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.
Where we differ is the idea that God ‘does want us to receive’ at any and all times with the only possible understanding of: And so if we are in a state of grace we MUST receive and not, “Since God wants us to receive Him, giving up that opportunity as a sacrifice for a reason one thinks pleasing to God is itself also pleasing to the Lord.”

For centuries it was understood that a Catholic could and often did refrain from reception of the Eucharist even if in a state of grace, without sinning.

It’s the same thing with, say, sacrifice of another good. Suppose that there is a long line of people waiting to have an audience with the Pope, chosen by lot, of whom you were one, and knowing you would have a chance to speak a few words with him. But for some reason beyond your control, the word comes out, “Only 10 more people may come in today. Tomorrow there will be a new audience and only those chosen by lot that day may come in, and those who were given appointments today even if they don’t come in may not seek another appointment for 2 years.” And there are about 20 people in line. You are the 10th in line. You could sacrifice your place to one of the 10 people who would otherwise not have their chance to see the Pope. You are ‘entitled’ in the sense that you are in the line, you’ve waited the whole time, etc., but suppose you see a person who looks just devastated at ‘missing out’ and you decide, "they can have my turn’.

If it can be seen as a kindness to a person in line to ‘give up your turn with the Pope for them’, may it not also be seen as a kindness to some fellow Catholic to offer up the sacrifice of receiving Christ in the Eucharist on ONE given Sunday for a purpose of anything from solidarity with those who for reasons of sickness or imprisonment cannot themselves receive? Or in reparation for sins against the Blessed Sacrament? In petition for the relief of those suffering with the coronavirus? Etc etc.?
 
Frequent reception is not the same as saying that one must receive if in a state of grace.

And nowhere does it state that offering up not receiving as a sacrifice is wrong.
 
Just a reminder, based on the last few comments, frequent communion for the laity, as great as it is, was introduced in the last century by St Pope Pius X. So while we do not have to receive each time, it is a positive thing to receive frequently nevertheless. Up until the 1900s, for centuries before people often went months without communion but still attended mass.

Now that this great ability and gift of frequent communion has been granted by St Pius, it will be ashame of course if Our Lords faithful have to start abstaining again after about a century of such beauty, but it will not be immoral, and in any case, only those who have made these rules will be held accountable by Our Lord (and not the faithful). So do not worry, you are not offending Our Lord by abstaining, He knows why you’ve done it, especially under these circumstances, and He admires your intense respect for Him and knows that you will start to receive again as soon as the appropriate and fitting time arises

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

There is a joke I once heard which I always like to remind myself about: “There are many successors to Judas, but only one successor to Peter”.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think this is a great question.

Ordinarily, bishops cannot prohibit Communion on the tongue (nor kneeling to receive).

That said, this is not an ordinary time with the virus. I honestly don’t know.

I’ve always preferred to receiving kneeling on the tongue, though I have been strongly considering to receive on the hand (though still kneeling).

If I do this, it will be something I’m not used to, but I want to be considerate to everyone around me since, again, this is not an ordinary time.

At Byzantine parishes, you are required to receive on the tongue. The reason of this being that the bread and the wine are together – it is administered by a type of spoon. However, the spoon never makes physical contact with the receiver’s tongue, so there is literally no contact besides you and the Eucharist. This may be the safest method that I can think of. Though I know most in the West are not Byzantine.
 
Last edited:
Dude, I don’t know – I don’t even know if it’s canonical for them to do this. I lean toward it being not, I haven’t found any evidence for it being so.

You came out swinging with the James Martin jab. I’m sure he’ll use this as an opportunity.

I’m still researching. Thankfully I do live a mile from a Ukrainian Catholic Church which I attend sometimes.
 
Last edited:
the bishops are not trying to offend anyone or dismiss their reverence. they are showing that they are taking countermeasures against the virus. i don’t care what anyone says, on the tongue contact would transfer more body fluid than hand contact. common sense should tell us that. we should honor their requests because it’s in the best interest of us all.
 
maryjk said:
If your bishop has said to receive in the hand. And you attend Mass, what are you going to do?

If the priest won’t offer it on the tongue, what is your response? Do you just stand there? Do you walk away? Do you say something?
Click to expand...
I would say for this crisis you would make a spiritual communion or receive in the hand if you are already standing in front of the priest.

Under normal circumstances where a priest or bishop refuses communion on the tongue because they don’t like it or do not want to offer it, then I would again if standing in front of the priest, receive in the hand at that moment or politely make the sign of the cross and walk away but then kindly speak to the priest or bishop afterwards reminding them that Rome has given the laity the right to receive on the tongue.

From my understanding of the COTT situaion stated by a priest is; Rome has given the laity the right to receive on the tongue and what Rome has given, bishops and priests can not take away and what Rome has taken away, priests and bishops can not give back.

each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, Redemptionis Sacramentum
gracepoole said:
The thing is, God does want us to receive. And it seems to be people who are only COTT who are choosing to do what they want to do instead of what God desires.
Click to expand...
Yes he wants us to receive Him,.This is what He desires but He wants us to approach Him worthily and so He also wants us to partake of the sacrament of confession frequently. Many graces are given there also and it also is a gift from God, why do people not want to receive graces there also? It is very rare to hear defenses for frequent confession prior to receiving communion.
gracepoole said:
And it seems to be people who are only COTT who are choosing to do what they want to do instead of what God desires.
Click to expand...
I disagree. First we can’t read each other’s hearts and motives. Only God can do that. Then those, like myself, who are only COTT are not choosing just what they want but are trying to do what God desires by doing what God has taught through His Church until recently.
 
Last edited:
it seems to me that you don’t trust the hierarchy. that’s how schisms start.
 
Soubirous1 said:
it seems to me that you don’t trust the hierarchy. that’s how schisms start.
Click to expand...
In all charity, there is no where in my statement that I said I do not trust the hierarchy. I am not in schism with the Church nor am I starting a schism with the Church. The schism statement is used frequently here on the forums and we really should avoid it. It is more of an attack on a person.

God bless.
 
Last edited:
Soubirous1 said:
your last sentence sounds like lack of trust in the hierarchy.
Click to expand...
There is nothing in my statement that says I do not trust the hierarchy. You are reading something into a statement that isn’t there or want to read something in it that isn’t there.
History shows that if something is changed or moved for one reason, it can happen again later for another reason.
 
Last edited:
why would the bishops withhold for another reason that isn’t necessary?
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
I would say for this crisis you would make a spiritual communion or receive in the hand if you are already standing in front of the priest.
Click to expand...
For me, it isn’t a crisis.

I voluntarily switched to the hand when our pastor stopped the Cup.

So, now, that our archbishop has requested that we receive in the hand, I am already doing it.
 
Soubirous1 said:
why would the bishops withhold for another reason?
Click to expand...
Thank you.

There have been laity who have gone in the communion line prior to this health crisis and have been refused COTT by a priest or EM because it wasn’t what everyone else was doing. These incidents do happen. This crisis could cause a priest or bishop to continue to restrict COTT even though there is no longer a reason, after the crisis.
maryjk said:
For me, it isn’t a crisis.

I voluntarily switched to the hand when our pastor stopped the Cup.

So, now, that our archbishop has requested that we receive in the hand, I am already doing it.
Click to expand...
I am referring to the health crisis that is the reason for the restrictions.
 
Last edited:
I’m looking for something official from the Church. i can’t find anything?
 
Soubirous1 said:
I’m looking for something official from the Church. i can’t find anything?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you are looking for, the Church has a lot of official things, so I am sorry I can’t help you. :confused:
 
Last edited:
it’s cool. i just thought that since you brought it up you would have a good source for it. thanks anyway
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top