Receiving The Sacred Host

[palmas85]

Before I write this, I don’t want to re start a brawl over receiving on the tongue versus in the hand . I found an interesting article in L’Osservatore Romano, October 26, 05 edition, and was wondering about it.

Arch Bishp Juan UGARTE-Peerz, Archbishop of Cuzco, Peru, in his statement is quoted as saying concerning receiving in the hand vs on the tongue.

"Certainly in the terms in which this act was initially contemplated-

LIMITED TO GROUPS OF PEOPLE OF GOOD FORMATION

• it is an acceptable option. In this case one does run the risk that some abuses are committed, which unfortunately happens when Communion is distributed in the hand in an indiscriminate manner, that is, without the guarantee that those who receive it have sufficient training and an upright attitude"

I don’t know, but was that the original idea behind distribution in the hand? To groups of well trained individuals, or was it meant for a broad and generous application to all the faithful?

Remarks, ideas,. comments arguments??

 

[Reepicheep]

A question.

What’s the purpose of recieving in the hand, as opposed to receiving on the tongue? That is, is what way is it better to receive in the hand, assuming those who receive are well-trained and well-disposed?

I began reciving in the hand when the custom was introduced, simply because that’s how it was being done. I went back to receving on the tongue when I heard enough people say that reception in the hand was disrespectful, and that there was risk of dropping bits of the consecrated Host. The question “why introduce communion in the hand in the first place” is one I’ve never heard answered.

…However the Eucharist is received, let Him be glorified.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

I’m not sure anyone knows specifically why communion in the hand was reintroduced. It was an ancient practice, and it was certainly acceptable. It is also true that Rome insisted that if this practice was reintroduced it be done with sufficient catechesis. Thus, the archbishop’s statement is correct that it is for people with “good formation.”

Deacon Ed

 

[John_Lilburne]

palmas85:

I don’t know, but was that the original idea behind distribution in the hand? To groups of well trained individuals, or was it meant for a broad and generous application to all the faithful?

When Conference of Bishops wrote of their decisions to have Communion in the hand the Vatican’s Sacred Congregation of Divine Worship’s 1969 reply included:

“2. The rite of communion in the hand must not be put into practice indiscriminately. Since the question involves human attitudes, this mode of communion is bound up with the perceptiveness and preparation of the one receiving. It is advisable, therefore, that the rite be introduced gradually and in the beginning within small, better prepared groups and in favorable settings.” (Documents on the Liturgy, Liturgical Press, 1982, ISBN 0-8146-1281-4, page 647).

I see this about being an effective way to introduce the practice “in the beginning”.