Has the practice of Communion in the hand really strengthened and clarified ourfaith?

[Exporter]

ByzCath:

I think pnewton’s premise is clear. If it is between not recieving eh Eucharist or recieving it in the hand… It is plain to see how it does so.

I think it falls to you to prove that Eucharist in the hand does as you say it does becuase it is you who is going against what the Church Teaches, not us.

---

ByzCath ( You are not Roman Catholic, correct?) I have been Roman Catholic since 1955 - 50 years!

I do not think that you have a dog in this fight, or it’s none of your business.

---

The original question was "Has the practice of Communion in the hand really strengthened and clarified our faith in the Real Presence?"

SO YOU SEE BYZCATH you are wrong to say I must prove taking the Eucharist in the hand is less Holy- It was said that the "hand" STRENGTHENS FAITH … that is simply a concept taken from “out of the air”. ( Give me just one reason that the “hand” enhances FAITH )

**You are wrong to say that the Eucharist cannot be recieved on the tongue, go check GIRM. **

A personal note: You, as a Non Roman Catholic should not be castigating a Roman Catholic in such matters. It would be appropriate for you to tell us the****written directives of the Byzentine Church if you so desired. You do not speak for the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

tom.wineman:

No ! In fact, it has opened the Blessed Sacrament to abuse
just as it did in the early church which was the reason it was
decided to give it on the tongue in the first place.

Tom,
This is a vaild argument against the practice but…

I think it needs to be proven.

Anecdotal information, or just feeling that it is easier to abuse, is not enough. Also it is not our place to make such a determination.

It is the Church’s job to do so and they have.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

*****************************************************************************
ByzCath ( You are not Roman Catholic, correct?) I have been Roman Catholic since 1955 - 50 years!

I do not think that you have a dog in this fight, or it’s none of your business.

---

Tired argument. I am a Catholic.

But if that is not enough for you then let me add that I am in the application process to join the carmelites. So, God willing, someday I will be a bi-ritual priest.

The original question was "Has the practice of Communion in the hand really strengthened and clarified our faith in the Real Presence?"

SO YOU SEE BYZCATH you are wrong to say I must prove taking the Eucharist in the hand is less Holy- It was said that the "hand" STRENGTHENS FAITH … that is simply a concept taken from “out of the air”.

Actually if you would bother to read my replies above you would see that I have already stated that the original question is bunk.

This practice was not instituted to strengthen nor clarify faith in the Real Presence.

**You are wrong to say that the Eucharist cannot be recieved on the tongue, go check GIRM. **

I never said this. Again, please read all I have said.

If you do so you will see that when I attend a Mass sometimes I recieve on the tongue, sometimes in the hand.

A personal note: You, as a Non Roman Catholic should not be castigating a Roman Catholic in such matters. It would be appropriate for you to tell us the****written directives of the Byzentine Church if you so desired. You do not speak for the Roman Catholic Church.

Again, read what I said above. I am a Catholic and as I can recieve the Eucharist at any Catholic Church I do have a right to an opinion on this.

I am not castigating anyone, unless you think that my support of Church Teaching is castigation.

Since you said, I will tell you what we do in the Byzantine Church.

The Eucharist is given on the tongue via a golden spoon. That is the Eucharist is given by Intinction. The Body is cut into cubes (we use levaned bread) and placed in the Chalice after the priest and deacon have taken communion. Then the priest (or deacon) uses a golden spoon to pick up a piece of the Body out of the Chalice and places it in the mouth of the individual.

 

[Exporter]

You insist, so if you are such a supporter of GIRM help us put.

( Give me just one reason that the “hand” enhances FAITH )

Possibly you can enlighten us Roman Catholic as to why the Vatican started allowing the recieving in the HAND? Just why was that?

Why dont you agree that recieving on the tongue is perfectly acceptable in the Roman Catholic Church?

 

[BulldogCath]

I agree- I cringe every time I hear some theologian or News organization quote as saying that our Pope JPII is “conservative”. Conservative as compared to what? Like TNT said, his pontificate has been built around Ecumenism and Ecumenism leads to the weakening of the faith. How can all religions be equal? I hear about the GIRM and all of these other documents and committees that are trying to keep the laity and priests from abusing the mass-but why should they listen when you have a picture of the Vicar of Christ-Our Pope kissing the Koran - a picture that has spread throughout the Muslim world and the AP Press picked up on that so fast it made your head spin, you have Cardinal Kasper having “Eucharistic Hospitality Masses” with Protestants, We have the Pope constantly coddling with Rabbis and the like, handing over of sacred artifacts and relics to the schismatic Orthodox (while SSPX and other “Trads” and shunned) and the documents themselves which promote abuses of the Mass and the laity.
Mixed signals-Pope Pius IX refused to take part in Ecumenical meetings for just that reason-as it sends out a mixed signal to the laity and the world that we no longer have the answers and are not the One True Faith .

TNT:

Of course, if the communicant was kneeling, “awkward” would not be an issue.
But that is another wisdom of tradition overthrown.

The entire efforts of the Vatican, in action, and episcopal selection has ONE overriding irrevocable commitment: ECUMENISM. JPII has reafirmed this more than ANY other teaching of his pontificate.
Any tradition in the Church that has even a hint of Catholic exclusive practice will be removed. In the case of this thread, it’s to demote the sacredness (Real Presence) of the species, exclusive to the Catholic Church vs prot churches.
For those who can’t latch on to why all the changes on a neverending basis, I promote that you print out the following and attach it to your home noteboard or fridge: Better yet, frame it and hang it in a conspicuous place. Then you can correctly answer the question every day.

---

Ecumenism: The destruction of Internal unity in the false hope of External unity.

---

To destroy a religion, we must FIRST sever its identifiable traditions. Only then can a new ecumenical religion be constructed in its place.

The preachings of our favorite novel-ist PNewton notwithstanding…

 

[tom.wineman]

ByzCath:

Tom,
This is a vaild argument against the practice but…

I think it needs to be proven.

Anecdotal information, or just feeling that it is easier to abuse, is not enough. Also it is not our place to make such a determination.

It is the Church’s job to do so and they have.

Evidently you haven’t read the posts on these forums about abuse of the Blessed Sacrament.

---

**Evidently you don’t believe in your own signature, **“All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.” Edmund Burke

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Evidently you haven’t read the posts on these forums about abuse of the Blessed Sacrament.

**Evidently you don’t believe in your own signature, **“All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.” Edmund Burke

This forum in no way encompasses the whole of the Church.

I have read a couple of threads discussing this abuse but can only recall one where a person posting actually saw someone walk off with the Eucharist and they could not tell us if the person consumed the Eucharist in the pew.

I guess you do not understand what I meant by “Anecdotal information”.

Again, it is not ours to decide, it is up to the Church to rule and they have done so.

 

[tom.wineman]

ByzCath:

This forum in no way encompasses the whole of the Church.

I have read a couple of threads discussing this abuse but can only recall one where a person posting actually saw someone walk off with the Eucharist and they could not tell us if the person consumed the Eucharist in the pew.

I guess you do not understand what I meant by “Anecdotal information”.

Again, it is not ours to decide, it is up to the Church to rule and they have done so.

Evidently Eastern Catholics do not practice on the tongue reception of the Eucharist.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Exporter:

You insist, so if you are such a supporter of GIRM help us put.

( Give me just one reason that the “hand” enhances FAITH )

Possibly you can enlighten us Roman Catholic as to why the Vatican started allowing the recieving in the HAND? Just why was that?

I don’t need to.

Also, the GIRM has nothing to do with this, other than telling us that reception on the Tongue or in the Hand is acceptable.

The Church allows for reception of the Eucharist in the Hand, that is good enough for me.

Why dont you agree that recieving on the tongue is perfectly acceptable in the Roman Catholic Church?

Please point out where I said otherwise. You won’t be able to do it though as I have never said that reception on the tongue is not acceptable in the Church.

Seeing that you are having trouble reading I will quote my previous replies where I said that I have recieved on the tongue.

Post #4

ByzCath:

I for one, could do without it but when I am at a Mass sometimes I take in the hand sometimes I take it on the tongue.

Post #43

ByzCath:

If you do so you will see that when I attend a Mass sometimes I recieve on the tongue, sometimes in the hand.

I think I see the issue here.

You seem to assume that becuase I disagree on this point, that I disagree with you on everything. That is not the case nor can you really infer that.

All you can tell here is that I am not totally against reception in the hand and I do not think that either reception in the hand or on the tongue has anything to do with strengthening or clairfying our faith.

By your posts I assume that you think only the priest should be handleing the Eucharist, is that assumption correct?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Evidently Eastern Catholics do not practice on the tongue reception of the Eucharist.

Evidently you do not know how to read, but I will repost the portion of my reply from Post #43.

ByzCath:

The Eucharist is given on the tongue via a golden spoon. That is the Eucharist is given by Intinction. The Body is cut into cubes (we use levaned bread) and placed in the Chalice after the priest and deacon have taken communion. Then the priest (or deacon) uses a golden spoon to pick up a piece of the Body out of the Chalice and places it in the mouth of the individual.

So, evidently, reception on the tongue is the only way in the Byzantine Churches.

Wow, it is hard to believe that there is such vehemence against those of us who follow Church teachings instead of our own opinions.

 

[TNT]

It is becoming self-evident that IF we are now to receive under both kinds, then tincture is the only sure way to go. For:

1. It is nearly impossible to abuse it.
2. NO ONE touches the species other than the Ordained, thus emphasizing the Sacred nature of God.(JPII).
   3… The only exception is those who are not able to ingest alcohol.
   This can be overcome in such a rare instance by having a ciborium with only hosts, yet still given by a tincture instrument on the tongue. They receive either first or last.
3. Indeed, the time it takes is cut nearly in half as no second party station is needed.
4. The need for EM’s is also cut in half.
5. Proof of this is that there is no debate in rites that use this method. Therefore, the whole discussion would have no reason to exist in the Latin Rite.
   ** Of course this will NOT happen because it is NOT the intent of the episcopate to solve ANY abuse or preserve the Sacred. The intent is Ecumenism, and piling in as many unordained into the realm of the Ordained as possible. KORAH has Risen, and we are all in the royal priesthood (a universal prot. mantra).
   ** so:
   TINCTURE IS THE BEST IF BOTH SPECIES ARE THE NORM.
   
   IT PRESERVES THE SACRED AND AVOIDS ABUSE

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

TNT:

It is becoming self-evident that IF we are now to receive under both kinds, then tincture is the only sure way to go. For:

1. It is nearly impossible to abuse it.
2. NO ONE touches the species other than the Ordained, thus emphasizing the Sacred nature of God.(JPII).
   3… The only exception is those who are not able to ingest alcohol.
   This can be overcome in such a rare instance by having a ciborium with only hosts, yet still given by a tincture instrument on the tongue. They receive either first or last.
3. Indeed, the time it takes is cut nearly in half as no second party station is needed.
4. The need for EM’s is also cut in half.
5. Proof of this is that there is no debate in rites that use this method. Therefore, the whole discussion would have no reason to exist in the Latin Rite.
   Of course this will NOT happen because it is NOT the intent of the episcopate to solve ANY abuse or preserve the Sacred. The intent is Ecumenism, and piling in as many unordained into the realm of the Ordained as possible. KORAH has Risen, and we are all in the royal priesthood (a universal prot. mantra).
   so:
   TINCTURE IS THE BEST IF BOTH SPECIES ARE THE NORM.

IT PRESERVES THE SACRED AND AVOIDS ABUSE

I was with you until the end.

Could you not have posted this with out the attack on the Bishops and the Church?

I am sorry but I disagree with the last sentence also. Communion in the hand in no way takes away from teh sacred. It can stop abuse, but if one is intent on abuse they will find a way.

 

[BulldogCath]

TNT and many I see on this board and whom I speak to after mass all seem-to some varying degree or another seem to have issues with what is going on today in our church. Some are Ok with the NO mass but know there are problems with the Priests and teachings-to the other side who want nothing to do with the NO mass and all of Vatican II. Notwithstanding, Does anybody here think that our voices are being heard? I write letters to my Bishop as do some others I know, but rarely get a response. I recently wrote to the entire diocese over their shameful silence over Terri Schiavo-and have heard nothing. Do we need to take over the church like in St Louis? Just my humble sincere thinking out loud here.

TNT:

It is becoming self-evident that IF we are now to receive under both kinds, then tincture is the only sure way to go. For:

1. It is nearly impossible to abuse it.
2. NO ONE touches the species other than the Ordained, thus emphasizing the Sacred nature of God.(JPII).
   3… The only exception is those who are not able to ingest alcohol.
   This can be overcome in such a rare instance by having a ciborium with only hosts, yet still given by a tincture instrument on the tongue. They receive either first or last.
3. Indeed, the time it takes is cut nearly in half as no second party station is needed.
4. The need for EM’s is also cut in half.
5. Proof of this is that there is no debate in rites that use this method. Therefore, the whole discussion would have no reason to exist in the Latin Rite.
   Of course this will NOT happen because it is NOT the intent of the episcopate to solve ANY abuse or preserve the Sacred. The intent is Ecumenism, and piling in as many unordained into the realm of the Ordained as possible. KORAH has Risen, and we are all in the royal priesthood (a universal prot. mantra).
   so:
   TINCTURE IS THE BEST IF BOTH SPECIES ARE THE NORM.

IT PRESERVES THE SACRED AND AVOIDS ABUSE

 

[TNT]

ByzCath:

I was with you until the end.

Could you not have posted this with out the attack on the Bishops and the Church?

I am sorry but I disagree with the last sentence also. Communion in the hand in no way takes away from the sacred.** It can stop abuse**, but if one is intent on abuse they will find a way.

Dear friend. I am (not was) attacking ECUMENISM, not the Church (NEVER), but the agenda driven episcopate to sacrifice anything for the appearance or advance of Ecumenism… Unordained not handling the Species is an outward sign of an invisible reality that there IS something so Sacred that one does not treat it in a common manner. (GOLDEN spoon comes to mind. Why not Chromed plastic?)
If we handle the Species the same as a potato chip, why a GOLDEN spoon in the Byz. Rite?
**

the hand in no way takes away from the sacred

**You will eventually (maybe years) see that it DOES and will continue to do so.
Finally, in re to determined abuse by some, how many documented instances do you have for abuse in the Tincture Rites, say in the last 2 years? If you said “none”, I could easily believe you. On the other hand, if you said “none” in the Latin Rite, NO ONE would believe you, and could they prove it. If you said “none” in the TLM I would also believe you…

It can stop abuse

**
Does that not make my point? Yes.**

Thanks for your otherwise support.

 

[Pug]

4. Indeed, the time it takes is cut nearly in half as no second party station is needed.

In my parish, the additional stations for the precious blood do not slow the lines down at all. This is because most people skip that station and the lines for those can be easily walked around by those who skip. Near the end, everybody just walks by that station.

Personally, I would rather get rid of the lines entirely. I would like to be able to receive as it was as a Protestant (sorry). There we had plenty of time to collect ourselves and be aware of what is going on. A whole group would go up and kneel along the altar rails (or stand if can’t kneel). Then the pastor would slowly go down the line on the rail. After, you stayed kneeling awhile, and then returned to your seat. Then a whole new bunch came up to the rails. It wasn’t the kneeling, it was the blessed time to pray without having to walk right before and after that was the thing.

I know it is probably just me. I am sometimes a bit odd, but I cannot focus properly on Jesus while walking.

A quote I grabbed off of EWTN, (by the sacred congregation for divine worship) not sure what I think of it.

1. The fact that the lay person is now able to receive holy communion in the hand should not suggest to him that this is ordinary bread, or just any sacred object. Rather ought it to strengthen his sense of his dignity as a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, of which baptism and the grace of the Eucharist make him a part. He will thus experience an increase of faith in the great reality of the Body and Blood of the Lord which he touches with his hands. His respectful attitude should be proportionate to what he is doing.

 

[Scout]

I can only speak for myself, but I do know that if I had not been able to receive Holy Communion in the hand then I probably would have had serious problems converting. I’m not saying this to sound superficial or arrogant, but I am extremely uncomfortable with someone getting that close to me. It’s just not something I could handle. I’m thankful that I have that option. For me, it doesn’t decrease the meaning at all, since that’s all I’ve known. I know I’m receiving Christ into my body and I am forever grateful for each opportunity that I am given to receive Holy Communion. If I had to receive it on the tongue I think I would be so nervous about someone being that close to my mouth that I would completely loose my focus on the solemnity and meaning of the occurance.

Scout :tiphat:

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

TNT:

Dear friend. I am (not was) attacking ECUMENISM, not the Church (NEVER), but the agenda driven episcopate to sacrifice anything for the appearance or advance of Ecumenism… Unordained not handling the Species is an outward sign of an invisible reality that there IS something so Sacred that one does not treat it in a common manner. (GOLDEN spoon comes to mind. Why not Chromed plastic?)
If we handle the Species the same as a potato chip, why a GOLDEN spoon in the Byz. Rite?

You will eventually (maybe years) see that it DOES and will continue to do so.

I can see what you are saying but I do not see how you can draw a line between Ecumenism and Communion in the Hand.

Can you elaborate on this a bit?

Finally, in re to determined abuse by some, how many documented instances do you have for abuse in the Tincture Rites, say in the last 2 years? If you said “none”, I could easily believe you. On the other hand, if you said “none” in the Latin Rite, NO ONE would believe you, and could they prove it. If you said “none” in the TLM I would also believe you…

Does that not make my point? Yes.

Thanks for your otherwise support.

No I do not think it makes your point. I have heard (see here, this is the same that many posts here say when they talk about alledged abuse in this) that some just take the Body on the Tongue and then spit it out afterwards.

That is a potental and if all we are doing is talking about potental abuse then it must be considered.

So then if you consider it then will you start to say that only the ordained should recieve? as that is the only way to avoid that abuse.

 

[TNT]

Pug:

…
A quote I grabbed off of EWTN, (by the sacred congregation for divine worship) not sure what I think of it.

. The fact that the lay person is now able to receive holy communion in the hand should not suggest to him that this is ordinary bread, or just any sacred object. Rather ought it to strengthen his sense of his dignity as a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, of which baptism and the grace of the Eucharist make him a part. He will thus experience an increase of faith in the great reality of the Body and Blood of the Lord which he touches with his hands. His respectful attitude should be proportionate to what he is doing.

I’ll tell you what I think of it:
It is a bunch of rhetoric designed to justify a bad practice. They are as dedicated to ECUMENISM at ALL COSTS as the episcopate. They are just not as blatant about it, yet.
**

should not suggest to him that this is ordinary bread, or just any sacred object

The fact that this has to be brought forth as a caution is proof that it is occurring, naturally! And, that an effort HAS to be made to prevent it from NATURALLY happening.

**

 

[pnewton]

***************************************************************************
pnewton says," SURE (recieving in the hand) could (not for sure , but COULD) strengthen faith.

This absolutely an unthinking statement. You tell me just how faith is strengthened by putting the Eucharist in the grubby hands of the laity.

I do not think you can show how faith is made stronger by putting the Eucharist in a hand…how about putting it in a pocket or in the wallet. FAITH COMES FROM HEARING THE WORD - not from touching a Host with your hands.

I read no Scripture that tells us that the hand is especially holy. Why is it that just lately some people have decided to throw out the centuries old method of recieving the Eucharist? It is the Priests hands that have been sanctified during Mass that are to touch the Eucharist - not the defiled hands of laity.

Unthinking? The fact that the Holy Eucharist strengthens or faith is unthinking? Most of us here are Catholics and I am sure this is a given for most.

Grubby hands, defiled hands? I know of no verse that says the hands are exceptionally holy, but, since you are going all sola scriptura on me, where does it say that everyone’s tongue is holy?

As far as touching the Sacred host, do we not all realize that this is unavoidable if we are to receive communion? We must touch the host either with our tongue or our hand.

 

[Exporter]

pnewton:

Unthinking? The fact that the Holy Eucharist strengthens or faith is unthinking? Most of us here are Catholics and I am sure this is a given for most.

Grubby hands, defiled hands? I know of no verse that says the hands are exceptionally holy, but, since you are going all sola scriptura on me, where does it say that everyone’s tongue is holy?

As far as touching the Sacred host, do we not all realize that this is unavoidable if we are to receive communion? We must touch the host either with our tongue or our hand.

---

pnewton, wake up. I have been a Roman Catholic since April 1955 ( that is 50 years!)
Hey Lake Jackson, lets get one thing straightened out right here. You mention Sola Scriptura Then you missed the point! You try to insert the phrase,“The fact that the Holy Euchrists strengthens “or” faith is unthinking”. I am NOT a Protestant! What I said was ( and you can go back and read it) I said it is very disrespectful to put the Eucharist in grubby hands. The Priest washed and dried his hands before touching the Hosts. The laity did not and do not have clean hands.
Your remark about the tougue - Jesus said “Eat my Body”. That means the Eucharist HAS to pass over the tongue. THOSE ARE THE WORDS OF CHRIST. Jesus DIDNT say to put His Body in you hands!

You misread my friend. Why don’t you get real brave and tell all of us how placing the Eucharist in the hand causes the faith to grow more that by taking the Host on the tongue. The question was about faith growing because the Eucharist was put in the hand. Now you read this again to understand and help us out. Tell us the advantage of recieving by hand. I dont think you can.