How has H1N1 effected your parish?

[redrosetea]

Receiving under both species for the laity is a fairly recent practice…We only received the host for almost most of my life

I don’t know when the chalice was stopped or why, but I never feel cheated at all just to receive the host…

 

[His_little1]

Maybe we could consider this our own personal “Lent” or time in the spiritual desert.
We went through this before and I personally appreciated the Blood of Christ and the sign of peace even more!

 

[Tracy24]

Depends on the diocese. In mine, we are in phase 2 of a 4 stage plan. No cup, no touching during the Sign of Peace, etc.

Stage 3 has things like draining the holy water fonts.

Stage 4 is cancel Mass.

Went to church this morning and found all the fonts had been emptied

The cup was taken away back in the spring and has remained that way ever since. No shaking hands during the sign of peace and no receiving on the tongue. The emptying of the fonts was new this time around though.

 

[incurableyoyo]

In our parish the fonts were not only empty ,they were gone!

 

[Blessed7]

I had also experienced this back in the spring. It has also made me more appreciative of the sign of peace and the precious blood! Br. Rich, with all do respect, I do understand it, and am honored to have been receiving both during the Eucharist. Since the absence of it, I have been feeling a bit uneasy about it, and just wanted to express my thoughts. You may want to explain something instead of assuming an individual does not understand. This very attitude can turn many individual’s away from the faith. I appreciate all responses to this!

PEACE!

 

[choy]

in our parish a big bottle of disinfectant gel was provided near where the holy water is. so people can disinfect their hands before putting it into the holy water. our parish priest also promised to change the water more frequently

 

[benedictgal]

I had also experienced this back in the spring. It has also made me more appreciative of the sign of peace and the precious blood! Br. Rich, with all do respect, I do understand it, and am honored to have been receiving both during the Eucharist. Since the absence of it, I have been feeling a bit uneasy about it, and just wanted to express my thoughts. You may want to explain something instead of assuming an individual does not understand. This very attitude can turn many individual’s away from the faith. I appreciate all responses to this!

PEACE!

With all due respect, this is what you posted when you started this thread:

Anyone else feel like the Eucharist is incomplete because of this absence? I undestand precautions, but removing denying the blood outright is an issue. I feel it should be a choice, and maybe that is bias considering my views on the “so called H1N1” threat. I have no fear, and walk the earth no differenlty. I have worked in social services for nearly a decade and have worked directly with individual’s who carry much more dangerous diseases, so being cautious is in the nature of the field. I know this is happening throughout the country and wanted to get other viewpoints on the matter. I have prayed and meditated on this the last couple of weeks since it has been removed from the service. Right now, only priests receive it. **Would this be considered a partial communion? I feel like I am missing a part of our LORD! **

While not wanting to put words into Bro Rich’s keyboard, I believe that what I highlighted in bold red is what he and the rest of us have been addressing. When you make statements like that, it does, as I read it, give the impression that there is some serious misunderstanding going on here. The fact that you stated:

Would this be considered a partial communion? I feel like I am missing a part of our Lord!

does leave me wondering if these statements are not a sign of a bigger problem in that there is some strong catechesis lacking in our understanding of what it means to receive Holy Communion. It is not a requirement for the faithful to receive Holy Communion under both species. In fact, the only one required to receive Holy Communion under both species is the celebrant since his consumption of the two completes the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Please note what Redemptionis Sacramentum states:

[102.] The chalice should not be ministered to lay members of Christ’s faithful where there is such a large number of communicants189 that it is difficult to gauge the amount of wine for the Eucharist and there is a danger that “more than a reasonable quantity of the Blood of Christ remain to be consumed at the end of the celebration”.190 The same is true wherever access to the chalice would be difficult to arrange, or where such a large amount of wine would be required that its certain provenance and quality could only be known with difficulty, or wherever there is not an adequate number of sacred ministers or extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion with proper formation, or where a notable part of the people continues to prefer not to approach the chalice for various reasons, so that the sign of unity would in some sense be negated.

Thus, while it is a laudable option, it is not a requirement for the faithful.

 

[Holly3278]

I checked “other” because we were told stop hand shaking and hand holding, no communion on the tongue, no cup. Then a month (or maybe longer) later (three weeks ago) we were told that it was okay again.

I must add that both announcements (stop and start again) were very low key and probably missed by quite a few people.

Just a note but hand holding during the Our Father shouldn’t be happening at any time. That said, I personally do not see anything wrong with a couple or a family holding hands during the Our Father. I don’t think that is forbidden. I think what is forbidden is the priest or bishop requiring everyone to hold hands during the Our Father.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=1175&CFID=17986727&CFTOKEN=78040998

 

[centurionguard]

In our diocese we have had the following things changed:

• No communion from the cup
• No sign of peace
• No receiving communion on the tongue

It should be noted that in our province (New Brunswick) has had no deaths from H1N1 and I don’t understand why communion has to be in the hand, H1N1 is spread more from sneezing than anything else (according to my Doctor). Wouldn’t communion in the hand increase the likelihood of spreading it?

Interesting; I live in the southern part of New Brunswick and the Archdiocese has only issued a narrowly defined document. Not sure just how serious their taking this H1N1 virus. However; individual parishes are issuing their own precautionary listing in Church Bulletins. My parish reads as follows:

N1H1 ALERT; We want to reassure our Christian community that we have been proactive in responding to social concerns and have in place measures to be taken in the event of an outbreak of seasonal flu, influenza or a pandemic. A Document was published this past May by the Archdiocese and is in the hands of each parish.
For now, we continue with our gatherings for liturgies, meetings, socials, etc. until we are notified otherwise. Be assured that we are aware of your concerns and will act in a responsible way to implement these directives should they become necessary. Please follow what is suggested for all of us – wash your hands often, sneeze or cough into your arm rather than your hand, stay home if you’re not feeling well.
Bottles of SANI-DERM Antibacterial Hand Wash have been placed at the entrances of our Church for your use – as you enter and as you leave. Please make use of this for your protection and the protection of others

 

[VivienneJ]

Well, I said “No changes in our parish liturgy”; but, we never recieve the Precious Blood; we never hold hands during the Our Father (most do adopt another controversial posture at this time, but that’s neither here nore there for the purposes of this thread); the sign of the peace that we have always used is to put our hands together and bow to each other; communion is mostly received on the tongue, and still is, but those who opt to receive in the hand still do; we still have the same number of EMHCs assisting our 3 priests, there is no way we could continue offering the number of Masses we do over a weekend if we didn’t have and use the large number of EMHCs we do.

As a side note I was in the southern hemisphere during their winter and there were no changes in liturgy there either: the Precious Blood was still offered; hands were held during the Our Father; hands were shaken at the sign of peace; priest and EMHCs still shared distrubition of communion; reception was mainly in the hand, on the tongue for those who normally and still choose that option. We simply stayed away from Mass if we were ill, avoided the cup until completely well and used hand sanitizer prior to reception of communion.

 

[yablabo]

Anyone else feel like the Eucharist is incomplete because of this absence? I undestand precautions, but removing denying the blood outright is an issue. I feel it should be a choice, and maybe that is bias considering my views on the “so called H1N1” threat. I have no fear, and walk the earth no differenlty. I have worked in social services for nearly a decade and have worked directly with individual’s who carry much more dangerous diseases, so being cautious is in the nature of the field. I know this is happening throughout the country and wanted to get other viewpoints on the matter. I have prayed and meditated on this the last couple of weeks since it has been removed from the service. Right now, only priests receive it. Would this be considered a partial communion? I feel like I am missing a part of our LORD!

Here’s some quotes from the Council of Trent:

Session XXI

On Communion under both species, and on the Communion of infants:

Canon I. If any one saith, that, by the precept of God, or, by necessity of salvation, all and each of the faithful of Christ ought to receive both species of the Most Holy Sacrament not consecrating; let him be anathema.

Canon II. If any one saith, that the Holy Catholic Church was not induced, by just causes and reasons, to communicate, under the species of bread only, laymen, and also clerics when not consecrating; let him be be anathema.

Canon III. If any one denieth, that Christ whole and entire - the Fountain and Author of all graces - is received under the one species of bread; because that - as some falsely assert - He is not received, according to the institution of Christ Himself, under both species; let him be anathema.

– Nicole

 

[acadian]

In the spring, our Bishop suspended distribution of the Precious Blood, asked that the faithful receive in the hand and that we bow to each other during the sign of peace. This lasted for about 2 days (seriously) before it was determined that he was overreacting and he rescinded his directive.

Now that fall is here and people are coughing and sneezing all over, I wish that they would once again ask people to bow during the sign of peace. (We don’t ever receive from the chalice, so that makes me no difference.) At Daily Mass, if I am feeling sniffly or whatever, I will just smile and nod at the people nearby, maybe flash the 60’s peace sign, and it makes no one any difference. But at a weekend Mass, people are determined they are going to shake your hand no matter what. I have to politely say, “I don’t want to pass along any germs.”

One day, the elderly lady next to me took our her small bottle of hand sanitizer after the sign of peace. She offered me some, too.

 

[human_being]

Yay! Common sense direction from the Bishop of Pittsburgh. Highlights:

tee

In our diocese the bishop has discontinued Precious Blood and asked for no handshaking for the sign of peace,for flu season.