Diocese Forbidden To Receive Christ On The Tongue

  • Thread starter Thread starter weepixie71
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
While I really doubt that any pathogens, including the H1N1 virus, can be spread by receiving Communion on the tongue (which I almost invariably do), I understand the Bishop’s concern at this time of pandemic (as defined by WHO and CDC), and therefore I would be obedient to the Bishop and receive the Body of Christ in my hand pro tem.
 
Our Bishop requested that we receive in the hand, and the Priest allowed that’s what you should do unless you cannot for moral reasoning (or something to that effect.)
I cried through most of Mass, trying to do what was the ‘right’ action in this situation. Grieved beyond words that this was put upon parishioners to have to wrestle with. I watched as everyone appeared to receive by the hand. We did not go up to Communion when it was our ‘turn’. But when it looked as if all would have received but us, we went. (My two boys to receive Communion and my third and youngest to receive a blessing)

All the way up there I prayed. I still didn’t know what I’d do. I have taught my sons that when in doubt go with the most reverent actions you can, the value of tradition, and regarding how to receive Communion, no saints (to my knowledge) have spoken for in the hand, but quite the contrary. If saints so speak against it, how can it be the ‘better’ way? For those who choose not to, I tell them they must not be aware of the saints teaching. Then our beloved Pope doesn’t give Communion to anyone unless they kneel and receive on the tongue.

Well, to make a long story short, my boys who received in front of me both knelt down and opened their mouths. I cannot kneel without a rail to help get up again, but found my answer at that moment. Nothing less would do.
In my parish, our loving pastor has granted that those of us who wish to kneel to receive may use the first pew,* but we were not at our parish this past Sunday. But, my boys know it is more reverent to kneel before God and that Holy Father only gives Communion to those who will do so, so that is what they, without hesitation, did.
  • A kneeler was put out, but there was complaints against it and it has since been removed. And very sorrowfully, I must say that my family appears to be the only ones using this great gift at the present time. More used it when we had the kneeler.
    We do not have a Traditional Mass that we may attend on a regular basis, so we are N.O. The newest Priest at our parish is trained in the traditional Latin and we have been doing the five 1st Saturdays in that manner. A very small turn out thus far.
    I pray for all our Church.
 
I am in the same diocese as weepixie71, but in a different town. I went to Mass last night, and I still received on the tongue…there were no announcements otherwise. Maybe that just changed, though…
 
Cat said:
I live in Northern Illinois. I work in a microbiology lab.

Yes, we only have a few confirmed cases, but there are probably hundreds of unconfirmed cases.

All winter long we’ve been doing rapid tests (less than a half hour from start to finish) for influenza, and we’ve seen dozens of positive type As this winter. **According to the CDC, approx. 75% of these Type As are actually swine flu. ** But until a few weeks ago, no one cared, so we didn’t send them to the State Lab for swine flu testing.

And for every person who goes to the doctor with flu symptoms, there are dozens who do NOT go to the doctor. It is a fact that many men will NOT go to the doctor until they are at the point of death. Many African Americans do not visit doctors, especially African American men. And there are so many people who are afraid of the expense that they just stay home and tough it out. And then there are those who don’t deal with doctors at all, but prefer homaeopathic medicine.

Last week we sent several hundred swine flu tests to Illinois Department of Public Health in Chicago. Most of these tests were rejected by IDPH because the patient didn’t have anything in their history to indicate possible swine flu (visit Mexico, visit California, etc.). But that doesn’t mean they didn’t have swine flu.

My point is, there is the potential for an outbreak, and the rather drastic methods; eg., closing schools, asking parishioners to receive Holy Communion in the hand, etc, that are being used to curtail this outbreak seem to be working. Better to be overly-cautious and protect others who are weak and susceptible to the flu.
Click to expand...
but isnt there always a flu of some kind going around? we even have flu seasons. by your reasoning we should do away with receiving Christ on the tongue, do not shake hands at the sign of peace, remove holy water from the fonts, maybe even have limited capacities in church permanently. after all the way we do mass is now is unsanitary.

as you well know a priest fingers are consecrated when he becomes a priest. i was raised to believe for this reason parishioners should not handle the host. now i know some bishops now say that this is ok… but i am a catholic who does not want to take the chance of offending the Lord. id rather sit in my pew and not receive communion at all than take it in my hands. maybe that is wrong but i have to listen to my heart on this one.
 
weepixie71 said:
but isnt there always a flu of some kind going around? we even have flu seasons. by your reasoning we should do away with receiving Christ on the tongue, do not shake hands at the sign of peace, remove holy water from the fonts, maybe even have limited capacities in church permanently. after all the way we do mass is now is unsanitary.
Click to expand...
You mean they don’t scrub your church from top to bottom after every Mass? 😃

Seriously, though, more and more public places are placing hand cleaners at convenient places within their facilities. I don’t see where churches couldn’t follow this practice.
 
In my own diocese they took away the Cup from us this past weekend. I am heart-broken.
My husband, who is not a Catholic (although he is a strong Christian) is struggling with this as much as I am. In his opinion, our Church is being hypocritical by treating the Blood as reverently as we (rightfully) do, but then outwardly indicating that it’s something harmful!

In my own view, I fully see his point and have a difficult time arguing against it. Since it IS truly the Blood of Christ, then there’s no way it can be harmful. Because of some people’s fears, the rest of us are being denied access. This is rewarding the faithless at the expense of the faithful. Where is the courage of one’s convictions? Didn’t Christ say we should be willing to lay down our lives for the Faith? What will happen when one’s faith is really tested, if people are conditioned this way to cater to their fears or to put their unwillingness to catch the flu ahead of their desire to worship our Lord–in every way possible, especially by partaking of both the Body and the Blood?

The real pity is that this is all so unnecessary–those who don’t want the Cup didn’t have to take it, and the Body could have been offered on miniature doilies, etc., although that, again, would send the message that taking Communion is dangerous.

Didn’t our Lord say we were to do this as often as we could–not just when it was convenient or safe? The Disciples put their entire lives on the line by taking Communion when Rome may have had spies on the lookout.

Holy Mary, pray for us!
 
weepixie71 said:
but isnt there always a flu of some kind going around? we even have flu seasons. by your reasoning we should do away with receiving Christ on the tongue, do not shake hands at the sign of peace, remove holy water from the fonts, maybe even have limited capacities in church permanently. after all the way we do mass is now is unsanitary.

.
Click to expand...
Do you actually know what the word ‘pandemic’ means? There are set definitions that the WHO uses in describing outbreaks of illness, based on contagiousness and the seriousness of the illness. Very rigidly defined ones. And it’s described the swine-flu as the second-worst kind of outbreak of illness possible. Level 5 out of 6 possible levels. It may yet reach Level 6. Your average winter flu outbreak isn’t even a 1 on the scale.

So no, there is NOT always this particularly virulent and especially debilitating (not to say deadly - and to healthy young adults, which your common-or-garden flu isn’t) strain of illness going round, no.

Comparing this to normal outbreaks of influenza is a bit like comparing a regular house fire to the World Trade Centre going up in flames on 9/11.
 
Joyful_Convert said:
In my own diocese they took away the Cup from us this past weekend. I am heart-broken.
My husband, who is not a Catholic (although he is a strong Christian) is struggling with this as much as I am. In his opinion, our Church is being hypocritical by treating the Blood as reverently as we (rightfully) do, but then outwardly indicating that it’s something harmful!

In my own view, I fully see his point and have a difficult time arguing against it. Since it IS truly the Blood of Christ, then there’s no way it can be harmful. Because of some people’s fears, the rest of us are being denied access. This is rewarding the faithless at the expense of the faithful. Where is the courage of one’s convictions? Didn’t Christ say we should be willing to lay down our lives for the Faith? What will happen when one’s faith is really tested, if people are conditioned this way to cater to their fears or to put their unwillingness to catch the flu ahead of their desire to worship our Lord–in every way possible, especially by partaking of both the Body and the Blood?

The real pity is that this is all so unnecessary–those who don’t want the Cup didn’t have to take it, and the Body could have been offered on miniature doilies, etc., although that, again, would send the message that taking Communion is dangerous.

Didn’t our Lord say we were to do this as often as we could–not just when it was convenient or safe? The Disciples put their entire lives on the line by taking Communion when Rome may have had spies on the lookout.

Holy Mary, pray for us!
Click to expand...
But outwardly it IS something other than blood - that’s the whole point. The substance (essence) of the Eucharist is not the essence of bread and wine, but the accidents (all physical properties) of bread and wine nonetheless remain. If you put the Eucharist under a microscope, it doesn’t look or behave any differently physically from normal bread and wine. It doesn’t develop any physical properties of blood - it doesn’t start to taste salty as blood would, it doesn’t develop red blood cells or platelets, and it doesn’t take on any other physical characteristic of blood, or lose any physical characteristic of wine.

This means ALL the physical properties of bread and wine remain, including potential to get you drunk if you have too much or make you sick if you’re celiac. And includes the ability to transmit illness. To believe otherwise is to misunderstand what transubstantiation means.
 
Our Bishop has put a ban on Communion on the tongue. I understand his concern for every ones health but I am devastated. For me, communion in the hand just feels wrong, wrong, wrong. I believe in the real presence. How could anyone become sick from Jesus. If it did happen I guess that would be the will of God. I was just starting to dream that I might have a chance to receive while kneeling. I don’t know how I will get through this. I guess I will pray, pray, pray. How did we ever get through all the other flu seasons. Thousands die from the flu every year. Why is this so different? It seems like this is just another excuse to take away our traditions. Devastated in Wisconsin
Reply With Quote
 
NeedImprovement said:
And what about the Holy Water font…? How many people stick their hands in there and then spread the water around their faces a bit ? Maybe we should switch from water to holy rubbing alcohol or holy Dettol or something !
Click to expand...
😃
 
LilyM said:
Do you actually know what the word ‘pandemic’ means? There are set definitions that the WHO uses in describing outbreaks of illness, based on contagiousness and the seriousness of the illness. Very rigidly defined ones. And it’s described the swine-flu as the second-worst kind of outbreak of illness possible. Level 5 out of 6 possible levels. It may yet reach Level 6. Your average winter flu outbreak isn’t even a 1 on the scale.

So no, there is NOT always this particularly virulent and especially debilitating (not to say deadly - and to healthy young adults, which your common-or-garden flu isn’t) strain of illness going round, no.

Comparing this to normal outbreaks of influenza is a bit like comparing a regular house fire to the World Trade Centre going up in flames on 9/11.
Click to expand...
Actually, the CDC hs indicated that they really do not know how serious H1H1 is, or how easily it spreads.

From cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm:

**Is this new H1N1 virus contagious?
**CDC has determined that this new H1N1 virus is contagious and is spreading from human to human. However, at this time, it is not known how easily the virus spreads between people.

**How severe is illness associated with this new H1N1 virus?
**It’s not known at this time how severe this virus will be in the general population… [snip]

As for the term pandemic, the WHO’s website who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/phase/en/index.html
provides the explanation of each level. The statement above “**And it’s described the swine-flu as the second-worst kind of outbreak of illness possible. Level 5 out of 6 possible levels. It may yet reach Level 6. Your average winter flu outbreak isn’t even a 1 on the scale.” **is quite misleading, when one considers that level one means that there is a low risk in human infection from animals. Even level three means that human-to-human transmission is rare.Level five means that the spread is limited to one region of the world.

%between%
 
Our diocese in Southern California has been instructed (until further notice)
not to receive on the tongue,
not to receive from the cup,
not to hold hands during the Our Father,
and not to shake hands during the sign of peace.

I HOPE that the intention of the bishop is to prevent flu from spreading (although it seems more people are dying from meteor strikes and the Loch Ness monster than from the swine flu).

But I have to unfortunately suspect (given past happenings…) that the bishop is just pre-empting any lawsuits that might arise from “I got swine flu from the church because the bishop didn’t take the right precautions, etc. etc.” I really hope I’m wrong on this one.
 
ricmat said:
Our diocese in Southern California has been instructed (until further notice)
not to receive on the tongue,
not to receive from the cup,
not to hold hands during the Our Father,
and not to shake hands during the sign of peace.

I HOPE that the intention of the bishop is to prevent flu from spreading (although it seems more people are dying from meteor strikes and the Loch Ness monster than from the swine flu).

But I have to unfortunately suspect (given past happenings…) that the bishop is just pre-empting any lawsuits that might arise from “I got swine flu from the church because the bishop didn’t take the right precautions, etc. etc.” I really hope I’m wrong on this one.
Click to expand...
Well, at least in this whole overreactive mess, there is a silver lining. At least the Our Father is being said correctly.😉

I actually have many feeling and opinions on this matter. But first I have a question. and this is a real, respectful, serious question.
I understand the Cup being suspended. I understand the sign of peace, and the Our Father. I even think that to be consistent there should be a directive concerning Holy Water. But seeing as the tounge is the “norm” and the hand is the indulgence… Do the US Bishops have this authority and can the Vatican weigh in on this? What is Mexico doing?

I just hope that this is not like the O administration official who said. “Never hesitate to take advantage of a good crisis” or somthing to that extent.
 
I wouldn’t be surprised if ricmat and I are in the same diocese. Those are the restrictions our bishop has put on us as well (and I live in rural California, and some consider it SoCal)

I enjoy the fact that nobody is trying to hold my hand during the Our Father, and that the sign of peace has turned into reverential bows towards one another and a smile. I will admit I received Communion once on the hand, the first night this was announced.

I’ll wait before I receive again. I felt so, so wrong for receiving in the hand. Guilty. Plus the Holy Water has been removed, so I couldn’t even sacramentally ‘wash’ my hand afterwards. I’ll refrain from receiving Communion, I think, until after the normal way is allowed again.
 
Good evening all. Prior to receiving Communion, we offer each other the Sign of Peace by shaking hands. I would be more concerned with shaking someone’s hand that had just coughed or sneezed in them or had held a used Kleenex in it. If I have a cold, I simply nod at the person and wish them Peace. Lots of potential germs being spread around this way.
 
Matt33 said:
Well, at least in this whole overreactive mess, there is a silver lining. At least the Our Father is being said correctly.😉

I actually have many feeling and opinions on this matter. But first I have a question. and this is a real, respectful, serious question.
I understand the Cup being suspended. I understand the sign of peace, and the Our Father. I even think that to be consistent there should be a directive concerning Holy Water. But seeing as the tounge is the “norm” and the hand is the indulgence… Do the US Bishops have this authority and can the Vatican weigh in on this? What is Mexico doing?

I just hope that this is not like the O administration official who said. “Never hesitate to take advantage of a good crisis” or somthing to that extent.
Click to expand...
Mexico had to close churches (and shops and schools etc) entirely for a time - means no Masses were said at all. I don’t know whether they’ve reopened or what they’re doing now if so. In any event, whatever they might be doing it IS preferable to err on the side of caution - unless you want churches to be forced to close entirely in parts of the US too, of course. 🤷.
 
LilyM said:
But outwardly it IS something other than blood - that’s the whole point. The substance (essence) of the Eucharist is not the essence of bread and wine, but the accidents (all physical properties) of bread and wine nonetheless remain. If you put the Eucharist under a microscope, it doesn’t look or behave any differently physically from normal bread and wine. It doesn’t develop any physical properties of blood - it doesn’t start to taste salty as blood would, it doesn’t develop red blood cells or platelets, and it doesn’t take on any other physical characteristic of blood, or lose any physical characteristic of wine.

This means ALL the physical properties of bread and wine remain, including potential to get you drunk if you have too much or make you sick if you’re celiac. And includes the ability to transmit illness. To believe otherwise is to misunderstand what transubstantiation means.
Click to expand...
One of the other physical properties of alcohol is to sterilize. And the property of the Eucharist is to heal both the body and soul of those with Faith.

One of the recommendations to PREVENT swine flu is to use alcohol to sterilize areas of potential transmission.

The swine flu has been reported to be no more dangerous than any other flu.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top