Do bishops have authority to prohibit Communion on the tongue?

  • Thread starter Thread starter savedbychrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gracepoole said:
As has been stated, this is an unprecedented situation. And no one’s soul is endangered by receiving on the hand.
Click to expand...
True. It’s indeed not a large matter as endangering a soul. You may find the discussion unnecessary, while I’d say why not discuss about it, unless it goes uncharitable (then the moderators would interfere).
 
savedbychrist said:
Being illicit is a different thing from being inappropriate. If it is appropriate and necessary, bishops might need to do it despite being illicit. That being said, they should still admit their act as being illicit, then say it is necessary (or else you would become like Archbishop Lefebvre when consecrating four bishops).
Click to expand...
Your scrupulosity is showing. We don’t really know how bad this is going to get, but all you can think about is licit vs illicit. If there are cases in your archdiocese, are you still going to force your pastor to serve you on the tongue?

If I’m a priest, I’d be thanking my bishop for helping me protect my health so I can keep serving my parish.
 
Perhaps, I think it us due to exaggeration. But there are certainly areas of the country that have many parishes where almost no on received on the tongue. I went to one just last week and the lady who was the EMHC was clearly surprised when I did so.
 
gracepoole said:
no one’s soul is endangered by receiving on the hand.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not in the most direct sense, but in an overall sense who knows what will happen to some individuals. When we back down on principles, we often loose sight of Gods height above us and start to see Him on our level rather than above us. Who knows how this will also effect children who see it take place and assume we are receiving ordinary bread. Furthermore, this practice is normally done by receiving in the lesser hand (the left hand), this is an outrageous outward sign even more so, to receive in the left hand? Wow, that not allowed under any circumstances in history.

Furthermore, there are many indirect risks to our souls involved. As Bishop Laise said:
“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.”

No lay person should be put under such pressure. Let’s not make things complicated for people
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
Your scrupulosity is showing.
Click to expand...
I was just making things clearer that being illicit is not the same as being inappropriate. It’s simple logic, not some overly detailed and insignificant stuff.

And yes, I do find myself scrupulous at times, if you find it important to know.
Zzyzx_Road said:
We don’t really know how bad this is going to get, but all you can think about is licit vs illicit.
Click to expand...
This is not my personal blog, I’m not telling all of my concerns here. And I think I know better than you think I do, since I live in a city located right next to China, and the coronavirus is on the headlines now almost every day. Our experts say it would not likely to end in a month or two, it’ll possibly last more than a year or so.

Such practical matters in liturgy thus becomes more important. We can’t go on like this forever, or else reconciliation with Church practices would get more difficult day by day. Physical health concerns are of course important, and I believe many doctors out there know better than all of us here. So why don’t we, Catholics, work on something else that we’re more familiar with?
 
Paul_Edwards said:
When we back down on principles, we often loose sight of Gods height above us and start to see Him on our level rather than above us.
Click to expand...
Just so I understand correctly, do you mean that a personal preference for one of two legitimate and approved methods of receiving is a matter of principle? I am sorry but I just don’t see preference rising to that level.
Paul_Edwards said:
this practice is normally done by receiving in the lesser hand (the left hand),
Click to expand...
Two things I take exception to about this statement:
1 - In what way is the left hand “lesser”?
2 - I (silently) observe from my pew (cannot legitimately receive yet) and see no marked preference for right vs. left hand uppermost for those who receive in the hand.
 
gracepoole said:
In the midst of a global pandemic, why is this of concern?
Click to expand...
On one level, I understand in our present day why so many people seem to distrust every single thing a bishop does—what with abuses and scandals and so forth. And I can understand why people ask questions. But sometimes I definitely feel like we can go overboard with it.

I mean, this is an extraordinary circumstance. I’m pretty well educated in the faith. I have a degree in theology and took a graduate class on the liturgy. But I know I am definitely not a liturgical expert nor do I know all the ins and outs of liturgical laws. And, frankly, I don’t need to be. So why not just trust our bishop and follow his direction? This is clearly not a case where following the bishop’s order is going to endanger children, spread heresy, or anything even remotely close. So why not just obey? Many saints spoke of the great merit in holy obedience, even when one’s religious superior may have been in the wrong.

And I do prefer to receive on the tongue. But for now I’m receiving on the hand. It’s a small sacrifice to make.
 
A little off topic; I’m not a fan of on the tongue. I’ve tried it in order to be more reverent; but almost always end up with things being awkward and once having the host fall on the floor . I’m sure people will get bugged by this by it’s far more reverent for me to receive in the hand; the exchange is careful and solemn and our Lord never gets dropped.

As to the Bishop; I don’t think he has the authority; but I’ll submit out of respect for him. And I do think he has the authority to ban communion outright so if the choice is on the hand vs. no communion at all I’ll take on the hand every time.
 
Also to add to your response here. There is no proof that one way over the other really matters as far as transmitting disease. So they are banning COTT without reason.

They banned it in my diocese. But check this out… rather than have one priest and one ehmc distributing the host in the hand or tongue as was the norm. They added two extra ehmc’s to Distribute in the hand only due to the ban… so is there really any benefit? I highly doubt it.
 
Joe_5859 said:
So why not just obey?
Click to expand...
Yes, obedience is a great virtue. I’m likely to be receiving my First Communion in the hand too when I get baptized (originally Easter Vigil, now postponed to Pentecost, might be postponed further), if the ban on COTT is still in place.

But if the bishop did not mandate it by his episcopal or priestly authority, is it really obedience going on? Wouldn’t it be a personal request from him simply as a Catholic just like us, since he is not really exercising his episcopal authority?

(Maybe others gonna say why does it matter, you scrupulous again, just obey and case closed, dont make simple things complicated.)
 
Not everything a bishop asks is an exercise of official apostolic authority. It doesn’t mean that it’s not obedience to follow his direction.
 
Our test when we are judged - which might be today, is: were we obedient to the Bishop in all things except sin? That was the rule of Saint Francis and we are well advised to humble ourselves and follow.
 
po18guy said:
Our test when we are judged - which might be today, is: were we obedient to the Bishop in all things except sin? That was the rule of Saint Francis and we are well advised to humble ourselves and follow.
Click to expand...
Personally I would play safe to follow the Bishop’s rule on this (when they resume Mass and I take my first Communion). Still, it is better to be prudent, especially in this diocese. Another bishop allowed diocesan-wide self-intinction for communicants since 2003 until today, and it was also allowed in the name of “disease control”, when a similar strain of coronavirus (SARS) outbroke back then. These rules were then never changed, but I do think it would constitute sin for the faithful to perform self-intinction.

When diocesan liturgical guidelines are unrealiable and advocate for badly illicit practices, I think I have the responsibility to figure out what is happening and check the reliable Church documents when something suspicious is going on. Obedience is not to become an excuse to be lazy and not search from reliable sources to prevent offending the Lord.
 
Why do we have Bishops? Who founded that office and why?

You know what offends Christ? Disobedience to those He sent.

We are not smarter than Christ.
 
I would say maybe yes? They have broad authority over the liturgy. Redeptionis Sacramentum was written to address people being refused communion without cause, not as a response to an outbreak of this magnitude.
 
savedbychrist said:
Recently due to the coronavirus, many dioceses around the globe has mandated Communion in the hand (i.e. prohibiting Communion on the tounge. I wonder, however, if bishops actually possess authority to do this.

Instructio Redemptionis Sacramentum 92 states:

Although each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice, if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the hand, in areas where the Bishops’ Conference with the recognitio of the Apostolic See has given permission, the sacred host is to be given to him or her.
[Cut for space.]
The bolded text means:
  • the faithful has the right to choose receiving Communion on the tounge
  • such right is always in place
So the question is:
  1. Is this Instruction from the Holy See binding on all bishops (of course the Bishop of Rome can change it)?
  2. If yes, do bishops have the authority to override this Instruction (without an indult)?
    [Cut for space.]
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church has had one of the most well honed organizations in history. Once upon a time, not only was the chain of command clear and concise, but so were the rules for each level of participation, from Pope down to any layperson. The key to smooth operation was obedience.

Roughly 50 years ago, obedience fell by the wayside, innovations crept in, then doubts. Without universal application of rules and adherence to the liturgy—obedience—a sort of free-for-all surfaced. Yes, God gave us keen intellects, but we’ve confused our ability to think with simply wanting our own ways. Most of us seem to question everything, whether it’s within our jurisdiction, or not. Questioning, doubting, and being quite willing to condemn or reject are the antithesis of obedience.

Church-wide decisions of a diocese or nation are best left to those who have been chosen to preside. We need to trust that our archbishops and bishops don’t exist in a vacuum but are CEOs, in every sense of the position. Yes, of course, under NORMAL circumstances, the usual rules from Rome should apply, but common sense should apply, too. When disease runs wild and is not contained, these are NOT normal circumstances!

We do not know the scope of this new coronavirus. We must trust our shepherds to shepherd us. The naysayers may end up being correct, and extra precautions may eventually prove to have been unnecessary. However, if we keep the status-quo as it is, with few or no precautions, and this disease wipes out thousands, adherence to every little “rule” (in lieu of health concerns) will have proven to be beyond irresponsible. It is far better to err on the side of precaution as long as the danger exists, even if that should be two or three years.

It is now a fact that Pope Francis has suspended Mass to the public. Holy Hannah and Holy Toledo! No doubt, there are people here on CAF who will question even His Holiness!

UPDATE: As of 4:54 PM, less than 30 minutes ago, the Wall Street Journal reported that the entire country of Italy is now restricted in movement, so no Masses at all, in Italy, until the crisis ceases.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top