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

[mlchance]

esdauter:

I am young devout Catholic and I have always recieved communion in the hand… For me it has always helped me take personal responsibility, therefore increase my faith!

Impossible. We have it on very good authority from a number of people here that receiving Communion in the hand has never strengthened the faith of anyone ever, but is in fact a sinister plot by protestantizers to undermine the Church.



– Mark L. Chance.

 

[teresas1979]

Impossible. We have it on very good authority from a number of people here that receiving Communion in the hand has never strengthened the faith of anyone ever, but is in fact a sinister plot by protestantizers to undermine the Church.

I only remember ever receiving in the hand except when I was a youngster in Portugal and they had Communion rail (a novelty for me) and so you had to kneel and receive on the tongue. I don’t think it matters where Jesus is placed as long as we receive reverently. Personally, I agree with kwitz in that no part of us is worthy. So why is the mouth more worthy than the hand? Mouths are known to carry many germs…

 

[beverly30]

GloriaPatri4:

Not very long ago I said Mass and preached for their Mother, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and after breakfast we spent quite a long time talking in a little room. Suddenly, I found myself asking her-I don’t know why-“Mother, what do you think is the worst problem in the world today?” She more than anyone could name any number of candidates: famine, plague, disease, the breakdown of the family, rebellion against God, the corruption of the media, world debt, nuclear threat, and so on. Without pausing a second she said, "Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand.

read article in its entirety
[catholic-pages.com/mass/inhand.asp](http://www.catholic-pages.com/mass/inhand.asp)

Too bad Mother Teresa isn’t still alive, so we could ask this wonderful example of a devout Catholic why she thought receiving Communion in the hand is the worst problem in the world today. I would hope people would hold her opinion to some value, and consider why she might have viewed this as such a problem. Changes occuring in the Catholic Church need not happen in my opinion.

 

[esdauter]

“We have it on very good authority from a number of people here that receiving Communion in the hand has never strengthened the faith of anyone ever”

I just said that it strengthened mine. You can’t say how I do or do not feel.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Communion in the hand is wrong. The person receiving the HOST has no way to make sure there are no small crumbs that fall off and and can be walked-on or sat-upon. I have seen some people who wipe their hands on their clothing when returning to their seats. I feel that this practice shows disrespect for the Body & Blood of our Lord.

Also, this practice has allowed the situation on E-bay. Two Hosts (the Body & Blood of our Lord) has been sold. The opportunity should never have been allowed for this to happen.

Kathleen Elsie Gibbs

 

[beverly30]

“We have it on very good authority from a number of people here that receiving Communion in the hand has never strengthened the faith of anyone ever”

He meant that sarcastically

I just said that it strengthened mine. You can’t say how I do or do not feel.

 

[rcn]

KathleenElsie:

Communion in the hand is wrong.

Wow. For a first post you surely did pick a strange thread to hop into.

The Church permits reception in the hand. To say that it is “wrong” is to deny the authority of the Church to decide matters of discipline. Are you sure you want to go there?

As has been stated several times already in this thread, hand reception had nothing to do with the “E-bay issue” which I’m really tired of hearing about.

 

[otm]

gelsbern:

Kiel, not picking on you, but your posts bring up points that just seem to beg for responses.

When communion is done one way around the world, no one has to remember anyone’s preference.

Communion never has been done only one way around the world, from the starting of the Church.

The Roman rite is not the Church, just one of many rites. It happens to be the largest, but just because that is how the Roman rite did it for a period of time doesn’t make it the best or even the only way of receiving.

 

[tuopaolo]

KathleenElsie:

Also, this practice has allowed the situation on E-bay. Two Hosts (the Body & Blood of our Lord) has been sold. The opportunity should never have been allowed for this to happen.

Kathleen Elsie Gibbs

I’ve changed my mind a little bit on this issue due to the ebay situation. I am now not opposed to a rule restricting Communion to be received only on the tongue. I don’t see how anyone who loves Our Lord could be opposed unless they were callous towards HIm.

 

[otm]

beverly30:

I’m obviously not exporter, but to me what he’s saying is kind of clear. He’s saying where do you draw the line. You change a little thing here, change a little thing there. Pretty soon it seems normal to change little things, so then they start with the bigger things. THINGS should stay the way they were (before Vatican II)

They are staying the way they were befre Vatican 2. Before Vatican 2, Communion in the Hand was the norm.

Then the norm changed.

Now it is changed back.

What is your problem?

 

[otm]

KathleenElsie:

Communion in the hand is wrong. The person receiving the HOST has no way to make sure there are no small crumbs that fall off and and can be walked-on or sat-upon. I have seen some people who wipe their hands on their clothing when returning to their seats. I feel that this practice shows disrespect for the Body & Blood of our Lord.

Also, this practice has allowed the situation on E-bay. Two Hosts (the Body & Blood of our Lord) has been sold. The opportunity should never have been allowed for this to happen.

Kathleen Elsie Gibbs

Considering that it was good enough for Jesus Christ, I would suggest that it might be good enough for us.

Or is this an issue of hyper reverence?

Furthermore, you state that it is the cause of the Ebay issue. Were you there when that individual purportedly received a host and did not consume? Or should we just presume superior knowledge on your part?

Can you even prove that the purported host was actually consecrated?

 

[otm]

Petrus Romanus:

Many Saints, including Mother Theresa were opposed to it.

I know that JP2 canonized a large number of people, but would you care to quote these many saints?
Petrus Romanus:

Yes, technically, it is not an abuse in terms of being illicit.

But it began as an an illicit abuse, and contributes to a host of other problems, so it is problematic at best, and in my view, these problems constitute an allowed abuse.

So, I should take it that Christ made a mistake? He was wrong, and so were the Apostles, and their successors? Interesting…
Petrus Romanus:

Fr. Groeschel and many other orthodox priests I have met disagree with allowing communion in the hand.

Fr. Groeschel is a good psychologist and a holy man. How does that anoint him as a liturgist?
Petru Romanus:

From the evidence on these boards, it is sad, that most are not aware that communion on the tongue REMAINS the universal Norm in the Catholic Church. Hence, further evidence of a protestantizing agenda at work.

So, Christ and his apostles, and their successors were protestantized? Fascinating theory, but I don’t think it holds a lot of historical or theological water…

 

[beverly30]

otm:

What is your problem?

Ditto…

 

[beverly30]

otm:

I know that JP2 canonized a large number of people, but would you care to quote these many saints?..

There is a quote on the first post.

 

[esdauter]

This is ridiculous. There is no differnce between a hand, a foot, a mouth, a throat…etc etc. No part is greater or cleaner than another. And if you want to stop people from taking the Eucharist…yes a very scary thing…then you have ushers who watch to make sure the Eucharist is consumed. THis is a norm in my home town. Even if everyone HAD to receive by mouth, that would not change peoples’ hearts. I have EXTREME respect for the Lord’s body and blood in the Eucharist and I recieve by hand…as I said before…it reminds me that I must reach out to CHrist and receive faith in my own hands. IT also reminds em that my hands are for giving and receiving love…you are much less likely to do something with your hands if you know they will hold Christ the next day! The problem is not hands our moouths…it is hearts, minds and wills!

 

[amantoan]

As I said earlier, I do feel that receiving in the hand (for many people) can contribute to carelessness in reception of Holy Communion. However, I suspect the real reason people frequently display a lack of reverence has more to do with poor catechesis than their reception style. If they truly understood, and believed in what they were doing, they would receive with absolute reverence whichever method they used.

 

[tuopaolo]

otm:

Fr. Groeschel is a good psychologist and a holy man. How does that anoint him as a liturgist?

Fr Groeschel is a holy PRIEST and that makes him more qualified than any so called lay-liturgist.

 

[Hospitaller]

Since Martin Luther recommended it as a way of erroding reverence for the sacrament, I really doubt it.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Hospitaller:

Since Martin Luther recommended it as a way of erroding reverence for the sacrament, I really doubt it.

So now the Church is attempting to erode our faith?

 

[otm]

BulldogCath:

Not true at all

There have been posted here many of times the opening concil speech by John XXIII as well as other closing statements made by Paul VI. Lets not rewrite history.

And as far as unity-yes the church was united because we knew which way to go and the teachings were coherent-now it is wishy washy and what is wrong today is right tomorrow and it is a free for all. Pope Pius X condemned Modernism-and Popes John XXIII, Paul VI and JPII have loved it and embraced it-putting man above God which we are reaping the wrath of God himself. Even the priest facing the laity instead of the altar in performing the holy sacrifice. It has now become “Communion” instead of “The Sacrifice of the Mass”. We can go on and on I am sure

Unless you can adequately define Modernism, you might want to quit using the term, particularly since you seem to be inclined to slur the names of several Popes.

I would also suggest that you state explicitly what you find to be the acts or statements of Paul VI and John Paul II which constitute “loving and embracing” Modernism. Otherwise, you are doing nothing but slandering the names of several very faith-filled, holy men of God.