Communion in the Hand?

[missal]

Hi savienu

Three hundred years of persecution caused people to hide and carry the Eucharist.
"The first great Ecumenical-Council assembled in Nicea, in Asia Minor, in 325, so many of the three hundred and eighteen bishops who attended bore on their bodies testimony of the torture they had undergone for the Faith in the last and most cruel of the persecutions, that the Fathers of the Council broke into tears of love and veneration at the sight of them…"quote from “Our glorious Popes”
Can Mr. Baddog honestly believe that in twenty years — the twinkling of an eye…Churches would be resurrected and rules set up to establish a most honerable, venerable way to receive Jesus Christ after receiving him in the most humiliating ways?
Yes, it took time to develop into the Latin Mass and Jesus on the alter, and kneelers, etc.
It must be pretty important that so many enemies of the Church want this removed huh:
View attachment 5471

Thank you for calling attention to that section. I couldn’t find what you were referring to either, that CITH was a common practice and not condemned by St. Basil. However, if you read the whole passage in context, he IS talking about those receiving during times of persecution, is he not?

 

[Bif]

Thanks for your responses, David and missal! Much appreciated

 

[Layman]

“Humility is a condition of the heart, not the position of the knee.”

The latter reinforces the former. It is the outer sign of the supposed inner condition. Kneeling is also an outer sign of respect, to our dear King.

By your reasoning, one could also receive humbly standing on one leg. While dressed as a ballet dancer. “Humility is a condition of the heart …” and all.

The question remains: Why, when one can humble oneself by receiving communion, kneeling, on the tongue, would anyone persist in taking it standing, in the hand?

 

[PJM]

ommunion in the Hand?

---

Originally Posted by Scar
i tend to believe that at the last supper Christ broke bread and gave it to his apostles in the hand…IMHO of course

**
REPLY to above**The apostles were the first bishops. Peter had already been made the first pope. The sacrament wasn’t fully initiated until Christ died on the cross. “it will be shed”

Dear friends in Christ, your point is valid and correct, however it is of “no signifiance” because Bishops, and Priest may, can, and do receive Christ “in their own hands” by virtue of the fact that they are impowered by God Himself, to make Jesus Present to us

 

[jpy15026]

Matthew 17:14
14 When they came to the crowd a man approached, knelt down before him,

Mark 1:40
40 A leper came to him (and kneeling down) begged him and said, “If you wish, you can make me clean.”

Luke 5:8
8 When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at the knees of Jesus and said, “Depart from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man.”

Romans 14:11
11 for it is written: “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bend before me, and every tongue shall give praise to God.”

When I approach Jesus on the day of judgment,the same Jesus I receive at the Sacrifice of the Mass,I don’t think I’ll be will sticking out my hand to Him,I’ll be on my knees or prostrated before Him,but that’s just me.
.

 

[Layman]

How you behave outwardly affects your inner state. Notice how when you put on your good suit you feel more ‘in charge’?

Another poster here has said that during a seder meal the presider would have passed a piece of bread into the mouth of those others present. I assume that’s what would have happened in Christ’s day.

Regardless, **picking up practices which have been long discarded shows we repudiate our history. Or that some elements in our Church are just being meddlesome. **

[Sarcasm:] Persish forbid that a proud, modern man should have to kneel in public; how humiliating, how embarassing! After all, we’re all the ‘priesthood of the baptised’, or whatever it is.

It’s hard not to come to the conclusion that ‘the fix is in’, and that we’re heading to a Protestant-style attitude (I’m just as good as the vicar) and worship (all the crowd-pleasing alterations and novelties).

 

[savienu]

Matthew 17:14
14 When they came to the crowd a man approached, knelt down before him,

Mark 1:40
40 A leper came to him (and kneeling down) begged him and said, “If you wish, you can make me clean.”

Luke 5:8
8 When Simon Peter saw this, he fell at the knees of Jesus and said, “Depart from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man.”

Romans 14:11
11 for it is written: “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bend before me, and every tongue shall give praise to God.”

When I approach Jesus on the day of judgment,the same Jesus I receive at the Sacrifice of the Mass,I don’t think I’ll be will sticking out my hand to Him,I’ll be on my knees or prostrated before Him,but that’s just me.
.

Great post!

 

[LilyM]

For what it’s worth, I asked my mother why she decided to receive in the hand (since Post- VII it was presented as an option), and she said basically the same thing- that she thought it was neat to be touching God.

Not basically the same thing.

It’s as far beyond ‘neat’ as the Sun is beyond the moon, just as for a husband to embrace his wife or a mother her child is well and truly beyond ‘neat’.

 

[LilyM]

How you behave outwardly affects your inner state. Notice how when you put on your good suit you feel more ‘in charge’?

Another poster here has said that during a seder meal the presider would have passed a piece of bread into the mouth of those others present. I assume that’s what would have happened in Christ’s day.

Regardless, **picking up practices which have been long discarded shows we repudiate our history. Or that some elements in our Church are just being meddlesome. **

[Sarcasm:] Persish forbid that a proud, modern man should have to kneel in public; how humiliating, how embarassing! After all, we’re all the ‘priesthood of the baptised’, or whatever it is.

It’s hard not to come to the conclusion that ‘the fix is in’, and that we’re heading to a Protestant-style attitude (I’m just as good as the vicar) and worship (all the crowd-pleasing alterations and novelties).

Only relevant if I didn’t bend the knee - which I and all Catholics in my diocese who are capable do, I can assure you - at the Eucharistic prayer.

 

[moorefamily7]

in reply to this i can only say that there is no documented proof from anywhere in the church that allows you to recieve the holy eucharist in the hand and i have heard this first hand from 2 very prominent members of the clergy. Secondly the pope has told the other bishops that if he celebrates mass anyone who wishes to recieve holy communion must kneel and recieve it in the mouth, otherwise you won’t get it. Thirdly it is the consecrated body of our lord, who blessed your hands to touch him, and you show the younger ones a bad example.

 

[LilyM]

in reply to this i can only say that there is no documented proof from anywhere in the church that allows you to recieve the holy eucharist in the hand and i have heard this first hand from 2 very prominent members of the clergy. Secondly the pope has told the other bishops that if he celebrates mass anyone who wishes to recieve holy communion must kneel and recieve it in the mouth, otherwise you won’t get it. Thirdly it is the consecrated body of our lord, who blessed your hands to touch him, and you show the younger ones a bad example.

An indult IS a document, 'documentary proof; if you will - IT allows us to receive CITH. There are many many indults have been granted over the past few decades. So your ‘very prominent members of the clergy’ are wrong if they think otherwise. Remember individual clerics aren’t infallible (apart from the Holy Father, and only then under some circumstances). But the Holy Father IS the final arbiter of such disciplinary matters as whether CITH is permissible, so if he permits it we can’t argue that it’s permissible at least).

 

[Layman]

“Only relevant if I didn’t bend the knee - which I and all Catholics in my diocese who are capable do, I can assure you - at the Eucharistic prayer.”

Good for you.

That too could be made ‘optional’, in time; from California or Holland → a church near you, within a decade or so from the time some ‘inclusive’ priest decides to get creative with the liturgy, ‘in the spirit of Vatican II (or renewal)’.

Just had an interesting thought: California is on a major fault line and Holland is dry only because of its dykes.

 

[LilyM]

“Only relevant if I didn’t bend the knee - which I and all Catholics in my diocese who are capable do, I can assure you - at the Eucharistic prayer.”

Good for you.

That too could be made ‘optional’, in time; from California or Holland → a church near you, within a decade or so from the time some ‘inclusive’ priest decides to get creative with the liturgy, ‘in the spirit of Vatican II (or renewal)’.

Just had an interesting thought: California is on a major fault line and Holland is dry only because of its dykes.

Well, genuflecting in front of the Tabernacle has ALWAYS been optional, yet it’s also an important sign of reverence

 

[malphono]

An indult IS a document, 'documentary proof; if you will - IT allows us to receive CITH. There are many many indults have been granted over the past few decades. …

Lily, you may have hit the nail (maybe inadvertently but nevertheless … ) when you said: many many indults. It seems to me there are far too many so-called “indults” around these days. Yes, I well know that indults have been around for ages, and I have no problem with them in principle, but what has happened in the past 40-some years is that the exceptions have become the rule. Or rather, the rules have become obscured by the proliferation of exceptions.

 

[LilyM]

Lily, you may have hit the nail (maybe inadvertently but nevertheless … ) when you said: many many indults. It seems to me there are far too many so-called “indults” around these days. Yes, I well know that indults have been around for ages, and I have no problem with them in principle, but what has happened in the past 40-some years is that the exceptions have become the rule. Or rather, the rules have become obscured by the proliferation of exceptions.

I bet you wouldn’t have been so terribly unhappy if the ‘exception’ had become the ‘rule’, or if there had been ‘many many indults’ when it was the TLM that was the ‘exception’ that needed permissions.

What’s wrong with having two (count 'em - two - what an ungodly proliferation!) of options as far as reception of Communion goes.

 

[palmas85]

Well, genuflecting in front of the Tabernacle has ALWAYS been optional, yet it’s also an important sign of reverence

Genuflecting in front of the Tabernacle has always been optional?

Are you sure on that one Lily? I mean do you really want to go on record with that statement?

 

[LilyM]

Genuflecting in front of the Tabernacle has always been optional?

Are you sure on that one Lily? I mean do you really want to go on record with that statement?

I mean before and after Mass, not during - and for the laity, not those who may be serving at the altar.

By my understanding, postures for the laity for before and after Mass have never been prescribed, but surely if it’s irreverent to receive Communion standing then surely it’s also irreverent to fail to genuflect as you enter or leave your pew.

 

[PJM]

=LilyM;5000423]An indult IS a document, 'documentary proof; if you will - IT allows us to receive CITH. There are many many indults have been granted over the past few decades. So your ‘very prominent members of the clergy’ are wrong if they think otherwise. Remember individual clerics aren’t infallible (apart from the Holy Father, and only then under some circumstances). But the Holy Father IS the final arbiter of such disciplinary matters as whether CITH is permissible, so if he permits it we can’t argue that it’s permissible at least).

Dear friend in Christ,

FYI…
**
Removal of Communion rails, walk-around altars, Communion in the hand, female altar servers, Communion under both species, removal of tabernacle out of the Sanctuary, Lay Lectors, and NOW ORDINARY (still no indult on this) ministers of communion.**

NOT ONE OF THESE WAS APPROVED BY VATICAN II!

Second point:

All of the above that have received “Indults” have done so after the practice had already been forced as “mandates of Vatican II” and were firmly established practices led by numerous American Bishops in direct disobedience to Rome.

This fact should hardy give the laity a “warm and fuzzy feeling” given the usurption of power and authority, and the example that has led to oh, so many other problems.

“If they can do it, why can’t I?”

Can anything good come out of such direct and deliberate disobedience? For sure nothing has so far

Love and prayers,

 

[LilyM]

Dear friend in Christ,

FYI…
**
Removal of Communion rails, walk-around altars, Communion in the hand, female altar servers, Communion under both species, removal of tabernacle out of the Sanctuary, Lay Lectors, and NOW ORDINARY (still no indult on this) ministers of communion.**

NOT ONE OF THESE WAS APPROVED BY VATICAN II!

Second point:

All of the above that have received “Indults” have done so after the practice had already been forced as “mandates of Vatican II” and were firmly established practices led by numerous American Bishops in direct disobedience to Rome.

This fact should hardy give the laity a “warm and fuzzy feeling” given the usurption of power and authority, and the example that has led to oh, so many other problems.

“If they can do it, why can’t I?”

Can anything good come out of such direct and deliberate disobedience? For sure nothing has so far

Love and prayers,

Rot. If disobedience were a genuine factor then why are artificial contraception and abortion not permitted? Remarriage upon divorce? Female ordination? For sure these all have been, or are currently, much more popular forms of disobedience than CITH ever was, and much more militantly advocated, no?

 

[Layman]

Or in other words: if things are bad, why aren’t they worse? If things aren’t worse, then they must be ok?

" … artificial contraception and abortion not permitted? Remarriage upon divorce? Female ordination?"

Too soon. Not yet, not yet. It’s hard to undo 1950 years in fifty.

Maybe never, if the resurgence of the TLM comes to fruition, and Pope Benedict has his way. Already the wolves howl and all he has done is state orthodoxy and invite our estranged brothers back home.

May his enemies be confounded and Christ open their eyes to the Truth.