Neocatechumenal way and the eucharist

[Igypop83]

Hello there, me and my fiancee are in a neocatechumenal comunity and I’m actually not very happy about some things there. One of them is the way, how the holy communion is recieved. The priest consecrates one piece of bread, which breaks into pieces which he gives to the people in the hand. But they all wait and consume it simultaniously after everyone has recieved it.
I know this way of recieving communion is approved for small communities but I don’t want to recieve it this way. Can I “insist” on recieving in the mouth like at “regular” mass?
I talked with the priest and he just said that there is nothing wrong about recieving in the hand and that I do not sin when doing it. What do you suggest me?

 

[Mike30]

Hello there, me and my fiancee are in a neocatechumenal comunity and I’m actually not very happy about some things there. One of them is the way, how the holy communion is recieved. The priest consecrates one piece of bread, which breaks into pieces which he gives to the people in the hand. But they all wait and consume it simultaniously after everyone has recieved it.
I know this way of recieving communion is approved for small communities but I don’t want to recieve it this way. Can I “insist” on recieving in the mouth like at “regular” mass?
I talked with the priest and he just said that there is nothing wrong about recieving in the hand and that I do not sin when doing it. What do you suggest me?

If you are uncomfortable in doing what the community does, why even bother to go there? Find another Parish.

 

[Igypop83]

Because I don’t consider everything bad what they are doing.

 

[SonCatcher]

Because I don’t consider everything bad what they are doing.

Just because they are not all bad doesn’t mean you should hang around them. St. Paul even couldn’t stay around St. Barnabas. If canonized saints had to part company, who are we to think we could get along with everybody who does good?

 

[triumphguy]

Because I don’t consider everything bad what they are doing.

Well nothing they are doing is “bad” if it’s approved. To “insist” on doing things your preferred way, however, would certainly be rude, and possibly disrespectful.

If your conscience says you ought not to receive communion in the NCW practice then do not attend.

 

[nagyszakall]

Hello there, me and my fiancee are in a neocatechumenal comunity and I’m actually not very happy about some things there. One of them is the way, how the holy communion is recieved. The priest consecrates one piece of bread, which breaks into pieces which he gives to the people in the hand. But they all wait and consume it simultaniously after everyone has recieved it.
I know this way of recieving communion is approved for small communities but I don’t want to recieve it this way. Can I “insist” on recieving in the mouth like at “regular” mass?
I talked with the priest and he just said that there is nothing wrong about recieving in the hand and that I do not sin when doing it. What do you suggest me?

I have a friend who had the exact same issue. The priest, however, had no problem (why should he?) giving him communion on the tongue when he didn’t raise his hand but put his tongue out. I don’t see why you couldn’t ask this priest one more time to give you communion on the tongue. I certainly wouldn’t consider it rude. I would ask him kindly before the celebration, explaining to him that this is how I prefer receiving communion…

 

[tafan]

While it may be true they have permission for this form of receiving communion, I would be shocked if that permission extended to the right of a priest to not allow one to receive communion in one of the two normal ways. So regardless of what the priest told youabout it not being wrong, just tell him you want to receive on the tongue. He has to allow it, you do not have to explain your reasoning to him.

 

[myfathersson]

While it may be true they have permission for this form of receiving communion

Actually this is what is known as a half-truth, of which you will find many in the Neocatechumenal Way.

The statutes of the NCW state:

“Regarding the distribution of Holy Communion under the two species, the
neocatechumens receive it standing, remaining at their place.” (Art 13, para 3)

This says nothing about whether communion is to be received in the hand or on the tongue. This article of the statutes was inserted as a response and amendment to the previous practise of the NCW receiving communion seated, which of course is anomalous, unless for reason of impairment.

Actually, in the current practise, the NCW member receives communion in the hand while standing, then takes a seat (without consuming) and waits until everyone else receives in a similar way. Once everyone receives in this manner, the priest (sorry presbyter) and the people consume simultaneously. This is clearly not what the vatican intended when it gave the approval to the Statutes, and more particularly when Cardinal Arinze transmitted the instructions of the Holy Father (internetica.it/neocatecumenali/english/Arinze-letter-interview.htm).

You can see now why the priest has a problem with the OP receiving on the tongue - because at that time, the priest himself has not taken communion.

 

[Igypop83]

Actually this is what is known as a half-truth, of which you will find many in the Neocatechumenal Way.

The statutes of the NCW state:

“Regarding the distribution of Holy Communion under the two species, the
neocatechumens receive it standing, remaining at their place.” (Art 13, para 3)

This says nothing about whether communion is to be received in the hand or on the tongue. This article of the statutes was inserted as a response and amendment to the previous practise of the NCW receiving communion seated, which of course is anomalous, unless for reason of impairment.

Actually, in the current practise, the NCW member receives communion in the hand while standing, then takes a seat (without consuming) and waits until everyone else receives in a similar way. Once everyone receives in this manner, the priest (sorry presbyter) and the people consume simultaneously. This is clearly not what the vatican intended when it gave the approval to the Statutes, and more particularly when Cardinal Arinze transmitted the instructions of the Holy Father (internetica.it/neocatecumenali/english/Arinze-letter-interview.htm).

You can see now why the priest has a problem with the OP receiving on the tongue - because at that time, the priest himself has not taken communion.

This is exactly how we are recieving holy communion! I’m actually from Austria and I thought, that might only be the habit in our community but maybe not globally in all neocatechumenal communities.
I actually don’t know what to do. I would like to have some community with other catholics and not just go to mass and that’s it. If it were not for the liturgy, I would actually be happy in the neocatechumenate. The people there seem to take their faith seriously, they also do many things together and the priest is really awesome.
So if I said, I don’t want to recieve the holy communion in any other way but on the tongue, could the priest deny it to me?
And why are they called presbyter? I was asking that myself many times.

 

[myfathersson]

If it were not for the liturgy, I would actually be happy in the neocatechumenate.

Hi, I understand what you mean. There are many good aspects to the NCW, and I have met some lovely people involved in it. Certainly there is a welcome moral conservatism and a deep desire to live one’s faith.

But the Eucharist celebration which is separate to the parish, and is liturgically flawed, has to be addressed. Part of the problem is that members are so defensive that any (legitimate) criticism is often treated as “persecution”, which is just another reason to believe it all the more firmly. “Persecution” is one of those favourite catch-phrases for the NCW, seeking to keep the individual from thinking, but merely subscribing to the group-think. Its the community at all costs, for the NCW.

Another problem is that the community takes over the role of the family as the fundamental unit on which the Christian community is built. The community becomes a de facto family. This can result in family members attending separate Eucharists in the same parish, and only ever going to mass together at Easter or other ‘special’ times. I know of one family where four members of the family are in four separate communities and therefore attend four separate “Eucharists” in the same parish! This is quite bizarre in my opinion.

Finally, there are few things that bother me more than the description of the Body of Christ being the “bread of slavery” (the Precious Blood being the cup of covenant or freedom). This comes from a heavily Judaic perspective where the Old Testament prefiguring of Christ overshadows the person of God revealed in Jesus Christ in the New Testament. I can’t seem to accept the notion that the Body of Christ is the bread of slavery. The living bread come down from heaven, yes, but not of slavery.

If the NCW was to integrate more into the parish (ie attend Mass with the rest of the parish; not retain the tithes for themselves but direct them to the parish etc) most of the liturgical misunderstandings and malpractises would cease. Also the members would hopefully be exposed to more orthodox Catholic teaching.

 

[corsair]

I look at this a little differently, I suppose. When I go to the TLM (EF) everybody recieves on the tongue and kneeling; the OF is sort of a “mixed bag” when it comes to communion. So if you are going to be a NeoCat, then be one. If not then go elsewhere.

This is why I go to the EF only. The other forms are valid, its just a matter of choice.

 

[Itari]

The problem is that given the manner in which communion is done I think it would be difficult to receive on the tongue because you would technically be receiving before the priest does which is not allowed.

Edit: I was actually wondering why you feel it is better to receive on the tongue rather than by hand? I hope I dont sound judgmental, I am just wondering as to what you feel the difference is.

 

[tafan]

The problem is that given the manner in which communion is done I think it would be difficult to receive on the tongue because you would technically be receiving before the priest does which is not allowed.

Edit: I was actually wondering why you feel it is better to receive on the tongue rather than by hand? I hope I dont sound judgmental, I am just wondering as to what you feel the difference is.

Then the priest should allow for communicants after he has received. Although , I am skeptical about the form NCW receive communion, I do not want to argue that. My only point is that the priest cannot refuse you receiving it on the tongue.

Someone compared it to not being able to receive it in the hand at a EF mass. Not the same at all. The EF is celebrated according to a completely different rubric, which is approved in its entirety. The NCW cannot claim this about their liturgy. It might be an approved modifications to the NO mass, but it still a mass according to the GIRM, and unless those approved mods say one cannot receive on the tongue, then one can. Period.

 

[Itari]

I would imagine it could be done, it would seem out of place to have that one person receive on the tongue after everyone else, but sure why not. It all depends on who is celebrating and their liturgical inclinations. This issue is not so much of a NCW thing as it is the priest who presides.

 

[L_Marshall]

The priest should consume the Blessed Sacrament before distributing any of it. This has been specified by the USCCB here:

The celebrant receives Holy Communion first and then the people come forward.

Also: The priest cannot deny you communion on the tongue. This is also specified by the USCCB here:

The communicant may choose whether to receive the Body of Christ in the hand or on the tongue.

 

[Earthen_Vessel]

And how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

I don’t understand why churchgoing Catholics spend so much time debating such things while people are leaving the Church in droves and young people no longer attend.

It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. We need to evangelize!, brothers and sisters, not spend all our energy debating whether communion should be on the tongue or in the hands, sitting or standing, etc., etc. I know there are liturgical rules and standards and I also know the liturgy is rich with symbolism and should always be reverent and should not be disrespected.

But souls are being lost, while they laugh at the Church that has the only answer to death, because we don’t evangelize! These people don’t give a fig about what you’re discussing in this thread and laugh at us because we sit in our church circles arguing with each other.

Brothers and sisters, it’s time to get out of ourselves and start preaching the Gospel to the people. No one, and I mean no one who needs to hear the Good News of Christ’s victory over death, cares about the things being argued about in this thread!

Instead, go out and tell your neighbors, who are suffering terribly, that Christ has been victorious over their death and he offers them eternal life, gratis, free of charge. That’s what people are waiting to hear. Or better yet, explaining concretely how Jesus Christ has rescued you from death in your own experience. This is what people wait to hear from us.

Again, and I say this with charity, “Wake up!”