Receiving on the tongue in my parish

[babochka]

We use loaves of leavened bread made of flour, water and yeast. (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[babochka]

I am in the Byzantine Rite, which is encompasses Melkite, Ukrainians, Ruthenian, Slovaks, Romanians, and others. I am Ruthenian, commonly known as the Byzantine Catholic Church.

 

[la_petit_fleur]

I am, but I am exposed to the people in front of me who have received on the tongue. That’s the whole problem.

 

[la_petit_fleur]

Yes, but fewer risks if they’re at the back of the line. Much more if they’re at the front or interspersed.

 

[1ke]

Then speak to your pastor about the situation.

 

[AdamP88]

It’s not risky. Stop living in fear.

 

[dochawk]

I know of at least one parish that has acquired 50 spoons and uses a new one for each communicant.

OK, that’s more than we have.

I think.

I’ll look next time I’m actually serving, once things start up again.

I don’t think this is true. I have never licked the priest’s hand while receiving.

That’s not the issue.

It’s the priest touching the Host with the same bit of finger that someone else licked.

We’ve never distributed under a single species.

In the third century, we started putting the Body into the cup with the Blood, and serving with a spoon.

so more than a half millennium before the schism.

The Melkites don’t use a spoon. I’ve never been able to get a definite answer as to when it was abandoned,

It’s within the last couple of centuries. Even they shrug when asked about it, because noone seems to quite understand it.

(we would ask that woman to tilt her head back!)

I am Ruthenian, commonly known as the Byzantine Catholic Church.

I’ve taken to calling us the nee-Ruthenian Metropolia of Pittsburgh, or something similar.

The Ruthenian immigration is over, the liturgical language is now English, and the parishes that are going are doing so by evangelization.

We do still have a few Ruthenians at my parish, but not enough to have a parish. And their average age is getting dangerously high . . .

we have an update on Fr. Marcus’ exposure: he didn’t directly speak to the other priest, but the other priest had the Mass before his.

No results yet.

 

[babochka]

I’ve taken to calling us the nee -Ruthenian Metropolia of Pittsburgh, or something similar.

Yes, there doesn’t seem to be a good term. The official “Byzantine Catholic Church” creates confusion because Melkites, Ukrainians, Romanian, etc. are Byzantines.

We do still have a few Ruthenians at my parish, but not enough to have a parish. And their average age is getting dangerously high . . .

I think this is true in most parishes in the Eparchy of Phoenix, but less so in the East. We have a few Rusyns. One is over 90, one over 70. Our priest brings down the average considerably, though. His children even more so.

We don’t have enough parishioners to have a parish (or even a mission), Rusyn or not. Yet still we remain, hanging on by the Grace of God.

 

[Newhills]

That’s not the issue.

It’s the priest touching the Host with the same bit of finger that someone else licked.

The initial post clearly referenced licking the priest’s hand and that’s what I was responding to.

And there are just as many claims out there, citing evidence, that people are either just as or more likely to catch the flu when communion is distributed in the hand as they are if they receive on the tongue.

And the priest is more likely to touch somebody when distributing into the hand than they are when pacing it on the tongue.

 

[paperwight]

And the priest is more likely to touch somebody when distributing into the hand than they are when pacing it on the tongue.

The danger comes from the breath of the person receiving on the tongue, not just their saliva.

Touching a dry hand if this happens at all. does not conctitute so high a risk as it is not wet with saliva nor has been breathed on.

 

[tuffsmurf]

How do Melkites recieve if they don’t use a spoon?

 

[Krisdun]

Perhaps just a couple of points to consider not sure how people will interpret them concerning this issue;

(1). At the last supper did the disciples not eat the bread Jesus shared with their own hands?

(2). Touching the Eucharist with your hands is touching Jesus himself and in the bible I recall people were healed just through touching him?

Different people will inevitably have their own views on this matter regarding receiving communion on the hand but just thought I would bring up these two points for discussion. Also just to clarify I have a neutral stance on this.

 

[Newhills]

(1). At the last supper did the disciples not eat the bread Jesus shared with their own hands?

(2). Touching the Eucharist with your hands is touching Jesus himself and in the bible I recall people were healed just through touching him?

1). The disciples were priests. The priest touches the Eucharist during mass.

2). I don’t feel worthy to place my hands on the body of Christ.

There is a very good option available of receiving the Eucharist while it is only being touched by consecrated hands & I personally feel that option to be the appropriate option for me.

 

[Krisdun]

Fair points although one may argue;

1. Were the disciples actually priests at the last supper or were they officially made priests later e.g. at Pentecost or after the Resurrection when they more fully understood?
2. If you are not worthy to touch Jesus what makes you worthy to eat his flesh?

But I these are just points for discussion and everyone will have differing views.

 

[Rau]

There is a very good option available of receiving the Eucharist while it is only being touched by consecrated hands & I personally feel that option to be the appropriate option for me.

As long as you understand that’s all personal preference, that’s fine. No doubt you’d forgo your preference if it was felt that the well-being of others would be safeguarded if you did.

 

[Buks]

I was surprised that suddenly those receiving OTT are not expected to receive after those receiving ITH. I find it especially odd with COVID surging again. When the person ahead of me received on the tongue, I turned and walked back to the pew, without receiving. I’m sorry but during this pandemic I consider receiving OTT before people receiving ITH to be either uncharitable or reckless.

 

[Newhills]

• Were the disciples actually priests at the last supper or were they officially made priests later e.g. at Pentecost or after the Resurrection when they more fully understood?
• If you are not worthy to touch Jesus what makes you worthy to eat his flesh?

1. I believe that they were. Also, who is to say that they received in the hand anyway?
2. He told me to eat his flesh. He didn’t tell me to place my non-consecrated hands on his body when there is a priest available to distribute to me.

 

[Newhills]

As long as you understand that’s all personal preference, that’s fine. No doubt you’d forgo your preference if it was felt that the well-being of others would be safeguarded if you did.

Yes, I clearly said that I personally feel that it’s the best option for me.

I also said earlier in the thread that I have been receiving in the hand, even though I do not feel comfortable but I would rather receive than not to receive. It is more out of respect for the priest who has asked people to receive on the hand - he has worked so hard over the last months to make the sacraments available to people while mass was unavailable so I don’t want to add to his “problems” at the moment by contesting how I receive communion.

 

[Newhills]

I was surprised that suddenly those receiving OTT are not expected to receive after those receiving ITH. I find it especially odd with COVID surging again. When the person ahead of me received on the tongue, I turned and walked back to the pew, without receiving. I’m sorry but during this pandemic I consider receiving OTT before people receiving ITH to be either uncharitable or reckless.

There is no credible medical evidence that receiving on the tongue is presents more risk. If you chose not to receive then that’s your decision & nothing to do with anyone else being “uncharitable”.

 

[Krisdun]

1. I believe that they were. Also, who is to say that they received in the hand anyway?
2. He told me to eat his flesh. He didn’t tell me to place my non-consecrated hands on his body when there is a priest available to distribute to me.

Both good points and of course it all depends on your personal views.
In (1) someone else may have a different opinion that the disciples did not become ‘priests’ so to say until they had received the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Also they had not witnessed the resurrection at that point (i.e. at the last supper) so it brings into question did they fully understand Jesus’ ministry on earth at that stage? But you make a good point that no one knows if the disciples did receive bread in hand or not…
In (2) someone may form the view that if you should not receive communion in non-consecrated hands but then which physical part of your body is? Your tongue certainly is not consecrated either?

But your points are valid and everyone is entitled to receive Jesus in the Eucharist as he/she deems appropriate.