Communion in the Hand?

[DavidPalm]

I like this, too.We had Intinction for weekday Masses at our old parish.
Again, I really appreciate being able to kneel at the altar to receive Holy Communion-in any manner.
The Maronite liturgy is beautiful.We’ve visited Maronite parishes a few times.Byzantine, too.Really liked the friendliness of the people there.

I agree with you both about intinction. There is a diocesan priest here in La Crosse who started giving out Holy Communion by intinction specifically to discourage Communion in the hand.

Kneeling for Holy Communion is a distinctively Western tradition, but when at a Latin Rite Mass I insist upon it as my right as a Latin Rite Catholic. The whole “stand up, stand up, stand up!” thing is a product of the revolution (but that’s fodder for another thread) .

I’ve been to the Byzantine Rite in St. Louis and the Ukranian Rite in Palatine, IL. Awesome.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

I agree with you both about intinction. There is a diocesan priest here in La Crosse who started giving out Holy Communion by intinction specifically to discourage Communion in the hand.

Kneeling for Holy Communion is a distinctively Western tradition, but when at a Latin Rite Mass I insist upon it as my right as a Latin Rite Catholic. The whole “stand up, stand up, stand up!” thing is a product of the revolution (but that’s fodder for another thread) .

I’ve been to the Byzantine Rite in St. Louis and the Ukranian Rite in Palatine, IL. Awesome.

I guess I don’t get it…either species i.e. the Host or Precious Bood are the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ…why do we even need to receive both?

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[elts1956]

I get such a kick out of all of the opposite claims about the Last Supper, I just had to write it up: The Last Supper: We weren’t there!

I think we need a description of a Sedar, because that is what the Last Supper was, a Jewish meal officiated by a Jewish Rabbi for his Jewish followers. So how was a Sedar conducted in Jesus’ time? Anyone know?

 

[kermitz06]

I guess I don’t get it…either species i.e. the Host or Precious Bood are the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ…why do we even need to receive both?

We don’t, but then again us Catholics have been known to like wine from time-to-time. j/k sorry.

 

[VivaPadrePio]

My two cents if I may.

1. I do see a problem with receiving communion in the hands.

If I should ever do it, I would hold God in my hands and, to all intents and purposes, nourish myself. The mere idea lets me cringe.

I do not want to nourish myself. I want the Church to do it. Like a baby is fed by his mother. I respectully bow in front of the Lord and receive from Mother Church the nourishment which I so desperately need. Directly and immediately.

It is not something I do. It is something I receive.

In my eyes, there is an element of “I am the one who makes the doings here” in having the host on the hand and then taking it oneself which I find frankly appalling. I know this is not meant that way, but I cannot see it any other way.

1. I would suggest that not everything is fine or the best thing to do, because the early Church did it.

The early Christian did such and such, and then there was an improvement in how they did it. This idea that something be “right” just because it was made at some time excludes th eprogressive work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church and in their venerable traditions.

1. protestant receive on the hand. In (traditional) open hostility to the Transubstantiation.
   In my book, this is a reason more to have communion on the tongue.
2. In general, I dare to say that too much in the last decades has been changed and made more similar to protestant usages: the Mass in the first place; the nowadays more spread habit of calling the mass “eucharist”, whilst traditionally the two concepts were more clearly separated in the everyday language; the habit of some progressive priests of being called “pastor”; the presence of altar girls. I could go on.

Nothing in these practices may be wrong in itself; but taken all together, they foster a spirit of indifference to the specificity of being catholic, they express a will of “realignment”, or “getting closer” to Protestants which seems charitable, and is dangerous.

It’s not we having to become more lke them; it’s them having to convert and become like us, period. Every “nicety” in this respect is, in my eyes, absolutely out of place.

Everything which “mixes up things” and changes something, anything whatsoever, to make it more similar to protestant habit adds to confusion and may foster moral and religious relativism, and this is the contrary of what Catholicism is for.

If you ask me, the way is in boldly reclaiming our Catholic specificity, in everything. It is making clear in much clearer terms than happened in the last decades, that there is only One Church, and no mistake must be made on this.

Therefore, communion on the tongue is, if you ask me, twice right: because it is more pious in itself and hallowed by the centuries, and because it sheds a further light of Catholicism on the communion and therefore further stresses the Catholic aspect of it.

In my eyes, particularly converts from Protestant heresies should be particularly happy and willing to adopt, whenever they are given the choice, the traditional Catholic option. This would remind them of their choice and of their now being Catholic and would therefore be a joy in the joy, everytime.

 

[Ceil-1]

Yes, but Jesus did say “Take, and eat”. The Gospels don’t say, …“And He dropped the Sacred Species onto their tongue”. So, I don’t think it is direct disobedience to Christ to to take it in the hand. And I certainly don’t want to be chasing the Sacrament as it rolls down the aisle. And I don’t particularly relish catching it in mid fall, or licking the priest’s fingers.

I did hear, sometime this past week, that, CIH started out as an abuse that recieved an indult by our bishops. Such a statement certainly does not make me wish to continue to do so.

So, what is a consciencious person to do? Skip Mass unless they can attend one where
Communion is done properly? Does the Lord desire such a thing? That we be so obsessed with doing it in that particular way that we sometimes don’t go to worship? I know we are not required to take Communion at Mass, but, is that what He wants?

 

[VivaPadrePio]

"Yes, but Jesus did say “Take, and eat”. The Gospels don’t say, …“And He dropped the Sacred Species onto their tongue”.

Ceil-1, we are Catholic, not Protestants. What is written in the Gospel is not a reason for us to do the same, unless the Church tell us so to do.

Note that we do not drink wine every Sunday, even of Jesus did it with the Apostles.
Nor eat we bread (with the associated problems with the crumbles) like Jesus did, but we use a rather more practical wafer instead.

But I agree with you, the practice of CHI is allowed, therefore it cannot be disobedience to Christ to receive communion in the hand.

I personally rather question the entire construction and have explained why, but away from me the suggestion that it would be disobedient to Christ to receive communion in the hand.

A conscentious Catholic is, in my eyes, very well advised to do what was considered good, and worked fine, for so many generations of Catholics before these truly extraordinary times.

Notice that whilst a lot of people have questions about the CIH, truly not many have reservations about the COT (and how could they? This has been the standard for so long…).

Also notice that of the two the second is the one most clearly identified with Catholicism.

If in doubt, choose what is most Catholic and most revered by time, isn’t it?

If you ask me to bet my pint, I’d say in 30-40 years communion in the hand will be just a vague remembrance and people will ask in puzzled wonderment how could it be that suddenly that which had always worked had to be questioned, made in a different way, and subjected to the exam of what the early Christians did.

But that’s just my personal impression.

 

[malphono]

A comment was made earlier in this thread that seems to bear repeating:

The fact is that in those times, in small family and communal groups, the Presider, who would have been Jesus in this case, typically placed a small morsel of each of the prescribed foods in the mouth of each of the Passover meal attendees before they consumed the meal. This was done to demonstrate the receivers total dependence upon God for sustinence and for life itself. It is quite likely, that Jesus did this exact same thing. Not saying that He did, but it is quite possible that He did so.

The tradition noted above is really true. FWIW, that same tradition still exists in the Eastern Mediterranean today, and not only among Jews at a Seder. It’s a familial tradition, but never was a true liturgical tradition, and I only note it for historical purposes: I am not a fan of “CIH.”

As DavidPalm has already said:

If even one incident of the desecration of the Eucharist can be prevented by the universal discipline of Holy Communion received only on the tongue, then it is a very big deal. Just that one reason alone ought to be sufficient for any devout Catholic. Sometimes I wonder if those who really balk at this really do want to have a certain “control” over the Eucharist.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

We don’t, but then again us Catholics have been known to like wine from time-to-time. j/k sorry.

LOL…I’m Irish so I prefer a wee drop of da brown stuff.

Iowa Mike

 

[tr1strev]

In my humble opinion it makes no difference whether communion is received by hand or traditionally. What matters is what is in your heart and mind as you approach to receive. If you reverently approach with full belief that you are receiving the body and blood of Christ then the manner of reception is immaterial.

 

[DavidPalm]

In my humble opinion it makes no difference whether communion is received by hand or traditionally. What matters is what is in your heart and mind as you approach to receive. If you reverently approach with full belief that you are receiving the body and blood of Christ then the manner of reception is immaterial.

Once again, this does not comport with the teaching of Pope Paul VI on the matter, nor with the universal discipline of the Church prior to the liturgical revolution of the 1960s. But again, that’s why some Catholics prefer to call themselves traditionalists; they pay attention to such things.

 

[palmas85]

I think we need a description of a Sedar, because that is what the Last Supper was, a Jewish meal officiated by a Jewish Rabbi for his Jewish followers. So how was a Sedar conducted in Jesus’ time? Anyone know?

Basically it would have been done according to the following formula:

It would begin with everyone assembling in the room. This would probably have included the wives and children of those Apostles that were married .

The Presider, Jesus would recite the Kiddush blessing, the blessing of the wine, and all would drink the first of four cups of wine

Then the Presider, Jesus, would wash his hands and then so would everyone else.

Next the presider would dip the bitter herbs into the salt water. Some accounts say that all present would do the same at their place, others that the Presider would do the dipping for all. The herbs were then consumed

Now the middle portion of the Matzah or unleavened bread took place is broken. There were three pieces. It would be eaten later and was called the afikoman.

The Presider would tell the Passover story. During this four questions would be asked by the youngest attending the meal, usually children. Afterwards the second cup of wine would be drunk. NOTE: Sources vary if this was in place in Jesus time or not.

Then comes the second washing of the hands, this time with a blessing

Now we reach the part of the meal that we are most familiar with, the blessing of the bread which is followed by the blessing of the matzoh which precedes the eating of the matzoh and bitter herb combination…

Now the holiday meal is served which was almost always roasted lamb shank.

Afterqwards If children were present there would be the finding and eating of the larger piece of Matzoh, the afioman previously mentioned.

Now we come to the after meal blessing and the drinking of the third cup of wine.

Finally we have the recitation of the Hallel, a verbatim recital of Paslms 113 to 118 and the drinking of the fourth cup of wine

That would have concluded the Passover meal in Jesus time. Of interst here is that we know that Jesus drank two cups of wine, typically considered to be the first and third. Scripture is silent on the second and fourth. As stated before the second may not have been a part of the meal at that time, but the fourth would have been.

It is believed by many that Jesus did not drink the final cup because without Him drinking it, that particular Passover meal is not considered to be over. It is still ongoing. That does make sense in a theological sense…

Some have asked what Jesus would have worn at the Last Supper. In his position as the leader and teacher of the Apostles, he would have dressed in a manner befitting that position. You wil remember that the Apostles did not call Jesus friend or brother. They called Him Lord or Master. **THEY WERE NOT EQUAL **despite what many today try to purport.

For the Passover meal Jesus probably would have worn a white robe, probably linen, a head covering akin to a yarmulkah and most likely a prayer shawl. The shawl would have been white with stripes of either blue or black. The robe would have had tassels on the fringes.

 

[Shin]

Indeed the long witness of tradition in this matter is one of the things that people should pay attention to.

The long witness of the smaller traditions, however much they are disciplinary, as a whole and even in parts is what can make or break the faith life of a Catholic…

Because as Catholics we pay attention to these things and the spiritual meanings and reasons therein… and hesitate to change them even when we do not understand them… because they are tradition, and exist for good reasons we in our frailty are certain not to know all of if even any of.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

In my humble opinion it makes no difference whether communion is received by hand or traditionally. What matters is what is in your heart and mind as you approach to receive. If you reverently approach with full belief that you are receiving the body and blood of Christ then the manner of reception is immaterial.

I would agree from the aspect of what is in a persons heart but I completely disagree with respect to the reverence given the Precious Eucharistic Species. Since the practice of communion in the hand has been introduced not only has belief in the Real Prsence and reverence for the Eucharist declined dramatically but abuses of the Precious Species has increased dramatically. If you want to make a dramatic comparision go to a Trindentine Mass and then go to a typical parish to a Novus Ordo Mass:

Trindentine Mass

The tabernacle is in the center of the alter
People dress up for mass
Women cover their heads as a sign of respect for the Virgin Mary and submission to Christ
People always genuflect
People approach the Eucharist with their hands clasped in front of them
Silence is maintained within the Chruch before and after mass
People speak in whispers in the gathering area
Children at mass don’t spend their time playing games, eating, or crawling around
People kneel as a sign of reverence to receive communion
Communion is given in only one species, the Host.
Alter boys use a paten to catch an errant Host
When the priest and servers exit, people kneel in prayer for a few minutes
Vessels are purified on the alter and washed in a Sacrarium and then in a sink.
Music is sacred

Novus Ordo (typical)

The tabernacle is usually in a separate chapel…If the Eucharist is the summit of our faith, why has the tabernacle been removed from the alter? Vatican II didn’t dictate it’s relocation.

People dress inappropriately to receive the King of Kings…shorts, flip flops, muscle shirts, jeans with holes in them, torn shirts, gardening clothes, revealing clothes (men and women). Heck sometimes people look like they are dressed for the beach or a bar fight rather than to receive the Lord…loss of reverence? I mean people wouldn’t dream of wearing some of the stuff they wear to mass to a wedding, etc.

99.99999% of women wear no head covering…loss of reverence?

Only a small percentage of people genuflect…loss of reverence?

People in the communion line are often talking, laughing, hands at their side, looking around, acknowledging people in pews as they go by. When they get to communion most don’t make any sign of reverence before taking the host e.g. slight bow, genuflection, whatever. When they get the host some turn away from the priest and consume the host has they walk to receive the Precious Blood…loss of reverence?

People loudly talk and visit in the church before and following the mass…loss of reverence?

The gathering area has become a recreation room…loss of reverence?

Children at mass have toys, games, coloring books, cookies, cerial, candy and all manner of other food and entertainment stuff…How do they learn to respect the mass? Loss of reverence?

Communion is given in both species…by too many Extra-Ordinary Eucharistc Ministers…does this increase the risk of abuse of the Precious Species…improperly purified vessels, spills, dropped or stolen hosts?..Loss of reverence?

Sometimes the priest sits while communion is distributed by lay people…Loss of reverence?

A paten is not used so any dropped Hosts or drops of Precious Blood fall directly to the floor…loss of reverence?

When mass end people nearly stampede to get out of mass. Sometime they nearly run over the priest and alter servers on their way out…loss of reverence?

On this thread we have been discussing how mass vessels are purified…so I won’t repeat it here.

By now some of you have concluded that I don’t like the Novus Ordo Mass…you would be wrong. I don’t like the loss of respect and reverence that have come with it…mostly introduced by liberal innovators. I believe this loss of respect and reverence is one of the chief reasons so many Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence.

The Novus could be said with the same degree of respect and reverence so why isn’t it?

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[elts1956]

Yes, but Jesus did say “Take, and eat”. The Gospels don’t say, …“And He dropped the Sacred Species onto their tongue”. So, I don’t think it is direct disobedience to Christ to to take it in the hand. And I certainly don’t want to be chasing the Sacrament as it rolls down the aisle. And I don’t particularly relish catching it in mid fall, or licking the priest’s fingers.

I did hear, sometime this past week, that, CIH started out as an abuse that recieved an indult by our bishops. Such a statement certainly does not make me wish to continue to do so.

So, what is a consciencious person to do? Skip Mass unless they can attend one where
Communion is done properly? Does the Lord desire such a thing? That we be so obsessed with doing it in that particular way that we sometimes don’t go to worship? I know we are not required to take Communion at Mass, but, is that what He wants?

A Catholic in good standing (had to specify that) can receive communion in the hand, or directly on the tongue, in any Catholic Church. All you have to do is stick out your tongue and the priest, though perhaps startled, will place the Host on your tongue. I do it all the time, even though I am the only one at Mass doing so.

 

[Auntie_M]

I would agree from the aspect of what is in a persons heart but I completely disagree with respect to the reverence given the Precious Eucharistic Species. Since the practice of communion in the hand has been introduced not only has belief in the Real Prsence and reverence for the Eucharist declined dramatically but abuses of the Precious Species has increased dramatically. If you want to make a dramatic comparision go to a Trindentine Mass and then go to a typical parish to a Novus Ordo Mass:

Trindentine Mass

The tabernacle is in the center of the alter
People dress up for mass
Women cover their heads as a sign of respect for the Virgin Mary and submission to Christ
People always genuflect
People approach the Eucharist with their hands clasped in front of them
Silence is maintained within the Chruch before and after mass
People speak in whispers in the gathering area
Children at mass don’t spend their time playing games, eating, or crawling around
People kneel as a sign of reverence to receive communion
Communion is given in only one species, the Host.
Alter boys use a paten to catch an errant Host
When the priest and servers exit, people kneel in prayer for a few minutes
Vessels are purified on the alter and washed in a Sacrarium and then in a sink.
Music is sacred

Novus Ordo (typical)

The tabernacle is usually in a separate chapel…If the Eucharist is the summit of our faith, why has the tabernacle been removed from the alter? Vatican II didn’t dictate it’s relocation.

People dress inappropriately to receive the King of Kings…shorts, flip flops, muscle shirts, jeans with holes in them, torn shirts, gardening clothes, revealing clothes (men and women). Heck sometimes people look like they are dressed for the beach or a bar fight rather than to receive the Lord…loss of reverence? I mean people wouldn’t dream of wearing some of the stuff they wear to mass to a wedding, etc.

99.99999% of women wear no head covering…loss of reverence?

Only a small percentage of people genuflect…loss of reverence?

People in the communion line are often talking, laughing, hands at their side, looking around, acknowledging people in pews as they go by. When they get to communion most don’t make any sign of reverence before taking the host e.g. slight bow, genuflection, whatever. When they get the host some turn away from the priest and consume the host has they walk to receive the Precious Blood…loss of reverence?

People loudly talk and visit in the church before and following the mass…loss of reverence?

The gathering area has become a recreation room…loss of reverence?

Children at mass have toys, games, coloring books, cookies, cerial, candy and all manner of other food and entertainment stuff…How do they learn to respect the mass? Loss of reverence?

Communion is given in both species…by too many Extra-Ordinary Eucharistc Ministers…does this increase the risk of abuse of the Precious Species…improperly purified vessels, spills, dropped or stolen hosts?..Loss of reverence?

Sometimes the priest sits while communion is distributed by lay people…Loss of reverence?

A paten is not used so any dropped Hosts or drops of Precious Blood fall directly to the floor…loss of reverence?

When mass end people nearly stampede to get out of mass. Sometime they nearly run over the priest and alter servers on their way out…loss of reverence?

On this thread we have been discussing how mass vessels are purified…so I won’t repeat it here.

By now some of you have concluded that I don’t like the Novus Ordo Mass…you would be wrong. I don’t like the loss of respect and reverence that have come with it…mostly introduced by liberal innovators. I believe this loss of respect and reverence is one of the chief reasons so many Catholics no longer believe in the Real Presence.

The Novus could be said with the same degree of respect and reverence so why isn’t it?

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

Dear Mike

Where on earth is the Catholic Church you are describing??? I have been to Catholic NO Churches in North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia (and some Latin masses in these areas also) and have never seen a “stampede” nor have I ever seen people “talking or not having their hands folded” in the communion line. Nor have I ever seen the Eucharist anywhere except in the front of the church.

Let me correct you on your Catholic history “tradition”. Communion in the hand WAS the original way. When it was discovered that some people were not eating the host right then but taking it home and even some descrating it. That is when the practice of on the tongue began.

Also, the veils…women were asked to wear them Not for the reason you give, but because there was too much gossipping going on between the women. The veils covered the side of their faces eliminating most of the talk going on.

The ONLY time I have ever seen a priest “sit” while giving out communion was when he was sitting in a wheel chair.

What you ae describing is certainly NOT a “Typical NO mass”. I don’t know where you are getting your info but it is definitely not correct.

The NO masses I have gone to are just as reverent today as they always have been.
The Latin mass is very pretty with all the bells and whistles, but it is not the only way, and I’m sorry you feel that way.

 

[Auntie_M]

(VivaPadrePio;4936881
A conscentious Catholic is, in my eyes, very well advised to do what was considered good, and worked fine, for so many generations of Catholics before these truly extraordinary times.

If in doubt, choose what is most Catholic and most revered by time, isn’t it?)

I have to agree with Viva on his view of a conscentious Catholic. We are the sheep and the Holy Father is our shepherd. We are to submit to his instructions, just as has been done for so many generations. He is the Vicar of Christ and Christ will lead him and he will lead us.

 

[Ceil-1]

Thank you, Auntie Em. You are the wisest of us all.

 

[DavidPalm]

I have to agree with Viva on his view of a conscentious Catholic. We are the sheep and the Holy Father is our shepherd. We are to submit to his instructions, just as has been done for so many generations. He is the Vicar of Christ and Christ will lead him and he will lead us.

And so what is it about “This method of distributing holy communion [on the tongue] must be retained,” don’t the defenders of Communion in the hand understand?

 

[Ockham]

What you ae describing is certainly NOT a “Typical NO mass”. I don’t know where you are getting your info but it is definitely not correct.

The NO masses I have gone to are just as reverent today as they always have been.
The Latin mass is very pretty with all the bells and whistles, but it is not the only way, and I’m sorry you feel that way.

It’s very encouraging to hear all the NO Masses in your area are reverent and spiritually fulfilling. However, it’s not fair nor accurate to claim they all are. Unfortunately, many if not the majority of NO Masses have become more of a spectacle than a sacrifice. The Tridentine Mass is not “bells and whistles”. It is a clear expression of our Catholic faith and heritage. The NO Mass of 1969 employs many Protestant fundamentals. Having more than one Mass is not consistent with Catholicism (one, holy, catholic, apostolic) and we’d be wise to return to our roots.