POLL: How do you receive Communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LisaB
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting, as I was just about to say the exact same thing. At my home parish, the communion rail is used by nearly everyone. Same thing. Most everybody receives on the tongue whilst kneeling. I feel very lucky and privileged to be able to receive this way.
 
On the tongue, although, I do remember the priest dropping the host once. Those priests got some ninja moves, so no one stepped on Jesus. I used to receive on the hand, and I really have no objection to it, on the tongue is just a preference.
 
I always do on the tongue unless there’s a hygienic reason to not do so, such as me being sick. I also will take the Precious Blood if offered unless, again, I have a hygienic reason to avoid it.

At my old parish, hand vs. tongue it was very split, but most received on the hand, and I would say a good majority also took a sip of the Precious Blood. I visited a parish today that’ll probably become my home parish that had altar rails. It looked like most received on the tongue, but the couple next to me received in the hand. The Precious Blood was not offered as far as I could tell. It felt weird to not have it, but I know that it isn’t necessary.
 
The implication in some of the posts in this thread is that receiving on the tongue is required. Is this true?

I hadn’t heard that.
 
blackforest said:
The implication in some of the posts in this thread is that receiving on the tongue is required. Is this true?

I hadn’t heard that.
Click to expand...
If you’re in the USA, the USCCB explicitly states:
Those who receive Communion may receive either in the hand or on the tongue, and the decision should be that of the individual receiving, not of the person distributing Communion.
Click to expand...
http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-wor...t/the-reception-of-holy-communion-at-mass.cfm

So no, it’s not “required” to receive on the tongue in USA.
Unless you are at an EF Mass where the Mass program often contains a statement that no Communion in the hand will be given. At EF Mass, everyone is typically expected to receive kneeling at the altar rail and on the tongue.
 
So why is receiving Communion in the hand, a practice sanctioned by the Vatican and USCCB, being called “diabolical?”

If I’m opening Pandora’s can of worms or whatever, I can delete this post. I just know that the controversy exists but am genuinely curious about its origins.
 
Short answer: There are a group of conservative clerics within the Church who believe that changes like Communion in the hand, not having the priest face “ad orientem”, etc are part of a general trend away from having reverence towards Jesus/ God and doing things the way God wants us to, and that this is having a bad effect on the overall church and on individual parishes.

As “proof”, I’ve heard priests say things like when their parish went back to all traditional practices, their attendance and collections went up by a huge amount, proving that God blesses parishes that do what He wants. I myself would say when attendance goes up like that, it’s a sign that there is just a large traditional Catholic base in the area that was being underserved by the existing parishes.

I’m sure one or more of the traditionalist posters can give you a more detailed answer from their perspective. I’m a moderate and while I am happy to have TLM options and to see Marian devotion making a huge comeback, I don’t have much strong feeling one way or other towards ad orientem and Communion in the hand. I don’t think my mouth is cleaner than my hand. I’m just happy Jesus is coming to me in whatever way the Vatican permits.
 
Last edited:
Lee1 said:
I’d be interested to know the proportion of people who drink the blood of Christ, in my church I’d say it would be ten percent or less amazingly.
Click to expand...
To fight ultraquism I don’t drink from the cup. That and I often have a long beard with mustache.
 
Very interesting! I’d never heard of ultraquism, four hundred years ago and you’re still fighting? 😉 ha ha.

People like me don’t believe in having a mustache, because it causes problems with autocorrect (UK moustache.)
🙂
 
Remember there is nothing new under the sun. All old heresies eventually become new heresies.

I used to fight the northern imperialist spellings imposed on us by Daniel Webster (he is the one most responsible for the change in American spellings), but then I realized no one but me cared.
 
Last edited:
You’re right of course.

Now that’s interesting, I was saying the other day that I was told many years ago that the reason why so many words differ in spelling in American English from UK English is due to a particlaur president who altered spellings on purpose to establish an American English, if that makes sense.

You sound as though you know the answer to this?

EDT: I see you’ve virtually answered my question, thank you.
 
Last edited:
I personally think intinction would solve a lot of the problems which are being mentioned here.
 
I just came across this site,here’s why


In her public affidavit, among other things, Bella V. Dodd stated: “In the late 1920’s and 1930’s, directives were sent from Moscow to all Communist Party organizations. In order to destroy the [Roman] Catholic Church from within, party members were to be planted in seminaries and within diocesan organizations… I, myself, put some 1,200 men in [Roman] Catholic seminaries”. Interestingly, Bella Dodd did not include this info in her book “School of Darkness.” Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, a friend of Bella V. Dodd, reportedly said in an interview on Monday, 28 July, 2003 with International News Analysis Today that Bella Dodd had refrained from detailing Communist efforts to undermine the Catholic Priesthood at the request of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, the person responsible for bringing Dodd back into the Roman Catholic Church. My guess is he didn’t want to get it a worldwide story and maybe he thought he they could fix it internally?
  • As corollaries of this movement, a whole gamut of further changes must follow: Get rid of cassocks and any external garb indicating religious dedication; suppress Latin, kneeling at liturgies, the Rosary and Marian devotions, Gregorian chant and traditional sacred music; and especially, downplay any special reverence for the Host as the “Real Presence.” This communist agent writes: “To weaken more the notion of ‘Real Presence’ of Christ, all decorum will have to be set aside. No more costly embroidered vestments, no more music called sacred, especially no more Gregorian chant, but a music in jazz style, no more sign of the Cross, no more genuflections, but only dignified stern attitudes…Moreover the faithful will have to break themselves the habit of kneeling, and this will be absolutely forbidden when receiving Communion…Very soon, the Host will be laid in the hand in order that all notion of the Sacred be erased.”
 
Look out. I don’t think CAF will allow you to post something like THAT.
 
And those with coeliac disease - that would be no good for them, unless they made sure they were always first to receive using a low-gluten Host, before the chalice became contaminated with the normal Hosts.
 
In the case of coeliacs, I think the solution would be to administer the Precious Blood to them via a spoon, similar to the one used in various Divine Litrugies, or via a fistula, if there were only one or two coeliacs receiving communion. In order to avoid consuming the Precious Blood contaminated by the non-gluten green hosts, arrangements could be made so that they receive first (maybe they go up to the communion rail first, or go up in line first).
 
Last edited:
I like to be fed communion.
Taking communion and being fed communion are two different things.
 
I actually do know an Eastern Catholic priest, that does have martial arts training, but I honestly believe, that all priests are really ninjas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top