Is it necessary to receive communion when being confirmed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Faithful_voyage28
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Faithful_voyage28

Guest
I was just wondering if it is necessary to recieve communion incase anyone knows? The reason why I ask is because I will be confirmed soon but communion at this parish will be only on the hand due to the pandemic. Before the pandemic it was not allowed at this archdiocese to recieve on the hand but due to the pandemic there have been changes. Only at the traditional latin mass can you still recieve communion on the tongue but it is only celebrated twice a month at this archdiocese. The priest has been encouraging me to recieve communion. But due to the love I have for our Lord I prefer to only recieve on the tongue. Not sure if it necessary not. I’m willing to do it just for this sacrament but would rather do spiritual communion. Any help will be great
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Faithful_voyage28 said:
I was just wondering if it is necessary to recieve communion incase anyone knows? The reason why I ask is because I will be confirmed soon but communion at this parish will be only on the hand due to the pandemic. Before the pandemic it was not allowed at this archdiocese to recieve on the hand but due to the pandemic there have been changes. Only at the traditional latin mass can you still recieve communion on the tongue but it is only celebrated twice a month at this archdiocese. The priest has been encouraging me to recieve communion. But due to the love I have for our Lord I prefer to only recieve on the tongue. Not sure if it necessary not. I’m willing to do it just for this sacrament but would rather do spiritual communion. Any help will be great
Click to expand...
The Church allows Communion on the tongue or on the hand normally but with health situation most places allow it only on the hand.
As receiving on the hand you receive the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ I don’t see how anyone could refuse to receive him. Actually I would find it ridiculous to refuse to receive our Lord.
 
Before the virus I had never received on the hand (since my reception and confirmation in 2017) and had intentions never to do so however, with there seeming to be no end to the pandemic in sight and not even an option of attending a Latin Mass in our diocese (and possibly country) right now, I could not envisage not receiving our Lord for months and perhaps years on end. Earlier in the outbreak, before he had no option but to temporarily suspend the choice, our Bishop also asked us to receive on the hand out of charity to our brothers and sisters as the virus spread. So I receive on the hand…for now. But, I pray, not forever.
Receive on the hand as you receive wisdom from the Holy Spirit. Our Lord won’t hold it against you!
 
I’m not sure there’s a requirement, but (1) it would be highly unusual and (2) why deprive yourself the great grace of receiving?
 
  1. No, of course there is no requirement, given that the “normal” order of Sacraments was always Baptism, then Confirmation (the “seal of baptism”), and then Communion (with Confession in there somewhere after the age of reason).
You can be a baby or a toddler or a kid under the age of reason and be Confirmed (although it is unusual in our Rite), whereas Latin/Roman Rite Catholics absolutely cannot receive Communion until after the age of reason. (Unless it’s part of Last Rites or something. And of course, some kids may reach the age of reason early, which is why priests used to ask really young kids questions and sometimes let them receive.)
  1. Since you have received First Communion, it would be more fitting to receive Communion. Nobody can make you do it.
Exercise your Christian freedom. Ask God about it. Then decide what you think is right, do that, and don’t worry about it.
 
Last edited:
I don’t understand why this would be an issue. My opinion is that you should just receive communion on the hand and that you shouldn’t make an issue out of it. Have a nice day. 😉
 
As far as I know Communion and Confirmation are separate sacraments. One does not “have” to receive Communion as part of the Confirmation ritual, just as one does not have to receive during Marriage.
 
I was Confirmed at a very large Confirmation back in December of 2019 – perhaps over a hundred Confirmandi, though I never saw a concrete number. I don’t think a single one of us received at the Mass said afterwards. Unless someone corrects me, I think you’ll be fine.

As for receiving in the hand, I’d argue that you should obey your own conscience instead of substituting somebody else’s. If you’re uncomfortable with it, don’t do it. It’s that simple. Personally, I’d rather not receive than receive and feel guilty or troubled by it. Issues of conscience like this always remind me of Romans 14:
  1. Let us cease, then, to lay down rules for one another, and make this rule for ourselves instead, not to trip up or entangle a brother’s conscience. 14. This is my assurance, this is what my conscience tells me in the name of our Lord Jesus, that there is nothing which is unclean in itself; it is only when a man believes a thing to be unclean that it becomes unclean for him. […] 22. Thou hast a good conscience? Keep it a matter between thyself and God; he is fortunate, who can make his own choice without self-questioning. 23. He who hesitates, and eats none the less, is self-condemned; he acts in bad conscience, and wherever there is bad conscience, there is sin.
Click to expand...
This whole chapter is about fasting and abstaining and the like, but the cord that binds it all is to follow what you feel you should do based on what you know. If you don’t want to receive, you don’t need to.
 
RWZiller said:
As for receiving in the hand, I’d argue that you should obey your own conscience instead of substituting somebody else’s.
Click to expand...
It is our duty as Christians to form our consciences well. That means to conform them to the mind of the church according to doctrine and discipline. The Church, in her wisdom, has designated CITH as a licit option for receiving Holy Communion.

Unfortunately, some pastors have taken it upon themselves to abrogate the law that permits COTT always and everywhere. Thankfully, my own pastors have not, but if I were “forced” to receive CITH then I would do so gladly, accepting it as penance for those like me whose rights have been violated.

It is worth your while, OP, to consult your pastor and plead the case for your right to receive COTT. Failing that, it is your duty to obediently receive in the manner your pastors have deemed acceptable for you.
 
That’s what I’m saying. It’s licit, but if he has a problem with it, the most expedient solution is to not do it. Never would I claim COTH is illicit or inherently sinful. I’m just saying that if it makes him uncomfortable and he doesn’t want to, he’s not obliged to. As you properly noted, we’re duty-bound to form our own consciences, not to accept as fact the results of others’ formation. If he has discerned for himself that COTH disagrees with his conscience, none of us have the right to assert he must do differently. That’s all I’m saying.
Anesti33 said:
Failing that, it is your duty to obediently receive in the manner your pastors have deemed acceptable for you.
Click to expand...
Or to not receive. There’s nothing wrong with electing not to receive.
 
You do not have to receive communion in conjunction with confirmation. I was confirmed immediately after my baptism by a priest. There was no Mass and no communion.

I would just say, though — and I know you didn’t bring this up as an issue in your case, I’m just noting it for general knowledge — that if one is conscious of unconfessed, unabsolved mortal sin, then one must not receive the sacrament of confirmation. We may not receive sacraments in mortal sin. Go to confession first.
Montrose said:
As receiving on the hand you receive the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ I don’t see how anyone could refuse to receive him. Actually I would find it ridiculous to refuse to receive our Lord.
Click to expand...
I do. I guess that makes me “ridiculous”.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
I do. I guess that makes me “ridiculous”.
Click to expand...
I hope you realise I am talking about when there is only the one choice in the current health crisis and not when there are two choices.
I normally receive on the tongue but if there is only one choice (receive in the hand) due to the health crisis then I certainly would not insult our Lord by refusing to receive him.
 
Last edited:
Do you have to? No. Should you? Yes. Receiving the eucharist brings to completion your initiation into the Church - something which should not be delayed. I’m respectful of those who wish to receive on the tongue - as is their right but rights don’t exist in a vacuum nor do they exist solely for our sake. So we shouldn’t insist on adhering to a right simply for the sake of doing so especially when doing so would delay reception of an important sacrament. The restriction on receiving communion by your archbishop wasn’t done without good reason - the intention is to protect the vulnerable in our faith and social communities from a contagious disease. Of course it’s easy to argue about which method of reception is riskier but given that the understanding of this disease is still emerging, and in the absence of any hard evidence either way, bishops are left to make captain’s calls about how best to respond and I don’t for a moment envy them!

While communion on the tongue is a right, rules are written for normal times and, in highly abnormal times like these the rules tend to take a back seat. Regardless of the manner in which we receive Him, we still receive our Lord - body, blood, soul and divinity - and this is all that should matter. Again, I fully respect each individual’s preference when it comes to the manner in which they receive communion but at the same time it’s important that we don’t allow the way we receive to assume a greater importance than what we receive.
 
Montrose said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
I do. I guess that makes me “ridiculous”.
Click to expand...
I hope you realise I am talking about when there is only the one choice in the current health crisis and not when there are two choices.
I normally receive on the tongue but if there is only one choice (receive in the hand) due to the health crisis then I certainly would not insult our Lord by refusing to receive him.
Click to expand...
I do indeed understand this.

If I am forced to receive communion in the hand (e.g., to make my Easter duty), I will use a purificator over my palm and “scoop It up” with my tongue, bringing the purificator home to wash and dispose of the water in my garden (I have a dispensation from a priest to do this from when I used to serve the TLM for him, a permission that has never been revoked). Or if that’s not possible, I will receive on the hand, again “scooping It up” with my tongue, and will immediately go outside and purify my palm over an isolated part of the parish grounds (where no one will be walking) with a bottle of water I will have on my person.

If I am not forced to receive communion, then I shall just abstain, until communion on the tongue is again possible.

The Precious Blood would pose no such problems, but It is not being given to the faithful for the duration.

That is my choice and my preference. I am content to leave others at peace with their choice, just so long as they inspect their hands for the slightest visible particle of the Sacred Species.
 
There is a difference between “I want” and "I need’.

When one shifts thinking it becomes clear. We NEED the Eucharist.

Christ humbled Himself to become a baby, and again to come to us in the most basic thing:bread and wine.

I ought humble myself to receive my Lord in the way my Bishop allows.
 
Talk to your priest to make sure you wouldn’t be giving scandal by not receiving.

In general, Confirmation typically takes places at an earlier point in the Mass, than the Consecration and Communion.

So in theory, there is no reason you cannot refrain from Communion during Confirmation (but anyone who notices will find it peculiar.)

However, if this is supposed to be BOTH your Confirmation and First Communion, then you should receive

With all that said, I think Father says it best above
InThePew said:
Do you have to? No. Should you? Yes. Receiving the eucharist brings to completion your initiation into the Church - something which should not be delayed. I’m respectful of those who wish to receive on the tongue - as is their right but rights don’t exist in a vacuum nor do they exist solely for our sake. So we shouldn’t insist on adhering to a right simply for the sake of doing so especially when doing so would delay reception of an important sacrament. The restriction on receiving communion by your archbishop wasn’t done without good reason - the intention is to protect the vulnerable in our faith and social communities from a contagious disease. Of course it’s easy to argue about which method of reception is riskier but given that the understanding of this disease is still emerging, and in the absence of any hard evidence either way, bishops are left to make captain’s calls about how best to respond and I don’t for a moment envy them!

While communion on the tongue is a right, rules are written for normal times and, in highly abnormal times like these the rules tend to take a back seat. Regardless of the manner in which we receive Him, we still receive our Lord - body, blood, soul and divinity - and this is all that should matter. Again, I fully respect each individual’s preference when it comes to the manner in which they receive communion but at the same time it’s important that we don’t allow the way we receive to assume a greater importance than what we receive .
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Out of curiosity, did Father have you receive first or do anything special for your First Communion during Mass?
 
adamhovey1988 said:
40.png
Faithful_voyage28:
But due to the love I have for our Lord I prefer to only recieve on the tongue.
Click to expand...
The inference from that, is that people who receive in the hand DON’T love the Lord. That’s actually kind of offensive.
Click to expand...
In all fairness to the OP, I don’t think that’s what the OP meant at all.

What the OP said would be similar to someone saying, “due to the love I have for our Lord I attend adoration every day.” It doesn’t mean that people who don’t love the Lord any less.

We all express love differently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top