L
Lepanto
Guest
Regardless of your current method (tongue/receiver vs. hand/taker or chalice/skipper vs. chalice/drinker)…would you change your communion method to intinction if it was offered as an option?
If intinction was made an option at your parish, would you use it?
- Status
M
Mighty_Q
Guest
I receive on the tongue, and I’d consider intinction.
A
anamchara
Guest
Why is this significant Lepanto? Just curious.
I don’t know how I feel about this. It would remind me of being back in the Protestant Church since that is how we always recieved (United Methodist and Presbyterain USA). I suppose wouldn’t be a bad thing at all
B
benedictgal
Guest
It would certainly be a very viable option. If you recall, Francis Cardinal Arinze made some remarks that strongly supported the matter:
Someone later on asked him if it was okay for the communicant to do a self-intinction. This was the Prefect’s response:
This last sentence is actually the crux of the matter. From what he said in the Q and A session, in order for the intinction to happen, the ministers must be priests or deacons. This would, in essence, eliminate the practice of having EMHCs altogether, if one understands what the good cardinal is saying.
Someone later on asked him if it was okay for the communicant to do a self-intinction. This was the Prefect’s response:
Therefore, Lepanto, for your scenario to work, the only ones who could distribute communion would be the priest and/or deacon.
B
BigFeet
Guest
Amen!! That’s perfect!
Actually, a parish I used to be a member of, distributed Holy Communion via intinction, AND they used Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion to do it. The pastor there didn’t care very much for Cardinal Arinze (he said rather unkind things about him on several occasions), and so he seemed to take every opportunity to do the opposite of whatever Cardinal Arinze said…that’s why my family and I left that parish. The pastor demanded our obedience to him, and yet he was very disobedient to the Church.
O
OutinChgoburbs
Guest
I would. I think it would be faster, and I think the germ population would be down- waterless soap notwithstanding.
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
Only if intinction were the *sole *method used to distribute communion. A neighboring parish has EMsHC distributing separate species and at one station a priest distributing by intinction.
And in answer to the OP: I’ve received by that method many times – Why would I not continue?
tee
K
kristie_m
Guest
Well…I receive in the hand, and I think would probably continue to do so given the option. I have a little bit of a phobia about anyone other than my dentist having their hands near my mouth. 
B
Brendan
Guest
You’ve pretty much described my parish.
Communion by Intinction, using only priests and deacons as ministers
Communion by Intinction, using only priests and deacons as ministers
L
LilyM
Guest
I’m a hand receiver and skip the chalice (don’t like the idea of drinking after dozens of other people, besides the Host is more than sufficient), and I’d be more than happy to try intinction at least.
It’d take me back to childhood though, I seem to remember that at least when we were young tongue was the norm.
It’d take me back to childhood though, I seem to remember that at least when we were young tongue was the norm.
B
Brendan
Guest
That option is granted on a country specific basis. So if you plan on international travel and plan on attending Mass, be prepared not to have the option to recieve in the hand.
K
kristie_m
Guest
As I don’t do much international travel (as in, none to date!) this probably won’t be much of an issue for me. However, I do agree that when in Rome…
K
Karl_M
Guest
The EMHC is allowed to distribute via intinction, but it would be impractical because you’d always need two people there-a second person to hold the (whatever they’re using) with the Hosts.
Intinction can’t be offered as “an option” because the priest, deacon, or EMHC has to do it for you (although you could have one station where it’s done-the point of EMHC’s and stations is that you go thru your line to your station and not jump lines).
At any rate, I doubt it will come back. Although there are parishes that do it, I was an EMHC at my friend’s funeral, and I had two rows of people that wanted “to dip.” The other EHMC had the same thing happen to him-all but one person took it OK when I told them “we don’t do intinction here” and made them do it the right way, but one lady gave me the evil eye for the rest of the Mass.
OK, I got off topic-If a parish did intinction the right way (including validly consecrated “wine”) I’d go along with it.
Intinction can’t be offered as “an option” because the priest, deacon, or EMHC has to do it for you (although you could have one station where it’s done-the point of EMHC’s and stations is that you go thru your line to your station and not jump lines).
At any rate, I doubt it will come back. Although there are parishes that do it, I was an EMHC at my friend’s funeral, and I had two rows of people that wanted “to dip.” The other EHMC had the same thing happen to him-all but one person took it OK when I told them “we don’t do intinction here” and made them do it the right way, but one lady gave me the evil eye for the rest of the Mass.
OK, I got off topic-If a parish did intinction the right way (including validly consecrated “wine”) I’d go along with it.
B
Belfarmer
Guest
In my parish intinction is the norm and I find it very spiritual. Communion via intinction is distributed by an installed acolyte (installed by the bishop) as well as of course by the priest. Is an installed acolyte acceptable? I suspect you all now have a good idea which diocese I am from as we have no EMHCs only installed acolytes.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
if intinction is introduced in a parish it likely will not be an option, but the only way to receive, as it should be. it is and always has been my preference, esp. when ministers use the proper vessels designed for the purpose. I have heard, but don’t know if it is true, that only the priest or deacon may administer in this way, if so, that is another plus.
B
Brenda_V
Guest
puzzleannie is correct here. Only the Priest or Deacon is allowed to give via intinction. Someone quoted in a pp the correct method. That means no EMHC’s allowed to help out.
Other than having the problem of time taken for communion and getting one group of Mass goers out and the next in I am all for it (although one of these days I am going to have to bite the bullet and talk to Fr, about receiving only from the cup due to my high sensitivity to wheat!) Oh, and so you know where I come from, I am a hand receiver who skips the chalice if it is offered (mostly because of germs and viruses - especially my own as I tend to have cold sores and I really don’t want to pass that on to someone else).
Brenda V.
J
japhy
Guest
I receive the Host on the tongue, and also receive from the Chalice when it is offered. I would happily receive by intinction!
It has also crossed my mind that (re)introducing intinction in the 1962 Missal is the best way to offer Communion under both kinds in the Extraordinary Form.
It has also crossed my mind that (re)introducing intinction in the 1962 Missal is the best way to offer Communion under both kinds in the Extraordinary Form.
O
Online_Knight
Guest
Isn’t intinction a bad idea because of the likelihood of the Precious Blood of our Lord dripping off of the Body and onto the floor? Are there steps taken to prevent this from happening? If not, I am against intinction completely.
K
Kielbasi
Guest
No, as I am unaccustomed to receiving in that way.
There is no “best” way overall to receive communion, so the best way for an individual is the mode in which he is most used to.
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
No more risky than any other method (And ought to be less so – The GIRM prescribes unsing the communion paten when distribution is by intinction).
tee
- Status