Why can't Eucharistic Ministers Place host on tounge correctly?

[Podo2005]

“Very few Popes”? Want to bet? How about all of the Popes until 1958? There was no handling (i.e. desecration) of the Eucharist until then. After that, Paul VI, who you can thank for this version of the Mass, discouraged it. John Paul II as well. Benedict XVI, I am unsure of.

As for “St. Teresa”, I am terribly sorry, but you can blame my Confirmation teacher. Teresa was our “class saint” (sic). I left there with dire misconceptions, apparently, which I should attempt to correct.

THE PRIESTHOOD WOULD HAVE BEEN AN OPTION, but they saw it just as fit to not enter it, as apparently, now everybody can touch the host, so why again do we have priests?
However, you enjoy your bloody liberalised American Catholic Church! Go play your bloomin’ electric guitar in Mass, singing songs which blaspheme against the Sacred Tradition of the Church! TAKE THE BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR RISEN LORD IN YOUR HANDS, LIKE A SIMPLE CRACKER! THE VERY THOUGHT IS A BLASPHEMY AGAINST HIS NAME! THE INDULT ITSELF WAS ONLY JUSTIFIED DUE TO “AMERICAN CULTURE”!

Whoops, can no longer edit the post with “St. Teresa”, sorry.

Can you please specify why Taking the body and blood of our Lord in the hand is like eating a simple cracker and why it’s blasphemy against His name? Does it say anywhere in the bible or church teachings that taking communion in the hand is blasphemy against his name? And I’m talking about what the church teaches today, not what Pope Pius XII or any other pope many years ago thought.

Podo

 

[Petergee]

How about all of the Popes until 1958? There was no handling (i.e. desecration) of the Eucharist until then.

Sorry you’re wrong. Communion in the hand was pretty much the norm right through the first millennium, obviously over a hundred popes had no problem with it.
Sorry I have no direct experience of “American culture” as I’ve never been there, I’m an Australian.
Teresa of Calcutta was your “class saint “ at your confirmation? As she died in 1997 and was only even beatified in 2002, your confirmation must have been quite recently. It’s very odd that you want to return to the practices of pre-1962.

I forgive your flame, I’ve had a lot worse, I know a few people with quick tempers.

Cargopilot, if you want a shorter term for “Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion”, just say “Communion Ministers”, as everybody in my parish does. I can’t see any theological objection to that, and it’s even shorter than “Eucharistic Ministers”.

I agree with you about the blessings though. I think people could rightfully object if I touched half a dozen kids’ heads, then picked up the Host with the same hand to give it to them.

 

[otm]

Lorrie:

A few weeks ago a Eucharistic Minister almost put the host up my nose.

A question: This same Eucharistic Minister actually snapped the host in two before attempting to give it to me. Is this even allowed???

absolutely.

it is usually done when there are more communicants than Hosts, but if you were receiving on the tongue, it may have been done as it might be easier to place in your mouth.

 

[otm]

cargopilot:

The Body of Christ, handled like a Dorito

No, the Body of Christ, handed like Christ handed to His apostles, and as the early church fathers handed to the early Christians.

 

[otm]

Servus Pio XII:

The Eucharist is Christ Himself. Only those ordained are, in most countries, even allowed to touch it. Only by special indult are American Catholics allowed to touch the host.

All Popes have discouraged the practise, and St. Teresa of Calcutta said that nothing made her sadder than to see reception by hand.

Receiving in the hand cuts down on the reverence, making a common food, rather than something holy. It also, once again, diminishes the import of priests, and therefore allows more potentials to instead seek “sacramental ministry” in the stead of the priesthood.

Any more questions?

Gee, that’s really interesting, given that is how the early Church did it, and how Christ taught them… Guess He made a mistake, hunh?

 

[otm]

Servus Pio XII:

THE PRIESTHOOD WOULD HAVE BEEN AN OPTION, but they saw it just as fit to not enter it, as apparently, now everybody can touch the host, so why again do we have priests?
However, you enjoy your bloody liberalised American Catholic Church! Go play your bloomin’ electric guitar in Mass, singing songs which blaspheme against the Sacred Tradition of the Church! TAKE THE BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR RISEN LORD IN YOUR HANDS, LIKE A SIMPLE CRACKER! THE VERY THOUGHT IS A BLASPHEMY AGAINST HIS NAME! THE INDULT ITSELF WAS ONLY JUSTIFIED DUE TO “AMERICAN CULTURE”!

Whoops, can no longer edit the post with “St. Teresa”, sorry.

To begin with, shouting is a bit unnecessary.

Further, since you seem to be on a bent that touching the host is a desecration, which is worse: touching the Host with your hand, or a priest giving Communion to an individual that priest, and everyone around him at the moment, knows is not Catholic?

 

[Michael038]

I’m an Extraordinary Minister Of Holy Communion, there are a few reasons for this problem.

1. There really is no formal training on serving communion in on the tounge.(at least not in my diocese).
2. The Priest do this day in and day out. They are better at it. We are just helping the Priest once per month distribute Holy Communion so we just do not do it as often.

I’m fortunate enough to also serve communion to the homebound which are mostly senior citizens. Most of these folks take the Sacred Host on their tounges.

Dont be so critical of these extraordinary ministers. Their hearts are right to want to help the church. We need many more!!

God Bless!

 

[Podo2005]

otm:

No, the Body of Christ, handed like Christ handed to His apostles, and as the early church fathers handed to the early Christians.

Couldn’t have said it better myself otm

 

[Servus_Pio_XII]

which is worse: touching the Host with your hand, or a priest giving Communion to an individual that priest, and everyone around him at the moment, knows is not Catholic?

They aren’t mutually exclusive. Look, maybe I overstated my view a bit. I mean to say that I do not believe America and a few other nations, by an indult, should be given wider option on how to trreat Christ’s body and blood. Such things should be universal.

I tend to get worked up- I didn’t call anyone a heretic, did I?

 

[Sean_O_L]

Petergee wrote:

Sorry you’re wrong. Communion in the hand was pretty much the norm right through the first millennium, obviously over a hundred popes had no problem with it.
Sorry I have no direct experience of “American culture” as I’ve never been there, I’m an Australian.

G’day Petergee - I too am an Australian from Melbourne.

I have often speculated that our words “G’day” and “G’donya” are Polish derivitives! Reason? Well it is in line with “Gdansk” and nearby “Gdynia” are good enough - dont you think? Joking, of course!

Cargopilot, if you want a shorter term for “Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion”, just say “Communion Ministers”, as everybody in my parish does. I can’t see any theological objection to that, and it’s even shorter than “Eucharistic Ministers”.

Actually it is always the “right thing” to use the correct terms - such as Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.

Servus Pio XII

Quote:
which is worse: touching the Host with your hand, or a priest giving Communion to an individual that priest, and everyone around him at the moment, knows is not Catholic?

They aren’t mutually exclusive. Look, maybe I overstated my view a bit. I mean to say that I do not believe America and a few other nations, by an indult, should be given wider option on how to trreat Christ’s body and blood. Such things should be universal.

What do you think of following Christ’s direct instruction: “Take … eat”? Was Christ being disrespectful?

 

[palmas85]

More than a few priests have told me that it is MUCH MUCH easier to distribute on the tongue while someone is kneeling rather than standing. Maybe it has something to do with the angle of the arms, heads, etc. So I would imagine that since most people stand while receiving these days it is more difficult for both Priests and Extraordinary Ministers. Maybe if everyone knelt it would be easier or maybe if everyone received in the hand it would be easier.

Maybe what they could do is have those who choose to receive on the tongue kneel and those who choose to receive in the hand stand. That might solve the problem. Who knows, might be worth a shot.

 

[rwoehmke]

cargopilot:

.

That’s one of the many problems with so many EMHC’s. As an over-used EMHC, I take extra care for the communicant who cares enough to receive the precious Body of Christ on the tongue. Formation of our new Catholic candidates may or may not include a brief explanation of receiving HC on the tongue. It is clearly discouraged. There’s no doubt about it, receiving in the hand is taught in a far more favorable light. “Use your hands to form a ‘throne’ on which the Body of Christ is placed.” The Body of Christ, handled like a Dorito

LOL, I can’t help but laugh at the thought of making a throne for my Doritos. Doritos I just grab with my fingers. No disrespect for your post meant.

 

[otm]

Servus Pio XII:

They aren’t mutually exclusive. Look, maybe I overstated my view a bit. I mean to say that I do not believe America and a few other nations, by an indult, should be given wider option on how to trreat Christ’s body and blood. Such things should be universal.

I tend to get worked up- I didn’t call anyone a heretic, did I?

I can deal with that. However, Rome has decided that indults are acceptable practice. Further, this is not exactly something new - indulst, that is. and I suspect that rome has a bit of accumulated wisdom, even thouhg you, or I might disagree from time to time.

 

[otm]

palmas85:

More than a few priests have told me that it is MUCH MUCH easier to distribute on the tongue while someone is kneeling rather than standing. Maybe it has something to do with the angle of the arms, heads, etc. So I would imagine that since most people stand while receiving these days it is more difficult for both Priests and Extraordinary Ministers. Maybe if everyone knelt it would be easier or maybe if everyone received in the hand it would be easier.

Maybe what they could do is have those who choose to receive on the tongue kneel and those who choose to receive in the hand stand. That might solve the problem. Who knows, might be worth a shot.

Actually, kneeling without a
communion rail can be quite awkward for some, as they need a solid object to assist them in getting up and down.

Further, it is much easier, and less risky, to present the cup to someone who is standing.

The whole issue could easily be resolved with better training; it really isn’t that difficult.

 

[robertaf]

Whew!

This has got to be one of the silliest threads to read, so far on Catholic Answers.

I have been a Eucharistic Minister for years. Wayyy back after Vatican II when it was first permitted.

Pause…

now is the time for you all to write how we are not Eucharistic Ministers.

finished???

Ok.

You are right… practice makes perfect. I was a minister for a very long time, years actually before the first person stood in front of me with their mouth open. In fact it was when the Bayside thing was so popular.

Up til then folks put out their hands. Sorry, what training I had was forgotte.

Now, I don’t know where most of you live and what the situation is in your parishes, but Communion in the hand is still the norm where I live and go to Mass.

I wish you all could have heard the awesome homily I heard today. It had to do with the parable in todays Gospel. The final thing was that it is not up to you all to decide what is CORRECT, but up to God. I
In the meantime, why don’t you just love one another.

 

[sententia]

For those of you who have trouble, perhaps speak to your Fr. about addressing this with the EMHC’s?
We have more than a few here who recieve on tongue, and our EMHC’s are taught how to place the host. I really don’t see why this is such a big deal when one goes to recieve communion reverently.