Communion on hand

  • Thread starter Thread starter anonymoususer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is how this would pass,

It is very common in heterodox circles to promote the Universal Priesthood as pretty much the same as Ordained Priests. “We are all Priests, this is why we can receive in the hand and all can participate in the Mass”
This participation is thought of as everyone acting as Priest.
This also extends to allowing women to be priests, but first we need to allow all Priests to be married, then women.

I don’t have much time to type more, but just spend some time in these type parishes and you will see this widespread.

In Christ
Scylla
 
scylla said:
You can certainly receive in the hand as long as you believe in the Real Presence and respect Jesus properly without an agenda. To receive in the hand with an intent to mislead and promote an agenda that diminishes Holy Orders and leads to heresy is evil.
Click to expand...
In the long lines of parishoners receiving communion, who is to say what the “intent” of each is? I have NEVER in my life personally known a Catholic that does not believe in the Real Presence (if it’s not Real, why even show up?).

When I was an alter boy in the early 1970’s the practice in our parish was to receive on the tongue, and I was priveledged to hold the paten and participate in that. I do not recall when we first began receiving by hand, but I do recall not seeing it as a change for the worse (of course, as an alter server I did not spend any time trying to decipher the “intent” of the faithful as they received by hand. To do so, in my opinion, is a slippery slope to judging others).

Again, Jesus told the apostles to TAKE and eat. I feel more obediant to this receiving in hand, and it makes the sacrament much more personal, to me at least.

I may have to give up trying to understand those against receiving in hand. Our lips are okay, our tongue is okay, the rooves (roofs?) of our mouths are okay, apparently, as I’ve read in these discussions the host getting stuck there as it is rolled around the mouth. But now I read that, not just the hands (still, why?) but also the teeth are out? Didn’t Jesus toward the end of John’s sixth chapter actually use a verb for eat that is closest to “gnaw” in today’s English? Sorry, I don’t have my bible at the office (and I really should be getting some work done!). But it just seems to me some of us here have a low opinion of the human body when it comes to receiving communion. And I admit that I just don’t get that.
 
scylla said:
To receive in the hand with an intent to mislead and promote an agenda that diminishes Holy Orders and leads to heresy is evil…
Click to expand...
…is not the same thing as receiving the Body of Christ in the hand. To conflate the two is, at best, dishonest.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
Yes it is dishonest, if I was saying that everyone had that intent.
Are you receiving in the hand with the intention to promote the universal priesthood above the ordained priesthood and all that entails, woman priests, etc??? Or are you just reverently receiving in your hand as that is your preference, if so then don’t worry about it?

But please read my posts carefully as I am not stating that those who receive in the hand are intentionally doing wrong at all, but are often used by those with an agenda to undermine Church teaching by misrepresenting practice.

It is not for us to judge individual intent on everyone receiving, I don’t even look as I am praying as I head up to receive.

What I am worried about is the teaching which is deliberately using the practice of receiving in the hand to diminish the Real Presence and misrepresent Catholic belief.

Now to understand that and receive in the hand is dangerous if you allow this to happen in your parish. There should be no compromise of Catholic belief in parishes but there is in certain parishes people teaching contrary to the faith and using the practice of receiving in the hand to help further this.

This might not be common in your parish but check out some of the Southern California parishes and you will see how bad it is.
Or feel free to attend LA Religious Congress, if you stomach it.

In Christ
Scylla
 
CatholicNick said:
Can I just ask WHY people receive in the hand? And WHY they choose to do so over the tongue?

Just Curious.
Click to expand...
Because having some one elses fingers touch my tongue repulses me. Also, the thought of their fingers touching so many other tongues and then touching mine, also repulses me. I think receiving on the tongue is a filthy practice and it looks irreverant if anything.

Jesus told his Apostles, “take and eat” not “stick out your tongue and suck on this.”

Jim
 
scylla said:
But please read my posts carefully as I am not stating that those who receive in the hand are intentionally doing wrong at all…
Click to expand...
Excellent, then.

👍

One can never be too sure in these regular “Communion in the hand” threads. The last one I participated in, I was called flat-out a liar by a regular poster who refused to admit that anyone who receives the Body of Christ in a manner other than the way he prefers could actually do so reverently and be faithful to the Magesterium.

– Mark L. Chance.
 
scylla said:
Your right your 5000th post was a waste of time, I agree. The Church does not promote heterodox teaching. Dissidents do.

I do not state that the Church teaches that it isn’t the Body of Christ, that communion received in the hand is intended by the Church to lead to heresy or any of the sort.

What I defend is the faithful best representing the Churches teaching that Jesus is fully present in the Eucharist.
As such the poor catechesis promoted by dissidents and encouraging a lack of respect for the Eucharist has hijacked the Churches understanding of receiving Communion.

To best represent Church teaching we can fight heretical belief by emphasizing piety which is downplayed to reject Church teaching.

You can certainly receive in the hand as long as you believe in the Real Presence and respect Jesus properly without an agenda. To receive in the hand with an intent to mislead and promote an agenda that diminishes Holy Orders and leads to heresy is evil.

If I teach heresy and back it up with my actions then I am doing something wrong. If you teach orthodox Catholic belief and provide proper understanding for your actions you are doing something good.

The problem is in dioceses where heterodox teaching is prevelant most often communion in the hand is used to reinforce heretical teaching, which is against Church teaching.

(again you don’t need to imply that I disagree with the Church as I disagree with people who misrepresent Catholic belief and even use permitted Catholic practice to promote a distorted view of the Church)

In Christ
Scylla

(now if it was a dissident practice to bring a cup with me up then receive on the tounge, turn around and spit into the cup, then I would be on the other end of this discussion)
Best example I could come up with in a couple minutes.
Click to expand...
More of Him, less of me…

More of Persona Christi, less of ol sola meo
 
“We are the body of Christ” … Ughhh

(yes, this is true we are the body of Christ, yet when I receive communion there is the center of our faith which we are receiving, The Body of Christ, fully and really present)

That is what we are fighting against, a hijacking of what is truly Church teaching.

In Christ
Scylla
 
scylla said:
This is how this would pass,

It is very common in heterodox circles to promote the Universal Priesthood as pretty much the same as Ordained Priests. “We are all Priests, this is why we can receive in the hand and all can participate in the Mass”
This participation is thought of as everyone acting as Priest.
This also extends to allowing women to be priests, but first we need to allow all Priests to be married, then women.
Click to expand...
In my life, I have been a member of four different Catholic Churches, and in the employ of two more (spanning three different dioceses). Not all of them were conservative either. The only place I have ever heard this nonsense espoused is on CAF when traditionalist Catholics use it as evidence that we should not allow people to receive in the hand.
 
My wife and I are practically the only ones in a 400 member churhc that still take the host directly into the mouth…we get some peculiar looks from people.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Because having some one elses fingers touch my tongue repulses me. Also, the thought of their fingers touching so many other tongues and then touching mine, also repulses me. I think receiving on the tongue is a filthy practice and it looks irreverant if anything.

Jesus told his Apostles, “take and eat” not “stick out your tongue and suck on this.”

Jim
Click to expand...
If you don’t mind me saying: that is really rude not to mention that in almost a year of receiving communion on the tongue I have never had it touched by the priest’s or the EMHC’s fingers. “Filthy practise” and 'suck on this" are NOT appropriate words to use for reception of Christ. And moreso since communion on the hand is the indult practise, and the Church has over 15 centuries approved of communion on the tongue, and it remains the normative practise.

There is absolutely zero need to dump on one practise in order to promote another. If I’m not mistaken that is what people have been saying throughout the thread.

“Take and eat” does not exclude communion on the tongue in any way.
 
Originally Posted by JimR-OCDS
Because having some one elses fingers touch my tongue repulses me. Also, the thought of their fingers touching so many other tongues and then touching mine, also repulses me. I think receiving on the tongue is a filthy practice and it looks irreverant if anything.
Click to expand...
Jesus told his Apostles, “take and eat” not “stick out your tongue and suck on this.”
Click to expand...
Jim
Click to expand...
Germ-a-phobe? We are sanitizing ourselves too much now. That is a lot of us can’t handle a simple common cold anymore. One day all this sanitizing is going to kill us because our immune system is getting lazy and lethargic in protecting us.
 
Where did this sudden fear of germs come from in this country? Have you noticed this? The media is constantly doing stories about the lastest infections? Salmonella, E coli, hantavirus, West Nile fever, Avian flu, SARS? And to boot, us Americans panic easily, so now everybody’s running around, scrubbing this, spraying that, overcooking their food, and repeatedly washing their hands; trying to avoid all contact with germs.

Besides, why do you think you have an immune system for?
IT’S FOR KILLING GERMS!

But it needs practice. It needs germs to practice on. So if you kill all the germs around you and live in a completely sterile life, then when germs do come along, you’re not going to be prepared. Guess what? You are going to probably die from it you stupid Freak!
 
Let me tell you a true stroy about immunization. When I was a boy in Alabama in the 1970’s, we swam in creeks, brooks, rills, streams, ponds, and lakes. And on occasion we would take forays into the sewer system. These acts of pure unadulterated childhood strengthened our immune systems. We were tempered.

So, personally, I never take any special precautions against germs. I don’t shy away form people who sneeze or cough, I don’t wipe off the telephone, I don’t cover the toilet seat, and if I drop food on the floor, I pick it up and eat it. Even if I’m at a sidewalk cafe. In New Orleans. The poor section. During a natural disaster.

And you know something? In spite of all of that so-called risky behavior, I never get infections, I just don’t get 'em folks. I don’t get colds, I don’t get the flu, and I don’t get food poisoning. And you know why? Because I have a good, strong immune system, and it gets a lot of practice. It’s not emasculated by an over-protective mother or an over-protective spouse.

My immune system is equipped with the biological equivalent of fully automatic, military assault rifes with night vision and laser scopes. So, when my white blood cells are on patrol, reconnoitering my blood stream, seeking out terrorists and other undesirables, if they see any—any—suspicious-looking germs of any kind, they don’t frak around. They whip out the weapons, whack the fellow, and deposit the unlucky fellow directly into my colon! Directly into my colon. There’s no nonsense. There’s no Miranda warning, there’s none of that three-strikes-your’re out ****. First offense, BAM! Into the colon you go!

Tally ho!
 
scylla said:
What I defend is the faithful best representing the Churches teaching that Jesus is fully present in the Eucharist.
As such the poor catechesis promoted by dissidents and encouraging a lack of respect for the Eucharist has hijacked the Churches understanding of receiving Communion.

In Christ
Scylla

(.
Click to expand...
My point is that, given the liberty to make the decision by the Church, it’s one’s subjective opinion that one “best” represents the teaching and one sets one’s self up as a judge of others to intimate that they are not demonstrating the “best” representation (I’m not attempting to say that reception in the hand is better). Absent strong evidence to the contrary, we’ve no idea what the degree of adherance to Church teaching is based on how a person receives Holy Communion and the Church doesn’t ask us to call that shot.
If you don’t want to receive in the hand, then don’t .
 
MrS said:
More of Him, less of me…

More of Persona Christi, less of ol sola meo
Click to expand...
Some people’s prayer tassles are getting longer and longer. They should mind they don’t trip over them.

So if we receive in the hand, it’s more about US? As I said, I find myself less SELF-conscious when receiving in the hand, less focused on SELF and more on CHRIST. The act of receiving on the tongue is, FOR ME, an act of complete self-consciousness. I’ve tried it time and time again, with the same result.
 
AJV said:
If you don’t mind me saying: that is really rude not to mention that in almost a year of receiving communion on the tongue I have never had it touched by the priest’s or the EMHC’s fingers. “Filthy practise” and 'suck on this" are NOT appropriate words to use for reception of Christ. And moreso since communion on the hand is the indult practise, and the Church has over 15 centuries approved of communion on the tongue, and it remains the normative practise.

There is absolutely zero need to dump on one practise in order to promote another. If I’m not mistaken that is what people have been saying throughout the thread.

“Take and eat” does not exclude communion on the tongue in any way.
Click to expand...
.

Go back and read my post, I was answering the question on why “I” receive in the hand.

Sorry that my reasons offend you.

Jim
 
JKirkLVNV said:
Some people’s prayer tassles are getting longer and longer. They should mind they don’t trip over them.

So if we receive in the hand, it’s more about US? As I said, I find myself less SELF-conscious when receiving in the hand, less focused on SELF and more on CHRIST. The act of receiving on the tongue is, FOR ME, an act of complete self-consciousness. I’ve tried it time and time again, with the same result.
Click to expand...
smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/13/13_1_217.gif

%between%
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top