Pastor only allowing communion onto tongue

[Lapey]

And get lots of cake all over each others face. In fact, most is smeared on the face from what I’ve seen.

I’m just saying from my experience that I had to practice taking Holy Communion so we knew how to do it. I’m assuming that the same practice is necessary for reception by tongue through a **priest or Eucharistic minister **that is obviously not as intimate as a spouse. Again, I’ve never seen anyone take it via tongue in person and I’m assuming most don’t know how to. Not to mention they would likely be upset with the priest for bringing back pre-Vatican II practices.

I think I am misunderstanding your point, but this is my thought to your statements.

1. The priest is the only Eucharistic minister at the Mass, all the rest are ministers of Holy Communion; either ordinary (deacon) or extra-ordinary (lay person).
2. COTH and/or COTT are not pre or post Vat II methods. Communion on the tongue was the norm before and after Vat. II Council. The indult, special permission, was requested and granted after the Vatican II council. So returning to a COTT only policy would not be reverting to a pre-Vat. II practice.
3. If you have never seen anyone receive on the tongue I would say we are in worse shape then I ever thought.

 

[illinidiva]

Why is the way Communion is received an indication of the Church’s shape? It could be more of an indication of how receiving Communion is taught to the children preparing for it. I went to a conservative parish and that was how we practiced it. We literally had to practice it with unconsecrated hosts. Most Gen Xers, Gen Years, and younger at regular parishes were probably taught it this way and are accustomed to receiving it that way. If a priest decided to change the practice on snap notice, there would just be lots of upset and confused parishioners who wouldn’t know how to receive Communion. Also, it would be considered like the priest imposing a more traditionalist philosophy on the parish. There would definitely be lots of upset parishoners contacting the bishop or finding a new parish.

I really don’t want to get into an argument over this and which is more reverent. I’m looking at the issue practically and why it may be unwise for a pastor to impose his will on such a matter.

 

[estesbob]

Why is the way Communion is received an indication of the Church’s shape? It could be more of an indication of how receiving Communion is taught to the children preparing for it. I went to a conservative parish and that was how we practiced it. We literally had to practice it with unconsecrated hosts. Most Gen Xers, Gen Years, and younger at regular parishes were probably taught it this way and are accustomed to receiving it that way. If a priest decided to change the practice on snap notice, there would just be lots of upset and confused parishioners who wouldn’t know how to receive Communion. Also, it would be considered like the priest imposing a more traditionalist philosophy on the parish. There would definitely be lots of upset parishoners contacting the bishop or finding a new parish.

I really don’t want to get into an argument over this and which is more reverent. I’m looking at the issue practically and why it may be unwise for a pastor to impose his will on such a matter.

Beats me. i am so overwhelmed to receive Our Lord and Savior I dont really care which option people choose to use.

 

[Lapey]

Why is the way Communion is received an indication of the Church’s shape? It could be more of an indication of how receiving Communion is taught to the children preparing for it. I went to a conservative parish and that was how we practiced it. We literally had to practice it with unconsecrated hosts. Most Gen Xers, Gen Years, and younger at regular parishes were probably taught it this way and are accustomed to receiving it that way. If a priest decided to change the practice on snap notice, there would just be lots of upset and confused parishioners who wouldn’t know how to receive Communion. Also, it would be considered like the priest imposing a more traditionalist philosophy on the parish. There would definitely be lots of upset parishoners contacting the bishop or finding a new parish.

I really don’t want to get into an argument over this and which is more reverent. I’m looking at the issue practically and why it may be unwise for a pastor to impose his will on such a matter.

It is a suggestion of the “shape” in which we are in because of the fact that COTT is the norm and COTH is the indult. That is all. Most classes for training communicants for their first reception do not train and practice both methods, isn’t this imposing our will on these kids by not teaching and practicing both methods? That is my only point here. Teach and practice both and allow people to choose. There are many who would like to receive on the tongue and kneeling but do not because everything out there today frowns on this as “making a spectacle” of one’s self. I have had our director of the Office of Worship for our diocese make this very statement when I was in formation; in fact the GIRM used to state that pastoral care must be taken to catechize the faithful who present themselves in this manner.

But this thread is not about this, it is about whether a pastor has authority to make a change, and he does.

Neither do I care to argue about the difference in reverence that would be fruitless.

 

[ProVobis]

1. If you have never seen anyone receive on the tongue I would say we are in worse shape then I ever thought.

From what I’ve been hearing, CITH is all they teach now in most places.

And they still do it wrong.

 

[Brendan]

From what I’ve been hearing, CITH is all they teach now in most places.

And they still do it wrong.

When my son (now 15) was in 2nd Grade, the teachers refused to teach COTT and attempted to enforce CITH only. My son indicated that he wished to receive COTT and it finally took the involvement of the pastor to set the teachers right on their lack of authority in the matter.

But you are correct, the only reason that illinidiva would have a point would be do bad catechesis.

 

[malphono]

When my son (now 15) was in 2nd Grade, the teachers refused to teach COTT and attempted to enforce CITH only. My son indicated that he wished to receive COTT and it finally took the involvement of the pastor to set the teachers right on their lack of authority in the matter.

Sound like those teachers were relics of the infamous Detroit liturgical circus of the late 1960s and 1970s (under the tutelage of certain hierarchs who shall remain nameless here, but you know who). Unfortunately I remember it all too well.

But anyway … I hope those “teachers” have since been put out to pasture.

 

[Lapey]

Sound like those teachers were relics of the infamous Detroit liturgical circus of the late 1960s and 1970s (under the tutelage of certain hierarchs who shall remain nameless here, but you know who). Unfortunately I remember it all too well.

But anyway … I hope those “teachers” have since been put out to pasture.

Unfortunately these teachers are very prevalent in many parishes. There is a stigma placed on clerics like myself who push for equal time in training kids to receive under both methods. I have talked to our CCD teachers and to no avail, and I am reminded that I am not the pastor, by the nun. There is still a very large bias against teaching COTT, don’t even try to attempt to explain why it is a viable option to kneel to receive if one so chooses. That option is a excommunicable offense!

 

[malphono]

Unfortunately these teachers are very prevalent in many parishes. There is a stigma placed on clerics like myself who push for equal time in training kids to receive under both methods. I have talked to our CCD teachers and to no avail, and I am reminded that I am not the pastor, by the nun. There is still a very large bias against teaching COTT, don’t even try to attempt to explain why it is a viable option to kneel to receive if one so chooses. That option is a excommunicable offense!

I suppose so. But it’s depressing. You used the “magic word” though, so I guess I’m not surprised.

You’re an ordained deacon and she’s a sister … and she’s telling **you **what’s right and what’s not??? It really is depressing

 

[Brendan]

Unfortunately these teachers are very prevalent in many parishes. There is a stigma placed on clerics like myself who push for equal time in training kids to receive under both methods. I have talked to our CCD teachers and to no avail, and I am reminded that I am not the pastor, by the nun. There is still a very large bias against teaching COTT, don’t even try to attempt to explain why it is a viable option to kneel to receive if one so chooses. That option is a excommunicable offense!

When we first visited the parish to which we now belong, that son of mine saw Holy Communion being offered Intincted at the communion rail.

He came out of that Mass and told my wife “THIS is where I want to make my First Communion”

We were in the process of moving into a larger house, nearby to our old house, but different parish., and were just checking out what the new parish was like.

Needless to say, my son’s comment was exactly what we wanted to hear.

We spoke with our soon to be new pastor and he agreed to have our son make his First Communion in our new parish, as opposed to his gradeschool class. So we did.

 

[YoungTradCath]

Unfortunately these teachers are very prevalent in many parishes. There is a stigma placed on clerics like myself who push for equal time in training kids to receive under both methods. I have talked to our CCD teachers and to no avail, and I am reminded that I am not the pastor, by the nun. There is still a very large bias against teaching COTT, don’t even try to attempt to explain why it is a viable option to kneel to receive if one so chooses. That option is a excommunicable offense!

I’m sorry.

 

[Gorgias]

Lapey:

I have talked to our CCD teachers and to no avail, and I am reminded that I am not the pastor, by the nun.

You’re an ordained deacon and she’s a sister … and she’s telling **you **what’s right and what’s not???

No; from the looks of it, she isn’t talking about correctness, but about authority. If the pastor says, “this is the way we’re going to do it around here,” then that’s likely the way it’s gonna be.

On the other hand, if it’s just an obstinancy at the CCD program, then it would seem to make the most sense for the deacon in the parish to go directly to the pastor, rather than to the individual teacher.

 

[Lapey]

No; from the looks of it, she isn’t talking about correctness, but about authority. If the pastor says, “this is the way we’re going to do it around here,” then that’s likely the way it’s gonna be.

On the other hand, if it’s just an obstinacy at the CCD program, then it would seem to make the most sense for the deacon in the parish to go directly to the pastor, rather than to the individual teacher.

I have. But I do go to the classes and share with the kids the other options. I do it in a non-confrontational way. In the pastor’s defense, he is elderly, 79, and very orthodox in most teachings. For some reason on this issue he has deferred to the nun. It is a situation that is present in many parish CCD programs from what I have seen. It is easily proven by watching the first communicants receive, none that I have watched in the last five years have chosen to receive on the tongue.

What have others witnessed?

 

[ProVobis]

I have. But I do go to the classes and share with the kids the other options. I do it in a non-confrontational way. In the pastor’s defense, he is elderly, 79, and very orthodox in most teachings. For some reason on this issue he has deferred to the nun. It is a situation that is present in many parish CCD programs from what I have seen. It is easily proven by watching the first communicants receive, none that I have watched in the last five years have chosen to receive on the tongue.

What have others witnessed?

I try not to watch.

 

[pnewton]

To whom to you feel that the Vatican is giving the right to determine the level of risk of profanation?

There was nothing in the original post that mentioned any risk of profanation. That is a special circumstance. I also note that the document does not state who is given this right. I believe this line is a red herring. Taken in context, this sentence simply cannot mean that CITH is denied because a priest always thinks their is a risk of the Blessed Sacrament being profaned. Church documents, like Scripture, do not lend to proof-texting. The immediate context is, " if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the hand, in areas where the Bishops’ Conference with the recognitio of the Apostolic See has given permission,* the sacred host is to be administered to him or her**. " *

 

[MissRose73]

I would have no issue with reception on the tongue only myself.

 

[maltmom]

I have. But I do go to the classes and share with the kids the other options. I do it in a non-confrontational way. In the pastor’s defense, he is elderly, 79, and very orthodox in most teachings. For some reason on this issue he has deferred to the nun. It is a situation that is present in many parish CCD programs from what I have seen. It is easily proven by watching the first communicants receive, none that I have watched in the last five years have chosen to receive on the tongue.

What have others witnessed?

In my parish the first communicants all received COTT. I hadn’t thought about it beforehand, I guess I thought some would choose CITH and some COTT. I’m not sure if they were taught both ways. If I remember, I’ll ask Sunday bc I know one of the teachers.

 

[illinidiva]

In my parish the first communicants all received COTT. I hadn’t thought about it beforehand, I guess I thought some would choose CITH and some COTT. I’m not sure if they were taught both ways. If I remember, I’ll ask Sunday bc I know one of the teachers.

They are seven and eight years old. They are going to choose either what feels less icky or what mom and dad want them to do. Second graders don’t have detailed opinions on the validity of a certain sacrament.

 

[Lapey]

They are seven and eight years old. They are going to choose either what feels less icky or what mom and dad want them to do. Second graders don’t have detailed opinions on the validity of a certain sacrament.

So the age of reason makes no impression on you? The reason I asked was if the children are observed as I have seen all receiving on the hand then that is probably all they were taught and visa versa. They should be taught and practice both ways of receiving, then as they age they can be prepared to decide. That is all.

 

[Lapey]

In my parish the first communicants all received COTT. I hadn’t thought about it beforehand, I guess I thought some would choose CITH and some COTT. I’m not sure if they were taught both ways. If I remember, I’ll ask Sunday bc I know one of the teachers.

All receive on the tongue? I wonder if the teachers have specific instruction to require this, interesting.