More reverence for the Eucharist!

  • Thread starter Thread starter lemminghead
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lemminghead

Guest
People need to stop receiving communion in their hand. More
reverence for the Eucharist!
 
The Magesterium has determined that communion in the hand is just as copasetic as receiving on the tongue, and have approved the practice.
 
40.png
lemminghead:
People need to stop receiving communion in their hand. More
reverence for the Eucharist!
Click to expand...
Only you are suggesting receiving on the tongue is more reverent. The Church disagrees with you.
 
40.png
lemminghead:
People need to stop receiving communion in their hand. More
reverence for the Eucharist!
Click to expand...
I would tend to agree that I feel it is more reverent, but technically Catholics are allowed to receive both ways. Personally, I receive on the tounge. I have a hunch, though, that Benedict is going to be the best ally you or I have ever had.
 
I think reverence for the Eucharist extends far beyond the issue of receiving on the tongue or in the hand.

I notice these things that bother me a lot more:
  • Priests and deacons who ‘dump’ consecrated hosts from one ciborium to the next
  • Priests, deacons, and EMHC’s who distribute communion as if they were dealing cards
  • EMHC, priests and deacons who pour the Precious Blood from one chalice to another when someone runs out
  • People who receive communion and on their way back to their pew are looking around, arms dangling at their sides, chewing with their mouth open, or talking to the person in front of or in back of them - or all of the above from the same person
  • People with their hands in their pockets while in the communion line, looking around trying to find a face they know
  • People who walk directly in front of the tabernacle without a genuflection - or a bow of the head if they are unable to genuflect
  • People who exit the church to get a drink during the consecration, and, even worse, walking directly alongside the altar or in front of it to do so instead of picking a less obvious exit door
  • EMHC’s who disagree with the church’s teachings on confession, birth control, women’s ordination, etc. Their participation as EMHC’s is, in my opinion, a disrespect.
I could probably go on if I thought more about what I have seen. But my point is that receiving in the hand or on the tongue is, in my opinion, not an indication of our reverence towards the Eucharist. It’s our demeanor, posture, and the state of our soul that counts when we are in the sacramental presence of our Lord.
 
I agree that there’s much more to question of reverence for the Eucharist than just how one receives. As to the reverence of the mode of reception, I’d say the modern Church which uses the practice has never stated anything explicitly. Obviously, she allows reception in the hand. Yet this is also only by indult. So I would hesitate to say that the Church’s allowance of the practice has anything to do with pronouncing it equally or more reverent than receiving on the tongue.
 
Andreas Hofer:
So I would hesitate to say that the Church’s allowance of the practice has anything to do with pronouncing it equally or more reverent than receiving on the tongue.
Click to expand...
Good point.
 
40.png
Kielbasi:
The Magesterium has determined that communion in the hand is just as copasetic as receiving on the tongue, and have approved the practice.
Click to expand...
I thought receiving in the hand was by indult and that the norm was on the tongue. Am I wrong on that?
 
I think part of the problem of the attitude of nonchalance toward the Blessed Scarament lies with the formation children are getting (or rather, not getting) in religious classes. I have sent my three kids to Catholic grammar school, and with each child I participated in the preparation program they had for the parents and kids. Each time, the emphasis was on “sharing” and having a “family meal,” etc., etc. I don’t recall any mention of the Body and Blood of Christ. I had to explain this to my children.
 
40.png
palmas85:
I thought receiving in the hand was by indult and that the norm was on the tongue. Am I wrong on that?
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure you’re right about that. The indult exists for the American Catholic Church. This is a real hornet’s nest, though. The hand-takers are pretty protective about their indult and will be brutal to anyone who thinks receiving the Blessed Sacrament on the tongue is better than popping it like popcorn and brushing the particles off on your jeans.
 
40.png
cargopilot:
I’m pretty sure you’re right about that. The indult exists for the American Catholic Church. This is a real hornet’s nest, though. The hand-takers are pretty protective about their indult and will be brutal to anyone who thinks receiving the Blessed Sacrament on the tongue is better than popping it like popcorn and brushing the particles off on your jeans.
Click to expand...
It must exist elsewhere too. During the pomp in Rome a few months ago, I saw several people literally grabbing the Host out of the hand of the ministers. They didn’t even wait for it to be placed in their hands.

And, yes, receiving on the tongue is still the norm for the Latin Rite.
 
I’d hate to say the obvious, but the most irreverent to me is when people who have no business “receiving” the Eucharist go right on up there because “it’s their Jesus too”…I speak of the ones who openly confess to not believing in the Real Presence.
 
I totally agree. For many years I received in the hand till I started watching the mass on EWTN and realized how much more reverent it was.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top