Kneeling to recieve Communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter MiserereMei25
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A priest has no authority to deny some one receiving the Holy Eucharist on the tongue and/or kneeling. In fact standing and in the hands is the EXCEPTION that was allowed. Kneeling and on the tongue continues to be the norm. Looks like that priest was ill-informed.
 
As far as I know it has never been a tradition within the Catholic Church that receivers dip and “serve themselves”. First time I saw intinction was in the early 1990´s in a reformed church where they stopped with single cups for each recipient to dipping instead. It seems like it is the way most of the protestant churches give communion these days and has, at least in my area, been since the 1990´s.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

In a way, it is really easy to spot those who are not of Catholic and Orthodox origin as they try to intinct. It is repeated several times in RCIA how we receive and I make sure that those I am sponsoring know all ways of receiving Holy Communion in the Catholic Church. One even said “OK HeDa, I’m just going to open my mouth. Then I don’t have to think about how to receive.”🤣

My old parish priest is from an Eastern Church and when our deacon wasn’t present at a daily Mass, he used a combined chalice and paten. All who receive First Holy Communion, Sacrament of Confirmation, parents of the children as well as sponsors receive by intinction during those Masses. The present parish priest only uses the combined chalice and paten if there is a major celebration and our deacon is not present.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
TexasLoneStar said:
Kneeling and on the tongue continues to be the norm.
Click to expand...
Not in the U.S.; it is perfectly fine to do so, but the norm is stated above and here:
  1. The Priest then takes the paten or ciborium and approaches the communicants, who usually come up in procession.
It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves. The norm established for the Dioceses of the United States of America is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, no. 91).

When receiving Holy Communion, the communicant bows his or her head before the Sacrament as a gesture of reverence and receives the Body of the Lord from the minister. The consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or in the hand, at the discretion of each communicant. When Holy Communion is received under both kinds, the sign of reverence is also made before receiving the Precious Blood.
Click to expand...
From USCCB website, emphasis mine: http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-wor...uction-of-the-roman-missal/girm-chapter-4.cfm
 
HeDa said:
No “self-intinction” is allowed by the communicant dipping the Body of Christ him/herself. Catholics receive from a minister and don’t take Holy Communion. A deacon in the Western Church may not intinct.
Click to expand...
I know that self-intinction is not allowed but for many years and in several parishes I attended it was the only way to receive under both species. We were not allowed to drink from the Chalice. It was only with the publication of Redemptionis Sacramentum that I became aware that it was not allowed.
 
No, it isn’t illicit to receive Holy Communion kneeling and in the tongue. A priest can not deny you Holy Communion becuase you recieve kneeling.

It also is the universal norm for receiving Holy Communion in the Latin Church, but that is often argued here.
 
In my Church, which is Anglo-Catholic, we have to kneel and have the option to receive the communion on our cupped hands, or tongue, and we have the option to use intinction too!
 
Entwhistler said:
I believe that is called Intinction?
Click to expand...
No.

Intinction is dipping the body into the blood; most byzantines add the body to the cup.

The Melkites are an exception; rather than roughly cubic particles, they use strips, which the priest dips into the blood.

Also, except for Ruthenian practice (I think it’s the only exception), only the “Lamb”—the central part of the loaf–gets consecrated. A specified number of particles, each representing a saint or such, are consecrated. Additional bread is added for the distribution.
Margaret_Ann said:
In the Byzantine Tradition, we receive Holy Communion standing because we receive both Species at once.
Click to expand...
We receive standing because it is the position of respect, while kneeling is strictly a position of repentance. They changed this in the west in the middle ages.
Augustinian said:
In fact, receiving while standing poses logistic problems if the communicant is significantly taller than the priest or extraordinary minister if the EM is supposed to put it in the communicant’s mouth.
Click to expand...
We (byzantine) are supposed to remain fully upright. However, being a full head taller than my priest even with him standing on the Ambon, I bend at the knees so he can reach (and did so even before he damaged his right shoulder). So do the other tall men, and some others for whom I can see no reason other than following our posture . . .

In Melkite practice, two servers hold a very large cloth to catch crumbs. (The priest had to correct me from ruthenian practice, where we hold the cloth just below the recipient’s chin to catch the entire host. This isn’t a problem for the Melkites, but with the cut bread they have smaller particles to worry about, thus the large catch-cloth)

hawk
 
I went to Mass out of town this weekend. The left out the sign if peace. No holding hands during Our Father. There were kneelers to receive communion if you wanted to kneel (was optional). We chanted Salve Regina afterward. It was heaven on Earth.
 
Last edited:
I think it is terribly sad that a priest can choose not to do the sign of peace.

I would not go back to a parish that did that.
 
From what I recall, the Vatican stated that a person who presents themselves for Holy Communion kneeling, can not be refused, but that the priest should speak with the person after Mass and explain the reason for standing.

In my little parish church, if a person were to kneel, it would cause a problem for the prisoners trying to avoid their legs. Also, the priest has to stoop down to reach the person

To me, it comes across as a “holier than though,” mentality to just suddenly kneel to receive, when the entire congregation receives while standing.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
From what I recall, the Vatican stated that a person who presents themselves for Holy Communion kneeling, can not be refused, but that the priest should speak with the person after Mass and explain the reason for standing.

Jim
Click to expand...
That used to be in the GIRM but it was taken out when the new GIRM was published. This is from the American GIRM on the Vatican website:
  1. The priest then takes the paten or ciborium and goes to the communicants, who, as a rule, approach in a procession.
The faithful are not permitted to take the consecrated bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them from one to another. The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.
Click to expand...
But the GIRM on the USCCB Website is the corrected version that was accepted before the English Roman Missal was implemented in 2011. It was corrected to reflect Redemptionis Sacramentum.
  1. The Priest then takes the paten or ciborium and approaches the communicants, who usually come up in procession.
It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves. The norm established for the Dioceses of the United States of America is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, no. 91).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
JimR-OCDS said:
From what I recall, the Vatican stated that a person who presents themselves for Holy Communion kneeling, can not be refused, but that the priest should speak with the person after Mass and explain the reason for standing.
Click to expand...
The Vatican statements on the subject say nothing about the priest speaking afterwards and explaining the reason for standing. I believe I posted a link to one of the letters from the Vatican on the subject earlier in the thread.

I do not see why, even in a small parish church, it would cause problems. Our old church was quite small, and it was not unusual for someone to kneel for communion. This is often said as a reason, but in reality it never presents a problem.

As for it being “holier than though”, I don’t see that at all. Do you think people who bow their head before receiving are being “holier than though” because lots of people do not do so? Its a matter of a personal decision. As I said before, I would rather kneel, but I do decided to stand, but not for any of the reasons you state.
 
It causes problems in my small church, but you’d have to be a member here to know

Jim
 
I am not for sure why it is sad that some parts of the mass are optional? The sign of peace is actually rather redundant, considering communion is coming shortly after, and it is the ultimate sign of community (hence its common name).
 
Ok, I will take your word for it. I have been to lots of small churches, and I cannot envision why. All it takes is a little space between the person kneeling and the next in line. Space which happens to be there naturally.
 
I like the sign of peace.
I know that many here do not, think it detracts from the moment, etc.
I do agree that in times of illness (SARS, flu epidemics and the like) the practice being suspended for a few weeks, but to not have it at all, ever, is something I could not tolerate.

I will not get into a debate about it, as I find it is pointless. I just would not go back to a parish where the sign of peace is omitted as a matter of fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top