Communion in the hand

[rinnie]

Yes this happened in a Roman Catholic Church. Let me share very briefly my experience in nearby churches and the rebellious and heretical priests I have encountered. At the church where I went to rcia, the priest told people to NOT go to confession and instead to just pray to God on their own. In a homily at Easter he claimed that the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ was not necessary and that Jesus did not necessarily rise bodily from the dead and that his bodily resurrection was not part of our faith. He has claimed that Vatican II changed things that it never did. He also disobeys the proscribed order of mass and adds and changes all sorts of prayers that he is forbidden to do. I spoke with a friend of mine who knew the previous bishop very well and said she’s sure he’s aware of him and his abuses. Yet he continues to let them persist. Then I started going to numerous other churches in the area, and noticed the same types of problems. Priests improvising the mass and doing whatever they want, a practice the Church has repeatedly said is a “grave offense.” Modernism has invaded the Church hierarchy on a very large scale. Read Pope Pius X’s warnings against the modernists and there heresies and you will see many of their errors being taught in seminaries today. It is starting to get better, but there are still so many bad priests and very few traditional ones. One priest in the area has been repeatedly asked to bring the Traditional Latin Mass to the beautiful old parish and the priest is obligated to do so under the Pope’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificom yet he is defying the pope and has said “not on my watch.” He refuses to have anything to do with this most ancient liturgy and instead he persists with improvised prayers and liturgical abuses performed by extraordinary ministers. The Church is in a time of theological crisis like never before.

I guess I am between a rock and a hard place. I have never seen this for myself so I tend to give the benefit of doubt to my church. In your defense I can not imagine why a True Catholic would lie about this. So I can not judge you either. This is just hard for me to understand. All we can do is pray that our Church does fix this problem. Myself I would probally find a RCC that does do the obey the Pope. I guess I am really stunned right now.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Yes this happened in a Roman Catholic Church. Let me share very briefly my experience in nearby churches and the rebellious and heretical priests I have encountered. At the church where I went to rcia, the priest told people to NOT go to confession and instead to just pray to God on their own. In a homily at Easter he claimed that the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ was not necessary and that Jesus did not necessarily rise bodily from the dead and that his bodily resurrection was not part of our faith. He has claimed that Vatican II changed things that it never did. He also disobeys the proscribed order of mass and adds and changes all sorts of prayers that he is forbidden to do. I spoke with a friend of mine who knew the previous bishop very well and said she’s sure he’s aware of him and his abuses. Yet he continues to let them persist. Then I started going to numerous other churches in the area, and noticed the same types of problems. Priests improvising the mass and doing whatever they want, a practice the Church has repeatedly said is a “grave offense.” Modernism has invaded the Church hierarchy on a very large scale. Read Pope Pius X’s warnings against the modernists and there heresies and you will see many of their errors being taught in seminaries today. It is starting to get better, but there are still so many bad priests and very few traditional ones. One priest in the area has been repeatedly asked to bring the Traditional Latin Mass to the beautiful old parish and the priest is obligated to do so under the Pope’s Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificom yet he is defying the pope and has said “not on my watch.” He refuses to have anything to do with this most ancient liturgy and instead he persists with improvised prayers and liturgical abuses performed by extraordinary ministers. The Church is in a time of theological crisis like never before.

Fine, you claim that you have seen this (but earlier it you said that friends had told you stories). Now why should we believe you?

And even if this did happen it has nothing one how the Church allows one to receive the Eucharist.

 

[una_fides]

Fine, you claim that you have seen this (but earlier it you said that friends had told you stories). Now why should we believe you?

Please re-read my earlier post. I said that I stopped going to those rediculous churches because of the abuses and that I personally never saw anyone profane the Eucharist like by taking it home or w/e because I don’t watch people receive Communion. You remind me of the pharasees questioning Jesus except that despite being wrong they actually had some idea what they were talking about.

 

[una_fides]

And even if this did happen it has nothing one how the Church allows one to receive the Eucharist.

These abuses happen quite frequently. You are a byzantine Catholic right? So you don’t even go to these types of churches I assume. Visit lots of random churches in big cities in the US and you will see what I’m talking about. Communion in the hand in these churches is just one more way that more easily facilitates abuse and more easily allows for priests to claim that Vatican II changed the Church’s teachings on things such as the Real Presence (which it didn’t).

 

[rinnie]

These abuses happen quite frequently. You are a byzantine Catholic right? So you don’t even go to these types of churches I assume. Visit lots of random churches in big cities in the US and you will see what I’m talking about. Communion in the hand in these churches is just one more way that more easily facilitates abuse and more easily allows for priests to claim that Vatican II changed the Church’s teachings on things such as the Real Presence (which it didn’t).

Now see now I am more confused then ever. Now are you saying that the RCC changed its teachings on the Real Presence of Christ. No this will not fly with me. And you have just discredited yourself with me. I am sorry. Yes the RCC does get communion in the hand. That is all that I can say have ever existed because that is all I have ever seen or ever heard about in my Church. Now this is getting real ugly. Please pm me with the RCC that teaches this and I will do everything in my power and contact my Bishop. I am sure he will help me. No RCC will ever let a Priest get away with saying the CHrist is not in the real presence of the Eucharist. PM me with the CHurch and the Priest. I will have this matter checked into.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Please re-read my earlier post. I said that I stopped going to those rediculous churches because of the abuses and that I personally never saw anyone profane the Eucharist like by taking it home or w/e because I don’t watch people receive Communion. You remind me of the pharasees questioning Jesus except that despite being wrong they actually had some idea what they were talking about.

So if you have no proof that this is happening then why do you claim that it is?

These abuses happen quite frequently. You are a byzantine Catholic right? So you don’t even go to these types of churches I assume. Visit lots of random churches in big cities in the US and you will see what I’m talking about. Communion in the hand in these churches is just one more way that more easily facilitates abuse and more easily allows for priests to claim that Vatican II changed the Church’s teachings on things such as the Real Presence (which it didn’t).

While I am a byzantine ruthenian Catholic I am also a brother in the Carmelite Order which is Latin Catholic so you assume wrong.

I have visited many Churches and have not experienced anything that you claim is going on.

As for the claim that communion in the hand makes the abuse easier, I disagree with that because you can actually see them consume the Eucharist. It is just as easy for someone to receive on the tongue and then spit it out when no one is looking.

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

As for the claim that communion in the hand makes the abuse easier, I disagree with that because you can actually see them consume the Eucharist. It is just as easy for someone to receive on the tongue and then spit it out when no one is looking.

i disagree. it’s much more likely that someone intent on desacrating the eucharist would seek out to recieve in the hand. but obviously it still was and could be done. what to me is more important is that recieving kneeling on the tounge is a objectively more pious way to recieve. it’s good catechesis which we need today.

 

[Caesar517]

I’ve always received in the hand because that’s how I was taught for my first communion. I didn’t find out about receiving on the tongue until many years later when I saw a few people doing it and just considered it to be one of those wired things that some people do. I have recently been looking into this, as about 1/3 of the people at my current parish receive on the tongue and our new priest has been encouraging it. It seems so much more respectful to me, but I’m scared that I would drop it and I don’t believe the altar servers could actually catch a falling Host.

 

[EasterJoy]

Another problem that is a concern for me is if Christ is fully present under both forms why is it necessary to distribute communion under both species, bread and wine. This seems to be a very risky practice as well as being hygienically unsafe.

As far as hygiene goes, the Centers for Disease Control have determined that the risk of transmitting disease via a common communion cup is very low, particularly if common-sense precautions are observed, such as wiping and turning the cup after each person recieves. From the standpoint of current scientific data, hygiene is not sufficient reason for denying the faithful the Eucharist under the species of wine.

As far as risk goes, once God decided to make us into the Body of Christ and to ordain men to prone to sin to act in the person of Christ, I think we were well down the slippery slope of risk. For that matter, if God were adverse to risk, He wouldn’t have made us in the first place. He didn’t just risk the necessity of the Crucifixion: He foresaw it and yet chose it, for our sake.

So of course the question is always this: not “is it risky?” but “does the gain justify the risk?” The Church has ascertained that, in our age, it does. That is a decision that She makes for each particular time: the current disciplines are not etched into the stone of dogma, any more than previous ones were.

I think that before there were Americans, though, the Church got a lot less guff on this kind of thing from within the Church, whether the rules were strict or not. One thing that American conservatives have fully in common with American liberals is that we don’t like to leave decisions up to the heirarchy anymore, nor do we trust the judgment of those who have actually studied the question from a far more fully-informed theological and pastoral position. We don’t like letting the shepherds be shepherds; we have to throw our two cents in about whether they are doing it right, even on decisions that are indisputably within their authority to make.

That unquestioning affection for our own opinions is what seeems the more risky practice to me.

 

[una_fides]

I guess I am between a rock and a hard place. I have never seen this for myself so I tend to give the benefit of doubt to my church. In your defense I can not imagine why a True Catholic would lie about this. So I can not judge you either. This is just hard for me to understand. All we can do is pray that our Church does fix this problem. Myself I would probally find a RCC that does do the obey the Pope. I guess I am really stunned right now.

Don’t be shocked. It’s been worse but in a different way. At one point in history most of the world’s bishops held to a heretical view about Jesus. They were called Arians and believed in different ways that Jesus was not God. The difference between then and now is that that heresy was clear and on a very fundamental issue that was easy to discern. Today the lines are blurred more and the modernists try to hide their heresies or justify them as some sort of imaginary extension of Vatican II (which wasn’t even a doctrinal council!). The Church needs prayer now more than ever, and most importantly our bishops need the strength to stand up and fight against these rogue priests rather than fear offending them or fear on account of the shortage of priests. God is in charge. If bishops start cracking down and enforcing more solemn and reverent liturgies, I guarantee you will see an increase in the number of priests. The more traditional a parish, the more vocations you will see sprouting up. For this reason, there is now hope because the priests in the seminaries are much more traditional than their counterparts from years past. If you don’t believe in the reality of the priesthood, the sacrifice of Mass, or the Real Presence (like many who attend mass today and even many priests today do not believe), then there’s no point to become a priest. The Church is shifting back to her tradition. Thanks be to God. I just pray it happens quicker before more damage is done.

 

[PJM]

Care to back up this claim with any proof?

The 2002 Catholic Almanac:

In 1967 about 70% of Professed Catholics fulfilled their Sunday and Holyday Obligations. In 2002 it was about 25%

In 2007 TIme magazine ran an article on Catholic Sacrament of Reconcillation. Per a “PEW Report” only about 10% of Catholics, confess even once per year.

htpp://www.pewreports.com

For more bad news.

 

[una_fides]

I’ve always received in the hand because that’s how I was taught for my first communion. I didn’t find out about receiving on the tongue until many years later when I saw a few people doing it and just considered it to be one of those wired things that some people do. I have recently been looking into this, as about 1/3 of the people at my current parish receive on the tongue and our new priest has been encouraging it. It seems so much more respectful to me, but I’m scared that I would drop it and I don’t believe the altar servers could actually catch a falling Host.

Just open up your mouth, tilt your head back slightly, and stick out your tongue slightly. They really should have servers with those golden plates that goes underneath and follows the priest’s hand. That makes it much safer. (I’ve had a priest miss my mouth on two occasions! Once it landed on the patten and the other not so good. This priest was sooo old! I felt bad for him.) But don’t worry. That’s less likely to happen. Whereas it’s almost certain that some particles could possibly fall to the ground as a result of Communion in the hand. It’s much safer to have it on the tongue, and it sets a better example for everyone else.

Btw, does anyone know the proper procedure if the consecrated species falls to the ground? I think I recall reading it somewhere a while ago, but the actual procedure escapes my memory. I think they’re supposed to wipe off the area with holy water maybe??

 

[rinnie]

Don’t be shocked. It’s been worse but in a different way. At one point in history most of the world’s bishops held to a heretical view about Jesus. They were called Arians and believed in different ways that Jesus was not God. The difference between then and now is that that heresy was clear and on a very fundamental issue that was easy to discern. Today the lines are blurred more and the modernists try to hide their heresies or justify them as some sort of imaginary extension of Vatican II (which wasn’t even a doctrinal council!). The Church needs prayer now more than ever, and most importantly our bishops need the strength to stand up and fight against these rogue priests rather than fear offending them or fear on account of the shortage of priests. God is in charge. If bishops start cracking down and enforcing more solemn and reverent liturgies, I guarantee you will see an increase in the number of priests. The more traditional a parish, the more vocations you will see sprouting up. For this reason, there is now hope because the priests in the seminaries are much more traditional than their counterparts from years past. If you don’t believe in the reality of the priesthood, the sacrifice of Mass, or the Real Presence (like many who attend mass today and even many priests today do not believe), then there’s no point to become a priest. The Church is shifting back to her tradition. Thanks be to God. I just pray it happens quicker before more damage is done.

You have made some pretty ugly charges against the RCC. Again pm me the name of this Church and then I will investigate this matter and then you will prove yourself to either be telling the truth or a liar. Its as simple as that.

 

[PJM]

Yeah. You know this how? Let me invision—five or six American bishops gather and say “How are we going to disobey Rome today? How 'bout we have communion distributed in the hand?”

Really?

You don’t know why it began, so stop pretending that you do.

John

My friend I have provided the Vatican II document that basically affirms your doubt. POST #88 On the Op.

Check it out.

 

[una_fides]

I think that before there were Americans, though, the Church got a lot less guff on this kind of thing from within the Church, whether the rules were strict or not. One thing that American conservatives have fully in common with American liberals is that we don’t like to leave decisions up to the heirarchy anymore, nor do we trust the judgment of those who have actually studied the question from a far more fully-informed theological and pastoral position. We don’t like letting the shepherds be shepherds; we have to throw our two cents in about whether they are doing it right, even on decisions that are indisputably within their authority to make.

That unquestioning affection for our own opinions is what seeems the more risky practice to me.

You make a good point here. We have to be humble and obey the decisions of the hierarchy and must always be careful not to fall into pride or rebellion.

Nevertheless, do we not have a right or even a duty to speak up to curtail abuses and to petition the hierarchy to let them know what is taking place in the parishes as a result of the things they are permitting? Certain bishops may think something is best for the community, but when it’s implemented, they can find out later that it’s not from the people. Furthermore, we must remember that there are modernists in all levels of the Church hierarchy today. Even bishops and groups of bishops. To the extent that a priest or bishop opposes Sacred Tradition, we must oppose that bishop to that extent. We are bound to obedience, but we must oppose false teachings. St. Paul warned of ravenous wolves entering the flock disguised as sheep as have numerous popes also warned in the past few centuries especially. I heard a faithful priest say the following in an amazing homily regarding the Church as the ark: There are even some crewmen in the ark who wish the ship to go astray and not reach its eternal destination, and who are trying to steer it off its course. Now also the ship is in a great storm. Now more then ever we must cling to the bark of Peter and remain faithful trusting that God will not let his Church go astray. She will reach her final destination.

 

[PJM]

Tell me this do you think that giving someone communion on the hand or on the tongue is going to stop abuse. What is the differene if some spit it out given either way. Anyone that would abuse the Body of Christ in any form is in big trouble. They will have to answer for that abuse not the Church. God does not make the Church responsible for our sins we are,

The difference is one ABUSE is the exception, done by a heathen or Satan worshiper.

The other abuse in done by Catholics who should know better, I blame the bishops and priest, not the uninformed laity.

God will Judge their motives, we can, and should judge their actions.

 

[rinnie]

The difference is one ABUSE is the exception, done by a heathen or Satan worshiper.

The other abuse in done by Catholics who should know better, I blame the bishops and priest, not the uninformed laity.

God will Judge their motives, we can, and should judge their actions.

There is no difference abuse is always from satan. I am not saying he cannot get to our Priest and Bishops. But to accuse someone you still must have proof. I agree anyone who ever does abuse will pay for it. And I would not want to be them when they meet God,

On another note many abuses have been reported and many inocent have suffered on the other side also.

Bottom line the Church was inocent and paid the price. But God takes care of his own. He will take care of his Church and I would never want to be the one who accused falsely or indeed did the abuse. Either way God is going to judge them. Amen to that!

 

[EasterJoy]

You make a good point here. We have to be humble and obey the decisions of the hierarchy and must always be careful not to fall into pride or rebellion.

Nevertheless, do we not have a right or even a duty to speak up to curtail abuses and to petition the hierarchy to let them know what is taking place in the parishes as a result of the things they are permitting? Certain bishops may think something is best for the community, but when it’s implemented, they can find out later that it’s not from the people. Furthermore, we must remember that there are modernists in all levels of the Church hierarchy today. Even bishops and groups of bishops. To the extent that a priest or bishop opposes Sacred Tradition, we must oppose that bishop to that extent. We are bound to obedience, but we must oppose false teachings. St. Paul warned of ravenous wolves entering the flock disguised as sheep as have numerous popes also warned in the past few centuries especially. I heard a faithful priest say the following in an amazing homily regarding the Church as the ark: There are even some crewmen in the ark who wish the ship to go astray and not reach its eternal destination, and who are trying to steer it off its course. Now also the ship is in a great storm. Now more then ever we must cling to the bark of Peter and remain faithful trusting that God will not let his Church go astray. She will reach her final destination.

If the bishop is making liturgical decisions that are within canon law and in obedience to the Pope, that isn’t an abuse. He’s the chief liturgist for his diocese, and he is bound by current discipline, not past discipline. A bishop must always take the experience of his flock seriously into account, out of the pre-eminent perogative of charity’s demands if nothing else, but he isn’t bound by their opinions. They are bound by his. He is bound by pastoral necessity. I mean to say that our bishops are bound by obedience to their vocations to discern what we actually need, but not bound to supply what we want. This is what I meant.

Having said that, humility does not preclude a faithful Catholic from holding opinions, even strong opinions, about what he or she likes or doesn’t like, especially when these reasons truly are borne out of a desire for everyone’s spiritual advancement. Charity and humility do not require that we never tell the bishop how we feel or what we see that we don’t like, although these virtues might require us to bite our tongues at times. We are morally required not to confuse our opinions with the facts concerning what is and isn’t permissible and with whom authority ultimately rests. A properly formed conscience will forbid this.

As for those times when bishops are not in obedience to the Holy See or canon law, duty requires Catholics to object, regardless of what anyone’s state in life is.

IOW, I think we are in agreement.

 

[una_fides]

Now see now I am more confused then ever. Now are you saying that the RCC changed its teachings on the Real Presence of Christ. No this will not fly with me. And you have just discredited yourself with me. I am sorry. Yes the RCC does get communion in the hand. That is all that I can say have ever existed because that is all I have ever seen or ever heard about in my Church. Now this is getting real ugly. Please pm me with the RCC that teaches this and I will do everything in my power and contact my Bishop. I am sure he will help me. No RCC will ever let a Priest get away with saying the CHrist is not in the real presence of the Eucharist. PM me with the CHurch and the Priest. I will have this matter checked into.

I never said the Catholic Church changed it’s teachings on the Real Presence. Please re-read my earlier post. I said that some priests claim that is so, but it is obviously not. I personally do not know of any priests who openly deny the Real Presence, but I have heard of them from other priests on EWTN. I have, however, heard many priests who have taught many other errors concerning confession, the resurrection, etc. Oh I forgot to mention that the same priest at the church I was telling you about that I did have experience at, he denied the existence of the Devil and demons. He also tried to cast doubt on the miracles that took place in Scripture (which is classic modernism). The list could go on. I’m sure I would have had many more things to tell had I stayed at that parish. I know someone there who still goes there. She said he that he promoted socialism from the pulpit, saying basically that true Catholicism is socialism in practice.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

The 2002 Catholic Almanac:

In 1967 about 70% of Professed Catholics fulfilled their Sunday and Holyday Obligations. In 2002 it was about 25%

In 2007 TIme magazine ran an article on Catholic Sacrament of Reconcillation. Per a “PEW Report” only about 10% of Catholics, confess even once per year.

htpp://www.pewreports.com

For more bad news.

And? There is no evidence that this was caused by the reception of Communion in Hand,

This is the well known logical fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

Just because something happens after something else does not mean that the first thing caused the second.

You just as well blame Vatican II for this.

Just as you might say that water is poisonous as everyone who has ever died drank water sometime before their death.