tongue or hand?

[otjm]

(This goes for OTJM since he posted more or less the same idea

Oh certainly, but there is also a DEMANDED level of respect for the Eucharist as that is part of our being disposed to recieve grace from the sacrament. Touching the host as little as possible with unworthy hands is, in my opinion, part of that. If respect for the sanctity of the Host is NOT part of the sacrament, then why should we worry if we drop it on the floor or hand it to those who are publicly against the church? Obviously, protecting the integrity of the Host is a vital aspect of Communion. Don’t oversimplify such a precious and complex relationship as is espoused by Communion, you make it trite by doing so…

There is no question that receiving in the hand is by indult, and no one is required to do so. I also have no question that the Eucharist demands respect. I do find it curious that it was good enough for Jesus, who taught his apostles, who then taught the preists and bishops they ordained, to distribute Communion in the hand, and there is no question that continued on in the early Church, and we are now discussing whether or not touching the Host is disrespectful. Respect has less with whether or not it is in the hand or on the tongue, so much as it is in the attitude of the recipient. I have seen enough people receive in the hand to know that there is a tremendous amount of respect paid by those who do so; it is easy to see in their eyes and demeanor.

The hand is no more nor less worthy to receive the host than the tongue; we sin with both. Some of the more viscious sins, to me, are made by the tongue. We are not worthy to receive; it is not the tongue or the hand but the person.

The issue of respect has more to do with catechesis than it does by tongue or hand; one can be flippant or casual both ways. I’ve seen people who receive on the tongue who did not appear to be as respectful as some I have seen receive in the hand.

As to why we give the Eucharist to those “who are publicly against the Church”, it is an issue of Canon law. Refusing the Eucharist to someone is not something done without following the procedures required. We both may feel that there are those, particularly politicians, who should be brought to heel, but that is a separate topic.

I truly wonder if Christ came down to distribute Communion, if He attempted to hand it to some if they would refuse to take it; and if He offered the Cup, if they would also refuse it. I have heard all the arguements; but that scene keeps playing behind my eyes… for all the protests these same people would make about the sanctity of the priesthood (and the priest stands as an Alter Christus), what would happen if they failed to recognize Christ Himself at Communion, as did the disciples on the road to Emmaeus, and after the refusal He recvealed Himself…

But I digress…

 

[tee_eff_em]

(This goes for OTJM since he posted more or less the same idea

Oh certainly, but there is also a DEMANDED level of respect for the Eucharist as that is part of our being disposed to recieve grace from the sacrament. Touching the host as little as possible with unworthy hands is, in my opinion, part of that.

From the indulgences she has allowed, it would appear that the Church disagrees. But you are entitled to your opinion.

It is not my intent to oversimplify nor render anything trite, but rather only to submit my intellect and will to that of Holy Mother Church.

By all means, i’m certain they CAN. However, can you honestly tell me that you believe in the Real Presence and yet are unwilling to believe that God could spare you from disease if that were His Will?

There is God’s will, and there is God’s will. God wills that all men be saved, but I do not know that all men shall be.

I believe God can spare me from disease in any imaginable circumstance, but I also believe that God wills (in most cases) the Eucharistic elements retain the accidents of bread and wine, including the accidents that allow the spread of contagion. Otherwise, belief in the Real Presence would require no faith – Want proof of the Real Presence? Sprinkle the consecrated elements with mold spores and *watch *the pollution be resisted.

tee

 

[TobyLue]

What bugs me is that in most churches First Communicants are not taught both ways. The actual norm all over the world, except in a few countries of which is US is one of them, is to receive it on the tongue. In the US we have the option of either the tongue or in the hand but as far as I have seen in most all churches children are told that they must received it on the hand and it is never, ever explained to them that they can receive it on the tongue. Thank God in my parish we receive it by intinction (that is the tradition in the AU parishes) so we have no option. Plus we also have an altar rail and we all kneel to receive Our Lord.

 

[Vittorio23]

What bugs me is that in most churches First Communicants are not taught both ways. The actual norm all over the world, except in a few countries of which is US is one of them, is to receive it on the tongue. In the US we have the option of either the tongue or in the hand but as far as I have seen in most all churches children are told that they must received it on the hand and it is never, ever explained to them that they can receive it on the tongue. Thank God in my parish we receive it by intinction (that is the tradition in the AU parishes) so we have no option. Plus we also have an altar rail and we all kneel to receive Our Lord.

During RCIA at my parish, when we were preparing for First Communion, we were taught both ways in which to receive. We were encouraged by our priest to receive on the tongue.

 

[Andruschak]

During RCIA at my parish, when we were preparing for First Communion, we were taught both ways in which to receive. We were encouraged by our priest to receive on the tongue.

Same here, which is why I receive on the tongue. :yup: But this seems to be a minority practice in the USA

 

[Vittorio23]

Same here, which is why I receive on the tongue. :yup: But this seems to be a minority practice in the USA

It really is a minority practice. I had decided beforehand that I would only receive on the tongue and what my priest said only confirmed that decision.

But, just the other weekend, I was in Denver and I went to receive Holy Communion, and the deacon paused, looked at me funny, looked at the priest, then finally gave me communion on the tongue. I noticed no one else receive on the tongue, although I do have to admit that I wasn’t paying very close attention.

It was just an odd experience, coming from a parish where about 40% of the people receive on the tongue, so it’s not a big deal to do so.

 

[Petite]

We can receive either on the tongue or the hand. Both are permissible, but I think for a long time, (maybe before Vatican II) that you could only receive on the tongue. (I could be wrong about this).

I personally would rather receive on the tongue, but there was an instance when I went to communion and the priest missed my mouth and the host fell on the floor.

I felt like dying right there. I didn’t know what to do.

So now, I only receive in the hand to avoid that from ever happening again.

Anecdotal: I grew up in the pre-Vatican II church. One Easter Sunday, decked out in my new Easter clothes and hat (I was about 10 at the time.), I knelt at the communion rail to receive Holy Communion. When I tilted my head back to receive (We were taught to tilt our heads back.), my hat fell off! I was mortified! I was SURE I had committed some awful sin being in church without my head covered (AND at the communion rail!)!

I first received Holy Communion in my hands when I visited Germany in the late 1970’s. When it was time for Holy Communion, people started pouring out of their pews–looking more like they were ‘storming the altar’! They all had their hands out–it was an incredible sight to me! (I prefer to receiving in my hands v. on the tongue. Even when I was preparing for First Communion in 1959, I fretted over the procedure! I must have been a nervous child! )

I remember in the parish of my childhood, there were usually three priests to distribute Holy Communion at the Sunday Masses. They more or less divided up the rail into thirds, and they (to me, it seemed) rushed down the row, then back up. I often wondered how they managed to say Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiat animam tuam in vitam aeternam with the rapidity that they did.

 

[TobyLue]

Petite

Anecdotal: I grew up in the pre-Vatican II church. One Easter Sunday, decked out in my new Easter clothes and hat (I was about 10 at the time.), I knelt at the communion rail to receive Holy Communion. When I tilted my head back to receive (We were taught to tilt our heads back.), my hat fell off! I was mortified! I was SURE I had committed some awful sin being in church without my head covered (AND at the communion rail!)!

Hah!!! I’ll do you one better. I was in my teens and was kneeling at the communion rail. As the priest was approaching and gave communion to the person to the right of me and the altar boy took a step towards me with the patten I titled my head back and opened my mouth and closed my eyes………nothing happened.??? Puzzled, I kept my eyes closed for what seemed an eternity and was wondering why the priest hadn’t put the Host in my mouth. I opened my eyes and saw the priest back at the altar. He ran out of Hosts and had to go get some more. I noticed a smirk on the altar boys face as I must have looked pretty silly there with my mouth wide opened, tongue sticking out and the priest back at the Altar….

 

[Abira]

Tongue only for me, I also receive from the cup from time to time, mostly at daily Mass if I am certain I am not sick. Usually at Sunday Mass I only receive the Host, as it is fully the Body and Blood of Christ.

why do you choose to receive the blood on some occasions and not others… isn’t the bread the full body and blood during the week too or just on sundays? (that confused me a bit lol)

There is no stupid question You are opening a real can of worms! It was discussed recently on another thread, you can probably search for it. I personally no longer “drink from the cup” for sanitary AND theological reasons. The Host is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus.

I don’t understand the theological reasons for not drinking from the cup… I’ve been trying to think and drawn blanks

I like the idea of drinking from a single cup. It makes me feel humbled and part of the church community because ‘we all share in the one bread’… or wine as the case is.

any answers on the above would be appreciated, not just from the original posters.

S

 

[Vittorio23]

I don’t understand the theological reasons for not drinking from the cup… I’ve been trying to think and drawn blanks

Both the consecrated Host and the consecrated Wine are fully the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, when you receive communion under the species of bread, you are truly receiving body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. You don’t necessarily need to drink from the cup.

 

[Andruschak]

Both the consecrated Host and the consecrated Wine are fully the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, when you receive communion under the species of bread, you are truly receiving body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. You don’t necessarily need to drink from the cup.

And for us recovered alcoholics, it would also be dangerous. The Church catechism states that I do NOT need to drink from the cup for complete communion. Good enough for me.

 

[Petite]

Petite
Hah!!! I’ll do you one better. I was in my teens and was kneeling at the communion rail. As the priest was approaching and gave communion to the person to the right of me and the altar boy took a step towards me with the patten I titled my head back and opened my mouth and closed my eyes………nothing happened.??? Puzzled, I kept my eyes closed for what seemed an eternity and was wondering why the priest hadn’t put the Host in my mouth. I opened my eyes and saw the priest back at the altar. He ran out of Hosts and had to go get some more. I noticed a smirk on the altar boys face as I must have looked pretty silly there with my mouth wide opened, tongue sticking out and the priest back at the Altar….

YIKES! I feared something like that happening to me too! Hope you have recovered from this!

 

[Ravyn_Guiliani]

IMO–not to offend or condemn anyone else–but this is how I see it:

it is not WINE and WAFER, it is BLOOD and BODY. And I cannot see children or alcoholics or those who are allergic to wheat violating any laws or physical restrictions by receiving it!
If Jesus healed the sick when He was here on earth then He certainly can make sure I do not catch a cold when partaking of His Body and Blood-if He wants to!
And as far as not touching it with anything unconsecrated—what about your tongue and mouth? Have they been consecrated to receive it?

Ravyn

 

[Abira]

Both the consecrated Host and the consecrated Wine are fully the body, blood, soul, and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, when you receive communion under the species of bread, you are truly receiving body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ. You don’t necessarily need to drink from the cup.

is the wine body, blood and soul too? could he receive under the wine and not receive the bread? would that be ok too?

S

 

[Cobbfmly]

*…*placing thy left hand as a throne for thy right, which is to receive so great a King…

This is exactly what we were told to do by the catechists when receiving in the hands started to be allowed (it was in the late 70’s). I did not receive in the hand until I was an adult with a wedding ring. At that point I could trust that I could make the throne correctly (telling right from left has always been hard for me).

 

[Abira]

…placing thy left hand as a throne for thy right, which is to receive so great a King…

this is how i was taught in the anglican church although i wasn’t aware of the reason etc, i always did it our of habit.

 

[Cobbfmly]

What bugs me is that in most churches First Communicants are not taught both ways. The actual norm all over the world, except in a few countries of which is US is one of them, is to receive it on the tongue. In the US we have the option of either the tongue or in the hand but as far as I have seen in most all churches children are told that they must received it on the hand and it is never, ever explained to them that they can receive it on the tongue. Thank God in my parish we receive it by intinction (that is the tradition in the AU parishes) so we have no option. Plus we also have an altar rail and we all kneel to receive Our Lord.

In our parish the First Communicants are given the choice to receive in the hand or on the tongue.

 

[Genesis315]

It depends for me. If I am receiving from a priest and there is a paton, I receive on the tongue. Otherwise, I receive in the hand according to the method of St. Cyril.

St. Basil also describes receiving Communion in the hand here:

newadvent.org/fathers/3202093.htm

 

[Cobbfmly]

is the wine body, blood and soul too? could he receive under the wine and not receive the bread? would that be ok too?

S

Yes, the blood is also the body, blood, soul and divinity. This is important to understand as some people are sensitive to gluten and can not receive Jesus’ blood only. I have a friend who’s son is extremely sensitive to gluten and may have to make his first communion with Jesus’ blood only.

 

[Genesis315]

St. Cyril also gives an interesting method for receiving the Precious Blood:

1. Then after you have partaken of the Body of Christ, draw near also to the Cup of His Blood; not stretching forth your hands, but bending, and saying with an air of worship and reverence, Amen, hallow yourself by partaking also of the Blood of Christ. And while the moisture is still upon your lips, touch it with your hands, and hallow your eyes and brow and the other organs of sense. Then wait for the prayer, and give thanks unto God, who has accounted you worthy of so great mysteries.