Communion on the Tongue

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnthebaptist1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I feel that CITH allows for more irreverence and such. Here’s a few things about CITH and about what priests do today that bother me.
  1. Priests today do not keep their thumb and finger together after consecrating the Eucharist until after they are done distributing like what is done in the EF. This was once common because there could be tiny particles of the bread on the fingers of the priest and once their fingers open without anything to catch those particles below, they may fall on the ground, get trampled, etc. Each of these particles are the Lord.
  2. In the same way, when the people come to receive the Eucharist on their hands, the same thing occurs. People then proceed to touch all sorts of things afterward.
  3. People don’t clean their hands before receiving. A priest at least cleanses his hands before consecration. Everyone else’s hands could be filthy and especially after shaking hands with everyone beforehand. Is this how you want to handle the Lord?
  4. Many people walk around with it in their hands for a while and do all sorts of things before finally putting it in their mouth. Some people don’t even put it in their mouths and instead put it in missalettes, on the floor, or wherever else.
Receiving CITM makes it so that these things do not occur. I mean irreverence for the Eucharist is bad enough in today’s world. I won’t even get started on how everyone goes up for Communion yet the confessionals are empty.
 
GangGreen said:
I feel that CITH allows for more irreverence and such. Here’s a few things about CITH and about what priests do today that bother me.
  1. Priests today do not keep their thumb and finger together after consecrating the Eucharist until after they are done distributing like what is done in the EF. This was once common because there could be tiny particles of the bread on the fingers of the priest and once their fingers open without anything to catch those particles below, they may fall on the ground, get trampled, etc. Each of these particles are the Lord.
  2. In the same way, when the people come to receive the Eucharist on their hands, the same thing occurs. People then proceed to touch all sorts of things afterward.
  3. People don’t clean their hands before receiving. A priest at least cleanses his hands before consecration. Everyone else’s hands could be filthy and especially after shaking hands with everyone beforehand. Is this how you want to handle the Lord?
  4. Many people walk around with it in their hands for a while and do all sorts of things before finally putting it in their mouth. Some people don’t even put it in their mouths and instead put it in missalettes, on the floor, or wherever else.
Receiving CITM makes it so that these things do not occur. I mean irreverence for the Eucharist is bad enough in today’s world. I won’t even get started on how everyone goes up for Communion yet the confessionals are empty.
Click to expand...
None of these have these have to do with CITH as such, but with how people receive CITH. You are getting into very dangerous territory with this post. CITH is allowed and there is nothing problematic with it as such. If you want to talk about the abuses of CITH thats totally fine, but don’t try to condemn CITH just because of its abuses. The same could be done for COTT.
 
GangGreen said:
I feel that CITH allows for more irreverence and such. Here’s a few things about CITH and about what priests do today that bother me.
  1. Priests today do not keep their thumb and finger together after consecrating the Eucharist until after they are done distributing like what is done in the EF. This was once common because there could be tiny particles of the bread on the fingers of the priest and once their fingers open without anything to catch those particles below, they may fall on the ground, get trampled, etc. Each of these particles are the Lord.
  2. In the same way, when the people come to receive the Eucharist on their hands, the same thing occurs. People then proceed to touch all sorts of things afterward.
  3. People don’t clean their hands before receiving. A priest at least cleanses his hands before consecration. Everyone else’s hands could be filthy and especially after shaking hands with everyone beforehand. Is this how you want to handle the Lord?
  4. Many people walk around with it in their hands for a while and do all sorts of things before finally putting it in their mouth. Some people don’t even put it in their mouths and instead put it in missalettes, on the floor, or wherever else.
Receiving CITM makes it so that these things do not occur. I mean irreverence for the Eucharist is bad enough in today’s world. I won’t even get started on how everyone goes up for Communion yet the confessionals are empty.
Click to expand...
and people could spit it out and do the same
 
thewanderer said:
I think we should take a step back. If he uses his hands as a symbol of the fact that he sins and so sees receiving on the tongue as being more reverent that is totally fine. So long as he also recognizes that for other people receiving on the tongue is not necessarily more reverent. He has not here said anything which implies this and we should not make assumptions about his opinions.
Click to expand...
He said he cannot receive on the hands because his hands sin. Do our body parts sin separately from the rest of the body? Is the sin of the hand not the sin of the nose, or mouth, or feet? We are one person, body and soul. If one part sins, the entire person sins.
 
thewanderer said:
None of these have these have to do with CITH as such, but with how people receive CITH. You are getting into very dangerous territory with this post. CITH is allowed and there is nothing problematic with it as such. If you want to talk about the abuses of CITH thats totally fine, but don’t try to condemn CITH just because of its abuses. The same could be done for COTT.
Click to expand...
The whole point is that CITH lends itself to abuses moreso than COTT. The things I listed above are quite common while abuses from COTT are less so. COTT doesn’t lend itself to as much abuse because of the fact that you only have one choice with it (unless a person is seriously going to spit it out and embarrass themselves in front of the whole parish). From what I’ve read in various places, it is one of the major reasons why COTT was once the only acceptable form.

I’ve never said that people should not be allowed to do it. Sure I would like that, but as long as the Church allows it, then I cannot stop people from doing it. However, that shouldn’t prevent me from sharing my opinion on the matter.
 
GangGreen said:
IDK, are they? You were apparently there.
Click to expand...
As noted it was an FSSP parish, thus Roman Catholic. Thus the precepts of the Roman Catholic Church is that only children who has reached the age of reason are to be given Communion.
 
GangGreen said:
The whole point is that CITH lends itself to abuses moreso than COTT. The things I listed above are quite common while abuses from COTT are less so. COTT doesn’t lend itself to as much abuse because of the fact that you only have one choice with it (unless a person is seriously going to spit it out and embarrass themselves in front of the whole parish). From what I’ve read in various places, it is one of the major reasons why COTT was once the only acceptable form.

I’ve never said that people should not be allowed to do it. Sure I would like that, but as long as the Church allows it, then I cannot stop people from doing it. However, that shouldn’t prevent me from sharing my opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...
This is an assertion that I have seen many people make but I have never seen backed up anywhere.

The fact of the matter is that reverence comes from within, not from without. Imposing a certain form of receiving on people will not make them more reverent. Helping them to see the importance of being reverent will, whether they receive on the tongue or in the hand. 🤷
 
ConstantineTG said:
He said he cannot receive on the hands because his hands sin. Do our body parts sin separately from the rest of the body? Is the sin of the hand not the sin of the nose, or mouth, or feet? We are one person, body and soul. If one part sins, the entire person sins.
Click to expand...
No, what he said is “The way I’ve treated it is…”

Which means that this is how he looks at it. If this is a useful way to look at things for him spiritually, ie imagining his hands as a symbol of the sins he has committed then how is that problematic? It is a way of looking/thinking about things which helps him further his own spiritual journey. Without further clarification we cannot say that he is unjustly condemming those who receive in the hand.
 
GangGreen said:
I feel that CITH allows for more irreverence and such. Here’s a few things about CITH and about what priests do today that bother me.
Click to expand...
A lot of anxiety could be avoided if this simple passage from the catechism were absorbed:

1128 This is the meaning of the Church’s affirmation49 that the sacraments act ex opere operato (literally: “by the very fact of the action’s being performed”), i.e., by virtue of the saving work of Christ, accomplished once for all. It follows that "the sacrament is not wrought by the righteousness of either the celebrant or the recipient, but by the power of God."50 From the moment that a sacrament is celebrated in accordance with the intention of the Church, the power of Christ and his Spirit acts in and through it, independently of the personal holiness of the minister. Nevertheless, the fruits of the sacraments also depend on the disposition of the one who receives them.
 
GangGreen said:
The whole point is that CITH lends itself to abuses moreso than COTT. The things I listed above are quite common while abuses from COTT are less so. COTT doesn’t lend itself to as much abuse because of the fact that you only have one choice with it (unless a person is seriously going to spit it out and embarrass themselves in front of the whole parish). From what I’ve read in various places, it is one of the major reasons why COTT was once the only acceptable form.

I’ve never said that people should not be allowed to do it. Sure I would like that, but as long as the Church allows it, then I cannot stop people from doing it. However, that shouldn’t prevent me from sharing my opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...
quite common ?, having an opinion is one thing,exaggeration is another.
 
GangGreen said:
I feel that CITH allows for more irreverence and such. Here’s a few things about CITH and about what priests do today that bother me.
  1. Priests today do not keep their thumb and finger together after consecrating the Eucharist until after they are done distributing like what is done in the EF. This was once common because there could be tiny particles of the bread on the fingers of the priest and once their fingers open without anything to catch those particles below, they may fall on the ground, get trampled, etc. Each of these particles are the Lord.
  2. In the same way, when the people come to receive the Eucharist on their hands, the same thing occurs. People then proceed to touch all sorts of things afterward.
  3. People don’t clean their hands before receiving. A priest at least cleanses his hands before consecration. Everyone else’s hands could be filthy and especially after shaking hands with everyone beforehand. Is this how you want to handle the Lord?
  4. Many people walk around with it in their hands for a while and do all sorts of things before finally putting it in their mouth. Some people don’t even put it in their mouths and instead put it in missalettes, on the floor, or wherever else.
Receiving CITM makes it so that these things do not occur. I mean irreverence for the Eucharist is bad enough in today’s world. I won’t even get started on how everyone goes up for Communion yet the confessionals are empty.
Click to expand...
You are so right about people going to confession,when I go ,I,am luck too see Three on wedday cofessional.and on Satuday, I see about six people show up. I guess they have no sins too confess.
 
my parish has 3 hours for confession on tuesday,2 hours on saturday .and if anyone paid attention they would see me take communion every sunday,and never see me at confession .because i go several times a month at the Holy Land monastery .i guess i should post in the parish bulletin so as not to scandalize the pharisees.
 
johnthebaptist1 said:
You are so right about people going to confession,when I go ,I,am luck too see Three on wedday cofessional.and on Satuday, I see about six people show up. I guess they have no sins too confess.
Click to expand...
Praise God! There is less mortal sin going around!
 
Receiving on the tongue, kneeling is an act of reverence. It’s especially humble in 2012. Do men even kneel to ask their wives to marry them, these days?

The history of the Roman Rite since 1970 is a democratisation of the act of worship. Let’s see where that gets us in our relationship, as a group, to the King Of Kings and the Lord of Lords.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top