from the snickering behind the hands about someone’s haircut or that they can’t affard nicer clothes. That we are seeing people debating the way people are honoring God, and finding them unacceptable totally sickens me.

I truly pray this is not the way things are with some here in “real life” and that this is just some internet phenomenon that brings out people’s latent nastiness by virtue of the anonymity. I also hope there are a lot of priests being kept really busy at confession as people come to realize what they have indulged themselves in. I somehow doubt it though since when one swimming in the septic tank it probably isn’t noticeable that what is coming out of one’s mouth smells just like the stuff floating there.

 

[choy]

Like they have somewhere else more important where they need to be?

its not always the lay people. the priest may need to say more masses or even help out in masses in other parishes. they may also have duties to bring communion to sick people and shut-ins

 

[choy]

VERY CLEVER RESPONCE! BUT, were you correct?

God intitles you to hold your own view.

According to the 2008 PEW Report [comparing Mass attendance from 1970 to 2007]…

1970 had nearly 75% of self professed Catholics regularlly fulfilling Sunday and holy day oblications. By 2007 that numner had dropped to below 25%. Additionaly those going to Confession droped from about 65% to 10%.

If you find humor in these stats, attribuitable more to the Novus Ordo and it’s “we are the Church,” mind set… then you see and understand things I simply cannot comprehend.

its funny how people throw around stats and make unfounded conclusions

always blame this, always blame that, just to justify their own views and convince people to adopt these baseless and unfounded view. if what you say were true, then the Church would have acted on it. oh no, wait, there’s a grand scheme happening in the back rooms of the Vatican where a sinister plot is being implemented. yes, there’s always a conspiracy theory. the US government is behind 9/11, and NASA didn’t send anyone to the moon. we can’t just accept what we’re told and believe in it. it always has to be something else, something we came up with in our own minds. this kind of mistrust in the Church is very, very anti-Christian. as Christians, we are to submit to those with the authority and in power, namely God. Jesus has appointed leaders for the Church here on earth. can we not just trust that they are doing their job? who are we to think we are better?

 

[ProVobis]

I personally don’t give a rat’s patootie how it came back into being. However it happened the Church has approved it and stood by that approval. I just don’t buy for a second the argument that they did it to prevent revolt or to prevent a “greater evil”.

So you’re saying the end justifies the means, or only in this case? It seems as if somewhere along the line, people took unnecessary risks to their souls in order to push their agenda. The Vatican could have easily excommunicated the abusers and had there not been the widespread acceptance of the abuse, they probably would have at least been reprimanded.

But the cat’s out of the bag now. It will take multiple statements by multiple Popes to finally put an end to the practice. At least Pope BXVI has stated that anyone receiving from him from now on must kneel and receive on the tongue.