on the tongue or in the hand?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mikworld
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I commune myself of course but if I am not the celebrant, I prefer to receive on the tongue as a communicant and almost all of my parishoners do so too. As a church historian, I have read that forming a “throne” for the eucharistic Christ with your hands is the ancient way of receiving—will see if I can find that reference, I think it may be St. Ambrose—receiving on the tongue arose in the Middle Ages so the priest could be sure you were actually consuming the Sacred Body and not saving it to smuggle home with you to use for purposes of magic etc, like blessing your fields or farm animals with it. Black Magic also had uses for consecrated hosts, so the priest stuck it on your tongue just to be sure. I went to a convent recently to pick up altar bread for the church here and got to watch the sisters there make the bread. Interesting process, it’s like a waffle iron. A huge waffle iron.

Here everyone who can kneels to receive the Most Blessed Sacrament; but it is interesting that the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325, the one that finalised the date for Easter, also enjoined us to STAND for communion during the entire Easter Season as a sign of joy.
 
40.png
patg:
My favorite Franciscan Theologian (my uncle) once told me that the mass is mostly the celebration of the last supper *which was a meal. *We eat with our hands and not with the server putting food into our mouths. By his logic, there is no reason not to take this spiritual nourishment into our hands and fully enter into the celebration and enjoyment of the meal (unless, of course, our hands are otherwise occuppied).

Pat
Click to expand...
So by that logic, are you saying that those who do not receive with the hands are not fully participating in mass?
I converted to the faith 3 years ago, and I have recieved the Eucharist in my hand twice…it just doesn’t seem right. I don’t know if it is just me, but touching our Lord with hands that have sinned so many times, I have a hard time doing that. Besides, it’s Jesus! It just feels weird holding Him in the palm of my hand anyway!
God Bless,

Justin
 
I used to receive in the hand, but have recently switched back to the tongue. NOt because I think it’s more “proper”, but simply because for me, right now, it just seems that I am more fully, physically receiving Christ: I am open and ready for Him.

But that’s just me. Some people may feel that way receiving in the hand. I may feel that way some day too.
 
40.png
mikworld:
So by that logic, are you saying that those who do not receive with the hands are not fully participating in mass?
Justin
Click to expand...
“There is no reason not to…” hardly implies such a general statemnt about the mass. And please note - “I” did not say this, I am merely the messenger here.

Pat
 
40.png
Deacon2006:
It is the church that permitts the recieving on the tongue or hand and not our opinion of a historical examination of first century eating habits.

God Bless
Click to expand...
Since the Church permits receiving in the hand, we’re not talking about “our opinion”, are we? (and thus I don’t see why I am being flamed for it). I also believe we still eat with our hands - I don’t think much has changed there.

I was merely giving an observation as to why taking in the hand is a very reasonable thing to do; I am sorry if this upset anyone.

Pat
 
40.png
misericordie:
… the rules are clear, only the priests are to distribute the Body of Our Lord in Mass, UNLESS he is too old, alone(no other priests in the parish to come down to Mass to help him) or he is alone, offering Mass in a Mass with hundreds of people and maybe he is very sick and old. THEN, a lay person can help him, … .
Click to expand...
  1. Can you give us a reference for those conditions (“too old” etc.)? (Also, I think you left out deacons:
    Can. 910, 1: “The ordinary minister of holy communion is a Bishop, a priest or a deacon.” )
40.png
misericordie:
… but if I were in that Mass, I would go ONLY on that priest’s line, even if I have to stand there 1/2 hour.
Click to expand...
  1. Why? Do you believe that what the Church teaches in Canon Law, etc. is wrong?
    Do you believe that there is no real presence if not distributed by a priest?
    or … ?
(Can. 910, 2: “The extraordinary minister of holy communion is an acolyte, or another of Christ’s faithful deputed in accordance with can. 230.” … and Can. 230 is here: vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_PV.HTM#GA
 
40.png
patg:
I was merely giving an observation as to why taking in the hand is a very reasonable thing to do; I am sorry if this upset anyone.
Click to expand...
I think Deacon2006 was simply suggesting that we ought not try to reason “why” the Church allows the various modes of reception. And a caution against drawing conclusions based on viewing the Last Supper as a “meal”, because that tends to underemphasize its real significance. (I think that’s what he meant.)

But with regard to some of the other responses… it seems to me that some who oppose receiving in the hand will take every opportunity to challenge those who aren’t opposed. Yes, it is one’s right to receive on the tongue… but it’s not one’s right to ridicule or judge those who don’t, or to read honest discussion as an attack of some kind.

Extraordinary Ministers is an issue that often gets the same treatment, and it has in this thread. But to respond to that would be off-topic.
 
40.png
misericordie:
You must mean the PRIESTS?? Because the only “Eucharistic Minister” is the PRIEST! Now, if you mean the EXTRA_ORDINARY Eucharistic minister(small m), (a LAY person), then, well, tough cookies for them if it “flusters” them. I DON’T RECIEVE from any lay person in Mass, because the rules are clear, only the priests are to distribute the Body of Our Lord in Mass, UNLESS he is too old, alone(no other priests in the parish to come down to Mass to help him) or he is alone, offering Mass in a Mass with hundreds of people and maybe he is very sick and old. THEN, a lay person can help him, but if I were in that Mass, I would go ONLY on that priest’s line, even if I have to stand there 1/2 hour.
Click to expand...
This is patently wrong.

And it really ISN’T a tough cookies for them. If the EME or EMoHC gets flustered, there is a chance they may drop the Eucharist on the ground. That is to be avoided at all costs. As an EME or EMoHC, I am nervous about this. It almost happened to me once, but thankfully, the person put out their hands and avoided the drop.

I have since learned to anticipate who receives on the hand who receives in the mouth. A surprising number of people receive on the mouth and I have no problems with not administering it in the proper fashion.

Now, on to the business about “only the priest”. Not true. There should be no proliferation of extraordinary ministers, but that’s about it. Most parishes these days do not have enough priests but have plenty of people. In my parish, extraordinary ministers are used at almost every Mass on Sunday and are used at every Mass during the week because that is when the blood is administered.

Catholicism is not an individual religion. If you have a problem with extraordinary ministers, take it up with your pastor. Ask to see where it says they can be used at your parish. But do not take it upon yourself to determine that they are being incorrectly used at your parish.
 
While Catholicism is not an individual religion, our salvation is an individual path. Some of us approach it as a long trip with many paths available to us that will all lead to the same destination. Others are very rigid in their travel plans and get frustrated at detours and roadblocks. Even Christ had to fight his demons in the desert.
 
loyola rambler:
While Catholicism is not an individual religion, our salvation is an individual path. Some of us approach it as a long trip with many paths available to us that will all lead to the same destination. Others are very rigid in their travel plans and get frustrated at detours and roadblocks. Even Christ had to fight his demons in the desert.
Click to expand...
That’s a good reminder, loyola. However, there do come times when others roadblocks really are obstinent pre-conceived notions. For example, those who reject many important Church teachings and refuse to change, as well as those who will not tolerate the very idea that others outside the Catholic Church can be saved.
 
In my youth, I was much more rigid and self-righteous (Ronald Reagan was such an idol!) But as I matured and as I started having kids and having to deal with their pre-conceived notions that everything maternal is inherently evil, I came to realize why God gave us all different talents and heads smart enough to work our way out of sticky situations. There are no absolute answers, other than we need to find our way to God and celebrate His glories in every way on everyday. If it’s done by dancing in prayer while doing housework, then hey! Blessed be God forever. If it’s found by meditating on a particular piece of organ music…then God is in each note.

Rigid thinking only makes for many frustrations. The real bottom line comes from one of those heretical secular songs from the 70s: You gotta take time to make time; make time to be there.

Showing up for mass is the first step in worship. It culminates with a wonderful little spiritual meal. Whether we put the Corpus Christi on our tongues or allow someone else to do it for us, the end result is a wonderful Communion with our Creator. Blessed be God forever!
 
loyola:

I draw the line at persistent disregard for Church doctrine. And even at that point, I realize that many are on a journey and haven’t come to the same conclusions that I have. A few years ago, as you know, I was pro-choice. Today I am not.

It’s more important that we follow Church doctrine than to worry about how many EME’s are up on the altar. Leave that up to the pastors. We can mention it if it bothers us, but, IMO, I wouldn’t let it get in the way of my worship.
 
40.png
redkim:
loyola:

It’s more important that we follow Church doctrine than to worry about how many EME’s are up on the altar. Leave that up to the pastors. We can mention it if it bothers us, but, IMO, I wouldn’t let it get in the way of my worship.
Click to expand...
Bingo!
 
loyola:

I’m not necessarily saying that anyone here does that, but I’ve found, from posting on other boards, that those who show a great concern for the rubrics of the mass seem to concentrate on that rather than on the worship of the Mass.

The Mass is a prayer. We shouldn’t be counting the do’s and don’t’s too much.
 
40.png
Mandi:
Always on the tongue, my hands are unworthy to touch the hem on the robe of My Lord and Saviour never mind His Body!
Click to expand...
I am the opposite. My tongue (what I say) gets me into more trouble than my hands (what I do).

Donna J
 
Donna J:
I am the opposite. My tongue (what I say) gets me into more trouble than my hands (what I do).

Donna J
Click to expand...
LOL!!

But seriously:

Not one part of us is “worthy” to recieve Christ. He is a gift to us.
 
Father George William Rutler, in a Homily on Good Friday, 1989, said:

"I will tell you a secret, since we have just a thousand close friends together, and also because we have the Missionaries of Charity with us, whom the Holy Spirit has sent into the world that the secrets of many hearts might be revealed. Not very long ago I said Mass and preached for their Mother, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and after breakfast we spent quite a long time talking in a little room. Suddenly, I found myself asking her (I don’t know why):

“Mother, what do you think is the worst problem in the world today?”

She more than anyone could name any number of candidates: famine, plague, disease, the breakdown of the family, rebellion against God, the corruption of the media, world debt, nuclear threat, and so on. Without pausing a second she said: "Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand
 
Not to disrespect Mother Theresa, but that is simply her opinion. The Vatican says we are allowed to receive it in the hand; that it is perfectly legitimate.
 
Brian Crane:
Father George William Rutler, in a Homily on Good Friday, 1989, said:

"I will tell you a secret, since we have just a thousand close friends together, and also because we have the Missionaries of Charity with us, whom the Holy Spirit has sent into the world that the secrets of many hearts might be revealed. Not very long ago I said Mass and preached for their Mother, Mother Teresa of Calcutta, and after breakfast we spent quite a long time talking in a little room. Suddenly, I found myself asking her (I don’t know why):

“Mother, what do you think is the worst problem in the world today?”

She more than anyone could name any number of candidates: famine, plague, disease, the breakdown of the family, rebellion against God, the corruption of the media, world debt, nuclear threat, and so on. Without pausing a second she said: "Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand
Click to expand...
I am so happy she DID say this, and the opinion of a BLESSED of the Church who lived a PUBLIC Holy life as she did, is NOT to be taken lightly. I have heard even the Pope would ask her for advice on certain things.
 
40.png
redkim:
Not to disrespect Mother Theresa, but that is simply her opinion. The Vatican says we are allowed to receive it in the hand; that it is perfectly legitimate.
Click to expand...
Hence her sadness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top