Why Are Some People Strongly Opposed to Communion on the Tongue?

[PaulinVA]

To those who prefer to receive in the hand, I ask, what reasons can you give for the practice of using EMHC and receiving in the hand, other than the time saved ?

And is the time saved, along with any reasons you may add, of benefit to us or God ?

My answer to this is that you need to address your concerns to the USCCB.

Do not harangue faithful Catholics who participate in the Mass in the way that it is being provided by the parish priests and local Bishop.

Yes, I agree that the EMHC are overused. Yes, I agree that the priests and deacons should be the only ones that are distributing communion. But, it is what it is. I can not change anything. Neither can you. It is up to the ordained to bring things in line.

 

[I_Believe]

My answer to this is that you need to address your concerns to the USCCB.

Do not harangue faithful Catholics who participate in the Mass in the way that it is being provided by the parish priests and local Bishop.

Yes, I agree that the EMHC are overused. Yes, I agree that the priests and deacons should be the only ones that are distributing communion. But, it is what it is. I can not change anything. Neither can you. It is up to the ordained to bring things in line.

Did you even read my entire post ? If so, why are you telling me “But, it is what it is. I can not change anything. Neither can you.” Didn’t I say we must accept it ?

What do you mean " harangue" ? If it were my intention to do so, why would I post a quote from H.H. JPII where he says …

This is in no way meant to refer to those who, receiving the Lord Jesus in the hand, do so with profound reverence and devotion, in those countries where this practice has been authorized.

?

 

[PaulinVA]

Did you even read my entire post ? If so, why are you telling me “But, it is what it is. I can not change anything. Neither can you.” Didn’t I say we must accept it ?

Yes, you said we must accept it. But then you went on to trash it.

What do you mean " harangue" ? If it were my intention to do so, why would I post a quote from H.H. JPII where he says …

To give your harangue credibility. Your post was a harangue against EMHCs and Communion in the Hand.

Or does the word “novelty” bug you ? Why would it when both H.H. BXVI (while Cardinal Ratzinger), and Cardinal Arinze both have used the word “banal” when describing the Novus Ordo ?

Well, yes, the word “novelty”, when used derisively when referring to what occurs weekly at Mass, does bug me. It is disloyal. As for banal? How can something accused of being full of innovations and novelties at the same time be lacking in originality?

 

[ElizabethPH]

With regards to the last comment: NOT EVERYONE takes in the hands. I never have, except during a couple of retreats when it was ‘forced’, and that when the paten was passed around and all ‘self-communicated’ [a liturgical ‘no-no’].

Who cares if you stand out? In this case, don’t go along with ‘the crowd’!

Hi

I should have said everyone but not all. By saying most everyone I thought was the same.
I don’t care, and I do agree; ‘don’t go along with the crowd’.

 

[I_Believe]

Yes, you said we must accept it. But then you went on to trash it.

To give your harangue credibility. Your post was a harangue against EMHCs and Communion in the Hand.

Well, yes, the word “novelty”, when used derisively when referring to what occurs weekly at Mass, does bug me. It is disloyal. As for banal? How can something accused of being full of innovations and novelties at the same time be lacking in originality?

No, it was a presentation of facts for those who don’t realize the two practices are innovations tolerated by Rome versus being introduced by Rome.

The quote from JPII was to back up my claims, not to “trick” anyone. If I had edited the sentence in question out, you would have grounds to consider I did so with an agenda. Nice try though.

Save your keystrokes on the debating of the NO. I saw you signed off after I posted and removed that last comment. I did so as to not hijack the thread.

We did however determine you have no answer to offer to the question I asked.
“To those who prefer to receive in the hand, I ask, what reasons can you give for the practice of using EMHC and receiving in the hand, other than the time saved ?”

Thanks for being honest.

 

[brotherhrolf]

I am hesitant to jump into this fray. I am 57 years old and have never received in the hand. I would like to kneel if I could and if the truth be known. Why?

I made my First Communion in 1957. We knelt. There was a communion cloth over the altar rail and the altar boys had patens to place under our necks. We were receiving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. When Our Lord was reserved in the tabernacle, we genuflected when we passed in front of said tabernable.

The practice of kneeling at the communion rail continued well into the 1970s. I am a product of 13 years of Catholic education. The sisters and brothers so instilled into our hearts such a profound reverence for Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament that, for me, I would not profane Him by recieving Him in my mortal hands. I am dead serious about this. Don’t mean anything against y’all, it’s just me and how I was taught and how I was brought up.

I am more than aware of the practices of the early church and the arguments for receiving in the hand. OK. But, for centuries reaching back into the Middle Ages and beyond, it wasn’t the practice. It wasn’t the practice for my Irish, German, French, English (Catholic) ancestors or for my Italian, Sicilian, Puerto Rican Catholic in-laws.

As a member of a cathedral parish, I have seen our young First Communicants …I don’t even want to think about it. I had to make special effort to instill in my two sons something of the reverence and the sheer privelege that my Lord should receive me…Domine, non sum dignus. I can see in my mind’s eye the cavalier treatment that one of my fellow chorister’s son made upon making his FHC.

I have seen Our Lord all over the floor of the cathedral…something I never saw years ago before Vatican II.

It’s my decision. I conform to that which I was taught. I was raised before Vatican II and I am not dead yet.

 

[I_Believe]

Thank you for your thoughts and recollections brotherhrolf

 

[PaulinVA]

We did however determine you have no answer to offer to the question I asked.
“To those who prefer to receive in the hand, I ask, what reasons can you give for the practice of using EMHC and receiving in the hand, other than the time saved ?”

Thanks for being honest.

I will repeat what I said, and hopefully you will be able to realize this is an answer to your question:

Originally Posted by PaulinVA forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
*My answer to this is that you need to address your concerns to the USCCB.

Do not harangue faithful Catholics who participate in the Mass in the way that it is being provided by the parish priests and local Bishop.

Yes, I agree that the EMHC are overused. Yes, I agree that the priests and deacons should be the only ones that are distributing communion. But, it is what it is. I can not change anything. Neither can you. It is up to the ordained to bring things in line.*

So, my answer is that I don’t have to defend the fact that I receive Holy Communion in the manner that my pastor and Bishop instruct me tn a related note, if the pastor and Bishop said that we would receive on the tongue while standing, I would embrace it. If the altar rail reappeared and I could receive kneeling on the tongue, I would be overjoyed.

I don’t want to be argumentative. Actually, I find many things discussed on the Traditional forum very compelling. I am teaching myself latin, as an example. I just think that we need to be obedient, or we are no different from the sandlistas (the liberals from the 60s) who openly and loudly disagree on the other end of the spectrum.

 

[Jimzz12]

Why are some people so against receiving on the Tongue?

Because they are clouded by pride and they let Satan guide their action.

 

[Holly3278]

I have no idea why some people are so strongly opposed to receiving on the tongue. However, I consider myself to be a traditionalist Catholic but I receive in the hand. I feel weird receiving on the tongue. It just kind of makes me self-conscious. The reason being that I have a couple of very crooked teeth in my mouth that you can only see if I smile real big or something. So yeah, I’m a bit self-conscious when it comes to receiving on the tongue. I received on the tongue once and I enjoyed the experience but I am not sure that I want to do it again.

That said, the disciples received in the hand. So why is it so wrong for us to receive in the hand?

 

[Pug]

Why are some people so against receiving on the Tongue?

I’ve never met anyone who is very much against the general practice. Or, if I have, they have kept silent about it.

Did you mean personally don’t prefer it, for themselves? If so, I can imagine some reasons, like for one that some of us have a hard time opening the jaw wide enough. Yes, it interferes with eating hamburgers as well. But I receive on the tongue anyway, since I felt called to switch. It is creepy how often your tongue/lip gets touched, though. That takes getting used to. (No comments about EMHC. I’m talking about priests.) Also, if you have a dry mouth, you must learn to swish in your mouth for a moment before receiving, or else you have the problem that the host will not stick. Before I figured that one out I always bit the host to stop it from falling, which I could see causing someone to go back to on the hand. Also, I find it less rushed to receive on the hand. I have more time to say Amen before receiving. Of course, I might find it less rushed in the overall if we had the lovely altar rails back.

Probably the main thing is how you grew up receiving, or what you are used to. The switch took a long time for me to accustom myself to, and I have to say, it is still not natural to me. I hate having my tongue touched (by fingers, not the host).

 

[Tsuwano]

I don’t think the question asked by the OP is really valid. I don’t think many people are opposed to CoT. I think about the same number are opposed to CiH but they are just far more vociferous here on CAF.

It’s also disingenuous to in any way infer that one method is better or worse than the other. They are not. One or the other might be preferred by a given person but one technique is not better or worse than the other – so long as they are approved by the Church.

I agree. I’m certainly not opposed to receiving communion on the tongue. I have received it in this manner many times. In fact, I find myself receiving the eucharist in this way quite frequently now that I am usually holding a sleeping baby during mass. Still, I prefer receiving the eucharist in my hand and putting it in my own mouth. I feel more comfortable using this method and also think it is the way the early Church received communion. What I dislike is the notion that I am somehow less holy or reverent, or even worse, that I defile the eucharist when I receive it in the hand, but my tongue is somehow cleaner or holier. I don’t get that at all.

 

[I_Believe]

I googled a while and found this

Instruction on the Manner of
Administering Holy Communion, published by the Congregation for
Divine Worship on May 29, 1969, and signed by the Holy Father Paul
VI, where it states:

 "When therefore a small number of episcopal conferences and some
 individual bishops asked that the practice of placing the
 consecrated hosts in the people's hands be permitted in their
 territories, the Holy Father decided that all the bishops of the
 Latin Church should be asked if they thought it opportune to
 introduce this rite. A change in a matter of such moment, based
 on a most ancient and venerable tradition, does not merely
 affect discipline.  It carries certain dangers with it which may
 arise from the new manner of administering holy communion: the
 danger of a loss of reverence for the August sacrament of the
 altar, of profanation, of adulterating the true doctrine."
 
 Three questions were therefore proposed to the bishops.  Up to
 March 12 the following responses had been received:

 1. Does it seem that the proposal should be accepted by which,
 besides the traditional mode, the rite of receiving Holy
 Communion in the hand would be permitted?

      Yes: 567
      No:  1,233
      Yes, with reservations: 315
      Invalid votes: 20

 2. Should experiments with this new rite first take place in
 small communities, with the assent of the local Ordinary?

      Yes: 751
      No:  1,215
      Invalid votes: 70

 3. Do you think that the faithful, after a well planned
 catechetical preparation, would accept; this new rite willingly?

      Yes: 835
      No:  1,185
      Invalid votes: 128

 From the responses received it is thus clear that by far the
 greater number of bishops feel that the present discipline
 should not be changed at all, indeed that if it were changed,
 this would be offensive to the sensibilities and spiritual
 appreciation of these bishops and of most of the faithful.

 After he had considered the observations and the counsel of
 those whom "the Holy Spirit has placed as bishops to rule" the
 Churches, in view of the seriousness of the matter and the
 importance of the arguments proposed, the Supreme Pontiff judged
 that the long received manner of ministering Holy Communion to
 the faithful should not be changed.

 The Apostolic See therefore strongly urges bishops, priests, and
 people to observe zealously this law, valid and again confirmed,
 according to the judgement of the majority of the Catholic
 episcopate, in the form which the present rite of the sacred
 liturgy employs, and out of concern for the common good of the
 Church."

ewtn.com/library/LITURGY/COMUNION.TXT

What about no didn’t they understand ?

 

[Charioteer]

I agree with charioteer. I don’t think people are opposed to Communion on the tongue. I certainly am not. In fact, in the last few months, I have received Holy Communion on the tongue because I’ve been using crutches.

I don’t think most Catholics care one way or the other. Good heavens, when we are on our deathbed, there is a good chance that we will receive our last Holy Communion on the tongue, right?

But I do think people are opposed to those who oppose Communion in the hand. I am. As long as the U.S. has the indult, then it is not our place to oppose the practice that has been approved by the local bishop.

And I’ll be honest–I expected some kind of mystical eye-opening feeling or rush of emotions when I first received Holy Communion on the tongue. It didn’t happen. I honestly think that the reason why so many people prefer to receive Holy Communion on the tongue is that they were raised that way. Same for people who receive in the hand.

Interestingly, I discovered something while I’ve been convalescing. Obviously, I cannot kneel at all in this CAM boot. I tried, and it got stuck under the kneeler and it was quite embarrassing! So I sit. But I don’t just sit up straight. I found myself returning to the practice that I grew up with in the Protestant churches–sitting in the pew, hiding my head in my hands and leaning on the pew in front of me. If you drop by evangelical church services, you will see many of the faithful doing this.

I just kind of did it because I didn’t want to sit up straight in the pew and interfere with the people behind me who were kneeling. I also wanted to be reverent in the Presence of the Lord Jesus.

It’s amazing–the EMOTIONS that flooded through me when I assumed this childhood posture, this posture that I was used to for so many years! I was crying. It seemed like every prayer of the priest was so very intense, even though the liturgy was the same liturgy of the Mass (OF) that I have experienced since becoming Catholic. But I found it easier to pay attention, to truly PRAY the Mass, in this childhood position, this “Protestant” position–because it’s what I was raised doing.

Ever since I have become Catholic, I have had a hard time with kneeling because I wasn’t raised with it. It doesn’t seem reverent to me, to kneel and keep the back straight and the head up and the eyes open! It doesn’t seem like a “prayer position”, at least to me!

So re-discovering my “Protestant” prayer position was quite an awakening! I truly understand now what it means to “pray the Mass.”

So I can sympathize with those who wish to receive Holy Communion the way they were raised to receive. In the future, I will very likely continue to pray during Mass the way I was raised to pray in church–sitting, with my head hidden in my hands and leaning on the pew in front of me. One thing about this position–there is NO WAY that someone will stop and chat with me!

I don’t know if it’s a correct posture for Catholics during Mass. I don’t think that there is a “correct” way to pray; from what I have seen, the rubrics make allowances for those who cannot kneel.

And I’m certainly not going to tell all the rest of the Catholics that they should try my Protestant prayer position! It’s not what they were raised with!

I enjoyed reading your posting. There are a number of people at my parish who assume that position after receiving communion (much to the scorn of some busy-bodies.) Now I know why they assume that position…

**After further reflection I think the OPs question is actually quite disingenuous – I really haven’t come across anyone in-person or on-line that was “Strongly Opposed to Communion on the Tongue.” Not a single one really – although many are strongly opposed to communion in hand. The OP’s question seems like it’s an attempt to provide a forum for those who wish to trumpet their personal views of why CoT is better than CiH.

There is a HUGE difference between personally preferring one over the other for one’s own use and being “Strongly Opposed to Communion on the Tongue.”**

 

[Charioteer]

I agree. I’m certainly not opposed to receiving communion on the tongue. I have received it in this manner many times. In fact, I find myself receiving the eucharist in this way quite frequently now that I am usually holding a sleeping baby during mass. Still, I prefer receiving the eucharist in my hand and putting it in my own mouth. I feel more comfortable using this method and also think it is the way the early Church received communion. What I dislike is the notion that I am somehow less holy or reverent, or even worse, that I defile the eucharist when I receive it in the hand, but my tongue is somehow cleaner or holier. I don’t get that at all.

Having thought about this a bit more I have NEVER heard of anyone (in-person or on-line) who was “Strongly Opposed to Communion on the Tongue.” Not a single person. Preferring one over the other for one’s personal practice does not equate to opposing the other.

Conversely I have run into several people (in-person and on-line) who vehemently opposed communion-in-hand. Not that it matters but I have never heard of a valid reason for opposing communion-in hand (or on one’s tongue for that matter.) As always simply follow the guidance of the Church.

 

[Charioteer]

I googled a while and found this

What about no didn’t they understand ?

You give a startling example of believing you know better than the Church. The Church has given formal direction on this matter. Why do you question it? What makes you think you are in a position to question the Church? Why not have the humility to make your own person choice for yourself and then be at peace? Here is what the Church directs on the matter:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWREPON.HTM

 

[Charioteer]

Because they are clouded by pride and they let Satan guide their action.

Have you ever heard the old saying about the pot and the kettle?

 

[RLT]

People should be strongly opposed to communion on the hand.

Taken from Father Z’s blog, gives you something to think about.

Do you believe that each particle of a Host is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ Jesus, God and man?

Do you receive Communion in the hand?

A reader sent two photos. The first is of an unconsecrated communion host rest on the palm of a black glove.

http://www.wdtprs.com/images/09_03_15_host01.jpg

This photo shows the fragments left behind.

http://www.wdtprs.com/images/09_03_15_host02.jpg

“But Father! But Father!”, some of you will perhaps be howling now. “That’s a glove, not a hand! We don’t know that that is what happens with hosts put into people’s hands! That’s not fair!”

I grant that we don’t know. I grant that palms are not gloves. I grant that there are differences.

But …

Consider the lack of care with which many receive, how they move the Host around and handle it.

Consider that often there is a more or less properly prepared EMHC also handling the Host.

Consider the condition of the skin of the palm.

Consider the few seconds after a person transfers the Host from palm to mouth.

Consider that the Host has been in contact not only with the palm, but the fingers of the other hand.

Consider.

Let me be clear: I do not think people intend to be irreverent when they receive on the hand.

 

[I_Believe]

I will repeat what I said, and hopefully you will be able to realize this is an answer to your question:

                 So, my answer is that I don't have to defend the fact that I receive Holy Communion in the manner that my pastor and Bishop instruct me to.On a related note, if the pastor and Bishop said that we would receive on the tongue while standing, I would embrace it.  If the altar rail reappeared and I could receive kneeling on the tongue, I would be overjoyed.

I don’t want to be argumentative. Actually, I find many things discussed on the Traditional forum very compelling. I am teaching myself latin, as an example. I just think that we need to be obedient, or we are no different from the sandlistas (the liberals from the 60s) who openly and loudly disagree on the other end of the spectrum.

No, you don’t have to defend it. It’s allowed.

My point is, this is unprecedented. We have a mix of personal rubrics. One approaches the priest and smiles with a slight bow. One genuflects at the front pew before he approaches, wishing there were a Communion Rail. I’ve seen a priest wait until a woman slowly crosses herself as soon as he says “The Body of Christ”. Only after she crosses herself does she say amen. Another may approach the Blessed Sacrament for a Blessing. Might bow, might not. Then there is the Precious Blood. Some drink, some walk by. The one walking by may make a gesture of adoration and reverence, or they may not.

Plus, it’s troubling to see Hosts dropped. I’ve seen it once. And I’ve seen the Precious Blood spilled. 13 months after returning to the Church, I had already seen these inexcusable and preventable horrors I read about on these forums.

Does anyone on this forum believe there is any benefit of CITH and EMHC that would render these accidents tolerable ? Can we think of a single one that would not center on our own needs ?

That’s what I’m getting at. When I see 3 EMHC at a weekday Mass with less than 25 in the pews. Why ? To save our precious time ?

Sorry Paul, I don’t want to argue either, but I just can’t find a saving grace in CITH. I accept the fact the indult is in place, and I don’t judge those who chose CITH, but I can’t get over the dropped Hosts.

 

[I_Believe]

You give a startling example of believing you know better than the Church. The Church has given formal direction on this matter. Why do you question it? What makes you think you are in a position to question the Church? Why not have the humility to make your own person choice for yourself and then be at peace? Here is what the Church directs on the matter:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWREPON.HTM

The condition is the complete avoidance of any cause for the faithful to be shocked and any danger of irreverence toward the Eucharist.
ewtn.com/expert/answers/communion_in_hand.htm

Well, that condition that is in bold on that document has not been met friend. Seeing Hosts dropped is shocking.

And the original indult granted was for only those places where the practice of CITH was already in place.

How do you feel about dropped Hosts ? Is it more of a , or more like this ?

http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/11/26/23372611.jpg