How do you receive the Body of Christ?

[Canto]

I make it a practice to look at my hands immediately afterward - partly to look for Particles,

A friend of mine said this: Jesus, at the Last Supper, said, “Take and eat”. He did not feed it to the disciples. He would have done it the way the Jewish Seder is done: taking a piece for Himself and passing it on for each person to also tear off a piece to eat. I like that description and that is one reason why I receive in the hand.

St John (13:26) tells us that Jesus dipped the bread. So they would have taken on the tongue - or got wet hands. The Eastern practice at the time was for the host to break bread and place it in the mouths of his guests as a sign of friendship and hospitality.

 

[paperwight]

And I have to ask, in what did He dip it? You are surely not saying that He dipped in the chalice, because the giving of the Bread and Wine are clearly described as two separate occasions because we are told that He took the cup ‘after supper’.

 

[Canto]

And I have to ask, in what did He dip it? You are surely not saying that He dipped in the chalice, because the giving of the Bread and Wine are clearly described as two separate occasions because we are told that He took the cup ‘after supper’.

Water I would assume

 

[paperwight]

Water I would assume

I wonder, then, why this was not contnued with in the Early Church.

 

[RazzsMom]

St John (13:26) tells us that Jesus dipped the bread. So they would have taken on the tongue - or got wet hands. The Eastern practice at the time was for the host to break bread and place it in the mouths of his guests as a sign of friendship and hospitality.

Canto - thank you for the comment.

Per the New American Bible, John 13:26 says:

Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I hand the morsel after I have dipped it,” So he dipped the morsel and [took it and] handed it to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot.

Notice the Gospel says “handed it”…not “placed it on his tongue” or “placed it in his mouth” or “fed it to him”. Also the notes at the bottom of the page in my Bible also say that “the morsel” probably refers to the bitter herb dipped into salt water. The bitter herb dipped into salt water is a part of the Seder meal. The bitter herb is to remind the Israelites of their bitter time in captivity and I believe I remember the salt water represents their tears. Also -the Bible does not say “bread”. I think St. John would have said “bread” if he meant bread, and would not have said “morsel”. The Last Supper was the **Seder **meal for Jesus and His disciples. So I am not certain that the use of any Eastern hospitality signs would have been referenced or noted as pertinent, as they would not have had meaning in regard to the Last Supper in the way that the bread, wine and the betrayal by Judas would have had…

But thank you for the reference to the verse. It made me get out my Bible to look up my point - and that is never a bad thing!!

Therefore I do think what I said earlier makes sense.

 

[WatchingMedia]

Does this count for parish priests? It’s discouraged at our church

Always privately talk to your Pastor first. If that does not work, privately talk to your Diocese Bishop.
ONLY if that does not work should you bring a problem to the Vatican.
NEVER make a public spectacle. Always be respectful.

(Personally, I **never **do anything behind my Bishop’s back. I always cc him on all emails to the Vatican.
I have never gotten a written response from the Vactican, but - - - the problem has always been fixed within a month or two.
Conversations between individual Bishops and Vatican are private, as they should be.)

 

[Deacon_JAR]

Really, no need for all the shouting.

Yes, I am “insinuating” that the hands of the ordained (regardless of their personal sinfulness) have been set aside for Holy things, as is the Tradition of the Church.

The Latin Church everywhere accepts CotT, not so CitH, likewise CitH can be suspended (with reason) CotT cannot.

Likewise Church discipline is clear (though often ignored) EMHCs should not be commonly used.

Using discretion in these matters, we can make prudential judgments, including the co-incidence of the decline in belief and discernment and the implementation of these practices. (The way we pray does tend to shape what we believe.)

May the Peace of the Lord be with you. My dear friend, this is the “greeting” I always offer to my brothers and sisters whenever I write on this forum. To “shout” will be a total contradiction of what I am offering you: the Peace of the Lord.

The bishops, by virtue of our “apostolic tradition”, are integral part of the “magisterium” of the church; they hold the offices of “teachers” and “shepherds” of the flock. They are the leaders of a geographical area we call diocese or archdiocese. The faithful who lives in those areas are to LISTEN to and RESPECT the guidance of their respective bishop. I have not and will never question the leadership or authority of our bishops. As a member of the clergy (Permanent Deacon) I promised obedience and loyalty to my bishop.

One important role of the clergy (bishops, priest, and deacon) is to SERVE GOD and to SERVE GOD’S PEOPLE. We are YOUR SERVANTS. Scripture says, “…WHOEVER WISHES TO BE GREAT AMONG YOU SHALL BE YOUR SERVANT.” (Mat. 20:26)

Now, to state that the bishops are “WORTHIER” than others to TOUCH the Precious Body of the Lord is NOT MY PLACE, NEITHER YOURS, to make that call. May the Lord forbid that!!! To declare any degree of “WORTHINESS” implies judgment and ONLY JESUS , THE SON OF MAN, has the right to judge the living and the dead. Scripture says, “For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself. AND HE GAVE HIM POWER TO EXERCISE JUDGMENT, BECAUSE HE IS THE SON OF MAN.” (John 5:26-27) Our Lord was the ONE who, in total obedience to the will of the Father, suffered, was crucified, and died for all mankind. As our creed says, “He will come again to judge the living and the dead.” JESUS ALONE CAN DETERMINE THE “WORTHINESS” OF A SOUL.

I believe my position concerning this subject: “How to receive the Body of the Lord?” is very clear: at the present time our beloved Catholic Church, in its infinite wisdom, allows the believer to receive the Precious Body of the Lord by COTT or COTH. Either way is legal and the choice belongs to the individual. To cast judgment on any one of the two choices does not belong to me. I have always respected and obeyed the dogmas and doctrines of our Mother Church. If in the future our Catholic Church declares that we are to use COTT only, then, as good members and soldiers of the church, WE WILL OBEY. In the meantime, my good brothers and sisters in the Lord, I tell you: “ IT IS THE HEART, IT IS THE HEART, IT IS THE HEART” THAT MATTERS.

 

[Canto]

Canto - thank you for the comment.

Per the New American Bible, John 13:26 says:

Jesus answered, “It is the one to whom I hand the morsel after I have dipped it,” So he dipped the morsel and [took it and] handed it to Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot.

Notice the Gospel says “handed it”…not “placed it on his tongue” or “placed it in his mouth” or “fed it to him”. Also the notes at the bottom of the page in my Bible also say that “the morsel” probably refers to the bitter herb dipped into salt water. The bitter herb dipped into salt water is a part of the Seder meal. The bitter herb is to remind the Israelites of their bitter time in captivity and I believe I remember the salt water represents their tears. Also -the Bible does not say “bread”. I think St. John would have said “bread” if he meant bread, and would not have said “morsel”. The Last Supper was the **Seder **meal for Jesus and His disciples. So I am not certain that the use of any Eastern hospitality signs would have been referenced or noted as pertinent, as they would not have had meaning in regard to the Last Supper in the way that the bread, wine and the betrayal by Judas would have had…

But thank you for the reference to the verse. It made me get out my Bible to look up my point - and that is never a bad thing!!

Therefore I do think what I said earlier makes sense.

Enjoying this thread

The Douay Rheims says he gave it to him so does the RSV-CE
So he could have given it to him on the tongue
The Navarre says the morsel Jesus offers him is a sign of friendship
Some Bible notes say bread

 

[MerryCatholic]

A common theme I have seen in these forums is the is the Communion On The Hand vs. Communion On The Tongue debate.

It is my expereince that some of those who prefer COTT would like to see CITH done away with, and, in general, blame CITH for a multitude of things they dislike in the Church.

I was born in 1970, the Missal of Paul VI is all I know,
and CITH has been the “norm” in my diocese for long as I can remember.

I personally do not care how one chooses to receive, and I respect anyone who follows their conscience for the sake of humility and reverence for God. I do not believe that anyone should be ridiculed or have their level of faith called into question, soley based on how they receive communion. I have received on the tongue, kneeling at the altar rail (my husband grew up in a very traditional parish). I have received standing and on the tongue. I find CITH to be the best way for me, yet was never really able to explain why.

I am studying theology and last semester took a course in Sacramental Theology. In one of the books I read, The Sacraments: The Word of God at the Mercy of the Body, Fr. Louis-Marie Chauvet says the following:

“It is in the very nature of the church to confess that the sacraments it celebrates in faith in the name of Jesus Christ have a spiritual efficacy called ‘grace,’ a beautiful term. The most forceful expression of this grace is no doubt that extremely sparing one given us in the diologue of eucharistic communion: to the statement, ‘The body of Christ’, Christians answer, not witht he description of their feelings or the difficulties that their intellect might struggle with, but simply with the ‘amen’ of faith. This amen comes from the mouth and the heart, of course, but also from the whole body since it is manifested by the opening of the hands into which the pure gift of God is placed. The gratuitous communication of God withthe believers, such is the salient point of the sacraments.”

This put words to what I have long felt when I receive. For one moment, I am touching God, and actually feeling His embrace. I beleive to truly appreciate any gift, one must have a moment of private adoration of it, and then one must choose to make use of it.

This is how I see CITH- I am opening my heart, mind, soul ***and body *** to receive the gift, and making the conscious decision to become what I receive.

Comments, thoughts?

Peace to all!

It depends. If I am at a TLM, then I will receive it on the tongue. If I am at a Novus Ordo, then I receive it on the hand. Either way, the point is in receiving Jesus.

 

[choy]

Six thousand people at a Mass in not ordinary. My ancedotal story is more common, would you agree? It’s not my opinion EMHCs are not used properly it’s the Magesterium’s.

*[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged. This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.*RS

here’s the thing, how can you conclusively say that they are abusing this? its just from your perceptioin. i mean, i can’t say it myself. we don’t know the situation the priest is in. its like you see a married man having dinner at a fancy restaurant with another woman, and you immediately concluded he was cheating on his wife. only to find out later he was taking his sister out for dinner. we can’t make a conclusive judgement on this based on our personal perception, because we don’t know all the facts

Why do you sometimes claim strict obedience to the Magisterium and then sometimes agree with disobedient acts under the guise of priest or bishop discretion?

but thats the fact. there’s not black and white, enumerated specific steps to say whether an EMHCs or not. there are conditions given and its up to the Priest and/or Bishop to decide if they meet those conditions or not. its up to THEM. NOT US. they are the ones to evaluate their situation and make a judgement off it. we can’t judge them on that because we don’t know their situation. we just don’t have all the facts

It is also the duty of every Catholic to ensure things are being done properly. Be assured the ‘modernist’ element in any individual parish or diocese is working covertly to bring about new changes. EMHCs began purifying the sacred vessels which is the exclusive duty of the priest, the US bishops applied for an indult to make this legal, the Vatican denied it. Interestingly this is the same pattern as how CITH got into the GIRM only in that case the Vatican acquiesced and allowed an illicit practice to gain a foothold.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0606058.htm

Here is a thought provoking article on this topic: EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF THE EUCHARIST
Peter A. Kwasniewski
ewtn.com/library/Liturgy/EXTRMIN.HTM

Also, the Blessed Sacrament is to be distributed from sacred vessels, not glass bowls. I’m not sure why you accuse me of ‘fanning flames of hearsay’ when I’m just pointing out the way the Vatican wants things done.

i know that the Eucharist is not supposed to be distributed from glass bowls. i’m just saying, can you prove this actually happens? or are you just throwing up scenarios out there and say its factual just to prove a point? i’m just asking you to be fair. i know you’re very passionate about defending your position, but don’t throw around unconfirmed stories just to reinforce your point. many people will read that and think its true and get mad about something that isn’t true. that is why i ask that scenarios like that, are you sure it is really happening?

also i’m referring to what you were claiming that EMHCs are being “paid”

 

[Ockham]

here’s the thing, how can you conclusively say that they are abusing this? its just from your perceptioin. i mean, i can’t say it myself. we don’t know the situation the priest is in.

Friend, I fear you are wandering into moral relativism in your defence of regularly scheduled EMHCs. The Magisterium has given clear direction and warnings that they are being abused. Once again, this isn’t my opinion, its the Church’s.

its up to THEM. NOT US.

Actually, it’s up to the Magisterium. See above.

i know that the Eucharist is not supposed to be distributed from glass bowls. i’m just saying, can you prove this actually happens? or are you just throwing up scenarios out there and say its factual just to prove a point?

Well let’s see…I’ve seen it with my very eyes. Is that definitive enough? I hope you don’t think I would lie to you.

 

[ProVobis]

Either way, the point is in receiving Jesus.

Is this what most CITH people believe? Just asking.

 

[choy]

Friend, I fear you are wandering into moral relativism in your defence of regularly scheduled EMHCs. The Magisterium has given clear direction and warnings that they are being abused. Once again, this isn’t my opinion, its the Church’s.

its not moral relativism. how can we really judge something based on the limited information we have? you are judging the necessity of EMHCs based on YOUR standards and YOUR interpretation of the rules. thats relativism right there, making YOURSELF the authority

Actually, it’s up to the Magisterium. See above.

Well let’s see…I’ve seen it with my very eyes. Is that definitive enough? I hope you don’t think I would lie to you.

fair enough. you should have mentioned that in the first place

 

[Ockham]

its not moral relativism. how can we really judge something based on the limited information we have? you are judging the necessity of EMHCs based on YOUR standards and YOUR interpretation of the rules. thats relativism right there, making YOURSELF the authority

It’s not about judgement it is about following the rules. There have been several people in this thread share first hand experiences of being at a small Mass (weekday) with maybe twenty people and yet an EMHC is deployed. The rules say that’s not allowed unless the priest is frail and unable to distribute Holy Communion.

fair enough. you should have mentioned that in the first place

Actually, I did. You might do yourself a favour by researching more and opining less.

 

[choy]

It’s not about judgement it is about following the rules. There have been several people in this thread share first hand experiences of being at a small Mass (weekday) with maybe twenty people and yet an EMHC is deployed. The rules say that’s not allowed unless the priest is frail and unable to distribute Holy Communion.

and how do you determine one is following the rules or not? are the rules black and white enough? it isn’t. there’s no prescription of, for example, one minister of Communion to 100 communicants. nothing. so how do you know if one is needed or not? who’s to make that call. certainly not us the laity.

and what if the priest is expecting 500 people, but only 200 showed up? shouldn’t EMHCs be there ahead of time? it not like they can just call up EMHCs on a whim

Actually, I did. You might do yourself a favour by researching more and opining less.

i mean you never said where your source was, either yourself or something else. you just mentioned the story

 

[Ockham]

and what if the priest is expecting 500 people, but only 200 showed up? shouldn’t EMHCs be there ahead of time? it not like they can just call up EMHCs on a whim

Read the rules set forth by head office.

The Truth will set you free.

May God Bless,

 

[LookingForFaith]

I recieve the Eucharist with the full knowledge that I am in no way worthy to recieve such a gift. That being said, I recieve in my hand. Simply because I was raised to do so. But if the rule was changed and COTT was the only way to do so, I would.

In the end, it’s not really all that important. Receiving on the hand or on the tongue. Is one way really better than the other? I mean, Jesus didn’t feed the bread at the last supper to the apostles. He handed It to them. I can see how people think that COTT is more reverent, but it’s the intent and what’s in your heart that God is paying attention to.

Just my :twocents:

 

[LookingForFaith]

I recieve the Eucharist with the full knowledge that I am in no way worthy to recieve such a gift. That being said, I recieve in my hand. Simply because I was raised to do so. But if the rule was changed and COTT was the only way to do so, I would.

In the end, it’s not really all that important. Receiving on the hand or on the tongue. Is one way really better than the other? I mean, Jesus didn’t feed the apostles at the last supper to the apostles. He handed It to them. I can see how people think that COTT is more reverent, but it’s the intent and what’s in your heart that God is paying attention to.

Just my :twocents:

 

[Canto]

Receiving on the hand or on the tongue. Is one way really better than the other?

Arguablly, recieving on the tongue reduces the risk of particles (Christ) going elsewhere.

I mean, Jesus didn’t feed the bread at the last supper to the apostles. He handed It to them.

RSV-CE Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”

Jesus gave it to them yet it does not say how
They could have taken it on the tongue
The custom of the time suggests this is how they recieved

In an earlier post, the seder meal was mentioned. “Ratzinger thinks what Jesus and the disciples had was a toda meal, a thanksgiving meal of a sacrificial nature. Also, the text that describes/prescribes the Passover seder didn’t develop until, if memory serves, the 8th c. Furthermore, the Passover seder was to take place on Friday evening, when the Lord was in the tomb.”

wdtprs.com/blog/2010/03/quaeritur-catholic-seder-meal/

Indeed, an old Rabbinic teaching says: “In the coming Messianic age all sacrifices will cease, but the thank offering [todah] will never cease.”(1) What is it about this sacrifice that makes it stand alone in such a way that it would outlast all other sacrifices after the redemption of the Messiah?

catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0124.html

 

[Pug]

and what if the priest is expecting 500 people, but only 200 showed up? shouldn’t EMHCs be there ahead of time? it not like they can just call up EMHCs on a whim

Why not? Can’t he just stand there at the altar and hold up a hand count of how many he wants? I’ve seen a priest do this when he ended up short of EMHC.