Tongue/Hand/Precious Blood

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mysty101
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mysty101

Guest
Ok for those of you who will not receive the Precious Blood because of germs. Do you realize how many times the fingers are touched by the tongue when people receive on the tongue? I really don’t like to distribute on the tongue for this reason. Plus, if my fingers are wet enough (and believe me, I try to be careful, but sometimes people close their mouth too soon.) the next Host may stick. I did almost drop one once, since it stuck to my wet finger, and almost fell when I withdrew my hand.

So the ministers’ fingers may be as contaminated as the cup.

Please vote as you would act when the precious Blood is distributed.
 
I think a little common sense goes a long way. First of all, do not receive from the chalice when you have the flu. When you are sick (and contagious) might be the one time it would be wise to receive in the hand, if you are not otherwise inclined to do so, or refrain from receiving.

Second, if for health reasons catching a cold or flu would be very dangerous for you, do not receive from the cup, or sit in the very front to be one of the first. Also, you receive only under one species during cold/flu season.

Finally, realize that not everyone that is contagious shows it. Do not be overly paranoid about exposure to bacteria or virus since exposure happens to everyone to some degree.
 
Just think of all the germs that are already on your hands from the sign of peace…:rolleyes:
I’ll receive on the tongue thank you very much…not so much that I am worried about germs, but because I personally feel that it is much more reverent.:twocents: Annunciata:)
 
don’t know about you but i’m feeling queezy… time to start attening mass of the air… EWTN… 😃
 
When you are a EMHC all you have to do is insert the Host with your palm facing up and you greatly eliminate the chance of your fingers toughing the communicates tongue.
 
I chose receive on the tongue and not receive the Precious Blood; couldn’t chose otherwise because our bishop has instituted a policy until Easter Sunday 2005 that the chalice not be offered, due to the shortage of flu vaccine and the high preponderance of at-risk people in the congregations (we tend to have a lot of elderly, children, and people with chronic illness at many masses).

I don’t shy away from the Precious Blood because of a germ issue and I think the majority of people don’t either. A lot of us 40 year olds didn’t receive in our young years, were well catechized that one doesn’t get MORE out of the Eucharist by receiving both species, and chose the option of the Precious Body alone in humble thankfulness and reverent habit. If for some reason the bishop stated that his preference for the diocese would be reception of both species, I would likewise humbly and thankfully receive both species. I guess I’m just a moderate, run-of-the-mill, ordinary Catholic. I don’t want to agitate for women priests or fuss about non inclusive language, and I also don’t want to force everyone into veils (if they’re women) or make EVERY Mass a Latin one (I wish our diocese had an induit, though). I don’t feel I get “more” out of Mass by taking Body and Blood; I don’t feel I got “less” if I receive only one species, and I don’t judge anybody else to be “better” or “worse” than I am if they receive a different way. I just figure that reception of the Eucharist is between every single individual and God, and that so long as you’re loving and listening to Him, you’re fine. Nobody but God knows our inmost hearts and WHY we REALLY do some things; we can’t judge others on appearance alone.
 
This question has been asked many times and in many ways.

Let me ask this one now.

What does it matter?

The fullness of Christ is found in either species.

The Church in America allows communion in hand or on the tongue.

Where is the issue? What does it matter how and what an individual chooses to recieve?
 
Tantum ergo:
I guess I’m just a moderate, run-of-the-mill, ordinary Catholic.
Click to expand...
Nope. You’re a radial, hard-core Catholic. Unfortunately, the “run-of-the-mill, ordinary Catholic” these days doesn’t bother with “pointless” things like the Mass and confession.
 
40.png
SaintJVMan:
When you are a EMHC all you have to do is insert the Host with your palm facing up and you greatly eliminate the chance of your fingers toughing the communicates tongue.
Click to expand...
I disagree. While it’s certainly more refined to place the host on someone’s tongue with your palm facing up, we amateurs have far more precise motor control when we do it palms down…
 
I do not receive the Precious Blood because I am terrified. And not of germs…but of dropping it! I’m a huge klutz and I know one of these days I’m going to have a bad hand off and the Precious Blood of Our Lord will go all over the floor.

I don’t want to tempt fate on this case.

As for receiving on the tongue…well I’m old fashioned. I feel that only consecrated hands should touch the Sacred Host.
 
40.png
amasimp:
I do not receive the Precious Blood because I am terrified. And not of germs…but of dropping it! I’m a huge klutz and I know one of these days I’m going to have a bad hand off and the Precious Blood of Our Lord will go all over the floor.
Click to expand...
I used to be terrfied of dropping it too…just had to face my fear and got over it.
As for receiving on the tongue…well I’m old fashioned. I feel that only consecrated hands should touch the Sacred Host.
Click to expand...
Certainly nothing old fashioned here…I tend to agree w/ you…the only other person I will receive from is my husband, he is an EME.
God Bless, Annunciata:)
 
Is it just me or doesn’t it seem funny to worry about germs when we’re talking about receiving the Body and Blood of Christ? It would seem if you got seriously ill and even died for receiving Our Lord for whatever reason that your reward would be great in Heaven!
 
Many people do believe this way, but unfortunately many do not—I guess I’m in the middle. I don’t think I would receive the cup after someone with sores on their mouth, but I do usually receive, even if I see someone coughing or sniffling.
spindleworks.com/library/kenyon/comonCup.html
First, the only secretion that would get onto the edge of the cup is saliva, not sputum (from the lungs), not respiratory droplets from a cough or sneeze, nor nasal secretions. That is, except in the very unlikely circumstance where someone coughs directly into the cup or someone’s nose drips directly into the cup and the cup is allowed to continue to the next person. A number of the infections mentioned are not easily spread through saliva…

…Adenoviruses are spread by respiratory droplets and should not be of concern on the edge of a cup…

…The Common Cold viruses are spread by aerosolized droplets and by direct contact. Coughing into your hand, then shaking someone’s hand and the that person putting his hand to his face may be a significant mode of transmission. The Common Cold is not serious…

…Bronchiolitis, Bronchitis, and Pneumonia can all be grouped together. They describe the response of the infected person to a variety of infectious agents. The majority of these will be spread by droplets that are inhaled deeper into the body. I could not find a comment on this in my books but I suspect that infections that may be on the edge of a cup could not get deep enough into the lungs. Again the air around the infected person who coughs is a much greater concern…

…Of all of the infections mentioned, except Herpes Simplex or Cold Sores, if they are present in the congregation at all, are in my opinion much more likely to be spread to susceptible people from others coughing and hand shaking or through their children having contact with each other than from the edge of the cup. Those concerned with using the common cup should be very concerned about sitting in church while someone else present is coughing…

…A common idea in defense of the common cup is that the alcohol in the wine kills the serious.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Mysty101:
Ok for those of you who will not receive the Precious Blood because of germs. Do you realize how many times the fingers are touched by the tongue when people receive on the tongue? I really don’t like to distribute on the tongue for this reason. Plus, if my fingers are wet enough (and believe me, I try to be careful, but sometimes people close their mouth too soon.) the next Host may stick. I did almost drop one once, since it stuck to my wet finger, and almost fell when I withdrew my hand.

So the ministers’ fingers may be as contaminated as the cup.

Please vote as you would act when the precious Blood is distributed.
Click to expand...
I am really starting to beleive you have a PERSONAL agenda and bias regarding the distribution of Communion ON THE TONGUE, which by the way is a CANONICAL/LITURGICAL RIGHT ALL Catholics have, and priest, or anyone who refuses to give Communion on the Tongue, violates one of the principal rights catholics have, and can suffer severe CANONICAL penalties(I have consulted on this with various Canon lawyer friends).
There should be no problems with “germs” and Communion on the tongue, if the PRIEST is TAUGHT how to correctly place the host on the tongue, and uses a good sized communion wafer. If however, a priest distributing communion, is so afraid and hates to give communion on the tongue, chances are he will make mistakes and put his fingers and maybe his whole hand on someones tongue when distributing. However, those who KNOW the RULES of distribution on the other hand, should not have any problems at all.
Know that the precious blood’s distribution to the laity is a farely NEW novelty, and was never done in our Church until some liberal priests began to PLEASE some few in the 1970’s. The same to be said about clay and crystal/glass chalices which are NOW FORBIDDEN!!(2004).
The laity who believe as the Church teaches that Christ is present Body, soul and divinity in the Validly Consecrated host, should not have a problem with NOT taking the precious blood. In any event, this is the OPTION of the priest, who as my priest friends who are PASTORS do, can absolutely prohibit the distribution of the chalice to the laity(they as pastors have all authority to prohibit this novelty).
Of course here I am talking about CATHOLIC Masses, which cannot be said of some “masses” nowadays.👍
 
40.png
Annunciata:
Just think of all the germs that are already on your hands from the sign of peace…:rolleyes:
I’ll receive on the tongue thank you very much…not so much that I am worried about germs, but because I personally feel that it is much more reverent.:twocents: Annunciata:)
Click to expand...
Well said Annunciata!! You seem to be a well informed REAL Catholic. You as well as I have the RIGHT! To receive Christ on the tongue, and know that if any priest(I say priest because as me I am sure you receive ONLY from a priest=we also have this right) refuses to give you communion on the tongue he can suffer severe canonical penalties and possibly his faculties can be suspended(I saw it happen here in my major archdiocese in the USA already) and I have consulted canon lawyers on this, one is a scholar priest friend of mine(a good Canon Lawyer).
Keep on standing up to those with a left-wing 1970’s agenda IN THE CHURCH=the Church is swaying everyday more on OUR side. Well said:clapping: .
 
40.png
Annunciata:
Just think of all the germs that are already on your hands from the sign of peace…:rolleyes:
I’ll receive on the tongue thank you very much…not so much that I am worried about germs, but because I personally feel that it is much more reverent.:twocents: Annunciata:)
Click to expand...
By the way, nothing more novel and NOT a requirement as the sign of peace, this is purely OPTIONAL in liturgical law. If I do give the peace sign, it is only to be charitable, and only to those NEXT to me, after which I quickly kneel and close my eyes, for the Agnus Dei (The “Lamb of God who takes,” etc.).
 
40.png
misericordie:
By the way, nothing more novel and NOT a requirement as the sign of peace, this is purely OPTIONAL in liturgical law. If I do give the peace sign, it is only to be charitable, and only to those NEXT to me, after which I quickly kneel and close my eyes, for the Agnus Dei (The “Lamb of God who takes,” etc.).
Click to expand...
from the GIRM which IS the law for the Mass.
*
*The Rite of Peace
Click to expand...
  1. The Rite of Peace follows, by which the Church asks for peace and unity for herself and for the whole human family, and the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament.
As for the sign of peace to be given, the manner is to be established by Conferences of Bishops in accordance with the culture and customs of the peoples. It is, however, appropriate that each person offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner.
*
 
40.png
Annunciata:
Just think of all the germs that are already on your hands from the sign of peace…:rolleyes:
I’ll receive on the tongue thank you very much…not so much that I am worried about germs, but because I personally feel that it is much more reverent.:twocents: Annunciata:)
Click to expand...
I carry a small bottle of antiseptic gel and clean my hands after the sign of peace before I go to get the host in my hand.
 
40.png
Mysty101:
Again Misery,
I said PREFER !!! smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_2_204v.gif

WHAT PART OF PREFER SOUNDS LIKE REFUSE???
Click to expand...
Before you blow your steam, as you seem to always do on these forums, I am NOT “Misery” but misericordie, it is a lack of maturity on your part, and typical of a person when they are loosing an argument to refer to personal attacks: you have here by constantly refering to me as: “misery.” I have not refered to you as: " “mystery”, though your very own personal and subjective ideas on the eucharist ARE that, a mystery to the well educated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top