What may a person say when receiving Communion?

[TheHem]

In light of the thread on DISTRIBUTING Communion, I am now curious about the person RECEIVING Communion in mass.

I think it’s been established (at least to my satisfaction) that you don’t break the norms of what you say when dispensing the Body and Blood of Christ (it’s not about you, or your relationship with the communicant, but about THEIR relationship with God).

However, what about when receiving? I have head some people that, upon “The Blood of Christ” being said, they respond with ‘May it cleanse my soul’, which I think is a wonderful thought, btw - or else they respond ‘Let it be so’, which sounds like something from days of old.

Hmmm… should there be some limit to what is said?

Yes, I know the response is supposed to be, simply ‘Amen’, but it’s not like any one is telling any one anything.

Or are they?

(Boy, as a Cradle Catholic, I have a lot of questions on communion, don’t I?)

why would anyone say “may it cleanse my soul” when the WHOLE Mass IS a prayer. it’s redundant. Especially when we are brought to the point where we say “Lord, I’m not worthy to receive you but only say the word and I SHALL be healed.” I’m a convert to Catholicism and in my learning journey of my faith, it seems that people are just simply ignorant of the teachings and truths of our faith. Although I will say, I think there are points in the mass that, out of preference, people choose to do things that others may not be comfortable. ie. holding hands during the “Our Father”. I personally prefer to lift my palms upward as a form of prayer. I also express my openess of heart when we proclaim “we lift up our hearts” by lifting my hands upwards.

 

[japhy]

As a lay person, when I am serving as a EMHE, is there anything I should do or say in response to anything from the communicant other than ‘Amen’?

I have no official say, but if I were to be in that position (I am not an EMHC), I would remind the communicant that the response is “Amen”, and wait for them to say it. I would also probably let the pastor know that there was an incident (without naming names) so that perhaps he can look to catechize the faithful, using the bulletin or an announcement at the end of Mass.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Hi Japhy,

The communion line is not the place for instruction. We are always told to wait until a more private place can be found, and let someone in authority do the instructing, unless it is a serious problem.

The communicant’s response is not a crucial part of the distribution of Communion, and in no way diminishes the sacrament.

My pastor told me that we are not Communion police. Our ministry is to distribute Holy Communion to those who approach us, not to judge them in any way.

Lux

 

[LilyM]

It was a college campus. The average age was 20.

They did teach him something. A priest at the college told me he never asked a congregation there to stand again.

You may call it “stubborn”…they would prefer to say they were celebrating the liturgy in faithful obedience to its norms and prescriptions.

The congregation*** there*** being the operative word. I’d be willing to bet he still asked it elsewhere, because you didn’t bother to explain to him WHY Church teaching led you to act as you did. So you woefully failed in your obigations to do right by all those other people in all those other parishes where he still asked it. You neglected an opportunity to catechise which could have benefited everyone rather than simply making yourselves feel good. And yes, even bishops need catechesis.

So again I repeat he almost certainly learned nothing by what you did. As St Francis said ‘no use in walking if your walking is not preaching’. Your action fails on that test - it was lots of things but not preaching.

Preaching instructs the ignorant in the truths of our faith (a spiritual work of mercy, remember). You just instructed him in flatout hostility and not in the truths of the faith.

And of course I didn’t mean ‘old’ in a literal sense, rather figuratively. Although being on campus the most likely epithet is snotty-nosed students I’ve been one too so I can say that

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

What’s truly crazy is YOU implying that the saying of something other than ‘Amen’ at Communion is anything like the sins of theft or abuse of one’s child!

Of course if a Bishop commands us to sin we have the right and duty to strenuously resist. This isn’t such a case, nothing like. No danger to life or limb, little if any to your soul.

Well, now’s as good a time as any for everyone to learn that abusing the liturgy is a sin. Thus, if a bishop commands you to break the liturgical law of the Church, he is commanding you to sin. That’s why you’re *bound *to disregard his order, and it’s certainly no insult.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Be careful here—no bishop commanded anyone to do anything.

 

[Walking_Home]

The command is built in. He is not commanding that the option must be used—He is commanding that the option CAN be used.

 

[Rosella]

Amen.

 

[LilyM]

Well, now’s as good a time as any for everyone to learn that abusing the liturgy is a sin. Thus, if a bishop commands you to break the liturgical law of the Church, he is commanding you to sin. That’s why you’re *bound *to disregard his order, and it’s certainly no insult.

Commanding you to sin mortally putting your soul in serious peril? As the theft or child abuse most likely would be grave or mortal sins? I think we need some perspective here.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Yes, Lily, some perspective is definitely needed.

Also commanding it to be allowed, is not the same as commanding anyone to do anything. If someone feels it is wrong, they should report it. This is the instruction.

There are far greater sins (if indeed allowing this minor change is sinful)—pride is the most deadly of the capital sins, and than there is anger and also disrespecting a Bishop.

from the Catechism

1269 Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us.76 From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to “obey and submit” to the Church’s leaders,77 holding them in respect and affection.78 Just as Baptism is the source of responsibilities and duties, the baptized person also enjoys rights within the Church: to receive the sacraments, to be nourished with the Word of God and to be sustained by the other spiritual helps of the Church.79

And scripturally

Luke10:16
Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me."

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

And scripturally
Quote:
Luke10:16
Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me."

Lux

---

It is really in bad taste to try and use scripture to try and justify actions which undermine the Mass and the authority of the Church.

 

[snowgarden]

Once my 8 year old nephew was in front of me and he was distracted and took awhile to do his bow and hand movements at Communion. I was such a wreck when the priest said “Body of Christ” to me, I accidently said “Thank you” instead of “Amen”

 

[LilyM]

---

It is really in bad taste to try and use scripture to try and justify actions which undermine the Mass and the authority of the Church.

The bishops are the authority of the Church!!! Of course as individuals their authority is subordinate to that of the various Bishops Conferences, Councils and the Pope. But it is nonetheless an authority that you and I do NOT possess, so it behooves us all to be very careful in our approach to it, lest our intellectual pride and lust to be right at all costs lead us to sin more gravely than the Bishop we seek to correct.

 

[AlexV]

A bishop who tells you that anything other than AMEN is the communion response in the ordinary form of the Roman Rite has acted ultra vires. A bishop does not possess the authority to make that particular liturgical change. That’s not “intellectual pride”…it’s fact.

 

[AlexV]

“There are far greater sins (if indeed allowing this minor change is sinful)—pride is the most deadly of the capital sins, and than there is anger and also disrespecting a Bishop.”

Amazing…the state of catechesis has collapsed so much that some people now think “disrespecting a Bishop” is akin to the capital sins.

Never mind the fact that nobody here “disrespected” any bishop.

 

[Grace283]

Hi Apryl,

The response instructed by the bishops is “Amen” (which is an affirmation that you believe in the real presence.)

Lux

uhmm…

Verbally, that is what I say, “Amen,” that is.

In my heart and mind, I give thanks to God for allowing me to take communion. And thanking him for all that done for us…

If you want more clarification, I just read this:

catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9711fea4.asp

hope it helps!!!

 

[Walking_Home]

The bishops are the authority of the Church!!! Of course as individuals their authority **is subordinate **to that of the various Bishops Conferences, Councils and the Pope. But it is nonetheless an authority that you and I do NOT possess, so it behooves us all to be very careful in our approach to it, lest our intellectual pride and lust to be right at all costs lead us to sin more gravely than the Bishop we seek to correct.

---

Bingo—The fact that a bishops authority is subordinate to the Pope says he does not have the authority to introduce elements into the Mass without the recognitio from Rome. Actions on his part without a recognitio are illicit. We do not sin or fall into pride by resisting illicit actions—so please don’t try to turn the tables—and drop this on us.

 

[Brendan]

Be careful here—no bishop commanded anyone to do anything.

Really?

So a pastor in his diocese may then choose to correct anyone who uses a vernacular response that has not been approved by Rome, without any hindrence from his bishop? Afterall, the bishop has issued no command on the subject?

 

[LilyM]

A bishop who tells you that anything other than AMEN is the communion response in the ordinary form of the Roman Rite has acted ultra vires. A bishop does not possess the authority to make that particular liturgical change. That’s not “intellectual pride”…it’s fact.

It certainly seems to be a case of ‘be right at all costs’ though. Did it not occur to you that by taking a less confrontational course you would have been able to better help both the Bishop and the rest of the diocese? And that you shamefully neglected to do so and took the easier option? Doesn’t look like it.

 

[LilyM]

---

Bingo—The fact that a bishops authority is subordinate to the Pope says he does not have the authority to introduce elements into the Mass without the recognitio from Rome. Actions on his part without a recognitio are illicit. We do not sin or fall into pride by resisting illicit actions—so please don’t try to turn the tables—and drop this on us.

Look, you want to be right that’s fine. You want to force your Bishop into a corner with your truth and turn him against both you and it? Keep on as you suggest. You’ll answer to God for the fact that your antagonistic attitude only drives him further away, as it surely will.

You want to help lead Him towards it instead? Which is kinda sorta your first duty being in possession of the truth yourself? Don’t make a scene in church, but approach the bishop quietly afterwards and explain yourself. You’ll fulfil your duty to him that way without antagonising anybody. If he still doesn’t listen, then all bets are off and you know at least you could’ve done no better or different.

And like it or not, you have a duty to catechise (not antagonise) your Bishop when he’s wrong.