Quick help needed - proving it's okay to receive on the tongue

[Uxor]

Uxor: I believe that Christ gave authority to His Church to determine such things. Trying to second-guess what God approves in this instance is a waste of time, given that. It is, in fact, a thoroughly Protestant activity.

No…people that are disobedience to the Church is protestant activity. Again this is happening the same way with female deacons today…and if you agree with that then Archbishop Lefebvre shouldn’t of been excommunicated.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

No…people that are disobedience to the Church is protestant activity. Again this is happening the same way with female deacons today…and if you agree with that then Archbishop Lefebvre shouldn’t of been excommunicated.

As for the first sentence, it doesn’t apply in this instance. It doesn’t matter where the custom came from (it was originally ours in the first place, anyway), it is now a legitimate discipline of the Church and as such, it enjoys that disciplinary infallibility that all the Church’s disciplines enjoy (at the least, it cannot lead the faithful into impiety).

As for the latter, I’ll bite: What ARE you talking about? And what has the excommunicated Arch got to do with any of this?

 

[Uxor]

As for the first sentence, it doesn’t apply in this instance. It doesn’t matter where the custom came from (it was originally ours in the first place, anyway), it is now a legitimate discipline of the Church and as such, it enjoys that disciplinary infallibility that all the Church’s disciplines enjoy (at the least, it cannot lead the faithful into impiety).

As for the latter, I’ll bite: What ARE you talking about? And what has the excommunicated Arch got to do with any of this?

crisismagazine.com/september2003/shaw.htm
. A predictable consequence was the erosion of belief on display in a much-discussed 1994 New York Times–CBS News poll. Most Catholics, it found, preferred to consider the bread and wine at Mass “symbolic reminders” of Christ rather than saying they were “changed into [His] body and blood.” In most age groups the split wasn’t even close. Among those between 18 and 44, 70 percent opted for the symbolic account. Only among those over the age of 65 did a slim majority, 51 percent, say the bread and wine become Christ’s body and blood.

Some people attempt to discount such findings by pointing out that polls often distort reality by lumping nonpracticing and practicing Catholics together. In some contexts, of course, the difference really is significant. But a 1997 poll in the Diocese of Rochester, New York, found that only 35 percent of the practicing Catholics believed in the Real Presence, while the majority thought of the sacrament in merely symbolic terms. Other polls have had similar results.

The new Mass, it seems, has been robbed of dignity. It’s as if the well of faith had been subtly poisoned, with a pervasive loss of reverence entering into Catholic life alongside innovations like Communion in the hand, standing instead of kneeling to receive, and vernacular translations that plod when they should soar.

The abuses, people no longer believing in the real presence one cannot deny. God said you will know if it came from Him by it’s fruits…they are not good…again it was done underhandedly. This is an old article, I’m sure the numbers are much higher in disbelief now.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

crisismagazine.com/september2003/shaw.htm
. A predictable consequence was the erosion of belief on display in a much-discussed 1994 New York Times–CBS News poll. Most Catholics, it found, preferred to consider the bread and wine at Mass “symbolic reminders” of Christ rather than saying they were “changed into [His] body and blood.” In most age groups the split wasn’t even close. Among those between 18 and 44, 70 percent opted for the symbolic account. Only among those over the age of 65 did a slim majority, 51 percent, say the bread and wine become Christ’s body and blood.

Some people attempt to discount such findings by pointing out that polls often distort reality by lumping nonpracticing and practicing Catholics together. In some contexts, of course, the difference really is significant. But a 1997 poll in the Diocese of Rochester, New York, found that only 35 percent of the practicing Catholics believed in the Real Presence, while the majority thought of the sacrament in merely symbolic terms. Other polls have had similar results.

The above is probably good, solid, empirical information (depending on the pollster).

***What follows, however, is pure subjective opinion and commentary. Correlation does not prove causation. I agree that the figures cited are alarming. It just goes to show what terrible catechesis we’ve had in this country. It does not follow, however, that it is the fault of the NO Mass or of any discipline of the Church. ***

The new Mass, it seems, has been robbed of dignity. It’s as if the well of faith had been subtly poisoned, with a pervasive loss of reverence entering into Catholic life alongside innovations like Communion in the hand, standing instead of kneeling to receive, and vernacular translations that plod when they should soar.

The abuses, people no longer believing in the real presence one cannot deny. God said you will know if it came from Him by it’s fruits…they are not good…again it was done underhandedly. This is an old article, I’m sure the numbers are much higher in disbelief now. **Again, that’s your subjective opinion. You’ve no way of tracing it to either the NO Mass or to communion in the hand. What is certain, however, is the Church’s teaching on disciplinary infallibility. **

Incidentally, what has this to do with female deacons and the Archbishop?

 

[Uxor]

JKirkLVNV:
The Church says this…still disobedience is going on…
Vatican instruction on the Eucharist to avoid abuses

On April 23, 2004, Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, presented, in the Vatican, a 70-page instruction entitled “Redemptionis Sacramentum”, on “certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist.” In his encyclical letter “Eucharistia de Ecclesia,” published in 2003, Pope John Paul II announced this document, which is aimed at putting an end to abuses against the Eucharist, “which have been a source of suffering for many.” **“No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands,” **the Holy Father added. Here are some important excerpts from this new instruction:

[92.] **Although each of the faithful always has the right **to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice, 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. However, special care should be taken to ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant in the presence of the minister, so that no one goes away carrying the Eucharistic species in his hand. If there is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the faithful.

I’ve seen people put the Host in their pocket or carry back to their pew.

[93.] The Communion-plate for the Communion of the faithful should be retained, so as to avoid the danger of the sacred host, or some fragment of it, falling.

Never is there a Communion plate…ever

[94.] It is not licit for the faithful “to take… by themselves… and, still less, to hand… from one to another” the sacred host or the sacred chalice. Moreover, in this regard, the abuse is to be set aside whereby spouses administer Holy Communion to each other at a Nuptial Mass.

The lay grab the sacred chalice by themselves.

[104.] The communicant must not be permitted to intinct (dip) the host himself in the chalice, nor to receive the intincted host in the hand…

Seen this too.

Disobedience…

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The Church says this…still disobedience is going on…

[92.] **Although each of the faithful always has the right **to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice, 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. However, special care should be taken to ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant in the presence of the minister, so that no one goes away carrying the Eucharistic species in his hand. If there is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the faithful.

I’ve seen people put the Host in their pocket or carry back to their pew.

[93.] The Communion-plate for the Communion of the faithful should be retained, so as to avoid the danger of the sacred host, or some fragment of it, falling.

Never is there a Communion plate…ever

[94.] It is not licit for the faithful “to take… by themselves… and, still less, to hand… from one to another” the sacred host or the sacred chalice. Moreover, in this regard, the abuse is to be set aside whereby spouses administer Holy Communion to each other at a Nuptial Mass.

The lay grab the sacred chalice by themselves.

[104.] The communicant must not be permitted to intinct (dip) the host himself in the chalice, nor to receive the intincted host in the hand…

Seen this too.

Disobedience…

Then you should report these matters to your bishop. I’ve reported people to ushers, seen priests send ushers after people. I don’t think it will go unaddressed if it is brought to their attention. At any rate, again, do you imagine that the Host was not secreted away or abused before the Indult? Disobedience is hardly specific to the post-conciliar Church.

 

[Uxor]

Then you should report these matters to your bishop. I’ve reported people to ushers, seen priests send ushers after people. I don’t think it will go unaddressed if it is brought to their attention. At any rate, again, do you imagine that the Host was not secreted away or abused before the Indult? Disobedience is hardly specific to the post-conciliar Church.

Because Traditonal Priests are trained to give Communion in the Mouth and know exactly where to put it. N.O Priests don’t nor are trained.

Catholic Answers says this…catholic.com/library/liturgical_abuses.asp

How seriously does the Church take the liturgical abuse problem?

It is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the liturgy and the sacraments as well as the tradition and the authority of the Church, which in our day not infrequently plague liturgical celebrations in one ecclesial environment or another. **In some places the perpetration of liturgical abuses has become almost habitual, a fact that obviously cannot be allowed and must cease **(4).

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Because Traditonal Priests are trained to give Communion in the Mouth and know exactly where to put it. N.O Priests don’t nor are trained. **I think that’s a bit of an overstatement (I’ve never even had a lay EMHC have trouble placing the Most Sacred Body on my tongue. let alone a priest), but if it is true, you should make it known to the proper authorities. **

Catholic Answers says this…catholic.com/library/liturgical_abuses.asp

How seriously does the Church take the liturgical abuse problem?

It is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the liturgy and the sacraments as well as the tradition and the authority of the Church, which in our day not infrequently plague liturgical celebrations in one ecclesial environment or another. **In some places the perpetration of liturgical abuses has become almost habitual, a fact that obviously cannot be allowed and must cease **(4).

I absolutely agree. Abuses are horrible. Church approved disciplines are not.

 

[Uxor]

I absolutely agree. Abuses are horrible. Church approved disciplines are not.

To stop the abuses and change the discipline, people should either stop taking Holy Communion in the hand or write the Vatican and Bishops to change the discipline. As long as you and others defend the practice the abuse will continue. I don’t want to face God why I didn’t defend the Eucharist.

 

[rlg94086]

[93.] The Communion-plate for the Communion of the faithful should be retained, so as to avoid the danger of the sacred host, or some fragment of it, falling.

Never is there a Communion plate…ever

BTW…this is the reason I take Communion in the hand when visiting a parish without patens. In most of these parishes, the Extraordinary Minister is not proficient at administering the host on the tongue. I would prefer to protect the sacred host.

 

[bear06]

To stop the abuses and change the discipline, people should either stop taking Holy Communion in the hand or write the Vatican and Bishops to change the discipline. As long as you and others defend the practice the abuse will continue. I don’t want to face God why I didn’t defend the Eucharist.

Sigh! That would stop some but not all. As I said, someone set on committing a sacrilege will do it. The only true way to stop abuse of the Eucharist is to stop distibuting it period because the same people who were receiving it on the tongue at my parish and spitting it out onto the vestibule floor will continue to do it. Of course that is not an option. The next best thing is vigilant ushers watching for the consumation of the Host. This I’ve actually seen work.

 

[Uxor]

Sigh! That would stop some but not all. As I said, someone set on committing a sacrilege will do it. The only true way to stop abuse of the Eucharist is to stop distibuting it period because the same people who were receiving it on the tongue at my parish and spitting it out onto the vestibule floor will continue to do it. Of course that is not an option. The next best thing is vigilant ushers watching for the consumation of the Host. This I’ve actually seen work.

You don’t need ushers watching when Holy Communion is given in the mouth. We have two Priests that give out Communion and it takes less time than at a NO Parish, with a Priest, Deacon, and 4 or 6 Extra Ordinary Ministers…I can’t figure that one out…except the Tradtional Priests are trained, plus they perform the the sign of the cross with each Host.

 

[bear06]

Because Traditonal Priests are trained to give Communion in the Mouth and know exactly where to put it. N.O Priests don’t nor are trained.

Catholic Answers says this…catholic.com/library/liturgical_abuses.asp

How seriously does the Church take the liturgical abuse problem?

It is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the liturgy and the sacraments as well as the tradition and the authority of the Church, which in our day not infrequently plague liturgical celebrations in one ecclesial environment or another. **In some places the perpetration of liturgical abuses has become almost habitual, a fact that obviously cannot be allowed and must cease **(4).

I’m unlcear here. Are you quoting RS as a way to show that Communion in the hand is an abuse? If so, RS never once recalls the permission for Communion in the hand.

 

[Uxor]

BTW…this is the reason I take Communion in the hand when visiting a parish without patens. In most of these parishes, the Extraordinary Minister is not proficient at administering the host on the tongue. I would prefer to protect the sacred host.

They shouldn’t be giving it out anyway…they are not Priests or ordained…and I certainly don’t like to see one wearing a sweater down pass her shoulders giving out Communion.

 

[Uxor]

I’m unlcear here. Are you quoting RS as a way to show that Communion in the hand is an abuse? If so, RS never once recalls the permission for Communion in the hand.

It has led to abuse…

 

[JKirkLVNV]

To stop the abuses and change the discipline, people should either stop taking Holy Communion in the hand or write the Vatican and Bishops to change the discipline. As long as you and others defend the practice the abuse will continue. I don’t want to face God why I didn’t defend the Eucharist.

Your asking me to say that the Church has promulgated an abuse. The Church CANNOT do that. Whether you realize it or not, that’s a terribly important point underpinning a lot of other things. It’s like the keystone in an arch. You pull it out, the arch falls.

As for facing God: When you read the lives of the Saints, those who have had visitations or locutions from Jesus or Mary always obeyed Church authorities. Take Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska, for example, to whom was revealed the Divine Mercy (from The Divine Mercy Message and Devotion, by the Association of Marian Helpers):

“When at one time, because of the decisions of her superiors and father confessor, she was not able to execute Our Lord’s inspirations and orders, she declared: “I will follow Your will insofar as You will permit me to do so through Your representative. O my Jesus, I give priority to the voice of the Church over the voice with which you speak to me.” The Lord confirmed her action and praised her for it.” (p. 50-51).

 

[bear06]

You don’t need ushers watching when Holy Communion is given in the mouth. We have two Priests that give out Communion and it takes less time than at a NO Parish, with a Priest, Deacon, and 4 or 6 Extra Ordinary Ministers…I can’t figure that one out…except the Tradtional Priests are trained, plus they perform the the sign of the cross with each Host.

Sigh! I guess you completely missed my horrible story about the Host my husband found on the floor of the vestibule which had been in someones mouth before it was spit onto the floor?

I’m not really sure what priests passing out Communion in record time has to do with this thread. My Novus Ordo passes out Communion on the tongue while we’re kneeling in just fine time. I also agree with you about the extraordinary ministers but so what? The fact is that you’re refusing to see is that the Host can be abused when someone receives it on the tongue. It can’t be prevented when someone is determined. If you want to make sure that it is not abused, then you should be all for ushers making sure that the Host is consumed. I’ve seen parishes that take this measure and it’s well worth the effort.

 

[rlg94086]

They shouldn’t be giving it out anyway…they are not Priests or ordained…and I certainly don’t like to see one wearing a sweater down pass her shoulders giving out Communion.

Okay, so you trust a priest without a paten who has been administering the host in the hand for the last 20 years not to make a mistake on the 1 out of a 100,000 times he gets someone who receives by tongue? (This may sound like an exaggeration, but I didn’t know people still received on the tongue until 10 years after I converted…never saw it.)

Again, I trust them to make it to my hand. Thankfully, at my own parish, many people receive on the tongue and our army of alter boys use patens.

 

[bear06]

It has led to abuse…

Uh, letting people receive Communion period has led to abuse. Should we stop that? Yikes. People have been desecrating Host for hundreds to thousands of years. Again, I don’t receive Communion in the hand. I prefer it on the tongue. In fact, I’d go as far to say that I wish the Church would make that the sole way of doing it but it’s ridiculous to say it has led to abuse. That would pretty much be original sin.

 

[Uxor]

Your asking me to say that the Church has promulgated an abuse. The Church CANNOT do that. Whether you realize it or not, that’s a terribly important point underpinning a lot of other things. It’s like the keystone in an arch. You pull it out, the arch falls.

As for facing God: When you read the lives of the Saints, those who have had visitations or locutions from Jesus or Mary always obeyed Church authorities. Take Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska, for example, to whom was revealed the Divine Mercy (from The Divine Mercy Message and Devotion, by the Association of Marian Helpers):

“When at one time, because of the decisions of her superiors and father confessor, she was not able to execute Our Lord’s inspirations and orders, she declared: “I will follow Your will insofar as You will permit me to do so through Your representative. O my Jesus, I give priority to the voice of the Church over the voice with which you speak to me.” The Lord confirmed her action and praised her for it.” (p. 50-51).

And Saint Maria Faustina would never take Communion in the Hand either she came out of the Tradtional Mass…