S
stpurl
Guest
You have hand sanitizer? Seriously, I have not seen it available in my area for weeks and weeks. Nothing, zip, zilch, nada.
Receiving communion in the hand using a purificator?
- Thread starter HomeschoolDad
- Start date
- Status
Emeraldlady
New member
I imagine he would respect the decisions of the medieval Church who knew the situations and contexts they were dealing with just as today we respect and accept the teachings of the Church dealing with the situations and contexts of today.Emeraldlady:
Then would the good Cardinal have said that medieval houseling cloths were “total madness”?
Last edited:
Are you referring to the TLM/EF or the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo)?
This makes an excellent case for not distributing communion at all for the duration, except for viaticum.
Receiving the Blessed Sacrament into that “filthy Petri dish of the oral cavity” was expressly mandated by Our Lord. How else would you receive communion? Taking It into one hands, especially when there is no set manner of purifying one’s hands afterwards (such as the priest does in the Mass), presently has a traditional school of thought against it, and a more modern school of thought (ca. 1980+) in favor of it. Are we saying that all of the reasons given in traditional Catholic manuals and the like, for hundreds of years, were wrong?
Protects the Blessed Sacrament from any danger of profanation, and avoids the possibility of unseen fragments being missed and ending up in any number of unbecoming circumstances.HomeschoolDad:
Not seeing what that accomplishes, though.
See above.HomeschoolDad:
Tradition: don’t you receive “on the bare tongue”? How’s that different?
Hygiene: if the priest doesn’t touch your hand when distributing CITH, then what’s the hygiene problem that a cloth solves?
The CITH/COTT wars have been fought for 40 years and it rattles out something like 75% CITH/25% COTT in more conservative congregations, 98% CITH/2% COTT in more liberal congregations, and 100% COTT at the Traditional Latin Mass. I have said all I can say.
P
PennyinCanada
Guest
I’ve seen price gouging where people buy boxes and try to sell on facebook on the community pages. The community pages also announce when a store gets a shipment in, and FINALLY they only allow 1 purchase per person. I have a 1 liter bottle at the moment. It’s liquid and can be sprayed on paper towel and put in a ziplock bag for travel. Also great for doing door knobs and such. More info than you needed right? lol
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
You don’t have soap? If not you can easily make soap yourself.
A
Agnus-Dei
Guest
Ordinary, only one offered here without driving about 80miles one-way. (The Latin is on my to-do list.)
Dominus vobiscum
Dominus vobiscum
That’s better than what I’ve got (or don’t have, I should say). Nearest Sunday TLM is two hours away.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Got it. A question for you: when a priest purifies the vessels, and he misses an “unseen particle” of the Eucharist, does he “profane” the Eucharist?
Not voluntarily, and it cannot be held against him. Traditionally, priests were taught to take the utmost care regarding visible fragments. I hope they still are.HomeschoolDad:
Got it. A question for you: when a priest purifies the vessels, and he misses an “unseen particle” of the Eucharist, does he “profane” the Eucharist?
As to how careful poorly-catechized youngsters, who know little more about the Faith than “it’s all about love” and “everyone is going to heaven”, I wouldn’t venture any bets.
G
Gorgias
Guest
Hang on a second – you’re moving the goalposts! We’re talking about the “unseen fragments”, not “visible fragments”! So, let’s try again: is the priest who misses “unseen fragments” profaning the Eucharist?
P
PetraG
Guest
Water is usually added during purification. When the Blessed Sacrament is diluted with water to a certain point, the eucharistic presence is lost. Otherwise, altar linens (such as purificators and corporals) are used which are themselves are handled carefully until they are soaked in water in order to achieve the same result.
Question: Why did you choose to put “profane” in quotations marks?
I can tell you from experience that a particle that goes unseen in one set of circumstances is not necessarily missed because it is too small to be seen with the unaided eye. That’s not what we’re talking about. I have found very small fragments that were missed by the priest–and this is a very careful priest!–and they were not too small to see. He just happened to have missed them because they were quite small.
Last edited:
All right, to clarify, an unseen fragment can either be visible — it got missed — or invisible. Invisible fragments cease to be the Body of Christ (some would quibble about this, but I wouldn’t) because they can’t be seen, and can’t have the appearance of anything. “Appearance” implies something that can be seen with the naked eye — you have to be able to see something before it can have an “appearance”. Floury dust that sloughs off a host (even though some solemnly assure us that this can’t happen with present host-baking technology, sealed edges and the like) does not have the appearance of bread, ergo not the Body of Christ.HomeschoolDad:
Hang on a second – you’re moving the goalposts! We’re talking about the “unseen fragments”, not “visible fragments”! So, let’s try again: is the priest who misses “unseen fragments” profaning the Eucharist?
This has all become an issue within the past 40-odd years, when various change agents decided that CITH was the way to go. I never heard, and I don’t think anyone else ever heard either, of Catholics longing to be able to receive in the hand, but darn it, the Church won’t let us do that. It came from the top down. People resisted it at first, but they were told this is what they should do, so Catholics being Catholics, and this not being something that threatened to make their lives very difficult (in other words, it wasn’t Humanae vitae), they “obeyed” — if that’s the word, supposedly one always has the option.
Once, when I was on a high school retreat — this was in the 1970s — we were using crumbly loaf bread of dubious validity — my mother baked it! — from a recipe that we were given. I think it had things in it like honey, sugar, and cinnamon, more appropriate to a Betty Crocker Snackin’ Cake than the Body of God. The priest administered communion to one of the girls in the class. A small fragment fell off. She froze up like she’d seen a ghost! The look on her face was one of utter horror. IIRC the priest reached out and plucked up the fragment. Nowadays, nobody would give that a second thought. (It would be my fervent hope that the communicant would pick up the fragment and eat It, rather than shaking It off or ignoring It.)
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Do you care to provide a reference for your claim that the definition of appearance is what is detectable to the naked eye? And what is visible to me might not be visible for someone else. So, according to you, this means that if two persons standing next to each other and look at the same area, Jesus is physically present according to one but not physically present according to the other person. Who is right?
Of course particles falls off modern hosts as well.
It sure did not seem like it was a problem with Jesus touching the ground 2000 years ago. But perhaps that has changed?
Last edited:
G
Gorgias
Guest
Ahh, but the paten can retain “unseen particles”. That’s the question I’m asking about.
Because I don’t believe that what HD is talking about is really ‘profanation’.
In other words… they were unseen. Thank you for demonstrating my point.
P
PetraG
Guest
Our priest actually rinses the paten, but even so it is a highly reflective surface. The particles I am talking about would be very difficult to miss. The purificator used to sweep those particles into the chalice and the corporal on which the purification is done absolutely need to be treated as if a small particle is on them. (I would say “yet to be seen” rather than “unseen”–I am not talking about something so small there is no way to distinguish whether or not it could be a fragment of a host, although care is taken that even such a tiny fragment is soaked with water before it could be lost. We do everything that can reasonably be done, so we can trust ourselves to mercy without committing presumption.)
One of the reasons I rarely receive Holy Communion directly in the hand any more is the difficulty of examining the surfaces of my hands to keep from missing a small fragment like that. It is better not to have to do that, I think.
Yes, they were not so small that it couldn’t be said whether they were bread or not with the unaided eye. Still, when the priest rinses the ciboria and paten into the chalice, the eucharistic species are diluted with water and really the only thing he will not consume in the course of purifying the vessels are fragments that are diluted with water (in which the eucharistic Presence no longer reside) and fragments that lie unseen on the corporal (which those who handle the linens ought to be very careful to keep contained until the linens are also soaked in water prior to laundering).
Last edited:
U
Usige
Guest
Odd, most places I’m aware of specifically instruct that priests and other ministers in the sanctuary not wear masks at anypoint during mass. The only place I have seen a suggestion for it being acceptable for a priest to wear a mask is if the Eucharist is distributed after mass.
Not saying some places won’t have ministers masked, but it’s not a foregone conclusion in my experience.
G
Gorgias
Guest
That’s not the standard. The standard is merely “unseen”, although I’d agree that there needs to be reasonable care in attempting to see them.
Actually, that’s not true. A particle of the host, floating in water, is still Eucharist. It only ceases to be Eucharist when it no longer has the accidents of bread.
I agree that there is much care that must be taken with the sacred vessels and the altar linens. However, there’s much more activity being taken at the altar – multiple picking up and setting down, the fraction rite, the handling of a broken host, etc.
D
DeniseNY
Guest
This is a much more serious problem.
S
stpurl
Guest
No, that’s not what I said. I have plenty of soap. Yes, I know one can make soap, I’m a woman, a grandmother, I’ve done a lot of the crafty stuff. I’m talking hand sanitizer. We have a small bottle we’ve had for a couple of months which we use sparingly (as two women in the ‘danger’ category we do not go out much at all) and Lysol wipes which likewise we use sparingly, but in my area even in the grocery stores, Dollar Generals, Wally World, etc., at least during the one time I week I get out there has not been hand sanitizer available in any of those places at those times.
M
Michaelangelo
Guest
Do you have an official source for this?
- Status