Lay Eucharistic Ministers

[water]

I was reading another thread that brought up communion in hand and Eucharistic ministers and it made me stop and think … how is it that the priest PRIOR to consecrating the bread and the wine cleanses himself (Lavabo) so that he can handle the precious body and blood and yet some Joe walks up to distribute the precious body and has not had any “cleansing” if you will.

Hello RomanRevert,

This might help you more about the reason of priest washing his hand:

Does the priest have to wash his hands during the offertory?

Yes. The priest, after the offertory prayers over the bread and the wine mixed with water, washes his hands, saying, “Lord, wash away my iniquity and cleanse me of my sins”. This gesture is a sign of the priest’ s desire for purity of heart as he offers the Sacrifice of the Mass.

source: catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0644.html

 

[CrypticWritings]

By the way, the real Maria Goretti wouldn’t even have considered for a moment to touch a consecrated host with her hands. It was unthinkable up until the past 35 years.

It still is an unthinkable abuse.
In the end, all of these wretched abuses will prove themselves why they are wrong so that the Catholic Church does not allow for these errors to occur in the future.
We learn from our mistakes…it is just a shame we have to make so many mistakes.

Anyway…The priest washing his hands is for the cleansing of venial sin. While sin is infinitely worse than physical uncleanliness, the priest still takes special care to remain physically clean.

 

[tee_eff_em]

[Psst! [user]Thursday1[/user]: [user]richmiller[/user] was referring to the Catechism, not the Code of Canon Law]

Not in the CCC!!
Ordained and religious are not laity in the CCC section 897

My apologies – I had not realized your post was part of the Catechism (*897 "The term ‘laity’ is

here

understood to mean…*), nor Lumen Gentium, which it there quotes.

tee

 

[AJV]

Lutherns do not believe in the REAL Presence. They believe in a spiritual presence not the actual body and blood of Christ. God is present everywhere therefore he is spiritually in a Luthern communion wafer but not physically.

The Lutheran belief is not our Catholic belief but I don’t think (pardon me, I don’t me to be pompous or disrespectful) it is *exactly *what you are saying, either.

The Formula of Concord

 

[ukdal1]

At our church, laity recieve the Eucharist in their hand and some people from the Eastern rite recieve on the tongue. I understand the reverence in NOT recieving in the hand but if the Church has issued that is okay to do in the US and other places, why is it a problem with some??? Just curious. I’m still in RCIA and I find both types of Mass to be interesting.

 

[richwmiller]

The Lutheran belief is not our Catholic belief but I don’t think (pardon me, I don’t me to be pompous or disrespectful) it is *exactly *what you are saying, either.

The Formula of Concord

I think the Lutherans have consubstantiation which holds that the bread is body and bread the wine is wine and blood whereas Catholics say it becomes blood but looks like wine and becomes body but looks like bread.

 

[richwmiller]

Can. 897 The most August sacrament is the Most Holy Eucharist in which Christ the Lord himself is contained, offered, and received and by which the Church continually lives and grows. The eucharistic sacrifice, the memorial of the death and resurrection of the Lord, in which the sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated through the ages is the summit and source of all worship and Christian life, which signifies and effects the unity of the People of God and brings about the building up of the body of Christ. Indeed, the other sacraments and all the ecclesiastical works of the apostolate are closely connected with the Most Holy Eucharist and ordered to it.

Huh?

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

Not canon law the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)
It starts out
The term laity is here to be understood to mean all the faithful except those in holy orders and those who belong to a religious state approved by the Church

 

[Paisius]

BigFeet I’m Orthodox and this is one area that traditional Catholics and Orthodox agree, I would never touch the consecrated Host and I consider it utterly sacrilegious to do so.

 

[DJim]

It still is an unthinkable abuse.
In the end, all of these wretched abuses will prove themselves why they are wrong so that the Catholic Church does not allow for these errors to occur in the future…

Can anyone even possibly explain how an individual can sit in judgment on the authority of Jesus Christ alive in the Church today and call a legitimate practice instituted by that same authority an “unthinkable abuse”???

If you want to discuss true and abiding disrespect for Jesus Christ, I would suggest that one not limit the discussion to the Blessed Sacrament, but one might also include the disrespect shown to the teachers to whom Jesus gave authority…

DJim

 

[BigFeet]

Do you have any idea how many hosts fall out of people’s mouths even when tongue is used? Or get spat out for that matter - children will do so.

I actually do have an idea. Rarely do they “fall out”. And if a Sacred Host does happen to drop off of someone’s tongue, that’s what a paten is for. Every particle is caught, and the paten is purified after Communion by the priest. When you have particles or crumbs remaining in your sweaty, filthy hand, you don’t even realize that they’re there, and you drop Him on the ground to be trampled. The priest purifies his hand after Communion. Do you? Also, “Children” do not spit out the host. Where on earth do you attend Mass???

Or how many particles go flying through the air and fall and get trampled on even when it’s distributed by tongue?

How is this possible? The priest does not shoot the Sacred Host through the air with a sling shot onto somebody’s tongue. Again…where do you attend Mass???

I challenge you to demonstrate (and not just by anecdotes - you could find plenty of anecdotes about distribution by tongue too) that there is more casual profanation with distribution by hand than with distribution by tongue before making such baseless assumptions.

Here’s a big one, and it isn’t “casual profanation”. It’s been proven that Satan worshippers hold “Black Masses” in which they profane our Lord in the Eucharist using the Sacred Hosts that they carry right out of Catholic churches after receiving in the hand.

And what exactly is “casual profanation”??? Is that like having a casual abortion? Profanity is profanity, no matter how you may choose to dismiss it.

My “assumptions” are not “baseless”. It’s called common sense…unless you’re in denial of reality. When you eat any food that has crumbs that you don’t want to get all over, it’s best to have it placed directly into your mouth while a plate is held under it. Obviously, the more it’s handled, the greater chance that particles will break off and fall to the ground.

 

[Thursday1]

Not canon law the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)
It starts out
The term laity is here to be understood to mean all the faithful except those in holy orders and those who belong to a religious state approved by the Church

Oops!
You know I’ve been on here too long when I see CCC=CIC

BigFeet:

Here’s a big one, and it isn’t “casual profanation”. It’s been proven that Satan worshippers hold “Black Masses” in which they profane our Lord in the Eucharist using the Sacred Hosts that they carry right out of Catholic churches after receiving in the hand.

People were stealing hosts long before communion in the hand was reinstated in the West. Everything from breaking into Churches to sewing “pockets” inside the mouth has been used.
In the end, you just have to trust that Christ will not let His Church fail. His Church allows reception in the hand.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

P.S.
I receive on the tongue, only because I was usually an acolyte at Mass, and didn’t have the time to give my thumb and forefinger an examination after receiving.

 

[richwmiller]

It’s been proven that Satan worshipers hold “Black Masses” in which they profane our Lord in the Eucharist using the Sacred Hosts that they carry right out of Catholic churches after receiving in the hand.

It used to be the job of the ushers to watch out for that. I am sure no usher today has even considered it.

 

[BigFeet]

Can anyone even possibly explain how an individual can sit in judgment on the authority of Jesus Christ alive in the Church today and call a legitimate practice instituted by that same authority an “unthinkable abuse”???
DJim

Simple. This “legitimate” practice was carried out illegitimately for many years by liberal dissenters without Church approval. It became so widespread “in the spirit of Vatican II”, that the Church finally caved in “because of the hardness of their hearts”. This isn’t the first time something like this was done (hmmmm), and in time they will correct the error of their ways. In the mean time, we’ll be held to account personally for actions which common sense dictates as wrong.

Thankfully, Holy Communion on the tongue remains the norm for the Catholic Church.

 

[LilyM]

I actually do have an idea. Rarely do they “fall out”. And if a Sacred Host does happen to drop off of someone’s tongue, that’s what a paten is for. Every particle is caught, and the paten is purified after Communion by the priest. When you have particles or crumbs remaining in your sweaty, filthy hand, you don’t even realize that they’re there, and you drop Him on the ground to be trampled. The priest purifies his hand after Communion. Do you? Also, “Children” do not spit out the host. Where on earth do you attend Mass???

Children spit out all sorts of food - and I’m sure some tasting the Precious Blood for the first time have probably spat it right back into the chalice.

How is this possible? The priest does not shoot the Sacred Host through the air with a sling shot onto somebody’s tongue. Again…where do you attend Mass???

This is possible because we’re talking light-as-a-feather crumbs of bread here. No slingshots necessary.

You ever opened a package of breadcrumbs? Or dried herbs, or any other light food? Whenever I do regardless of my care some crumbs do escape.

And if you’ve ever dropped or spilled ANYTHING you’ll know it never falls neatly in a semicircle of about 20cm around your feet or around where it dropped. Always ends up a metre away or even more. What paten on earth is going to catch anything that moves that far?

Fact is when the priest moves the hosts in any way - including to put them into your mouth - these particles do go into the air - and fall away from the paten onto the ground.

It’s been proven that Satan worshippers hold “Black Masses” in which they profane our Lord in the Eucharist using the Sacred Hosts that they carry right out of Catholic churches after receiving in the hand.

Satanic Masses (including filched consecrated hosts) are no more prevalent today than they were in the middle ages when there was no question of receiving on the tongue. If anything less so.

Clearly there are plenty of ways to obtain consecrated hosts without going up for communion, if one is determined to do so. I’ve known churches broken into and attempts made to open the tabernacle, that’s one way.

And what exactly is “casual profanation”??? Is that like having a casual abortion? Profanity is profanity, no matter how you may choose to dismiss it.

YOU used that expression yourself in your post and I repeated it in my answer to you, and you want to criticise me for repeating your own words?

I wasn’t the one being dismissive. I’m NOT dismissive, just dubious that such measures as receiving on the tongue make any real difference to levels of profanation.

My “assumptions” are not “baseless”. It’s called common sense…unless you’re in denial of reality. When you eat any food that has crumbs that you don’t want to get all over, it’s best to have it placed directly into your mouth while a plate is held under it. Obviously, the more it’s handled, the greater chance that particles will break off and fall to the ground.

Which’d be fine if patens were the size of dinner plates. Or even cake plates. Most if not all of 'em aren’t, so I doubt there’s any real difference. And it must be obvious to anyone that plenty of spills and crumbs happen even with this sort of feeding - ever seen a baby being fed?

 

[DJim]

Simple. This “legitimate” practice was carried out illegitimately for many years by liberal dissenters without Church approval. It became so widespread “in the spirit of Vatican II”, that the Church finally caved in “because of the hardness of their hearts”. This isn’t the first time something like this was done (hmmmm), and in time they will correct the error of their ways. In the mean time, we’ll be held to account personally for actions which common sense dictates as wrong.

Thankfully, Holy Communion on the tongue remains the norm for the Catholic Church.

Unfortunately (or is that fortunately?) your characterization above bears no resemblance to the actual truth.

The practice is NOT the result of “caving” (again, where is the respect for the Christ-given authority of the Church here?).

It is not an error in the least.

I have witnessed the most reverent receptions of Our Lord in the hand, both young and old.

I have also seen cavalier reception on the tongue, young and old.

This is such a profound non-issue that I remain amazed by the attention it receives.

The point isn’t what part of your body interacts with the Host–the point is whether you are properly disposed for intimate union with your Lord and Savior. It’s not about the “outside of the cup” so to speak, but the inside…

There is nothing wrong with either forms of reception as long as the Church–the spotless Bride of Christ–authorizes both.

As I see it, those who complain about “liberal dissenters” have themselves become the dissenters, which is unfortunate…

DJim

 

[retrovert]

Remember too that the priest may be in mortal sin when he says mass. It’s still the body and blood of our Lord.

 

[CrypticWritings]

Can anyone even possibly explain how an individual can sit in judgment on the authority of Jesus Christ alive in the Church today and call a legitimate practice instituted by that same authority an “unthinkable abuse”???

If you want to discuss true and abiding disrespect for Jesus Christ, I would suggest that one not limit the discussion to the Blessed Sacrament, but one might also include the disrespect shown to the teachers to whom Jesus gave authority…

DJim

If my commanding officer prepares to lead my men and I down a path he believes safe and I know I have seen guerilla rebels placing landmines there the previous evening, you better believe I’m going to tell him what I witnessed.

We cannot confuse authority with omnipotence. The pope is human, he is an authority, and yes, he can make mistakes.
Part of our duty as good and faithful followers is to look out for those apointed over us just as they are looking out for us.

It doesn’t mean I’m smarter or have any more competence than him, I’m just telling him what I know to be true and will stand by it.

In a similiar way, there is nothing wrong with an employee telling a superviser their ideas on how to improve a process. Give them proper respect and let them know what your idea or perception is…who knows, maybe you’ll save time and money.

Perhaps, you do not understand the perspective I am coming from. Could I not percieve that you have in effect passed a “judgement” upon me?

Oh, no worries, I’m not so bothered by it, if you want, and I could, I’d treat you to a nice microbrew…mmmmm…

 

[DJim]

Perhaps, you do not understand the perspective I am coming from. Could I not percieve that you have in effect passed a “judgement” upon me?

Oh, no worries, I’m not so bothered by it, if you want, and I could, I’d treat you to a nice microbrew…mmmmm…

The point is that “we” don’t get to decide when something the Magisterium does is an “unthinkable abuse” or not…

Your analogy fails because the Magisterium does not go around planting “landmines” in the Church.

The legitimate authority of the Church says that Communion in the hand is okay. You call it an “unthinkable abuse.”

So, I do indeed pass judgment on your statement (not you personally)–your statement is flatly false and disrespectful of the legitimate authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

DJim

PS–If I drank “brew”, I’d gladly accept…

 

[CrypticWritings]

The point is that “we” don’t get to decide when something the Magisterium does is an “unthinkable abuse” or not…

Your analogy fails because the Magisterium does not go around planting “landmines” in the Church.

The legitimate authority of the Church says that Communion in the hand is okay. You call it an “unthinkable abuse.”

So, I do indeed pass judgment on your statement (not you personally)–your statement is flatly false and disrespectful of the legitimate authority of the Roman Catholic Church.

DJim

PS–If I drank “brew”, I’d gladly accept…

When I have time later (and provided I don’t forget), I wanted to start a new thread about this sort of thing. I just finished talking on the phone to a friend about such an issue.
Anyway, I do feel my analogy is applicable, but that’s okay if you don’t like it.
Here is a scenario of what I see that can “contradict”:
I was browsing through my Catechism of the Council of Trent a while back for a paper I had to write. I was curious when I read the council’s statements about the Eucharist.
The Council of Trent stated only the priest is able to administer the Eucharist, and that only the priest recieved under both Species, namely the Precious Body and Blood.
So there is a problem that now we have a different “directive” on this. Why?
One reason stated at Trent was that the faithful should not recieve the Precious Blood because of possible spillage.
Not much has really changed, liquid can still spill.
I don’t say this to be a “wise guy”, but I ask why the change?
We recieve Our Lord in His fullness under the Species of Bread. It was a heresy in the past days to say we had to receive under both kinds to fully participate, hence the decision/directive at the council.
We still have the freedom not to receive both Species, but now it is “accepted” for us to receive both. People are no less clumsy that they were in the past.
Also, even with a perceived “shortage” of priests, I have still seen the faithful recieve Holy Communion in a orderly and timely fashion when only one priest is administering to almost 200 people.

I can’t help but ask how we can change a standard that is so important. Even touching the Ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament caused that poor soul to be “struck dead”. We have here something much more than that, We have the Body and Blood of Christ. So, I can’t help but consider and pray and ask for an improvement in this standard.
Just as a side note, there is nothing I say here that I would not personally say to the pope or any bishop in person. I have my own faults to work on and sure, the powers that be may not care what I have to say, but I believe these are issues that must be addressed and they are the cause of so much confusion.

 

[richwmiller]

Thankfully, Holy Communion on the tongue remains the norm for the Catholic Church.

In Mexico it is the only way. You hold out your hand and it goes in your mouth anyways.