Does a parish pastor have authority to require communion in the hand?

[Mike30]

Not in the classes I taught for close to 20 years! I always taught what the Church holds, explaining both methods, explaining the actual history of both, and telling them it was entirely their choice unless CITH was withdrawn.

The majority of those I taught in RCIA choose CITH, but not all - as it should be.

Sorry you were countermanded - me, I would not have followed directions to not teach COTT, and probably asked if they wanted to meet me in a conference with the bishop. nOr maybe not said anything; I would have just gone ahead and taught it.

As did I.

But the DRE and the Priest were both pretty well ticked off about it.

Oh well, at least everyone knew their options.

 

[Nicea325]

Does a parish pastor have the authority to require that an entire First Communion class receive their First Holy Communion in the hand? This is an issue we are running into for two of our sons. Our family receives only on the tongue, but we have been told that this is not an option at our parish for the public celebration of their First Holy Communion. However, we were told that they could receive either way after they make their First Holy Communion. The reason given for this requirement is for the pastor’s wishes of “uniformity.”

Nope! The Bishops provide the norms, not the parish pastor. The GIRM states otherwise. The pastor cannot tell people receive only in the hands. I give each person the option, in the hands or in the mouth. Some people make such a bug fuss over this issue.

 

[otjm]

OK, I am going to ask the question no one has brought up.

Suppose the child would prefer to receive CITH, and it is the parent who is against this (and assuming at this point the priest has not budged). Where do we go from here?

Presumably the child is about 6 or 7, or maybe 8. At which point/age does the child have the right to determine how they wish to receive?

We have had a whole lot of discussion about the rules, and some about speaking further to the priest, and some about going with the flow.

This is a fairly young child; but peer pressure starts before grade school. Has that/is that having any impact on the child (as I would assume they are receiving with classmates, and this may have been talked about before by the kids)?

Do we now have a child torn between two (or more - has the child attended any classes about Communion? Then we have a teacher…) or more adults who at this point have differing opinions. Who is the child to please? And I would not presume the child may be unaware of the priest’s position at this point - kids have amazing “radar” and ears that work incredibly well.

Parents have a right to raise their children and they are the first responsible for bringing up the child. Does it end there?

 

[PJM]

=srperez1;10726099]Does a parish pastor have the authority to require that an entire First Communion class receive their First Holy Communion in the hand? This is an issue we are running into for two of our sons. Our family receives only on the tongue, but we have been told that this is not an option at our parish for the public celebration of their First Holy Communion. However, we were told that they could receive either way after they make their First Holy Communion. The reason given for this requirement is for the pastor’s wishes of “uniformity.”

NO He does NOT!

BUT That may not prevent him from doing so.

CONTACT the OFFICE of your Bishop: GOD willing; he’ll take care of it. BUT know their are still some Bishops who do are disobedient.

OFFER IT UP TO JESUS and explain to your kids what your doing and WHY.

 

[Gorgias]

It seems as if you’re saying that that every reason that a person would give to receive communion on the tongue can be countered with proper catechesis

No, certainly not! In fact, go back to my response, and you’ll see that I said:

Gorgias:

GangGreen:

or they do not wish to risk dropping the Host or even spilling a crumb

this is pretty reasonable; it would be difficult to argue with this perspective.

babochka:

, and then, if they still stubbornly refuse to see that communion in the hand is acceptable, it can be grudgingly given to them on the tongue

Grudgingly? Where in my post do you see that characterization?

As others have mentioned, the practice isn’t what I’m talking about, it’s the rationale that a person might have for doing so. If the reason is based on mistaken ideas, then yes – catechesis is the proper response! The goal of the catechesis, of course, isn’t to brainwash people into CITH robots; rather, whichever method of receiving is chosen, the goal is a proper understanding of the Eucharist and the reasons the Church gives for the methods for its reception that she approves!

What if a priest approached the opposite situation in the same way? What if the parish was one in which most, if not all, people receive on the tongue and the priest had instructed that first communicants would only be permitted to receive on the tongue? What if a child (or his family) felt strongly that he should be permitted to receive in the hand, as is his right under church law? Would you still feel that the situation called for pastoral care and loving catechesis?

If the reason that the family insisted on CITH was problematic, then yes!

 

[babochka]

No, certainly not! In fact, go back to my response, and you’ll see that I said:

Grudgingly? Where in my post do you see that characterization?

As others have mentioned, the practice isn’t what I’m talking about, it’s the rationale that a person might have for doing so. If the reason is based on mistaken ideas, then yes – catechesis is the proper response! The goal of the catechesis, of course, isn’t to brainwash people into CITH robots; rather, whichever method of receiving is chosen, the goal is a proper understanding of the Eucharist and the reasons the Church gives for the methods for its reception that she approves!

If the reason that the family insisted on CITH was problematic, then yes!

Ok, thank you for the clarification. I was misunderstanding you.

I think my main problem is with the idea of the priest insisting on either communion in the hand or communion on the tongue, when either one is an acceptable, approved way of receiving. Also, to give preference to either method in instruction is problematic to me. I think each method should be laid out, along with reasons why one might prefer one method over the other. I also think it is be important to mention that communion in the hand is not available in all dioceses.

 

[Brando]

OP - have you discussed it with the pastor? Asked his reasons? Maybe he has valid concerns that you could address. Height of the children, previous experience with children not opening wide enough to receive, or other just causes that have perhaps lead to the Eucharistic falling on the floor because the young children weren’t capable of properly receiving on the tongue in the past? Often it’s easy to let a few bad experiences color our view of something, especially when we want to protect a loved one, such as Our Lord.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android

 

[Cat]

I assume that this is what you are speaking of?

I am not arguing in favor of holding a priest responsible for his actions. I am arguing that I would still receive in the mouth. Also, there is nothing to be lost by receiving on the tongue (unless one is afraid of getting germs from the Eucharist). For someone that doesn’t wan’t to drop crumbs, it is of utmost importance to receive in the mouth so that they don’t cause Christ to fall on the floor.

PS I am not at all trying to be argumentative. I am just trying to point out that one’s preference may be deeper than “traditional” verses “modern” reception (such as is my case).

Zekariya, it depends on the type of the host used for consecration.

The hosts in our parish (and in our diocese) have the consistency of hard plastic. I can’t imagine how anyone could produce a crumb from these hosts. They don’t really “break,” they “bend.”

I’ve been in one parish (in Michigan) that used a type of host that had many crumbs–frankly, I found this uncomfortable for several reasons (fear of dropping crumbs, and fear of coughing up the crumbs).

Perhaps your parish uses hosts like this, and so your fears would be justified.

But I’m guessing that most parishes use the “plastic”-type hosts that our parish uses, so crumbs are not an issue, ever.

BTW, the ONE time that I dropped the host was when I received on the tongue from a EMHC who was shorter than I am. Ever since then, I only receive on the tongue from a priest or EMHC who is taller than I am. I also take age and physical dexterity into account; if the priest or EMHC is very elderly, or if the EMHC is a teenager, I don’t receive on the tongue.

 

[Cat]

I see this as an obedience issue.

Consider this from a child’s point of view.

Father (the priest) tells Child that all children will receive Holy Communion in the hand.

Mommy and Daddy tell Child that he/she will receive Holy Communion on the tongue.

Child thinks, “It’s OK to disobey the priest. Mommy and Daddy did.”

If Mommy and Daddy tell Child that Father is wrong, then Child thinks, “Father is wrong about this. So he might be wrong about lots of things.”

I could go on, but considering the massive amount of “cafeteria Catholicism” in the U.S., in which Catholics pick and choose which teachings and practices they will accept and which they will reject, I think that the lesson of obedience to the priest trumps the lesson of Communion on the tongue vs. Communion in the hand.

Reverence is NOT the issue. Holy Mother Church has allowed for both methods of receiving and does not consider one method “more reverent” than the other.

Nope, it’s not a reverence issue, it’s an obedience issue. Children are not old enough to figure out the issue here and realize that receiving Communion on the tongue is not “disobedience.” Children are not capable of abstract thought. All they know is that Mommy and Daddy are disobeying the priest. What a terrible seed for parents to plant in their child.

 

[ProVobis]

The hosts in our parish (and in our diocese) have the consistency of hard plastic.

You can find a bunch of people trained enough to detect rubs on precious coins, caused by holding them with the fingers. The consistency you refer to isn’t the same consistency say, of dentures, but it is far more “rubbable” than coins, and any handling could be detected just as easily.

 

[ProVobis]

Holy Mother Church has allowed for both methods of receiving and does not consider one method “more reverent” than the other.

CITH is not a universal right. Each country requires 2/3 of bishops’ approval before the Vatican grants the indult to that country, according to Cardinal Arinze.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ap1KL2D5ae4

No priest or bishop has the right to demand communion in the hand. (5:42)

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Quite frankly…as long as the priest isn’t saying you can’t ever receive on the tongue…I don’t see what the big deal is.

A viable option would be to talk to the priest about it again…lay out your concerns in a very respectful manner. But if he doesn’t budge…it is only for one time-not forever. It would seem that a lesson in obedience would be a great lesson for the child to learn.

For those of you wonder…I would advocate the same way if everyone had to receive on the tongue for first communion and the child wanted to receive CITH. I think it’s good to learn both ways in case there is a chance that the host might be dropped. There are some EMHC’s that are not adapt at distributing COTT.

 

[At_His_Feet_1]

Does a parish pastor have the authority to require that an entire First Communion class receive their First Holy Communion in the hand? This is an issue we are running into for two of our sons. Our family receives only on the tongue, but we have been told that this is not an option at our parish for the public celebration of their First Holy Communion. However, we were told that they could receive either way after they make their First Holy Communion. The reason given for this requirement is for the pastor’s wishes of “uniformity.”

The first time I received Holy Communion was back in the early 70’s, and it was in the hand. We were taught to place/position our hands in such a way as to ‘create a throne for our Lord’ to receive Him. Everyone at the time was doing as such, and I never knew any other way. We’re talking…such and such years after Vatican 2. I was part of the very next generation after that. There wasn’t a kneeling rail.

Throughout the years, when I moved to different parishes, I noticed that others were receiving on the tongue. I wondered…‘what is going on here’? In my experience, I never saw any priest deny someone from receiving on the tongue, or in the hand. Nor did I see a priest request from his parishoners one way over the other.

Regarding your question: I would set aside some time with your parish priest and ask as to ‘why’ he stipulates receiving in the hand as being of uniformity?

I’m curious…is it more of a ‘conveniance’ for him to administer the Host that way? More curious even to his response…

Either way, I hope you find an answer.

God Bless

 

[Elizium23]

I see this as an obedience issue.

Consider this from a child’s point of view.

Father (the priest) tells Child that all children will receive Holy Communion in the hand.

Mommy and Daddy tell Child that he/she will receive Holy Communion on the tongue.

Child thinks, “It’s OK to disobey the priest. Mommy and Daddy did.”

If Mommy and Daddy tell Child that Father is wrong, then Child thinks, “Father is wrong about this. So he might be wrong about lots of things.”

I could go on, but considering the massive amount of “cafeteria Catholicism” in the U.S., in which Catholics pick and choose which teachings and practices they will accept and which they will reject, I think that the lesson of obedience to the priest trumps the lesson of Communion on the tongue vs. Communion in the hand.

Reverence is NOT the issue. Holy Mother Church has allowed for both methods of receiving and does not consider one method “more reverent” than the other.

Nope, it’s not a reverence issue, it’s an obedience issue. Children are not old enough to figure out the issue here and realize that receiving Communion on the tongue is not “disobedience.” Children are not capable of abstract thought. All they know is that Mommy and Daddy are disobeying the priest. What a terrible seed for parents to plant in their child.

Yes, it is an obedience issue, but it is exactly the reverse of what you have described. The priest has overstepped his boundaries here and is violating the absolute right of the parents to educate their child in the faith. The home is the Domestic Church, the parents are the prime spiritual teachers of children. Since the parents have such rights to establish a family custom that is fully in line with Church discipline and teaching, I see no reason for the pastor to impinge on the Fourth Commandment in this regard. There is nothing in the Decalogue about honoring your pastor when he tries to violate your rights. No, he is not commanding the children to sin, but he has no right to impose this on them. Priests must recognize and respect the authority of parents over their children and the debt of obedience which children owe to them.

That being said, you can’t urge your children to disobey the priest because as a parent you should be respecting Church authority. But there are plenty of options that do not involve disobedience. Can you decline to participate in the ceremony itself? Just get the pastor to sign off that your child is ready for FHC, and then have it without fanfare at your usual Sunday Mass. Now that’s kind of unfair to the kids, but it would be a greater stretch if your pastor tried to extend his prohibiting to ordinary Masses. You could go to another parish for a FHC ceremony, and let the pastor know in no uncertain terms why you have abandoned his own. This would send a message that you are not afraid to leave in defense of your rights. If you contribute financially or by volunteering, that could put some fear into him.

 

[sojo]

I’m very simple minded when it comes to these things. Yes, a crumb might fall. It would be an accident, and one caused by a brand-new First Communion Child and Jesus would smile and shake His head indulgently. Like I said – I’m very childlike in my thinking sometimes.

On the other hand, a parent who made a stink with a hard-working (probably over-worked) priest who is trying to create a lovely, sacramental moment for a whole group of young children, doting parents, catechism teachers and the entire parish and may or may not have gone a wee bit over the edge on making everything just “perfect”… I don’t think He would be very pleased. It is prideful and disruptive and I don’t think Jesus would be pleased at all.

But that’s just my 2 cents. Your “possible” crumb (that may or may not happen) vs. absolute disobedience to a priest, possible scandal among the entire First Communion class and parents (who are already on edge, I’m sure), and the possibility of a “scene” (and a sleepless night worrying about such) which is the last thing a priest needs before the big First Communion event needs.

Perhaps if the priest is unwavering, you might request a private First Communion altogether? You DO know that there is no law that it has to take place as a group event? My son has special needs and he had his First Communion separately at an Easter Vigil to reduce the anxiety of a group event. It was easier on my son, our family and the priest who understood the circumstances.

I’m going to assume you never discuss any of this in front of your child, of course. That would be totally wrong.

 

[Corki]

CITH is not a universal right. Each country requires 2/3 of bishops’ approval before the Vatican grants the indult to that country, according to Cardinal Arinze.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ap1KL2D5ae4

No priest or bishop has the right to demand communion in the hand. (5:42)

This is one of the big reasons why we teach our FHC class both ways. Many of the families have roots in Mexico where therei s not Communion in the hand in many (if not all) dioceses. It’s not hard at all to explain to seven year olds that there are options in the Mass and that this is one of them.

 

[maryjk]

For someone that doesn’t wan’t to drop crumbs, **it is of utmost importance to receive in the mouth so that they don’t cause Christ to fall on the floor. **

I always think it is funny when someone posts this.

I have only ever dropped the Host once in all of my 40 years of receiving.

And it happened when I received on the tongue.

 

[Zekariya]

I always think it is funny when someone posts this.

I have only ever dropped the Host once in all of my 40 years of receiving.

And it happened when I received on the tongue.

That is how I personally feel regarding receiving. I understand that others have good reasons to receive in the hand. One should do what they feel comfortable with concerning the permitted ways of receiving.

Parishes should start the old practice of placing a paten under peoples chins (the East still does this albeit with a cloth).

 

[jediliz]

That is how I personally feel regarding receiving. I understand that others have good reasons to receive in the hand. One should do what they feel comfortable with concerning the permitted ways of receiving.

Parishes should start the old practice of placing a paten under peoples chins (the East still does this albeit with a cloth).

My parish has altar servers that use a paten. My sister’s parish does not use their altar servers (different diocese) at communion time, but then, most of the parishoners there almost always receive in the hand. The paten is supposed to be there is PREVENT the host from falling on the ground for those who receive on the tongue.

No, the parish pastor does NOT have the authority to REQUIRE communion in the hand. I would ask the bishop to talk to the pastor about this.

 

[Cat]

CITH is not a universal right. Each country requires 2/3 of bishops’ approval before the Vatican grants the indult to that country, according to Cardinal Arinze.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ap1KL2D5ae4

No priest or bishop has the right to demand communion in the hand. (5:42)

Thank you, yes, I’m aware that CITH is not a universal “right.”

But where it is allowed, it is not an “inferior” or “less reverent” method of receiving the Lord Jesus.