Receivng Communion on your Hand

[cuqui]

My husband disagrees with me that I receive the Body of Christ on my hand while he says he is not worthy of holding Him and sticks out his tongue.
I am an extraordinary minister and better than 90 percent of the parishioners get it on their hand. I was not told by our pastor (nor does our parish enforce) that we should receive our Lord on our tongues only.
Is there a church teaching on this? When I was growing up, everyone got it on their tongues and everyone knelt in front of and around the altar (this was in the Philippines in the 60s and maybe 70s).
Any thoughts?

 

[SavedbyHisBlood]

Hmm idk, i’ve always recieved it by hand.

 

[Phemie]

The universal norm is to receive on the tongue. Some countries have an indult allowing the reception of Communion on the hand. That indult could be rescinded at any time. Some bishops have decided not to take advantage of the indult and even though most of their country receives in the hand, the people in their diocese are not allowed to.

 

[Ailina]

This is the way I look at it: At the original last supper, did Jesus break the bread, bless it, and then feed it to each Diciple individually? No, He broke the bread, GAVE it to his diciples and then said “This is my body,** take** it and eat it, all of you…” No mention of the Diciples possibly dropping bits of crumbs, or having Jesus feed them as if they were infants.

I think taking it in the hand is fine for that reason. That is the way it was done in the early church. But not everyone in this forum will agree.

 

[Walking_Home]

This is the way I look at it: At the original last supper, did Jesus break the bread, bless it, and then feed it to each Diciple individually? No, He broke the bread, GAVE it to his diciples and then said “This is my body,** take** it and eat it, all of you…” No mention of the Diciples possibly dropping bits of crumbs, or having Jesus feed them as if they were infants.

I think taking it in the hand is fine for that reason. That is the way it was done in the early church. But not everyone in this forum will agree.

---

Your are right—the Catholics would not agree.

 

[Catholic1954]

I remember the change, from receiving Communion on the tongue to the hand. NO ONE wanted to receive in the hand, until one day the priest told us, “You sin more with your tongue, than your hands, it is perfectly all right to receive Communion in your hand.” I figured he was right, and have been receiving Communion in my hand ever since. If and when the Chuch changes back to tongue only I will be happy to comply.

 

[RyanML]

This is the way I look at it: At the original last supper, did Jesus break the bread, bless it, and then feed it to each Diciple individually? No, He broke the bread, GAVE it to his diciples and then said “This is my body,** take** it and eat it, all of you…” No mention of the Diciples possibly dropping bits of crumbs, or having Jesus feed them as if they were infants.

I think taking it in the hand is fine for that reason. That is the way it was done in the early church. But not everyone in this forum will agree.

Do you know how the Eucharist was regarded in the early Church? One ECF said that the hand was to be a throne for our Lord and that all care should be taken not to drop even the smallest particle and to treat the Sacrament as more precious than gold. This is hardly the attitude of most Catholics today. While a return to the traditional practice without proper catechesis would not completely solve the problem, it would be a tremendous help in a world drifting further and further away from the Sacred.

As to the point that Jesus gave His Apostles Communion in the hand, the Apostles were the first bishops of the Church and they, as well as priests, are the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion.

 

[bpbasilphx]

---

Your are right—the Catholics would not agree.

You are wrong. Some Catholics would agree.

I would ask the Original Poster’s husband why his tongue is more worthy than his hands to receive the Eucharist on.

NONE of us are intrinsically worthy to receive the Lord’s Body on either our tongue OR hand.

He Himself provides the worthiness to receive either way.

(Lest people wonder, I receive on my tongue.)

 

[RyanML]

You are wrong. Some Catholics would agree.

I would ask the Original Poster’s husband why his tongue is more worthy than his hands to receive the Eucharist on.

NONE of us are intrinsically worthy to receive the Lord’s Body on either our tongue OR hand.

He Himself provides the worthiness to receive either way.

(Lest people wonder, I receive on my tongue.)

I don’t think anyone is arguing that the way in which we receive determines our worthiness to receive. That is only by God’s grace. But how efficacious that grace is which we receive from Holy Communion is in accordance with our disposition. I think that receiving in the traditional manner disposes us to greater reverence towards the Blessed Sacrament and that needs to be encouraged.

 

[Ailina]

Do you know how the Eucharist was regarded in the early Church? One ECF said that the hand was to be a throne for our Lord and that all care should be taken not to drop even the smallest particle and to treat the Sacrament as more precious than gold. This is hardly the attitude of most Catholics today. While a return to the traditional practice without proper catechesis would not completely solve the problem, it would be a tremendous help in a world drifting further and further away from the Sacred.

As to the point that Jesus gave His Apostles Communion in the hand, the Apostles were the first bishops of the Church and they, as well as priests, are the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion.

How do you know the attitude of Catholics today, or yesteryear? I’m sure there were a lot of Catholics who were just as irreverent as today. I’m sure there are a lot of Catholics today who are reverent although you may not know it if you are judging them based on how they look or whether they stand or sit or kneel or whatever.

Maybe communion shouldn’t be given out at all unless Catholics answer the secret skill testing question (Define transubstatiation and it’s implications!). Honestly? I didn’t understand the basic tenets of our faith when I was a kid receiving first communion. Oh sure, I parroted back what I learned, but I didn’t understand it.

 

[RyanML]

How do you know the attitude of Catholics today, or yesteryear? I’m sure there were a lot of Catholics who were just as irreverent as today. I’m sure there are a lot of Catholics today who are reverent although you may not know it if you are judging them based on how they look or whether they stand or sit or kneel or whatever.

Maybe communion shouldn’t be given out at all unless Catholics answer the secret skill testing question (Define transubstatiation and it’s implications!). Honestly? I didn’t understand the basic tenets of our faith when I was a kid receiving first communion. Oh sure, I parroted back what I learned, but I didn’t understand it.

How long are lines for Confession and how long are lines for Communion?

 

[MetalMark]

The Magisterium has permitted communion in the hand, so I do not object. I typically receive by the mouth, however.

 

[RyanML]

How do you know the attitude of Catholics today, or yesteryear? I’m sure there were a lot of Catholics who were just as irreverent as today. I’m sure there are a lot of Catholics today who are reverent although you may not know it if you are judging them based on how they look or whether they stand or sit or kneel or whatever.

Maybe communion shouldn’t be given out at all unless Catholics answer the secret skill testing question (Define transubstatiation and it’s implications!). Honestly? I didn’t understand the basic tenets of our faith when I was a kid receiving first communion. Oh sure, I parroted back what I learned, but I didn’t understand it.

Oh I don’t know, the general lack of reverence and respect I’ve experienced in most churches gives me a good idea. But maybe you’re right. Maybe the majority of folks are inwardly very reverent and loving towards our Eucharistic Lord but just have no desire to show it

 

[m134e5]

I think taking it in the hand is fine for that reason. That is the way it was done in the early church.

In the early Church, it was also customary to go to confession by confessing your sins to the entire congregation, and by doing some pretty harsh public penances. Do you want to go back to that too?

 

[Walking_Home]

Originally Posted by Walking_Home View Post

, or having Jesus feed them as if they were infants.

I think taking it in the hand is fine for that reason. That is the way it was done in the early church. But not everyone in this forum will agree.

Your are right—the Catholics would not agree.

You are wrong. Some Catholics would agree.

I would ask the Original Poster’s husband why his tongue is more worthy than his hands to receive the Eucharist on.

NONE of us are intrinsically worthy to receive the Lord’s Body on either our tongue OR hand.

He Himself provides the worthiness to receive either way.

(Lest people wonder, I receive on my tongue.)

---

Maybe if you had paid attention to the part I emphasized in red in the post I responded to–you would not have jumped the gun the way you did. So what say you as an Eastern —are the crumbs from the consecrated Precious Body important or not. A drop of the Precious Blood.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Ailina]

Oh I don’t know, the general lack of reverence and respect I’ve experienced in most churches gives me a good idea. But maybe you’re right. Maybe the majority of folks are inwardly very reverent and loving towards our Eucharistic Lord but just have no desire to show it

Well, appearances can be so very deceiving. I’m sure it was the same in bygone days, when the people who dressed the most splendidly were capable of the worst kinds of cruelty and crimes. Yet they still attended mass religiously. I don’t think all Catholics in the past were completely reverent. Most went through the motions, just like people today, for appearances sake more than anything.

And really, the pressed tiny little wafers we receive today are pretty much crumbless, compared to the actual bread people first received in their hands long ago. Just because a person takes it on the tongue doesn’t mean they can’t drop it. It happens.

 

[pnewton]

Traditionalist Catholics do not receive in the hand. The TLM permits reception on the tongue only.

 

[Ailina]

In the early Church, it was also customary to go to confession by confessing your sins to the entire congregation, and by doing some pretty harsh public penances. Do you want to go back to that too?

Sure, why not? It would probably keep people more honest and less likely to sin, wouldn’t it? Especially since most people in those tiny communities knew their neighbours very well indeed. It was hard to get away with anything, so people tended not to try. Today, in our anonymous societies, it is very easy to hide what we are doing privately.

Actually, I’m surprised this kind of confession hasn’t come up among the traditionalists, considering it was part of the Traditional Church for so long.

Anyway, since communion in the hand has been practiced for the past 40 years, we are not “going back” to anything since it is something going on already.

 

[Walking_Home]

Originally Posted by m134e5 View Post
In the early Church, it was also customary to go to confession by confessing your sins to the entire congregation, and by doing some pretty harsh public penances. Do you want to go back to that too?

---

Actually–that is a good way to take control of a person --like in a cult. Know a person’s innermost deeds that can be used and held over the person’s head.

 

[Ailina]

---

Actually–that is a good way to take control of a person --like in a cult. Know a person’s innermost deeds that can be used and held over the person’s head.

Hey, the early Catholic Church practiced confession that way (publicly, I mean), so does that mean it was a cult back then? No, because forgiveness was the goal, was it not? What was being held over peoples heads?