How do you receive the Body of Christ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oneofthewomen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oneofthewomen

Guest
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!
 
I don’t care how people receive Communion either.

I will say that I used to receive CITH up until this year. Now I take COTT and I only go to the priest. In fact, if I go to a lay EM, then I still receive it in the hand. When my husband and I EM, we only do cup too. I don’t have a problem with other people doing the host, we just choose not to.

For me, I am opening my body even more to Jesus when I receive COTT because I don’t like humbling myself at all and I feel like I am when I take COTT. But that is a good thing for me. Again, I don’t expect other people to do what I do and I don’t pay that much attention anyway. As long as they do it worthily, then I am just glad they are there!
 
Like the OP I grew up in the Church only ever knowing CITH. I remember the first few times seeing people receive COTT and being rather confused as to why these people were receiving in that way. I didn’t look down upon them for receiving differently, I just wasn’t familiar with it. Now of course I know that many people elect to receive COTT and I look at that as their choice, one that is quite acceptable and respectful. I still receieve CITH, though I have considered switching to COTT. Like bnbkaine I get the impression that were I to receive COTT that I would feel more humbled, though I certainly feel humbled and awed every time I receive the Lord.

I do not like intinction however. I just switched the time I go to mass at my local church and was astonished to see that the VAST majority of people intinct (somewhere around 85%). And it almost seems to me that they are doing so in a hurried and almost careless manner. As a cup bearer at today’s mass I quite honestly felt pained to see the way in which some people received. Forgive the analogy, but the way they behaved it was almost as if I were watching someone dipping a chip into a salsa dip. No one seemed to be bothered by this though, including the clergy, so I held my peace. What I found most ironic though is that the mass I usually attend is filled with younger people like myself, none of whom I have ever seen intinct. Whereas this mass is filled with mostly older adults whom I would have expected to be more traditional/conservative than their juniors.

I do feel bad for not saying something, but I felt it would have been wrong of me to interrupt the mass by trying to prevent someone from intincting. Plus with such an overwhelming majority doing so and the authorities not batting an eye I was worried I’d simply be told I was wrong and would have thus caused a scene for nothing.
 
I’m afraid I must disagree with Fr. Chauvet. I find the priest’s blessing (“May the Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul for eternal life. Amen.”) before he gives me Communion and my passive receptivity a better statement. 👍

I receive kneeling and on the tongue, as the above would suggest, and do think CITH should be abolished. However, I doubt that CITH is the cause of many (indeed, if any) problems, but rather is itself a symptom of some deeper ailment.
 
I prefer communion on the tongue, but NOT for the reasons that most traditionalists insist on:dts:

It’s just that, as a teenager in the Lutheran Church, this was the normal practice, so I continue to receive communion on the tongue as a habit. Really.:blushing:

I will admit that I would be tempted to receive communion in hand if I knew a group of tonguers were watching me, just to tick them off:whistle:
 
Oneofthewomen said:
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.

When was the book published?

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!
Click to expand...
 
To me, saying “Amen” out loud is already involving the body. So is assuming any sort of posture at all to receive, be it standing, kneeling, bowing before, etc., assuming it is deliberate in order to respect Jesus. Also, no matter if I choose in the hand or on the tongue, it is a physical act that I have freely willed.

I like the physicality of the sacraments. It helps me.
 
Our Pastor recently noted in the Sunday bulletin that there had been many instances where the host that had been given in the hand were mishandled by the persons who received them ~ thrown away, dropped on the floor, etc. ~ and the problem was so extreme (worldwide) that the Holy Father was considering making receiving the host on the tongue mandatory.

So while I had originally been taught to receive in the hand, I switched at that point to on the tongue for most situations.
 
MelanieAnne said:
Our Pastor recently noted in the Sunday bulletin that there had been many instances where the host that had been given in the hand were mishandled by the persons who received them ~ thrown away, dropped on the floor, etc. ~ and the problem was so extreme (worldwide) that the Holy Father was considering making receiving the host on the tongue mandatory.

So while I had originally been taught to receive in the hand, I switched at that point to on the tongue for most situations.
Click to expand...
i’ve seen hosts dropped from those who receive on the tongue. its not a fool proof way of preventing dropping the host. accidents happen

i’m curious how hosts are thrown away, as they are to be consumed in the presence of the priest/deacon/EMHC. no person should be allowed to step away without consuming the host
 
To Julian0404-

You asked when the book was published- 1997, in French,
the English edition I read was published in 2002.
 
choy said:
i’ve seen hosts dropped from those who receive on the tongue. its not a fool proof way of preventing dropping the host. accidents happen

i’m curious how hosts are thrown away, as they are to be consumed in the presence of the priest/deacon/EMHC. no person should be allowed to step away without consuming the host
Click to expand...
The concern was not accidents, but for deliberate mishandling of the hosts. Apparently it is a worldwide problem. Perhaps it should be consumed before stepping away, but since there is a worldwide problem, obviously this is something that has been missed, and missed a lot!
 
MelanieAnne said:
The concern was not accidents, but for deliberate mishandling of the hosts. Apparently it is a worldwide problem. Perhaps it should be consumed before stepping away, but since there is a worldwide problem, obviously this is something that has been missed, and missed a lot!
Click to expand...
But how does receiving on the tongue avoid deliberate mishandling. Certainly someone who was profane enough to throw communion away wouldn’t think twice about spitting it out later.

My personal thought on the matter is that COTT or COTH is a personal decision (since it is a choice the church gives us). One can, I believe receive as reverently in the hand as on the tongue.

My personal pet peeve is when people adopt an additional practice that is not normal for the parish. The most common example would be kneeling before receiving outside of a traditional mass. I agree that our Lord is due all the reverence that muster and so much more, but when a person adopts a very different practice like this, it often strikes me, true or not (And I admit it might just be a problem with my perception) as being an ostentatious show of holiness.

In the hand, on the tongue, standing, kneeling, etc. These are all external displays that can be faked. Ultimately what matters is what is in our heart when we receive. At least in my humble opinion.

–
Bill
 
mchale said:
But how does receiving on the tongue avoid deliberate mishandling. Certainly someone who was profane enough to throw communion away wouldn’t think twice about spitting it out later.

My personal thought on the matter is that COTT or COTH is a personal decision (since it is a choice the church gives us). One can, I believe receive as reverently in the hand as on the tongue.

My personal pet peeve is when people adopt an additional practice that is not normal for the parish. The most common example would be kneeling before receiving outside of a traditional mass. I agree that our Lord is due all the reverence that muster and so much more, but when a person adopts a very different practice like this, it often strikes me, true or not (And I admit it might just be a problem with my perception) as being an ostentatious show of holiness.

In the hand, on the tongue, standing, kneeling, etc. These are all external displays that can be faked. Ultimately what matters is what is in our heart when we receive. At least in my humble opinion.

–
Bill
Click to expand...
Bill, I’m just reporting what was communicated to us by our Pastor. Does on the tongue completely eliminate the possibility of mishandling? No. But it is such a big problem that the Pope is looking for solutions and on the tongue seems to be one way to reduce the problem if not eliminate it entirely.

My decision to change the way I receive was not intended to be an “ostentatious show of holiness” if that is what you are suggesting. I merely thought that if that is what is coming, then I may as well get with the program now. Besides that, it made sense to me.
 
MelanieAnne said:
Bill, I’m just reporting what was communicated to us by our Pastor. Does on the tongue completely eliminate the possibility of mishandling? No. But it is such a big problem that the Pope is looking for solutions and on the tongue seems to be one way to reduce the problem if not eliminate it entirely.

My decision to change the way I receive was not intended to be an “ostentatious show of holiness” if that is what you are suggesting. I merely thought that if that is what is coming, then I may as well get with the program now. Besides that, it made sense to me.
Click to expand...
MelanieAnne, keep in mind, I said, as long as church law allows it, CITH and COTT was a matter of personal choice. I was specifically talking about the fact that some people seem to add their own additions. Kneeling to receive when the standard practice in the parish in an OF mass is to receive standing is but one example.

The other thing to keep in mind is that just because we expect that the Church will do something in the future, or even if we know the Church will, it doesn’t mean we are free to act on it.

–
Bill
 
mchale said:
MelanieAnne, keep in mind, I said, as long as church law allows it, CITH and COTT was a matter of personal choice. I was specifically talking about the fact that some people seem to add their own additions. Kneeling to receive when the standard practice in the parish in an OF mass is to receive standing is but one example.

The other thing to keep in mind is that just because we expect that the Church will do something in the future, or even if we know the Church will, it doesn’t mean we are free to act on it.

–
Bill
Click to expand...
Fine.

But since it’s a choice, I made one. One that is mine to make and should not be subject to criticism. Suggesting that someone might do something as an “ostentatious show of holiness” indicates that you actually know what is in the heart of someone else. But you don’t.
 
mchale said:
MelanieAnne, keep in mind, I said, as long as church law allows it, CITH and COTT was a matter of personal choice. I was specifically talking about the fact that some people seem to add their own additions. ** Kneeling to receive when the standard practice in the parish in an OF mass is to receive standing is but one example. **

The other thing to keep in mind is that just because we expect that the Church will do something in the future, or even if we know the Church will, it doesn’t mean we are free to act on it.

–
Bill
Click to expand...
Was going to let this pass, but you brought it up again… 🤷

Kneeling is a normative option in the OF, as has been clarified repeatedly by CDW&DS. It is not an individual addition anymore than CITH. It actually has more standing than CITH (allowed as a variation, where allowed by the Conference and local bishop, and can be suspended), as it cannot be suspended by the local bishop or conference.
 
CDNowak said:
Was going to let this pass, but you brought it up again… 🤷

Kneeling is a normative option in the OF, as has been clarified repeatedly by CDW&DS. It is not an individual addition anymore than CITH. It actually has more standing than CITH (allowed as a variation, where allowed by the Conference and local bishop, and can be suspended), as it cannot be suspended by the local bishop or conference.
Click to expand...
I apologize. The information I had seen at

usccb.org/liturgy/innews/072002.shtml

in fact had indicated otherwise.

I am curious, is there some place I can read what the CDWDS has to say on the matter?

In any case, my general point is that I have often seen people do things at Church that seem overly ostentatious.

Now I freely admit, that I can’t know the real motivation of other people. But my personal preference is that personal devotion should blend in with common practice when such practice does not violate the rules for the mass. (i.e., If I go to a parish and notice 90% of the parishioners kneeling at the alter rail to receive, I assure you I would happily kneel as well, on the flip side, if I noticed everyone intincting the host in the cup, I would certainly not follow common practice… if that makes sense).

–
Bill
 
MelanieAnne said:
The concern was not accidents, but for deliberate mishandling of the hosts. Apparently it is a worldwide problem. Perhaps it should be consumed before stepping away, but since there is a worldwide problem, obviously this is something that has been missed, and missed a lot!
Click to expand...
this is the first time i heard of this problem. how sure are you its a world wide problem and something not made up or exaggerated?

in my experience, i’ve seen that even the EMHCs are pretty good in making sure the hosts are consumed in their presence. i’m pretty sure that there are some out there that are not as good on their task as the rest.
 
choy said:
this is the first time i heard of this problem. how sure are you its a world wide problem and something not made up or exaggerated?

in my experience, i’ve seen that even the EMHCs are pretty good in making sure the hosts are consumed in their presence. i’m pretty sure that there are some out there that are not as good on their task as the rest.
Click to expand...
The report from my Pastor was that it was a worldwide problem and that the Pope is considering the best way to remedy it. He indicated that the leadership of the church is very concerned about it being a problem everywhere. Why would he tell us these things unless it was a genuine concern?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top