Purgatory for Communion in the Hand?

[kwitz]

They are comparible because both require an indult - neither are the norm. Either I trust that the Church in her wisdom can make decisions of this nature that are correct or everything I believe about her authority is a sham.

Kris

 

[Agomemnon]

kwitz:

They are comparible because both require an indult - neither are the norm. Either I trust that the Church in her wisdom can make decisions of this nature that are correct or everything I believe about her authority is a sham.

Kris

Glad you recognize that the norm is recieving on the tongue.

The Tridentine Mass is far older than the NO,. The NO varies from diocese to diocese, parish to parish. Why? But let’s stick with my earlier statements and question. Please answer.​

I’m saying that with the loss of faith in the Eucharist that receiving communion in the hand lends itself to that loss of faith. I think that communion in the hand also lends itself to desecration from carelessness (crumbs falling to the ground…people walking on them…etc.) I also think that its not an indifferent practice. Let us not forget that satanist use the consecrated Host (our Lord) in their sacriligious ceremonies. The distribution of communion the way it is now risks that desecration and evil against our Lord as well. Is recieving in the hand worth the possibility of desecration of our Lord? What do you think is ‘gained’ by such a practice???

 

[Catholic2003]

kwitz:

They are comparible because both require an indult - neither are the norm.

Don’t forget that the post-1970 celebration of the TLM also began as an abuse. In fact, the main point of Ecclesia Dei was the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The plea for a wide and generous TLM indult was probably added to stem the tide of radical traditionalists leaving the Church. Talk about ratty children!

 

[kwitz]

It doesn’t matter what I think is gained by this practice (if I thought my opinion to be what determines truth, I’d join the First Church of Kris). The Church permits it - therefore it is acceptable. Is receiving in the hands an older practice? It could be; I have seen credible arguements that support this. But that isn’t what makes it fine. Because I submit to the authority of the Church, I have to accept what she has decreed acceptable. I have faith that she can not be led astray.

 

[kwitz]

Catholic2003:

Don’t forget that the post-1970 celebration of the TLM also began as an abuse. In fact, the main point of Ecclesia Dei was the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The plea for a wide and generous TLM indult was probably added to stem the tide of radical traditionalists leaving the Church. Talk about ratty children!

Do you have a source to back this up? I stated something similiar on another thread and was accused of making things up. It is something I have always had the impression was true but had never verified. I thought that for many years the TLM was almost forbidden but that recently the indult has been given more generously.

Kris

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Agomemnon:

How’s that WIDE AND GENEROUS application of Ecclessia Dei going in your diocese?? Is it wide and generous so that all that may go to the Tridentine Mass so that we can pray the Mass of our choice?

This seems to be off the subject, but I’ll answer it anyway. Until three years ago the indult Mass was offered at four locations around my diocese, one for each general region and such that no one had to drive more than about 10 miles to get to an indult Mass. Due to declining attendance at two of these Masses (one to about 10 and the other 25 - 35) they have been discontinued. The last one to go was coupled with the retirement of the elderly priest who served that parish. They now have the Mass of Paul VI said in Latin. The two remaining parishes continue to offer the Tridentine Mass every Sunday. One of these is Mission San Juan Capistrano in the chapel and it is full every Sunday. Some Sundays there is standing room only and other Sundays it’s just full. There is also a Norbertine Monastery in the diocese, and they offer a Latin Mass on Sundays. I believe, however, that this is the Mass of Paul VI and not the Tridentine Mass.

Deacon Ed

 

[Inkman]

I am not so sure as to why anyone would receive in the hand. I will never receive in the hand for fear that particles of our Lord would fall on the floor or be washed away. A couple of years ago we found a consecrated host in a hymnbook I don’t think it would have gotten there had it been placed in the mouth of the recipient. I also saw a young girl try and return to her seat without consuming the host, fortunately the priest kept his eye on her and made her consume our Lord.

 

[pnewton]

I notice that certain people like to point out that it is only be indult that we receive on the our communion in hand until the tables are turned and then they like to say that the tlm (in lower case to show the same respect you have shown the “NO’” mas). is also an indult.

When you speak of respect, then let me say that I will always receive by hand until told by ecclesial authority that I may not, because to receive by sticking out my tongue to the Lord will always remind me of the pompous and arrogant extremist I have heard on the topic. To chose the path of humility will always be my choice,

 

[Catholic2003]

kwitz:

Do you have a source to back this up? I stated something similiar on another thread and was accused of making things up. It is something I have always had the impression was true but had never verified. I thought that for many years the TLM was almost forbidden but that recently the indult has been given more generously.

Kris

I did a quick google, and came up with two historical descriptions of Archbishop Lefebvre here and here. From the second,

However, Lefebvre’s continued use of the Tridentine Mass eventually became an issue with the Vatican. By 1974 the controversy had become so heated that Lefebvre made a famous declaration within Traditionalist circles calling into question the validity and orthodoxy of the Second Vatican Council.

 

[deaconswife]

Agomemnon:

Let us not forget that satanist use the consecrated Host (our Lord) in their sacriligious ceremonies. The distribution of communion the way it is now risks that desecration and evil against our Lord as well.

If you think that receiving on the tongue is a safeguard against a satanist using the host for a sacriligious ceremony you are incorrect. If you look back in history (particularly in the period prior to the French Revolution when some in the aristocracy used the Black Mass to achieve their ends) testimony in their trials documented the means by which this was done.

 

[Servant1]

Inkman:

I am not so sure as to why anyone would receive in the hand. I will never receive in the hand for fear that particles of our Lord would fall on the floor or be washed away. A couple of years ago we found a consecrated host in a hymnbook I don’t think it would have gotten there had it been placed in the mouth of the recipient. I also saw a young girl try and return to her seat without consuming the host, fortunately the priest kept his eye on her and made her consume our Lord.

And you could tell it was consecrated how?

What would happen to the Lord if some particles fell out of your hand? Would he rise up and hit you? Would he be hurt? Can he ever be hurt again, since he has conquered death and ascended to his Father?

What matters is respect and reverence - and that comes from your heart. Something happening by complete accident is not the same as it happening by deliberate, thoughtful action.

YOU haven’t the power to “harm” the Body of Jesus. You certainly have the power to respect or disrespect that body. And that is done with your heart and attitude.

If you accidentally drop a small particle of a Host, do you not think the Lord in his omniscience knows what level or reverence is in your heart? And that he will accept your reverence accordingly?

On the other hand, if you have disrespect and sacrilege in your heart, do you not also think that the omniscient Lord already knows that and reckons that guilt to you whether you touch his BOdy with your tongue or your hand?

 

[LittleRose]

Early Church documents describe communicants recieving in the hand in the same manner in which we do now, by creating a “throne” with your hands by placing the left over the right. I know some people find this practice shocking, but since it has reliably documented origins in the earliest days of Christian liturgical practice, I personally have no problem with it.

 

[Trevelyan]

From an Interview with Cardinal Ratzinger:

"Communion in the hand, or directly in the mouth?

I wouldn’t want to be fussy about that. It was done in the early Church. A reverent manner of receiving Communion in the hand is in itself a perfectly reasonable way to receive Communion."

from Adoremus - adoremus.org/0604Ratzinger.html

 

[Gail]

I find this interesting especially since the Bishops Review Board Study on the sex abuse scandal reported: “Somehow, the “smoke of Satan” was allowed to enter the Church, and as a result the Church itself has been deeply wounded.”

TheGrowingGrape,

Ditto, I agree with you and with this quote. If you haven’t read Maria Simma “Get Us Out of Here.” It is well worth it. She even mentions how souls have come to her of this abuse of communion in the hand. Because of the part of Communion in the Hand in this book, you will only find this book available at medjugorje.org/. Once I read this book, I will only receive communion on the tongue.

Those that feel they can rationalize communion in the hand are some of the same people who want to rationalize other areas of the church as well.

Once we are in purgatory, we will know the answer. Thank God for purgatory! Until then, my hands are not worthy to touch our Lord and should only be put on my tongue directly by the priest.

God Bless,
Gail

 

[Servant1]

Gail:

TheGrowingGrape,

Ditto, I agree with you and with this quote. If you haven’t read Maria Simma “Get Us Out of Here.” It is well worth it. She even mentions how souls have come to her of this abuse of communion in the hand. Because of the part of Communion in the Hand in this book, you will only find this book available at medjugorje.org/. Once I read this book, I will only receive communion on the tongue.

Those that feel they can rationalize communion in the hand are some of the same people who want to rationalize other areas of the church as well.

Once we are in purgatory, we will know the answer. Thank God for purgatory! Until then, my hands are not worthy to touch our Lord and should only be put on my tongue directly by the priest.

God Bless,
Gail

Gail - they are two separate issues. Your argument seems to claim that all rationalization is bad. You deny the Magisterium of the Church and claim your theological judgement is superior to theirs if you say nobody can/should receive communion in the hand. You have the thorough, God-given, Church-supported right to decide for yourself about how you receive communion.

But your own feelings are not what decides the norm for the Church, especially when the Magisterium of the Church has taught otherwise.

Please tell us what is holier about your tongue than your hands. In essence… ontologically. WHY and HOW is your tongue/lips/mouth, in essence, holier than your hands?

 

[Gail]

Servant1:

…Your argument seems to claim that all rationalization is bad. You deny the Magisterium of the Church and claim your theological judgement is superior to theirs if you say nobody can/should receive communion in the hand.

Who are you? I just feel like you have slammed me and judged me wrongly. Completely misunderstanding what I have said.

I TOTALLY support the Magisterium of the Church. I make no claim what so ever that my judgement would be superior to anyone so where you got this off the wall idea from what I wrote I have no idea.

I just commented on the fact that I read the book “Get Us Out Of Here.” After reading the story, which you may or may not accept, it changed how I viewed receiving communion. I just changed after 20+ years of receiving communion on the hand about 8 months ago to only receiving communion on my tongue. Me, personally, I do not feel that my hands are worthy to touch God and it is for the priest hands to place Jesus on my tongue and allow Him to enter into my body. I do not judge others as to how they receive, that is their choice. Yet there may be something to this that is given to these visionaries. But sometimes we, who do not receive these graces, are too proud and close minded to see.

I would suggest before you attack anyone again to maybe buy the book and read it for yourself and then make your own judgement call. I have loaned this book to 5 people. Telling them all, you do not have to accept this but read it and see what you think. All of them have said it has changed them. Several have also changed from receiving on the hand to only receiving on the tongue.

I suggest you pray about this and ask the Holy Spirit to guide you as to what you should do.

God Bless,
Gail
I am just a speck of dust on an ant

 

[Oren]

When I went through RCIA no one ever told me that we could receive on the tongue…we were only taught about hands. So that’s the way I first received the Eucharist. I’m not against it…but I still think receiving on the tongue is more reverent…it takes a certain amount of humility to open your mouth and let someone feed you…I dunno, that’s just my take on it. One thing I think is that the lessening of the restrictions was a bad idea, because it opened the way for the use of the extraordinary ministers, well the abuse of it. It just seems to me like its all part and parcel of diminishing the priests role…and I think they should be given so much more respect than that. I don’t remember what Saint it was, but when her priest was dying she kept her hand on his fingers because they had touched God. Then you look at the Church today, and you can just wonder where that kind of respect, love and reverence has gone…

I also think all the people who said that we can’t hurt Jesus by dropping Him on the ground should stop and think about what they’re saying for a while…

 

[Servant1]

Gail:

Who are you? I just feel like you have slammed me and judged me wrongly. Completely misunderstanding what I have said.

I TOTALLY support the Magisterium of the Church. I make no claim what so ever that my judgement would be superior to anyone so where you got this off the wall idea from what I wrote I have no idea.

I just commented on the fact that I read the book “Get Us Out Of Here.” After reading the story, which you may or may not accept, it changed how I viewed receiving communion. I just changed after 20+ years of receiving communion on the hand about 8 months ago to only receiving communion on my tongue. Me, personally, I do not feel that my hands are worthy to touch God and it is for the priest hands to place Jesus on my tongue and allow Him to enter into my body. I do not judge others as to how they receive, that is their choice. Yet there may be something to this that is given to these visionaries. But sometimes we, who do not receive these graces, are too proud and close minded to see.

I would suggest before you attack anyone again to maybe buy the book and read it for yourself and then make your own judgement call. I have loaned this book to 5 people. Telling them all, you do not have to accept this but read it and see what you think. All of them have said it has changed them. Several have also changed from receiving on the hand to only receiving on the tongue.

I suggest you pray about this and ask the Holy Spirit to guide you as to what you should do.

God Bless,
Gail
I am just a speck of dust on an ant

OK, Gail -

First off you misinterpret a disagreeing with you as a personal attack on you. No personal attack was ever in my mind. Note that in my first words I used the conditionsl terminology of “seems” etc. Perhaps I should have prefaced everything I said by “seems” so you could understand the latitude I intended to convey. I think you perhaps misunderstood most if not everything of what I said, If you believe I aimed a personal slam at you. So - unless I am interpreting wrongly again - what we have here, and what it should be considered as is a misunderstanding rather than a personal slam - all the way around. OK?

Seems to me I did note that you have every right (and really duty, probably) to decide for yourself about how it was most edifying for you to receive communion. What it sounded to me like you were saying was that regardless of what the Magisterium taught, there was something innately “lesser” about receiving on the hand rather than the tongue. My question then became, based on that, what is innately, or in essence, less holy about one’s tongue than one’s hands, assuming one is in a state of grace, etc. Perhaps that is a better wording - I hope so.

I certainly can appreciate your wording to other folks, as stated above - that each should make up his/her own mind about what they read in the book you loaned them.

Perhaps this exchange is an indication that all of us should make sure of a writer’s intent before characterizing it as an attack or a denial of Magisterium or anything else.

 

[SFX]

I am only replying because while reading a booklet put out by the USCCB, copyrighted 2002, called Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America, I came across a quote from St.Cyril of Jerusalem, who died in 386. He says, “When you approach, take care not to do so with your hand stretched out and your fingers open or apart, but rather place your left hand as a throne beneath your right, as befits one who is about to receive the King. Then receive Him, taking care that nothing is lost.” The only citation is Cat. Myst. V, 21-22. It seems to me that if people have been receiving communion in the hand since his time, that it is acceptable, and your preference, as long as the Church approves. If you are concerned, receive It on the tongue.

SFX