This question has been repeatedly asked. Why don’t you try a search of the forums and see all of the threads where it’s been discussed?
Here is one link (I just did a search and you’re right, it wasn’t terribly helpful):
You souldn’t pass-on such stuff unless you can document the source.
I appologize AltarMan, I read it in the book “An exorcist tells his story.” But, I did affirm the fact that reception in the hand has been approved by the Church. If I had been trying to deceive someone I would have left that out.
As you can see I am for recieveing on the tounge ONLY,but Rome has spoken and I will not judge a person for recieveing on the hand.I just wish people would at least consider that it is possible for the Host to fall when recieveing on the hand.One day maybe we will go back to the way it was before. :rolleyes:
God bless you and Mary keep you!It is so nice to hear from people like you. I choose to receive on the tongue as well. I also cover my head out of the same adoration.
Wow!! God Bless you. My children, husband and I do not receive in the hand for these very reasons.
I think you are refering to the document “Memoriale Domini” of 29 May 1969. It is in Chapter 12 of "Vatican Council II: Volume 1, The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, General Editor: Austin Flannery, 1996, ISBN 0-918344-39-5, page 148.
PROUD 2 B RC said:+JMJ+
Communion in the hand had not been allowed but it became so wide spread here in the states that they allowed it.But even John Paul 2 would not allow it in his private chapel and discouraged it in St.Peter’s Basilica.I found this on www.unavoce.org/
Communion in The Hand
- St. Thomas Aquinas: The great Doctor of the Church writes,“Out of reverence towards this Sacrament (Eucharist), nothing touches it but what is consecrated” (Summa, Pt III Q.Q2 Art. 3)
- History: Disobedience to the Pope; Communion in the hand was illegally introduced in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, France and in the U.S. well before Pope Paul VI wrote “Memoriale Domini”. The Holy See firmly opossed the disobedient and abusive practice from the beginning.
- St. Basil: (330 - 379 AD) Considered Communion in the hand a “grave fault”.
- Council of Rouen: (650 AD) “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layperson, but only in their mouths.”
- Council of Constantinople: (695 AD)“prohibited the faithful from giving Communion to themselves.” “It decreed an excommunication of one week’s duration for those who would do so in the presence of a bishop, priest, or deacon.”
- The Council of Saragozza: (380 AD)“It was decided to punish with excommunication antone who dared to continue the practice of Communion in the Hand.”
- Council of Trent:“To priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer the Holy Eucharist. That the unvarying practice of the Church has also been, that the faithful receive the Sacrament from the hands of the priest…”
- Pope Paul VI: In Memoriale Domini (May 29, 1969), the Pope recognized that Communion on the tongue was more conducive to faith, reverence, and humility.
- Memoriale Domini
ope Paul VI stated that: “The Apostolic See therefore vehemently urges bishops, priests and laity to carefully submit to the law (Communion on the tongue) which is still valid and which has been confirmed” (#16)
- Pope John Paul II:
- Had a sign posted on St Peter’s Bascilica specifying that all priest who celebrate Mass in St Peter’s, no mater where they come from, were to give Communion on the tongue.
- Currently gives Communion only on the tongue in his private Masses at the Vatican. Concelebrating priest are told to do the same.
- said: “I did not revoke what one of my predecessors has said about this … Hear, my dear priests and my dear brothers and sisiters, only Communion on the tongue and kneeling is allowed. I say this to you as your bishop!”,
- On Communion in the hand: “There is an apostolic letter that the existence of this special permission is valid. But I tell you, that I am not in favor of it… neither will I recommend it !” (Nov. 1980, Germany)
Intresting information dont you think!Just think of it this way,if you recieve in the hand,what happens when you walk away,leave the church and go on with you day.Is it not possible that a particle was on your hand and it fell to the ground,and our Lord is now getting stepped on!Even the priest wash his thumb and fore finger in a ablution bowl or puts him thumbs and fore finger over the chalice when the server pours water in the chalice.The priest takes no risk **HOW DARE WE TAKE RISKS!**Especially with the BODY, BLOOD, SOUL, AND DIVINITY OF OUR LORD!
- Mother Teresa of Calcutta:Statement by Mother Teresa of Calcutta
"Futher it is the custom in our Society, and my known wish, that the Sisters receive Holy Communion on the tongue, which to my knowledge they are doing everywhere. (India 1995)- Fr. John Hardon S.J.:“Whatever you do to stop Communion in the hand will be blessed by God”
- Bishop Juan Laise of San Luis, Argentina:Warns “With Communion in the hand, a miracle would be required during each distribution of Communion to avoid some particles from falling to the ground or remaining in the hand of the faithful.”
As you can see I am for recieveing on the tounge ONLY,but Rome has spoken and I will not judge a person for recieveing on the hand.I just wish people would at least consider that it is possible for the Host to fall when recieveing on the hand.One day maybe we will go back to the way it was before.
God bless you and Mary keep you!
I do not think it to be irreverent but I do think it to be risky.As for me judging if I judged I did not itnend to,my own mother recieves in the hand.I dont say hey you are not reverent,no I do not!I do think it wrong but like I said Rome has spoken.Other than that my aurgument stands.O and if you could,tell me,are you sure that not one tiny piece of our Lord could fall to the ground when you recieve in the hand.Also could you please explain why a lay erson should recieve on the hand,and not use an ablution bowl,just incase a particle is still on your fingers or palm?If the priest uses one why shouldnt those lay people who recieve on the hand not do the same?So I say again,the priest doesent take risks **HOW DARE WE TAKE RISKS! ** Especially with the **BODY,BLOOD,SOUL,AND DIVINITY OF OUR LORD!**
Take what I have said as you will.But I stand by it.Maybe it is making a judgement and if it is am I wrong for wanting what is the safest way to recieve our Lord?No.Can you honestly say recieveing on the hand is the safest way to recieve?It started as an abuse and I hope it will one day end but hopefully not at the price of people leaving the church?So I did not mean to judge and I am sorry if I did but I must stand for what I think is the safest way to recieve.It is obviously safer to recieve on the tongue.There is no hand involvement of the lay person, very little or at least much less possibility of a particle falling to the ground.O and could you please tell me what you have to say about the quotes above?How do you explain them and then justify recieveing on the hand?Not trying to judge,just wondering?Honestly. :confused: :(
God bless you and Mary keep you!God bless uou and Mary keep you!
PROUD 2 B RC said:
First, St. Thomas was simply stating the practice of the day – and he failed to observe that the tongue touches the Blessed Sacrement and is not consecrated.
This is the same way the Eucharistic Adoration and numerous other practices in the Church arose – from the people. However, Pope Paul VI did poll the bishops on this and finally decided that if the national conference of bishops requested it Rome would grant the right to give communion in the hand as an indult or exception to the law.
Actually, he didn’t. The source of this claim is his Letter XCIII which you can read for yourself.
Local councils do not determine the practice for the universal Church.
And this continues to be the norm – St. Basil, in the letter above, explains why receiving communion in the hand does not fall into this category. He says, “For when once the priest has completed the offering, and given it, the recipient, participating in it each time as entire, is bound to believe that he properly takes and receives it from the giver.”
Local councils do not determine the practice of the Unversal Church.
And this is a discipline which the Church may change – and has done so in this case.
And it remains the norm, but that doesn’t address the fact that Rome did grant permission to the Church to give communion in the hand.
First, there is no pragraph 16 in the cited document. The correct wording is “…observe the law…” not “…submit to the law…” and, finally, it is that very document that permits communion in the hand! In fact, the pope writes: “The rite of communion in the hand must be introduced tactfully…”
- Memoriale Domini
Yes, when Italy had not asked for permission to give communion on the tongue that was necessary – since it was a major pilgrimage site.