Drive through communion possibility

  • Thread starter Thread starter Episcopalian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Episcopalian

Guest
So my Episcopal diocese has closed their churches for Sunday worship since my city is hit pretty hard with Corona.

A few of them are offering “drive through” communion, or doorstep communion, where passerbys, on foot or in cars can get communion on Sunday.

The Catholic diocese has waived the Sunday requirement for Mass…but can this drive by or passerby Communion style be similarly offered? I never heard of it before, but attributed it to the quirkiness of the Episcopal Church 😛
 
This would require me to give an unbiased assessment of Anglicanism, I’d rather not be kicked off the forums.
 
Episcopalian said:
The Catholic diocese has waived the Sunday requirement for Mass…but can this drive by or passerby Communion style be similarly offered?
Click to expand...
I would offer the opinion “no”. The Eucharist isn’t merely a ‘product’ to be consumed; it’s part of the celebration of the Mass. So, we receive the Eucharist when we participate in Mass, but typically, not otherwise. We make exceptions for those who cannot attend Sunday Mass, or for those in end-of-life situations, but that’s normally the extent of the exceptions. The Eucharist isn’t something that we merely pass out to passers-by.
 
I remember a priest once talking about how he denied communion to someone who arrived at Mass just before communion and came up to receive. As he put it, “the Eucharist is not fast food.”
 
Gorgias said:
The Eucharist isn’t something that we merely pass out to passers-by.
Click to expand...
exactly… also aren’t there prayers that should be performed before you should take the Eucharist? Isn’t the confession of sins that we do in church an important prayer done before we take in the Eucharist?
 
No.

Our archbishop has banned quasi liturgical Eucharistic services in parishes. This would be a step even farther.

What is said somewhat repeatedly is that we are not required to receive more than once a year; we are encouraged to do so, but that is to be at a Mass - with the exception of the sick and the homebound who cannot get to Mass.

No. Nononononononono NO!
 
Gorgias said:
We make exceptions for those who cannot attend Sunday Mass, or for those in end-of-life situations, but that’s normally the extent of the exceptions. The Eucharist isn’t something that we merely pass out to passers-by.
Click to expand...
Well certainly, if nothing else, there are exceptional times we’re living in! A “drive through communion” wouldn’t involve giving out the Eucharist in the same way as we receive it at mass (i.e. “the body of Christ” - next car pulls up - "the body of Christ) but could involve a sort penitential rite and prayer with those in each car prior to them receiving communion. However, I see two key difficulties with this - the first is limiting contact - certainly possible with the sacrament of reconciliation but much harder with the Eucharist if anyone other than the drive is receiving. The second problem is time - far more people would want to receive the Eucharist than reconciliation (shouldn’t be that way, but would be) and the whole process would easily take about for each from the time the car pulls up to the time it moves off. Multiply that by the expected number of cars and you quickly work out the problem!

So, in circumstances like this, where it’s simply not possible for everyone to receive, triage is necessary - taking it to the most vulnerable first and leaving the rest to make a spiritual communion.
 
While I would most definitely agree with your comment that it is not fast food, the liturgical rules are that one can receive twice in a day; but the second reception must be at a Mass - which would imply, perhaps the priest should have given the Eucharist (barring any other valid reason) and then spoken with the communicant afterwards.

“Any other valid reason” - might be the individual did not appear to be a member of the parish.
 
potato potato… tomato tomato… IMO… they mean the same thing.
 
40.png
Priest offers drive-through confessions during coronavirus Liturgy and Sacraments
I don’t know where this photo was taken, but I saw it on social media. My mother and my aunts used to joke about having drive-through confession and called it “Toot n’ Tell”. Now it’s a reality. [priest offering drive through confession during coronavirus]
Click to expand...
 
Actually, there is a difference between the two; one implies action on my part; the other implies action on the priest’s part. A communicant does not reach into the ciborium and take a Host out; one either receives in on the tongue or in the hand from the priest/deacon/EMHC.

From the USCCB, The Reception of Communion At Mass: "Those who receive Communion may receive either in the hand or on the tongue, and the decision should be that of the individual receiving, not of the person distributing Communion. If Communion is received in the hand, the hands should first of all be clean. If one is right handed the left hand should rest upon the right. The host will then be laid in the palm of the left hand and then taken by the right hand to the mouth. If one is left-handed this is reversed. It is not appropriate to reach out with the fingers and take the host from the person distributing.

My bolds. Words have meaning; and it is not potato/potato.
 
I believe in Rome the faithful are still allowed to receive Holy Communion even though there’s no Masses going on. The Pope’s secretary has urged priests to provide Communion to people who ask for it, expressing a concern if people can get “pasta and pizza” delivered, but no Holy Communion.


However, I doubt it would be done on a drive-through basis. The Pope’s secretary seems to be suggesting priests should take the Eucharist to the people, many of whom might not have cars anyway.
 
Last edited:
Last week here in my Swiss diocese, while public Masses were prohibited, there was at least one FSSP parish which had two daily times for distributing Communion. Not sure if they will able to keep it going with the new restrictive measures we are under since this morning.
 
okay @otjm
correcting my post
exactly… also aren’t there prayers that should be performed before you should receive the Eucharist? Isn’t the confession of sins that we do in church an important prayer done before we receive the Eucharist?
Click to expand...
I’m sorry that you felt, correcting my use of the word take over receive, then explain the use of the word take over receive was more important then answering the part about prayer and confession before receiving the Eucharist.

I can just thank God, my Catholic church is still open.
 
Last edited:
otjm said:
40.png
annad347:
take the Eucharist
Click to expand...
A pet peeve, as I hear it phrased this way constantly: One does not “take” the Eucharist. One receives it.

And there is a significant difference between the two.
Click to expand...
I personally “receive” communion, but Jesus did tell His disciples, “Take, eat; this is my body”.
 
Last edited:
InThePew said:
Well certainly, if nothing else, there are exceptional times we’re living in! A “drive through communion” wouldn’t involve giving out the Eucharist in the same way as we receive it at mass (i.e. “the body of Christ” - next car pulls up - "the body of Christ) but could involve a sort penitential rite and prayer with those in each car prior to them receiving communion. However, I see two key difficulties with this - the first is limiting contact - certainly possible with the sacrament of reconciliation but much harder with the Eucharist if anyone other than the drive is receiving. The second problem is time - far more people would want to receive the Eucharist than reconciliation (shouldn’t be that way, but would be) and the whole process would easily take about for each from the time the car pulls up to the time it moves off. Multiply that by the expected number of cars and you quickly work out the problem!

So, in circumstances like this, where it’s simply not possible for everyone to receive, triage is necessary - taking it to the most vulnerable first and leaving the rest to make a spiritual communion.
Click to expand...
I agree with this assessment. At first blush, it sounds like a good idea, but the logistics militate against it. I would, though, like to see some way to accommodate those in a spiritual emergency. Mortal sin is infinitely worse than coronavirus. The worst coronavirus can do is kill you. Mortal sin has far worse consequences.
 
I highly doubt it will happen in the Catholic Church but it is theoretically within the power of the Catholic bishops to do something like this. Communion is already regularly given to parishioners remotely for health reasons.

Obviously the Eucharist isn’t fast food and this isn’t something that would be done in any ordinary circumstances, but these circumstances aren’t ordinary.

A “drive-thru” communion during a pandemic and a drive-thru communion during normal life is apples and oranges, and we have no right to say that a person in this situation doesn’t have the appropriate interior disposition to receive.
 
Last edited:
It is the absolute worse idea that I can imagine. People will not prepare themselves to receive, nor will they spend time in reflection and prayer after they receive. It will foster an attitude that these actions are not important.
Our actions affect our beliefs. If we act as if receiving communion is no different than getting a meal at a fast food restaurant, than that mundane attitude towards the Eucharist will be what many of us will end up with.
Horrible, horrible idea. Besides the Eucharist should only be taken outside of the Church in a very controlled manner (ie Eucharistic procession, or to distribute to the sick and homebound).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top