How do you receive the Body of Christ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oneofthewomen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi everyone, OP here!

This has been a really great thread, thank you all so much for your insights and opinions.
’
I have a question for all of you who say that BXVI wants us to receive kneeling and OTT.

My understanding is that his comments were in regard to anyone who attended one of his private Masses or for those, who, in attending a Papal Mass, are chosen to receive from the Pope himself, not as a general mandate for all Catholics.

If the Pope really wanted this to be the only way don’t you think that
a) he would have recinded the indult for CITH, and
b) that everyone at a Papal Mass would be expected to receive kneeling and OTT?

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that many people (if not most) received Communion while standing at the Papal Mass held in NYC.

Just from a time stand-point,
I could not imagine 50K + people all kneeling to receive.

Also, many posters have talked about the EF, and how COTT and only from the priest is the norm, and that it does not take any longer to distribute communion.
My question is, in general, how many actually receive at the EF?
Many of my older friends and relatives have said that prior to VII, most of them only received communion as their “Easter duty”, and did not receive every week. So, I could understand, if only 10% of the congregation is receiving communion, then kneeling would not be a big deal, but if you had 500 attendees, who all want to receive, and have only one priest, it could take longer to distribute communion than the Mass itself would take.

Comments?
 
Oneofthewomen said:
So, I could understand, if only 10% of the congregation is receiving communion, then kneeling would not be a big deal, but if you had 500 attendees, who all want to receive, and have only one priest, it could take longer to distribute communion than the Mass itself would take.

Comments?
Click to expand...
There is a simple and practical solution to this hypothetical situation: have more than one priest distribute communion. At the SSPX’s large chapel in St. Mary’s, Kansas, there are as many as 4 priests distributing communion when there is a large crowd. Wit that many priests, and with ushers making sure things go smoothly, it is actually quite fast.

It is pretty rare that you’ll have 500 hundred people attending mass at once, with only one mass at such a large chapel. Usually you’ll have several masses, which implies that there are several priests living there, which would mean that these other priests could help with communion.

Even if this were impossible, reverence is more important than time. I heard or read about one (Novus Ordo) priest talking about watching “All in the Family” after mass. Well, if Archie Bunker is so important to watch after mass, distributing Communion in a more reverent way would surely be a better means of using his time well.
 
It does not take much longer for a congregation to receive the Blessed Sacrament while kneeling then standing.

What’s your rush anyway? Do you ever stand in line for a coffee, hamburger, sale at WalMart, etc? If the line is moving slower then expected use that time to talk to God, prepare yourself more for Holy Communion. Why does it have to be an express?

I have not seen any numbers on percentage of receipients pre and post V2. However, given the drop in numbers at the Confessional I’d say the typical NO Communion line is too long. There are numbers that show belief in Transubstantiation has dropped since V2. Why do you suppose that is?

Why hasn’t the pope recalled the indult? What do you think would happen if he did? CITH is with us until enough people understand why it is inferior and the history of how it got into the GIRM.

Seeing as though CITH is the de facto norm and COTT isn’t even taught in most schools, why hasn’t the indult been converted to a norm? Why is the official norm of the universal Church still COTT? Why has no pope ever publically supported CITH?
 
Put the altar railing back up. Kneel at it. No need for EMHC.

Institute a 3 hour fast before reception of Holy Communion. That gives cover for people who need to go to confession but don’t want to appear as the only people not going up. Then, people could stay in the pews and tell anyone who asked that they “Forgot and ate something before Mass”.

Way too many people receiving these days.
 
The CITHers are going to respond with:
  • how dare you pretend to know who is in a state of grace
  • how dare you state CITH is inferior
  • St. Cyril said to make your palm a throne
  • it’s in the GIRM.
  • are you a sedevacanist (either directly or implied)?
 
PaulinVA said:
Way too many people receiving these days.
Click to expand...
As bad as this sounds, it is actually true.

In the old fast, one’s stomach was literally empty. It was seen as perfectly fitting to mortify ourselves as much as possible for the reception of God Almighy into our souls.

Presently, the fast means not presently eating. One hour is hardly anything. I can now eat a full meal that will keep me full for several hours, and receive the Sacred Host just one hour after completing the meal.

Is modern man really this soft and pathetic?
 
PaulinVA said:
Put the altar railing back up. Kneel at it. No need for EMHC.

Institute a 3 hour fast before reception of Holy Communion. That gives cover for people who need to go to confession but don’t want to appear as the only people not going up. Then, people could stay in the pews and tell anyone who asked that they “Forgot and ate something before Mass”.

Way too many people receiving these days.
Click to expand...
Even if they don’t return to the three hour fast, I still think it could be helpful for the priest to offer instruction from the ambo about keeping the communion fast and especially how one ought to not receive if one has not kept it. Emphasis could be made that if you see someone not go up, it could be because they did not meet the fast. Also emphasize not to put others on the spot about them not going up to receive. A person ought not have to answer other parishioners about why they did not receive that day.

Although, sometimes it means you have a visitor in the parish, so one might wish to inquire if they are a visitor and offer them some type of welcoming conversation.
 
Oneofthewomen said:
My understanding is that his comments were in regard to anyone who attended one of his private Masses or for those, who, in attending a Papal Mass, are chosen to receive from the Pope himself, not as a general mandate for all Catholics.

If the Pope really wanted this to be the only way don’t you think that
a) he would have recinded the indult for CITH,
Click to expand...
I just want to address the point about rescinding the indult. As I understand it, some indults are allowed because the bishops need to be able to choose their battles. They need to use their pastoral judgment to determine which issues to make top priority. So an indult does not necessarily imply that the thing permitted is good; it may just mean that there are other things going on which are worse.

When the Pope gives an indult for CITH but insists on COTT for his own Masses, it implies that he does not want to “tie the hands” of the bishops, but also is making a statement about which way of receiving is better.
 
As for the fast - if one attends Sunday morning Mass currently it means not eating about 15 mins before Mass starts but one might be walking or driving anyway.

If it was increased to 3 hours it would mean skipping Sunday breakfast or having it when you get home.

Doesn’t seem all that difficult, unless one went everyday of the week.
 
Canto said:
As for the fast - if one attends Sunday morning Mass currently it means not eating about 15 mins before Mass starts but one might be walking or driving anyway.

If it was increased to 3 hours it would mean skipping Sunday breakfast or having it when you get home.

Doesn’t seem all that difficult, unless one went everyday of the week.
Click to expand...
Well, there’s a good theological reason for it, and a practical reason as well.

You’re right. If people leave home 15 minutes before Mass, they don’t actually ever worry about the fast, since distribution of Holy Communion starts about 45 minutes after the start of Mass.
 
Canto said:
As for the fast - if one attends Sunday morning Mass currently it means not eating about 15 mins before Mass starts but one might be walking or driving anyway.

If it was increased to 3 hours it would mean skipping Sunday breakfast or having it when you get home.

Doesn’t seem all that difficult, unless one went everyday of the week.
Click to expand...
My :twocents: regarding the Eucharistic fast-

Being a post-VII baby,
I am only familiar with the hour long fast before communion.

My understanding and practice of the fast is that I fast for 1 hour prior to the start of Mass(not the reception of communion), so if Mass starts at 11am, I do not eat anything after 10am.

Regarding the change in the "requirement" of the fast, my belief is that the Church, in her wisdom, decided that a ***“rule”, ***per se, was not necessary, that the faithful should just want to observe the fast.

IMHO, doing something because ***I have the desire ***to do it says more than doing something because ***I am required to ***do it.
 
PaulinVA said:
Well, there’s a good theological reason for it, and a practical reason as well.

You’re right. If people leave home 15 minutes before Mass, they don’t actually ever worry about the fast, since distribution of Holy Communion starts about 45 minutes after the start of Mass.
Click to expand...
I think it is a nice length for a daily mass fast. Of course, I used to attend an evening daily mass, so of course I would think that. The three hour fast would require skipping dinner with my family every time I went to daily mass and chose to receive. Since I am the cook and must sample the food I prepare to check for salt, etc., I prefer the 1 hour fast for daily mass.

I do worry about the 1 hour fast on both Saturday vigil and on daily mass. It does impinge regularly on my behavior. On Sunday, however, even a from midnight fast would be nearly indistinguishable from a 1 hour fast, for me. I would be unable to take a drink to soothe my throat in the morning (water is not soothing and is difficult for me to swallow). That is the only difference.
 
Pug said:
I think it is a nice length for a daily mass fast. Of course, I used to attend an evening daily mass, so of course I would think that. The three hour fast would require skipping dinner with my family every time I went to daily mass and chose to receive. Since I am the cook and must sample the food I prepare to check for salt, etc., I prefer the 1 hour fast for daily mass.

I do worry about the 1 hour fast on both Saturday vigil and on daily mass. It does impinge regularly on my behavior. On Sunday, however, even a from midnight fast would be nearly indistinguishable from a 1 hour fast, for me. I would be unable to take a drink to soothe my throat in the morning (water is not soothing and is difficult for me to swallow). That is the only difference.
Click to expand...
Thos sound like they could all be good mortifications. 🙂
 
choy said:
why do we need to turn people away?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say turn away but catechise people, especially politicans who support the execution of children in the womb.

1 Corinthians 11:27 Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.
 
Canto said:
I wouldn’t say turn away but catechise people, especially politicans who support the execution of children in the womb.

1 Corinthians 11:27 Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.
Click to expand...
Right – the problem isn’t that too many receive, it’s that too few are worthy to receive.
 
Canto said:
I wouldn’t say turn away but catechise people, especially politicans who support the execution of children in the womb.
Click to expand...
I don’t even think you have to go this far. Look at all the ABC, cohabitation, gossip, missing Sunday Mass, Lenten Friday meat, sins of the flesh, etc. going on and even bragged about. Even sins like stealing and cheating others and gluttony have now been demoted to “venial” yet they are still serious in my book. If anything, raise the fast to three hours before communion to make it a more meaningful event. In my opinion it’s more casual than it needs to be.
 
choy said:
why do we need to turn people away?
Click to expand...
As others have said, too many people are receiving because too many are not properly disposed to receive. They should go to confession and become properly disposed.

We don’t need to turn people away. We need to have them understand that they should not present themselves to receive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top