Receiving the Eucharist on the Tongue

  • Thread starter Thread starter Domnall
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bob_Aliano said:
It would appear there is a greater chance of dropping the host with this method!
In addition, after the Eucharist has been put in your unsanitary hand what difference does it make that you pick it up with your fingers? Secondly, there are fewer germs on your tongue than on your unwashed hands, been all through that issue during the H1N1 overreaction.
Click to expand...
then wash your hands? 🤷
during the H1N1 scare, there were bottles of alco-gel at the Church entrances

germs are easily killed on the hands than in the mouth because the mouth is body temperature, plus the bodily fluids are where the germs live and thrive
 
HHMom said:
I’ve seen a THIRD way of receiving and it was a nun that did this.

Let the priest put it in your hand. Stick your tongue out. Then bring your palm and face together, lifiting the Eucharist up to your tongue. This way you don’t have to pick up the host with your own fingers.

Sounds weird, but the priest doesn’t have to risk touching your mouth and transmitting germs to others or himself.
Click to expand...
as long as the hands are left over the right, the right is a throne for the left that receives the King (historically it was the other way around, as prescribed by St. John Chrysostom)
 
Domnall said:
I’m not 100% sure of an answer to this so I’m asking you folks who know the best. I grew up in a Traditionalist Catholic church and we always received the Eucharist on our tongues. However, when I started going to the parish I attend now, we receive the Eucharist in our hands. However, I see some people (especially the elderly) receiving it on their tongues still.

Well, my question is can I do that as well? Is it appropriate for me to choose to receive the Eucharist on my tongue? I find it more respectful.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, it’s appropriate.

I’ve NEVER received in my hand - and I’m only 28. COTT is not just for the old folks. =)
 
Ever read Numbers? Check out 4:15.

It’s aside the point, anyways: I don’t know why you CITH people absolutely, and vehemently, insist on invading any thread about COTT. He didn’t ask if CITH was invalid - he merely asked if COTT was still allowed.

The answer, was of course, yes: COTT is the norm, and CITH is an indult.
 
read the thread please. there was no invading until a traditionalist decided to invalidate the CITH

i just want the correct information to be out there, that is why i posted what i posted. like i said in my first post in this thread. BOTH forms of receiving are valid as allowed by the Church, regardless of the OPINIONS of some
 
choy said:
read the thread please. there was no invading until a traditionalist decided to invalidate the CITH

i just want the correct information to be out there, that is why i posted what i posted. like i said in my first post in this thread. BOTH forms of receiving are valid as allowed by the Church, regardless of the OPINIONS of some
Click to expand...
Correction:

Both forms of receiving are valid in the Novus Ordo.

The EF has not been corrupted as such.

Happy Holidays.
.
 
mick321 said:
Correction:

Both forms of receiving are valid in the Novus Ordo.

The EF has not been corrupted as such.

Happy Holidays.
.
Click to expand...
both forms are valid in the Catholic Church
or is the Church divided into two Churches? the OF Church and the EF Chruch?
 
choy said:
both forms are valid in the Catholic Church
Click to expand...
This is correct of the Roman Catholic Church, and from what I know of the Eastern rites it’s not generally correct of them.

As to the comment you were responding to, that’s wrong. The 1962 Missale does not say anything whatsoever about the manner in which the faithful are to receive Communion. And a “TLM” involves the use of the 1962 Missale, not the erection of a localized time warp where all the liturgical and canon law and norms of the last 42 years don’t exist.
 
MarkThompson said:
This is correct of the Roman Catholic Church, and from what I know of the Eastern rites it’s not generally correct of them.

As to the comment you were responding to, that’s wrong. The 1962 Missale does not say anything whatsoever about the manner in which the faithful are to receive Communion. And a “TLM” involves the use of the 1962 Missale, not the erection of a localized time warp where all the liturgical and canon law and norms of the last 42 years don’t exist.
Click to expand...
Source?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top