Communion in the Hand--Loss of Grace?

[otm]

Actually, our Catechists have to be certified too, but in my old parish they were still teaching that the mass was a meal.

Scary isn’t it? Glad I escaped.

Yeah, it is pretty scary when they teach what the Church teaches.

Now if you mean that they taught it was only a meal, that would be contrary to Church teaching.

 

[robertaf]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Quite right!
In my home parish, back in Cleveland, we had one traditional mass and one that I believe was Charismatic. That was wonderful!

Now, in my area in Detroit. I am being to find out that when people call themselves Charismatics, they are not like you Roberta. They are something else that is not Catholic.

No wonder I’m confused.

I’m confused too.

But I think you and I should shake and be friends.

 

[netmilsmom]

otm:

Yeah, it is pretty scary when they teach what the Church teaches.

Now if you mean that they taught it was only a meal, that would be contrary to Church teaching.

Isn’t that a Sacrificial Meal?
Not like a Thanksgiving get together, right?

 

[thistle]

Elzee:

Yep, still is scarey for some of us. I’ve seen a video that teaches it’s a meal - right down to comparing it to the family dinner table and passing around big ole slices of bread. It totally trivialized the meaning of the Eucharist in my opinion.

The Eucharist is a meal. It says so in CCC 1390.

 

[netmilsmom]

thistle:

The Eucharist is a meal. It says so in CCC 1390.

1390 Since Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species,    communion under the species of bread alone makes it possible to receive    all the fruit of Eucharistic grace. For pastoral reasons this manner of    receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common    form in the Latin rite. But "the sign of communion is more complete when    given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic    meal appears more clearly."[222] This is the usual form of receiving    communion in the Eastern rites.

---

That states the Eucharistic Meal. Not that the eating of Bread and Wine is a McDonald’s number one but rather our soul is fed.
My daughter actually said this today when we went to McDonald’s after mass.
She said, “Although I got Jesus in me at church, I’m still hungry.”

The Protestants (Including my hubby that I just asked to read this) believe that they eat and drink in rememberance. It is a Communal meal for them.
For us it is the reliving of the sacrifice. Not a big family feast.

 

[netmilsmom]

robertaf:

I’m confused too.

But I think you and I should shake and be friends.

I missed your post, Lady!
Me too!

 

[Elzee]

thistle:

The Eucharist is a meal. It says so in CCC 1390.

Yes - but it is food for our souls, a re-presentation of the one sacrifice of Christ which transcends time. The problem I had with the video is it dumbed down the full meaning of the Eucharist, comparing it to sitting down at a dinner table and sharing slices of a loaf of bread. There was very little mention of the Real Presence, no mention of the sacrifice, no mention of the grace. It was a video that could (almost) have easily been shown in any Christian Church that has communion.

 

[sosayi1960]

Sounds to me like hearsay from people who want to discredit EWTN. However Communion in the hand was an abuse that was made an indult here in the US while communion on the tongue is still the norm. And from what I hear from the Vatican, they may just soon once again ban communion in the hand as it was done hundereds of years ago.

Ken

It’s easy to discredit EWTN but that’s another story. If the Vatican bans communion in the hand,I fear, the church is going down another slippery slope. Our Lord said: “Take and Eat, Take and Drink”. The church would be ignoring what Jesus himself said.
He didn’t say open your mouth and close your eyes. I think it’s awful .