Question for those that receive Holy Communion in hand?

[Don_Ruggero]

Pope Saint John Paul II, writing two days after the excommunications occurred, stated quite clearly:

[3] In itself, this act was one of disobedience to the Roman Pontiff in a very grave matter and of supreme importance for the unity of the church, such as is the ordination of bishops whereby the apostolic succession is sacramentally perpetuated. Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act. In performing such an act, notwithstanding the formal canonical warning sent to them by the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops on 17 June last, Mons. Lefebvre and the priests Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, have incurred the grave penalty of excommunication envisaged by ecclesiastical law.

To be clear: Pope Saint John Paul held the fullness of Executive, Legislative and Judicial power in the Church and it was he who promulgated the very ecclesiastical law that excommunicated these men. It is absurd to argue that these men were not, in fact, excommunicated – as was Bishop de Castro Mayer, of unhappy memory.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-p...jp-ii_motu-proprio_02071988_ecclesia-dei.html

 

[Don_Ruggero]

The problem with COTT stems from two issues: people not sticking their tongue out far enough, thus catching only a small part of the Host and it not sticking; and the other, pulling the tongue back in and catching the Host with the upper teeth, causing it to fall off.

This is certainly also my experience and is very true. But I hope you will forgive me if I add several other points.

• The Host best adheres on a tongue that is moist. I have had the Host fall to the floor in front of me because the person attempting to receive on the tongue had an absence of saliva and so It fell off for lack of anything to adhere to.
• Some people have a nervousness that does not lend itself to a calm receiving of the Host. Either they act too quickly or in a fashion that confounds the minister. It is not necessary to bring one’s mouth into contact with the Host…it is for the minister to place It on the tongue. I have more times than I wish to remember had to halt distributing Communion and go to the sacristy to wash my hand because someone licked my hand in their attempt to receive on the tongue. It is not a pleasant experience by any stretch of the imagination.
• Not to be untoward but there is also a problem that one encounters with persons who wear dentures and who must take care that these do not become displaced in the act of sticking out the tongue. I have also had the misfortune to encounter that problem on occasions, too

but I get tired of this bit about so many people dropping the Host. It simply is not true. If you have your hand out, palm up, to drop the Host you would need to turn your hand 90 degrees or better, and there is nothing about reception that would cause one to do so.

Indeed.

 

[otjm]

Thank you for your additions.

6th grade boys, at least when I was that age, were not necessarily known for a complete life of holiness, At class, we would often compare notes about how long a string of spit Father had managed to draw from someone who had too much saliva.

And I will leave my observations at that.

 

[otjm]

as your profile is locked, I could not determine how long you have been a member.

CITH stands for Communion in the hand; COTT stands for Communion on the tongue.

They have been standard for a number of years now, and likely will continue to be used into the future.

Hope that helps.

 

[Rob2]

When receiving in hand, do you first make eye contact with the individual distributing Holy Communion and then shift your focus to the Host, .

I can do no better than to quote Pope Benedict XVI, in his book “God is Near Us,” on how to receive the Eucharist in the hand .

Pope Benedict quotes St. Cyril of Jerusalem (4th century A.D.) who tells candidates for baptism what they should do at communion. He says: “They should make a throne of their hands, laying the right upon the left to form a throne for the King, forming at the same a cross. This symbolic gesture, so fine and so profound, is what concerns him: the hands of man form a cross, which becomes a throne, down into which the King inclines himself. The open, outstretched hand can thus become a sign of the way that a man offers himself to the Lord, opens his hands for him, that they may become an instrument of his presence and a throne of his mercies in this world.”

Pope Bensdict continues to say that when we receive communion, we should cultivate “an inner submission before the mystery of God that puts himself into our hands. Thus we should not forget that not only our hands are impure but also our tongue and also our heart and that we often sin more with the tongue than with the hands. God takes an enormous risk – and at the same time an expression of his merciful goodness – in allowing not only our hand and our tongue but even our heart to come into contact with him. We see this in the Lord’s willingness to enter into us and live with us, within us, and to become from within the heart of our life and the agent of transformation.”

 

[LateranBasilica]

as your profile is locked, I could not determine how long you have been a member.

CITH stands for Communion in the hand; COTT stands for Communion on the tongue.

They have been standard for a number of years now, and likely will continue to be used into the future.

Hope that helps.

My time as a member is irrelevant to this issue. I am well aware what these acronyms stand for.
However as I stated on another thread of the OP.
A symptom of the secular world sneaking into describing the greatest gift given to mankind. Reducing the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus Christ and our participation in the Passion of Jesus Christ, in the Mass, to acronyms rather than taking the time to type out Communion in the hand or Communion on the tongue.

Whether they are standard or not is beside the point. Do we choose to follow the fashion or do we take a stand and say we are partaking in the Body and Blood of Christ. We do not reduce this act to a couple of letters.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I don’t have a dog in the fight, but I get tired of this bit about so many people dropping the Host. It simply is not true.

In my many, many years of receiving, I have perhaps seen the recipient drop the host one time. I have by contrast seen 3 or 4 incidents of the priest or EMHC dropping or spilling the Hosts onto themselves or onto the floor. That is why I am much more concerned with not breaking the rhythm of the person handing out Communion than I am about insisting on my own personal preferred way to receive.

Also, I would like to know what kind of hosts are being used that make all these visible “particles” to drop from a hand. 99 percent of my lifetime Communions have been with the standard type of flat white circular Host or with a pre-broken piece of such Host (for example if the priest broke up a host to make enough communion for everyone at the Mass) and in neither case have there been crumbs of Host put into my hand.

 

[ewohdrol]

I am not sure how to word this. But this topic has always puzzled me.

Why are we so caught up on particles of the host dropping? Do you think Jesus would be bothered if the host was accidentally dropped? If the intent is respect and reverence is God that fickle that he would be angered? Is this really what we should be spending our energy arguing?

Apologies if this sounds blasphemous. But I wonder if we are putting so much emphasis on the methodology of receiving our Lord and missing the actual point of communion.

I grew up in the traditinal rite (tongue) and now choose to receive on the hand. Never seen one host drop in either tradition.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Why are we so caught up on particles of the host dropping? Do you think Jesus would be bothered if the host was accidentally dropped? If the intent is respect and reverence is God that fickle that he would be angered? Is this really what we should be spending our energy arguing?

Someone on a previous thread noted that people tended to get all caught up with whether infinitesimal, practically invisible particles of Host dropped, when they should be instead focusing on whether there is a visible person in need in their full view. It has also been observed that when Jesus was breaking bread at the Last Supper and handing it around to his apostles, he likely wasn’t watching every crumb like a hawk.

It’s like everything else, people get fixated on an issue, especially some people who either have scrupulosity worries or do not like Vatican II and everything after.

 

[Peeps]

I think that some people are uncomfortable making eye contact in many settings, not just during Holy Communion. Shyness? Awkwardness? Self-conscious for some reason? Taught by an older relative to not be so “forward” (especially if you are girl)? Humility (false or genuine)?

The reason doesn’t matter. There are people who just don’t look others in the eye ever or seldom.

One woman that I know in our parish who almost always keeps her head bowed and eyes down is simply a very humble person who is almost constantly in prayer (silent) and is very passionate about petitioning the Lord to end the scourge of abortion in the U.S. She is a sweet and friendly person, but this is just her way. (She also wear a heavy veil during Mass, and almost always dresses in black.)

Or…it could be a balance issue–a lot of people with balance issues keep their head down to make sure they don’t trip on something. i do this–wish I didn’t, but I am terrified of falling. Also, I have stopped folding my hands when I process forward in the Communion line at church because I found that I was off-balance and several times in the last few months, I have stumbled and almost fell. (I have an arthritic knee that often gives out on me.) I process forward with my arms slightly out to my sides (as though I were walking a tight-rope) so that I will be better balanced, and since I almost always sit in the same area, I also touch the wall as I process forward–another attempt to remain balanced. I’m sure there are people who think I’m ignorant of normal Church practice, or irreverent. Nope. Just old and gimpy.

Is there an actual Church teaching that tells us to make eye contact or not make eye contact during Holy Communion?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Is there an actual Church teaching that tells us to make eye contact or not make eye contact during Holy Communion?

No. You are just supposed to approach for Communion reverently. It is possible to be very reverent without needing to look the priest or EMHC in the eye, for example, if one has their head bowed, if an elderly person is stooped over, if one is looking at their hand to make sure they do not fumble the host. I have also seen priests and EMHCs who focus their gaze on the hands of the person and getting the host in them.

 

[Peeps]

Thanks. I thought this was the case, but sometimes parishes/RCIA instructors miss something.

 

[TomH1]

I receive on the hand. I have never even thought about the answer to this question while I am receiving Communion. My main concern is to simply focus on what I am doing. I suspect what I do is follow the Host from ciborium to my hand with my eyes to ensure it is not dropped.

 

[halogirl]

I look at them as I want to acknowledge that sense of community and that we are connected through the Body and Blood and that I am grateful they are ministering to me.
The only awkward time I had was during my first communion at Easter with my fellow RCIA graduates. Looking back it was funny. As new members of the church we were invited to bring up the offerings. I thought ah ok it will be really clearly set out - I will know what to pick up. We went to the back of the church and there was this table totally covered with chalices, plates, glasses, decanters . More chalices. I just froze and felt like Indiana Jones. Grabbed a cup after a cross looking parishioner prompted me. Man that was nerve wracking !!

 

[pnewton]

Do we choose to follow the fashion or do we take a stand and say we are partaking in the Body and Blood of Christ. We do not reduce this act to a couple of letters.

This is not a teaching of the Church. I can nazify grammar with the best and I still take issue with this. No one needs to hold this view of how language works. I still capitalize pronouns when referencing God. That is my own “sacramental.” I would not dream of suggesting others do likewise lest they reduce God somehow.

There is a basic principle of spirituality that we need to bear in mind, namely, that the Church’s view of what helps people spiritual is wide. Whether we are speaking of out specific motions during receiving communion, or how we refer to this act in various exchanges, one’s own view of what is spiritually up-lifting need not be universal, and we shouldn’t make it so, lest we cross the line into becoming a Pharisee, going beyond what God has established into seeing our own personal traditions as a universal imperative.

 

[njlisa]

I should update how I receive Communion. Now that I am disabled, I am unable to stand up when I receive Holy Communion. I sit in a section reserved for the disabled and the elderly. I bow my head while others are receiving Communion. When the Extraordinary Minister comes to me, I make a second bow. Then I receive the Host in my hand. When the priest consecrates the host, I dip down my knee as far as I can so that I can watch.

 

[LateranBasilica]

I take issue with the act of receiving the Body of Christ being reduced to a few letters, whichever way received. There is no shortage of letters to enable entire words to be written, especially where the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is concerned.
The Church does not need to hide this act behind 4 letters.
We capitalise the G in God, for a reason. Respect.