Vatican official suggests reconsidering Communion in the hand

[johnstown_johnn]

This of course is a practice, but not a doctrine of the church. Practices can change.

It is very possible that the practice will revert back to on the tongue. What will you do then?

I receive the host in my hands and I do not treat it like a big mac, nor do many of my compatriots who receive in the hand as well.

Do you bow or genuflect as an outward sign of reverence? NOBODY does that at McDonalds and I do NOT see it with those that recieve on the hands. Not here, anyway.

Mother Teresa is part of the Magesterium of the Church? That is her opinion, which she has every right to, but of course, the church did not delegate to her the authority to determine how communion may be received.

Rig responded to that far better than I could.

 

[rlg94086]

Those that don’t rejoice could at least refrain from spouting lies, such as the practice of receiving Communion in the hand is the equivalent of eating a Big Mac.

Or is that too much to ask?

If someone wants to compare receiving Communion in the hand to the eating of a Big Mac, it is not a ***lie, ***they are using a colorful metaphor to express their opinion. If John had lied about something, I would agree with you.

mlchance:

Regarding Mother Teresa, I find it interesting that her alleged objection to Communion in the hand is constantly bandied about as if it proves anything or as if the alleged quote isn’t hearsay reported to the media by a priest. Mother Teresa is indeed a saint, but even saints may err, and forgive those of us who don’t place hearsay above the Church’s decisions.

– Mark L. Chance.

Again, Mark, quoting a saint as a back-up to a deeply held opinion is not an attempt to “prove anything,” it is giving evidence to support your opinion. What is wrong with that? And what do you mean by calling the quote “hearsay?” Is it evidence in a case?

The Church has clearly said that receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is the norm…receiving in the hand is by indult. Yes, it’s allowed in the US. If the Vatican reverses that decision then it won’t be. Why is it unusual, when faced with that news, for people who believe we should only receive on the tongue speak up and quote saints??

Feel free to quote a saint that says receiving in the hand is more reverant or just as reverent. Your “hearsay” would be just as acceptable to promote your personal opinion as John’s.

 

[brockmac]

Johnn,

Blessed are the poor in spirit, theirs is the Kingdom of God.

We are called by our Lord to be humble and to submit to His Church, our Mother.

For the time being, the Church allows that people may recieve the precious Body of our Lord in the hand or on the tongue. As I stated in my previous post, I do think that for me, receiving on the tongue is a sign of humility and reverence. However, I know many very sincere and devout Catholics who fully recognize the the Presence of our Lord in the Eucharist and choose to reverently receive in the hand.

Neither you nor I are capable of discerning what is going through the mind of our bretheren as they receive our Lord’s Body and I doubt that it would be good for my spiritual development to dwell on what might or might not be going through the minds of everyone else receiving Communion while I should be either preparing to receive Him myself (before receiving) or thanking Him for this wonderful gift (after receiving).

I am grateful to our Lord for the love He has given you for His Eucharistic Presence. I wish all Catholics shared the reverence that you have expressed in your posts for His Body and Blood. I would simply humbly suggest that you be a little more cautious about judging things that you cannot know with certainty.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

This thread is all about our perspectives on the reception of Communion. It is NOT a show of “pride”, it is more a show of Humility.

If we all follow your post above then this thread should be closed. It has no purpose in continuing on. This thread should never have been started…right?

 

[brockmac]

I am not saying that we cannot discuss the merits of reception in the hand vs. on the tongue. I am only suggesting that the discussion be conducted with love and humility and without making blanket assertions about those who chose to receive in a way other than the way we receive.

In a way the discussion reminds me of other threads I have seen where posters have suggested that people who attend the OF of the Mass are somehow less Catholic or at least less reverent than those who attend the EF.

I think we can have a discussion about the merits of each option without suggesting that people who have different opinions, which are not contrary to Church teaching, are not somehow less reverent or less Catholic. Now if someone has an opinion that is contrary to the Church’s teaching, we would be duty bound to correct that. But barring that, I would pray that charity would prevail.

 

[johnstown_johnn]

I am not saying that we cannot discuss the merits of reception in the hand vs. on the tongue. I am only suggesting that the discussion be conducted with love and humility and without making blanket assertions about those who chose to receive in a way other than the way we receive.

In my Mass attendance and seeing those that receive in the hand…I NEVER, NOT ONCE, made a judgment on those folks. I DO NOT see myself as MORE in awe…it is MY inner sense of devotion to th Host…had I ever passed judgment on anyone else I would be guilty of FALSE PRIDE. I know enough to avoid that great sin since it can be UNCONTROLLABLE. I DO NOT venture there.

In a way the discussion reminds me of other threads I have seen where posters have suggested that people who attend the OF of the Mass are somehow less Catholic or at least less reverent than those who attend the EF.

I think we can have a discussion about the merits of each option without suggesting that people who have different opinions, which are not contrary to Church teaching, are not somehow less reverent or less Catholic. Now if someone has an opinion that is contrary to the Church’s teaching, we would be duty bound to correct that. But barring that, I would pray that charity would prevail.

This is a subject that IS NOT taken lightly, obviously, since the Eucharist is CENTRAL to the Faith.

No Eucharist = No Church

Please, dispell the notion that receivers on the hand are being judged…that is NOT happening…not at all.

 

[Leeta]

Old red leg,

The early practice of the Church regarding holy Communion was different from the ‘communion in the hand’ practiced today. The Host was placed in the RIGHT hand, and it was then reverenced with a profound bow and then without taking the Host from the hand, was lifted to the mouth and carefully consumed along with any crumbs! Many times reference is made to a blessing of the forehead and the lips with the host. This adoration took place after the Host was placed on the hand!

In Luke 19:22, Jesus gives his body to the Apostles, they do not take it.
In the Byzantine rite, communion on the tongue was always done.
After about 800 A.D. the above practice was discontinued in the Latin rite, due to abuses and dangers to our Lord.

So one can see that there has been a liturgical development and the Church is not an archaeological society when it comes to liturgy. We are not supposed to go ‘back’ to the liturgy of the first centuries, as the Church of Christ and some liberals think.

 

[brockmac]

Johnn:

My sincere apologies. I did not mean to mischaracterize your statements. Some of them to seem to be judgemental of those who receive in the hand, but if you say that this is not your intention I will take you at your word.

 

[OldRedleg]

Leeta,

The mechanics of how the faithful received the Eucharist in the hand in the early Church depended on the region and time frame involved. The indult for communion in the hand describes the technique taught by Saint Cyril of Jerusalem which was to make “the left hand a throne for the right hand, which receives the King” (Fifth mystagogical catechesis of Cyril of Jerusalem, n. 21: PG 33. col 1125, or Sources chretiennes, 126, p 171; Saint John Chrysostom, Homily 47: PG 63, col. 898. etc.)."

Those who receive the Body of Christ in their hands are every bit as orthodox as those who receive Him on the tongue. It is the inner sense of devotion and belief in the real presence that is important.

As an EMHC I have given the Eucharist to people on the tongue and in the hand. I do agree at times some people who receive in the hand do not APPEAR externally to have the appropriate sense of devotion and belief in the real presence. However, I posted the March 29, 1998 picture of Bill Clinton receiving the Eucharist at Queen of the World Catholic Church in Johannesburg, South Africa to drive home the point that the external façade of piety can be more egregious if the inner disposition is corrupt. (In charity, for all I know Bill Clinton is a closet Catholic in good standing…but I kind of doubt it.)

It is not for us to judge our brothers and sisters internal piety and devotion to the Eucharist through a simple observation of whether they receive on the tongue or in the hand.

Let us not bring unnecessary division to the body of the Church on this issue as long as both methods are fully allowed and approved by our bishops. Lets face it. The guys who wrote and approved the indult (with the Pope’s blessing) were men with Doctorates in Divinity and with far more theological training and experience on this issue than anyone posting on this board.

 

[MrS]

Again, Mark, quoting a saint as a back-up to a deeply held opinion is not an attempt to “prove anything,” it is giving evidence to support your opinion. What is wrong with that? And what do you mean by calling the quote “hearsay?” Is it evidence in a case?

.

Perhaps someone can quote a saint who expressed emotions against communion on the tongue

 

[stinkcat_14]

Perhaps someone can quote a saint who expressed emotions against communion on the tongue

Nobody has argued that it is inappropriate to receive on the tongue. As I have said a number of times, if you wish to receive on the tongue, that is your choice, and I would never tell you to do anything different.

 

[vern_humphrey]

There are and have always been many different ways to receive Communion, including such things as tincturing (dipping the Host in the wine.) Certainly the early Christians received in the hand – it was a real meal, after all. Jesus broke the bread and gave it to them – and they took it by hand.