Resistance to Church Law

[Philosoraptor]

I have heard stories like this often, though I have never experienced it myself. After being in the mood in which men of old burnt witches, I began to wonder: Why is it that there seems to be resistance to the faithful wishing to receive the Blessed Sacrament on the tongue? Why would anyone object to the faithful who wish to honor It more by their very posture?

It is clear that the practice of receiving on the hand was begun through disobedience and that the traditional manner has been on the tongue for almost fifteen hundred years. Granted, the Church in Her indulgence has since permitted the disobedience - thus it is now a lawful and licit manner of reception. Whether it was a prudent move, whether it fosters a spirit of devotion to the Blessed Sacrament or whether it tends to promote indifference - all these are interesting questions, but I shall ignore them. Instead, why does it seem as if there is resentment towards those who receive on the tongue, and how can we correct them in truth and love?

 

[LouisvilleRC]

You know I’ve really never seen anyone have a problem with this. I’ve seen non-habited LCWR sisters even receive on the tongue. Personally I’m a hand person but if it makes you feel closer to Jesus or more reverent that is good for you.

 

[Catholic1954]

What “resistance”? Anyone who wishes to receive on tongue may do so, but if the Church says you may receive on the hand then She has the authority to say so; there is no disobedience to it. The Bible does not say the Apostles received on the tongue at the Last Supper and it does not say Jesus told them to receive one way or the other.

 

[Aramis]

Church Law includes the rubrics of the missal and the general instructions are part of those rubrics.

Obedience to Church Law thus includes obedience to the GIRM of the place where one is when one is at a Roman mass.

Which, in the US (and several other countries), says the choice is the individual communicant’s. Not the celebrant’s, not the MHC/EMHC’s, not the next guy in line, not CUF’s, and not the SSPX’s. The individual’s.

Note that the Pope has a separate set of rubrics for masses with the Pope as celebrant. As the prime legislator, he writes the laws, and can write himself a separate set. And, Pope Benedict XVI did so. There is a separate ceremonial addendum for papal masses.

 

[clintondyches]

I have heard stories like this often, though I have never experienced it myself. After being in the mood in which men of old burnt witches, I began to wonder: Why is it that there seems to be resistance to the faithful wishing to receive the Blessed Sacrament on the tongue? Why would anyone object to the faithful who wish to honor It more by their very posture?

It is clear that the practice of receiving on the hand was begun through disobedience and that the traditional manner has been on the tongue for almost fifteen hundred years. Granted, the Church in Her indulgence has since permitted the disobedience - thus it is now a lawful and licit manner of reception. Whether it was a prudent move, whether it fosters a spirit of devotion to the Blessed Sacrament or whether it tends to promote indifference - all these are interesting questions, but I shall ignore them. Instead, why does it seem as if there is resentment towards those who receive on the tongue, and how can we correct them in truth and love?

Since I’m in a wheelchair, our Deacon always brings communion to me first and he knows that I receive on the tongue. Yesterday, however, our Deacon was out of town and one of the EM’s brought me communion - when I stuck out my tongue, he was baffled. I had to really stretch my neck out to let him know that I wanted to receive on the tongue, and NOT in the HAND. The consecrated Host finally made it’s way to my tongue, but not without some effort on my part!

Clinton

 

[POJIUJH]

Yes exactly. If you try kneeling too you will undoubtedly come across plenty of confused faces and even some priests wanting to discourage you from this reverent behavior.

I have said before and I will still say it despite the angry comments I get, that the reason is that it hits a nerve. Everybody really knows that kneeling and on the tongue is more reverent than standing and receiving on the hand. The modern way of receiving on the hand is even less reverent than how it was done in the early Church, and even that was necessarily outlawed for 1500 years once a more reverent way to receive was thought of.

Even in the minority of countries that have taken the indult to receive on the hand, it can still be denied if there is a risk of profanation under Redemptionis Sacramentum 92 but it can’t ever be denied to somebody receiving on the tongue and/or kneeling (providing they are properly disposed to receive it, that is). There are plenty of legitimate occasions where a priest is obligated to deny Communion, yet the only denial I have seen were to people receiving on the tongue or kneeling. This really says a lot.

 

[Brendan_64]

The reverse situation can also occur.

While Communion on the tongue is the universal norm, if dispensation has been granted in that area to allow Communion in the hand then Communion in the hand is permitted in both the OF and EF forms of Mass.

If it is now common practice in that particular liturgy to receive in a particular way, ought we not respect that practice and receive accordingly? Should this not cut both ways?

How would someone holding out their hands to receive be regarded at an EF Mass?

Either method of receiving ought to be permitted, without question, at either form of the Mass.

 

[markomalley]

While Communion on the tongue is the universal norm, if dispensation has been granted in that area to allow Communion in the hand then Communion in the hand is permitted in both the OF and EF forms of Mass.

I would question the highlighted portion of your statement.

Instruction Universae Ecclesiae makes it clear that the EF is to be celebrated according to the norms and rubrics in effect in 1962.

1. The liturgical books of the forma extraordinaria are to be used as they are. All those who wish to celebrate according to the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite must know the pertinent rubrics and are obliged to follow them correctly.

The indult granting permission for the faithful in certain territories to receive communion in the hand was granted long after 1962 and does not, so far as I’ve seen, appear in any liturgical books applicable to that form of the Mass.

 

[Brendan_64]

I would question the highlighted portion of your statement.

Instruction Universae Ecclesiae makes it clear that the EF is to be celebrated according to the norms and rubrics in effect in 1962.

1. The liturgical books of the forma extraordinaria are to be used as they are. All those who wish to celebrate according to the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite must know the pertinent rubrics and are obliged to follow them correctly.

The indult granting permission for the faithful in certain territories to receive communion in the hand was granted long after 1962 and does not, so far as I’ve seen, appear in any liturgical books applicable to that form of the Mass.

The OF Mass is also expected to follow the norms for that Mass and the rubrics as set out in the GIRM. The norm for the OF Mass is Communion on the tongue.

The granting of the indult is not specific to a particular form of the Mass in that area. If an indult is granted, then it applies to both forms of the Mass.

What is more likely to happen, a person being refused Communion on the tongue by a priest at an OF Mass, or a person being refused Communion in the hand by a priest at an EF Mass?

 

[Cat]

Yes exactly. If you try kneeling too you will undoubtedly come across plenty of confused faces and even some priests wanting to discourage you from this reverent behavior.

I have said before and I will still say it despite the angry comments I get, that the reason is that it hits a nerve. Everybody really knows that kneeling and on the tongue is more reverent than standing and receiving on the hand. The modern way of receiving on the hand is even less reverent than how it was done in the early Church, and even that was necessarily outlawed for 1500 years once a more reverent way to receive was thought of.

Even in the minority of countries that have taken the indult to receive on the hand, it can still be denied if there is a risk of profanation under Redemptionis Sacramentum 92 but it can’t ever be denied to somebody receiving on the tongue and/or kneeling (providing they are properly disposed to receive it, that is). There are plenty of legitimate occasions where a priest is obligated to deny Communion, yet the only denial I have seen were to people receiving on the tongue or kneeling. This really says a lot.

Refer to boldface above–this is pretty harsh, and it’s way outside of Catholic Church teaching.

Everybody DOESN’T know that receiving on the tongue and/or kneeling is more reverent than standing and receiving on the hand. That’s just not true. And it’s just plain insulting to all of us who couldn’t kneel unless the Lord performs a healing miracle.

I challenge you to get to know an assortment of Catholics who receive Holy Communion standing and on the hand. And don’t purposely choose the ones who obviously don’t even want to be at Mass and don’t have a clue. Watch the Catholics who walk forward and are obviously in a state of worship and awe as they approach Jesus and receive Him. Get to know them, and then come back here and tell us that those Christians aren’t as reverent as you are.

 

[Brendan_64]

Even in the minority of countries that have taken the indult to receive on the hand, it can still be denied if there is a risk of profanation under Redemptionis Sacramentum 92 but it can’t ever be denied to somebody receiving on the tongue and/or kneeling (providing they are properly disposed to receive it, that is). There are plenty of legitimate occasions where a priest is obligated to deny Communion, yet the only denial I have seen were to people receiving on the tongue or kneeling. This really says a lot.

It is only to be denied if there is a real risk that the person won’t consume it there and then. Redempionis Sacramentum 92 also states that “if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the hand, in areas where the Bishops’ Conference with the recognitio of the Apostolic See has given permission, the sacred host is to be administered to him or her.” No exception is made with regard to the EF Mass and communicants wishing to receive in the hand. Just like at an OF Mass, it ought to be given either on the tongue, or in the hand, according to the wishes of the communicant receiving, not according to the wishes of the priest.

 

[agnes_therese]

Instead, why does it seem as if there is resentment towards those who receive on the tongue, and how can we correct them in truth and love?

I would venture to say that if you look at Catholics in general, there is no such resentment. Nobody in my parish thinks twice about it, including Father, the deacons, and the Extraordinary Ministers.

 

[markomalley]

The OF Mass is also expected to follow the norms for that Mass and the rubrics as set out in the GIRM. The norm for the OF Mass is Communion on the tongue.

The granting of the indult is not specific to a particular form of the Mass in that area. If an indult is granted, then it applies to both forms of the Mass.

What is more likely to happen, a person being refused Communion on the tongue by a priest at an OF Mass, or a person being refused Communion in the hand by a priest at an EF Mass?

Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei was asked this very question and this is how they responded:

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/832/0b6t.jpg

“Dear Mr. XXXX In reference to your letter of 15. June, this papal commission would like to point out that the celebration of Holy Mass in the extraordinary form envisages the reception of Holy Communion while kneeling, as the Holy Host is laid directly on the tongue of the communicant. There is no provision for the distribution of Holy Communion on the hand in this form of the Holy Mass. With blessings,”

So, if there is a major pastoral need, perhaps your Conference of Bishops could make a formal request for an indult that would apply to the EF. It appears that the position of Ecclesia Dei is that the indult doesn’t apply right now.

 

[Brendan_64]

Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei was asked this very question and this is how they responded:

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/832/0b6t.jpg

“Dear Mr. XXXX In reference to your letter of 15. June, this papal commission would like to point out that the celebration of Holy Mass in the extraordinary form envisages the reception of Holy Communion while kneeling, as the Holy Host is laid directly on the tongue of the communicant. There is no provision for the distribution of Holy Communion on the hand in this form of the Holy Mass. With blessings,”

So, if there is a major pastoral need, perhaps your Conference of Bishops could make a formal request for an indult that would apply to the EF. It appears that the position of Ecclesia Dei is that the indult doesn’t apply right now.

In what region does that letter apply?

There is no intention to make receiving Communion in the hand for any form of Mass, but an indult permits deviation from the norm.

An indult to allow Communion in the hand applies to a particular area, not to a particular form of Mass. The 1962 Missale does not exist in isolation from the rest of Church Law. If Communion in the hand is permitted by Church law in an OF Mass then it is permitted in an EF Mass in that area.

wdtprs.com/blog/2007/09/summorum-pontificum-does-not-create-an-ecclesiastical-jurassic-park/

It is ironic that some ‘traditional’ Catholics seem to get enraged if occasionally an EMHC hesitates before giving Communion on the tongue, but would be outraged at the thought of a person being given Communion in the hand at an EF Mass.

Can we not just grow up and accept that our Church is of the view that both ways of receiving are appropriate ways to receive Communion (otherwise the Church would not permit them in any circumstances) so therefore either way should be acceptable at either an OF or EF Mass. It’s not as if the Eucharist is more sacred at one form of Mass than another.

 

[markomalley]

In what region does that letter apply?

There is no intention to make receiving Communion in the hand for any form of Mass, but an indult permits deviation from the norm.

An indult to allow Communion in the hand applies to a particular area, not to a particular form of Mass. The 1962 Missale does not exist in isolation from the rest of Church Law. If Communion in the hand is permitted by Church law in an OF Mass then it is permitted in an EF Mass in that area.

wdtprs.com/blog/2007/09/summorum-pontificum-does-not-create-an-ecclesiastical-jurassic-park/

It is ironic that some ‘traditional’ Catholics seem to get enraged if occasionally an EMHC hesitates before giving Communion on the tongue, but would be outraged at the thought of a person being given Communion in the hand at an EF Mass.

Can we not just grow up and accept that our Church is of the view that both ways of receiving are appropriate ways to receive Communion (otherwise the Church would not permit them in any circumstances) so therefore either way should be acceptable at either an OF or EF Mass. It’s not as if the Eucharist is more sacred at one form of Mass than another.

So far as I know, it’s universal. For what it’s worth, it was cited by your own Latin Mass Society as authoritative.

As far as your anger issues, I think they may have been misdirected.

 

[Brendan_64]

So far as I know, it’s universal. For what it’s worth, it was cited by your own Latin Mass Society as authoritative.

As far as your anger issues, I think they may have been misdirected.

Where did you get the impression that I was angry?

All I’m saying is that receiving Communion on the tongue, or in the hand are both perfectly acceptable ways to receive Communion. Our Church believes this to be the case otherwise it would not permit them in any circumstances. Perhaps we (laity and clergy) should just get over ourselves and accept the same.The Body of Christ is no more special in either form of Mass, so the method of receiving Him ought to be acceptable in either form of Mass.

 

[Brendan_64]

So far as I know, it’s universal. For what it’s worth, it was cited by your own Latin Mass Society as authoritative.

As far as your anger issues, I think they may have been misdirected.

Where do you get the impression that I am angry? i am not angry at all, I can assure you.

I think that perhaps it is time that we, as Catholics, accept that either method of receiving Communion (on the hand, or on the tongue) is a perfectly acceptable to receive our Lord. Our Church believes this to be the case otherwise it would not permit either method. It’s not as if the Eucharist is more special in one form of Mass than the other, therefore if one method of receiving Him is acceptable in one form of mass then it ought to be acceptable in the other.

The 1962 Missal does not specify how Communion ought to be received, and as the EF forms part of the Church today it is subject to Church rules as they exist today (not as they existed in 1962).

Father Z has got it right when he says, that if a person participating at an EF Mass pust out his hands, in the right fashion, to receive (in a place where the bishops conference has been given permission to permit receiving in the hand), then a priest errs in purposely not giving that person Communion in the hand. And that’s from a priest who would prefer that Communion be given on the tongue.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Yes exactly. If you try kneeling too you will undoubtedly come across plenty of confused faces and even some priests wanting to discourage you from this reverent behavior.

I have said before and I will still say it despite the angry comments I get, that the reason is that it hits a nerve. Everybody really knows that kneeling and on the tongue is more reverent than standing and receiving on the hand. The modern way of receiving on the hand is even less reverent than how it was done in the early Church, and even that was necessarily outlawed for 1500 years once a more reverent way to receive was thought of.

Even in the minority of countries that have taken the indult to receive on the hand, it can still be denied if there is a risk of profanation under Redemptionis Sacramentum 92 but it can’t ever be denied to somebody receiving on the tongue and/or kneeling (providing they are properly disposed to receive it, that is). There are plenty of legitimate occasions where a priest is obligated to deny Communion, yet the only denial I have seen were to people receiving on the tongue or kneeling. This really says a lot.

I prefer to receive on the tongue and do not believe kneeling and receiving on the tongue is more reverent than standing and receiving in the hand. You are dead wrong in your assertion that everybody really believes this. Reverence is in the heart. There is no way I am ever going to say I am more reverent than someone who receives in the hand. Don’t get in the habit of assuming your OPINION of things is the always the correct one.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Yes exactly. If you try kneeling too you will undoubtedly come across plenty of confused faces and even some priests wanting to discourage you from this reverent behavior.

I have said before and I will still say it despite the angry comments I get, that the reason is that it hits a nerve. Everybody really knows that kneeling and on the tongue is more reverent than standing and receiving on the hand. The modern way of receiving on the hand is even less reverent than how it was done in the early Church, and even that was necessarily outlawed for 1500 years once a more reverent way to receive was thought of.

Even in the minority of countries that have taken the indult to receive on the hand, it can still be denied if there is a risk of profanation under Redemptionis Sacramentum 92 but it can’t ever be denied to somebody receiving on the tongue and/or kneeling (providing they are properly disposed to receive it, that is). There are plenty of legitimate occasions where a priest is obligated to deny Communion, yet the only denial I have seen were to people receiving on the tongue or kneeling. This really says a lot.

I prefer to receive on the tongue and do not believe kneeling and receiving on the tongue is more reverent than standing and receiving in the hand. You are dead wrong in your assertion that everybody really believes this. Reverence is in the heart. There is no way I am ever going to say I am more reverent than someone who receives in the hand. Don’t get in the habit of assuming your OPINION of things is the always the correct one.

 

[Saints_Alive]

How would someone holding out their hands to receive be regarded at an EF Mass?

Either method of receiving ought to be permitted, without question, at either form of the Mass.

Well, no. See Universae Ecclesiae. The norms in place in 1962 are to be retained. COTT is the way we are allowed to receive at the EF Mass.

If you disagree, take it up with BXVI