How do you receive the Body of Christ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oneofthewomen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Deacon_JAR said:
May the Peace of the Lord be with you. Are you insinuating that Bishops are worthier than any other believer, therefore, are they the only ones worthy to touch with their hands the Precious Body of the Lord?
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting the norm of the Church for centuries is in error? Should the Church have allowed CITH since day one? Were all the popes and saints wrong when they condemned CITH? Why did Pope Paul VI ruled against CITH when it reared its head post-V2?

As a Catholic I get uneasy when people use “personal choice” to justify their actions.
 
choy said:
if one does just because they’re told, then whats the use?
but if one does because they understand why and does it for that reason, then there is profit from it
Click to expand...
I understand very well. It has to do with respect for Our Lord.
 
WatchingMedia said:
Communion received on the tongue and while kneeling - Pope’s recommendation.

vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/details/ns_lit_doc_20100526_communion_en.html
Click to expand...
That is what I prefer. But the Bishop wrote a letter 2 years ago in the diocesan newspaper discouraging this practice in the Ordinary Rite because it is “disruptive in the Communion line” and “it draws attention to oneself”. So I obey the bishop and receive standing preferably on the tongue. I am 6’4". If the person distributing is a lot shorter than me then I feel compelled to receive in the hand which I feel very uncomfortable with.
 
Late last year I went from Communion on the tongue to Communion in the hand. I prefer Communion on the tongue but had several reasons for changing.

What we must consider is that both methods are approved by the Church and so pleasing to God.

I changed mainly because I was the only one taking Communion on the tongue and I often saw a panic in the eyes of those administering the Eucharist when I did not hold out the hand. During Mass I didn’t have peace of mind leading up to receiveing the Eucharist because I’d be worried about an accident (dropping of the host by an inexperienced minister of the Eucharist, etc.).

Also, I believe one day I will be involved in giving the Eucharist to people who are in nursing homes or confined to their homes and it struck me that if I could not hold the eucharist in the palm of my own hand for myself, it would be a conflict to use my hand to give it to others.
 
desertPavel said:
That is what I prefer. But the Bishop wrote a letter 2 years ago in the diocesan newspaper discouraging this practice in the Ordinary Rite because it is “disruptive in the Communion line” and “it draws attention to oneself”. So I obey the bishop and receive standing preferably on the tongue. I am 6’4". If the person distributing is a lot shorter than me then I feel compelled to receive in the hand which I feel very uncomfortable with.
Click to expand...
I forgot to mention that the Bishop prefaced his remarks by saying that a communicant kneeling should never be denied Communion.
 
choy said:
the Pharisee is a Traditional Catholic (i said “A”, not “ALL”) who goes and prays in Latin and kneels for communion and receives on the tongue. and yet their heart is not filled with humility, thinks that “i’m praying in Latin and kneel when receiving, this irreverent clown beside me who holds hands during Pater Noster and receives standing, in the hand, doesn’t show any reverence. Lord, thank you i am not an irreverent clown like this one.”

while the “modernist” prays the Our Father in the vernacular with all of his heart, reaching out his hands to the people beside him, connecting with one another to lift up the prayer in unison. and during communion as he reaches out his hand to receive the Body of our Lord, in his mind he says, “Lord, i pray that i’m made worthy to receive you despite being a sinner,” and says “Amen” to the priest in full conviction, believe that what he receives is the Body of Christ, and his desire to be in communion with Savior
Click to expand...
Or we could tell the story with the “modernist” being self-righteous and condemning and the traditionalist being sincere and loving God. These attitudes are not distributed along traditionalist/“modernist” lines. There are plenty of pharisees to go around.
 
Always on the tongue.
Always from a Priest or Deacon.
Always kneeling in the EF Mass.
Sometimes standing in the OF Mass.
 
floresco said:
Or we could tell the story with the “modernist” being self-righteous and condemning and the traditionalist being sincere and loving God. These attitudes are not distributed along traditionalist/“modernist” lines. There are plenty of pharisees to go around.
Click to expand...
Amen. The post you quoted is Exhibit A.
 
choy said:
the Pharisee is a Traditional Catholic (i said “A”, not “ALL”) who goes and prays in Latin and kneels for communion and receives on the tongue. and yet their heart is not filled with humility, thinks that “i’m praying in Latin and kneel when receiving, this irreverent clown beside me who holds hands during Pater Noster and receives standing, in the hand, doesn’t show any reverence. Lord, thank you i am not an irreverent clown like this one.”

while the “modernist” prays the Our Father in the vernacular with all of his heart, reaching out his hands to the people beside him, connecting with one another to lift up the prayer in unison. and during communion as he reaches out his hand to receive the Body of our Lord, in his mind he says, “Lord, i pray that i’m made worthy to receive you despite being a sinner,” and says “Amen” to the priest in full conviction, believe that what he receives is the Body of Christ, and his desire to be in communion with Savior
Click to expand...
Choy, Thank you for articulating this so well.
floresco said:
Or we could tell the story with the “modernist” being self-righteous and condemning and the traditionalist being sincere and loving God. These attitudes are not distributed along traditionalist/“modernist” lines. There are plenty of pharisees to go around.
Click to expand...
Lycorth said:
Amen. The post you quoted is Exhibit A.
Click to expand...
However, I should point out that I was in no way trying to pit “traditional” vs. “modern”. I agree with you, floresco, there are plenty of pharisees, on both sides!
I am sorry if I did not make this point clear enough.:o

I started this thread so that we could learn from one another, not bash one another.😉
 
ProVobis said:
Cardinal Arinze doesn’t quite articulate the Pharisee mindset when talking about kneeling or receiving on the tongue.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ap1KL2D5ae4
Click to expand...
Why do you continually make comments that elude to the fact that I am anti-tradition?😦

I am not!
My problem is with people who believe that their way is the only way, whatever side they are on!!!
 
floresco said:
Or we could tell the story with the “modernist” being self-righteous and condemning and the traditionalist being sincere and loving God. These attitudes are not distributed along traditionalist/“modernist” lines. There are plenty of pharisees to go around.
Click to expand...
well, there’s so many barbs against the modernist that it makes it seems as there are no guilty traditionalists
 
ProVobis said:
Cardinal Arinze doesn’t quite articulate the Pharisee mindset when talking about kneeling or receiving on the tongue.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ap1KL2D5ae4
Click to expand...
sadly, not everyone here is Cardinal Arinze

edit to elaborate:
Cardinal Arinze knows what he’s talking about. sadly a lot here just yak and yak without understanding fully why certain traditions are as it is. they do for the sake of the action, thinking that its the movements that cause reverence, not reverence that causes the action

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 15:8-20[/BIBLEDRB]
 
Oneofthewomen said:
Why do you continually make comments that elude to the fact that I am anti-tradition?😦

I am not!
My problem is with people who believe that their way is the only way, whatever side they are on!!!
Click to expand...
Well, if you’re on the side which insists on going against tradition, I would look at the reality that things may be going against you in the next few years. Don’t forget, Cardinal Arinze had been given very good odds of becoming Pope last election and he’s still very electable at 76 or so. He may make it tougher to get 2/3 of the bishops to approve such indults in their own countries in the future but that is my opinion.
 
MarkThompson said:
I’m not sure you really know what hearsay is, Ockham.
Click to expand...
Really? Well, here’s what I know this morning. I’m sure you’ll attempt to correct me if you believe I’m wrong. After spending some time Googling this subject there does not seem to be a consensus on whether Mother Theresa actually said the words attributed to her.

From the Sisters of Charity site (bold font mine):

*"Mother Teresa would not have contradicted the Church. On the mode of receiving Holy Communion, she wrote to her sisters: “This is like the permission of the Bishops given some years ago for receiving Holy Communion in the hand. It is allowed, but not an order, … as M.C.s, we have chosen to receive Holy Communion on the tongue. If questioned about [it], do not enter into discussion – “let every spirit praise the Lord” – but let us pray that all be done for the greater glory of God and the good of the Church.”

You quoted “Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand.” This statement does not seem authentic to us. We have never heard Mother Teresa saying these words nor read them in her writings." *

motherteresa.org/08_info/ReceivingC.html

So what does this tell us? Anonymously, someone speaking on behalf of the entire order claims the quote “does not seem authentic” and because she never heard Mother Teresa make such a statement it must be false.

Not exactly a definitive proof, would you agree?

Then there is the origin of the quote itself. One Father George William Rutler gave a sermon on Good Friday, 1989 in St. Agnes Church, New York City where he said Mother Teresa in answer to the question, ‘what makes you the saddest’ said: ‘Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand.’"

There are many sites that post this quote as authentic but I’ve yet to find something official such as a transcript from the church’s archives.

At this point it’s interesting to note that although Mother Teresa may not have made this quote she did make COTT the norm for her order. Combine that with our current pontiff doing the same when he distributes Holy Communion and I think every Catholic should ask themselves who’s example they’d rather follow: Mother Teresa or someone like Bishop Weakland.
 
choy said:
sadly a lot here just yak and yak without understanding fully why certain traditions are as it is. they do for the sake of the action, thinking that its the movements that cause reverence, not reverence that causes the action
Click to expand...
Actually, it works both ways. Have you ever heard the saying: “Fake it 'til you make it”? Taking on the discipline of reverent actions is a way to foster an attitude of reverence in ourselves. We can do the actions to externally manifest an existing inner reality of reverence or we can do the actions because we hope to create the inner reality.

I wish to note a Catholic teaching that is relevant to this discussion. It is the sin of rash judgment to assume that another is making reverent gestures out of vainglory or other bad motives. We have a moral obligation to attribute good motives to people insofar as it is possible.
 
ProVobis said:
***Well, if you’re on the side which insists on going against tradition, I would look at the reality that things may be going against you in the next few years. ***Don’t forget, Cardinal Arinze had been given very good odds of becoming Pope last election and he’s still very electable at 76 or so. He may make it tougher to get 2/3 of the bishops to approve such indults in their own countries in the future but that is my opinion.
Click to expand...
I am not against tradition!
It was our richness and traditions that brought me back to the Church.
**What I am trying to do is understand and learn. **
And snarky comments from you and others in these forms only helps to increase my apprehension of so called “Traditional Catholics”. :mad:

Why do I have to pick a side?
Are we not one, holy, catholic and apostolic church?!:confused:

IMHO, we need to get away from either/or and start becoming both/and.:newidea:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top