Why Is CITH So Popular?

[Hotchkiss]

I don’t intend to prove it, because I can’t without calling every DRE in the world and doing a statistical plot of the results. But it’s a little more than just “personal opinion.” In First Communion programs in the USA, CITH is usually presented as the norm, and the teacher then feels obligated to say, “Oh, and it is also permitted to receive directly on the tongue.”

If you live in North America, the only way that you can honestly believe that the majority of First Communion instruction programs explain to the kiddies that COTT is the universal norm and CITH is an exception that is allowed is if your parish and every other parish in your diocese is 100% orthodox in every respect. You know what I’m talking about – this is why people drive for 20 miles because they can’t take any more “Lord of the Dance” stuff. It’s because many of the parishes in this country have watered some things down. Have you attended First Communion Masses at several representative parishes? What was the proportion of youngsters who received on the tongue?

Actually you would only need a representative sample to render some valid statistics. Read up on sampling…

Get emotional as you want but what you suggest is not only not proven it wouldn’t explain why most people who grew-up with COTT now receive CITH.

 

[surritter]

They do that in the Catholic Church too. At the distribution of each sop that spoon (which is less likely to harbor germs that one’s fingers) is fairly well disinfected by the Precious Blood that has NOT lost it’s antiseptic properties.

You’re attempting to compare apples and oranges…

A spoon shared with a hundred folks – some of whom are sick – is automatically sanitized by dipping it in wine? (Of course that wine is now the Precious Blood, but the physical properties haven’t changed.)
No way. But you can take your chances if you like.

 

[surritter]

Actually you would only need a representative sample to render some valid statistics. Read up on sampling…

Get emotional as you want but what you suggest is not only not proven it wouldn’t explain why most people who grew-up with COTT now receive CITH.

I’m not emotional – I’m presenting facts. Those who are under the age of roughly 45 have probably been taught from the beginning to receive in the hands.

So your question is about those over 45. That’s why I proposed a second, parallel theory: it’s just plain easier to receive in the hands!

 

[Hotchkiss]

I asked a simple question – Why Is CITH So Popular? *Obviously no one has the answer but I thought it would initiate some thoughtful discourse. * To some degree it did and I thank those that participated.

It has nothing to do with the CITH versus COTT “debate” yet some just couldn’t control themselves.

I think it would be utterly fascinating and possibly quite helpful if someone really made the effort to find out via valid statistical methods. That might actually render some ideas on how to make COTT more popular to the faithful. I would certainly do a great deal more than than the emotional outbursts we are now treated to on the subject.

 

[Hotchkiss]

I’m not emotional – I’m presenting facts. Those who are under the age of roughly 45 have probably been taught from the beginning to receive in the hands.

So your question is about those over 45. That’s why I proposed a second, parallel theory: it’s just plain easier to receive in the hands!

You’re not presenting facts. You’re presenting your opinions – what you suspect to be the truth. I would suspect that nationally, the great majority are catechized correctly – that both methods are acceptable in the USA. That’s certainly the case in my diocese.

Your suspicion is no more valid (or “factual”) than my own…

 

[surritter]

You’re not presenting facts. You’re presenting your opinions – what you suspect to be the truth. I would suspect that nationally, the great majority are catechized correctly – that both methods are acceptable in the USA. That’s certainly the case in my diocese.

Your suspicion is no more valid (or “factual”) than my own…

Hotch – I and several other people have told you our theories, which are based on firsthand experiences at dozens of parishes throughout the US. Your response is to say, “nope, no way. I demand proof.”

Relax – this is a discussion forum and our theories are very reasonable. Your diocese is apparently commendable in this regard – perhaps you live in Peoria, or Lincoln Neb. – but I can tell you exactly what happens at a great many parishes. After catechesis on the doctrine of the Eucharist, the teacher discusses the procedure of receiving HC (if you’re lucky they’ll even mention that a bow is required), demonstrates CITH, and then the kids practice the CITH method. A mention is made of the traditional COTT procedure with description, but in the demonstration and practices, no one actually demonstrates COTT.

So don’t be so confrontational, i.e., “You’re not presenting facts. You’re presenting your opinions – what you suspect to be the truth.”

I have offered my evidence, which is the above scenario multiplied by several parishes, and extrapolated it to create a theory; one that can help answer your original question, at least regarding the under-45 crowd. If you had your thumb on the pulse of Catholicism in this country, you wouldn’t be so quick to doubt.

 

[Cat]

I asked a simple question – Why Is CITH So Popular? *Obviously no one has the answer but I thought it would initiate some thoughtful discourse. * To some degree it did and I thank those that participated.

It has nothing to do with the CITH versus COTT “debate” yet some just couldn’t control themselves.

I think it would be utterly fascinating and possibly quite helpful if someone really made the effort to find out via valid statistical methods. That might actually render some ideas on how to make COTT more popular to the faithful. I would certainly do a great deal more than than the emotional outbursts we are now treated to on the subject.

I’m going to make a guess that most of us who participate in CAF are just average folks with average jobs.

How on EARTH would any of us “make the effort to find out via valid statistical methods?!”

I work in a hospital lab, so I know all about validation studies and standard deviations and all that statistical analysis stuff. But I wouldn’t know how to begin to design a valid study that would yield useful information about the “popularity” of Holy Communion in the hand!

A survey? How would it be administered? Online? But lots of people never go online and don’t even own a computer. Through the mail? Who would pay for it? Over the phone? Who would volunteer to call? And who would write the survey and design the questions to yield useful information?

I doubt any diocese would be willing to take part of their funds away from useful ministries to pay for a study of popularity of Holy Communion methods, especially since it really doesn’t matter in the U.S. The bishops have declared that both methods are allowed.

I’m willing to bet that most of us on CAF are not in any position to approach our diocese and say, “I would like to do a statistical analysis of CITH and COTT.” I personally think my bishop’s staff would show me the door!

Hotchkiss, I think the best you’re going to be able to manage is anecdotal evidence from the Catholics that you ask, and frankly, I think for the particular question you’re posing, that’s probably adequate. “Popularity” is a very esoteric term and difficult to objectively analyze, as you’ve seen from this thread.

Basically what I’m trying to say (nicely) is “give it up.”

 

[benedictgal]

Actually you would only need a representative sample to render some valid statistics. Read up on sampling…

Get emotional as you want but what you suggest is not only not proven it wouldn’t explain why most people who grew-up with COTT now receive CITH.

But, you have yet to provide any statistical data to back up your assertions. You have only stated your opinions, but, no factual information.

With all due respect, you have yet to address the question I raised about the possibility that there may be an underlying issue behind the question.

Regarding the issue of the spoon, Redemptionis Sacramentum notes that:

[103.] The norms of the Roman Missal admit the principle that in cases where Communion is administered under both kinds, “the Blood of the Lord may be received either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon”.191 As regards the administering of Communion to lay members of Christ’s faithful, the Bishops may exclude Communion with the tube or the spoon where this is not the local custom, though the option of administering Communion by intinction always remains. If this modality is employed, however, hosts should be used which are neither too thin nor too small, and the communicant should receive the Sacrament from the Priest only on the tongue.192

I am unaware of any Latin-Rite parishes where the use of the spoon is employed. Furthermore, as RS indicates, if it is not the local custom, then this manner may be excluded. While it was not you who raised the issue, I believe that some clarification should be in order.

Regarding your insistence that folks who were reared under COTT now receiving CITH, you have yet to provide any factual date to support that assertion. All you are stating is your opinion, but, you do not have any quantifiable nor qualitative information to back up your claim.

My father, my late mother and late grandparents all grew up with COTT; however, all of them received (in my dad’s case, receive), COTT. They never received CITH. My father takes Holy Communion to the sick, visiting about 30 at a senior citizen’s home. All of them receive COTT (this pool includes those who have the motor skills to receive CITH if they chose). The elderly at the Cathedral parish, who, obviously were taught COTT, still retain that practice. This is based on my first-hand experience as an EMHC there. In my parish, there are three elderly women who receive CITH; the rest receive COTT. Again, this is based on my first-hand experience as an EMHC in my parish.

One clarification: I would not use the term distributors when referring to either the Ordinary Minister or the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. Another poster used this term on many occasions. The wording is reminiscent of his. We need to use the terms that the Church uses as this is the vocabulary that she employs when referring to the OMHC and the EMHC.

 

[John_oxios]

John, I’m having trouble understanding your posts.

Hotchkiss is not saying the Eastern Rites aren’t Catholic. He’s simply saying they don’t call the Divine Liturgy the “Mass”.

Hi Japhy,

To quote Hotchkiss:
They don’t have Masses is in the East. They have other sacrificial liturgies like the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom

.

What is it you don't understand in my posts?

God Bless,
john

 

[japhy]

What is it you don’t understand in my posts?

I’ve encountered some run-on sentences and some phrases which I think are meant to be quotes. It wasn’t immediately apparent what you were trying to say.

 

[John_oxios]

We are talking about COTT versis CITH. not posture…

They don’t have Masses is in the East. They have other sacrificial liturgies like the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom. I attend one each week. We don’t kneel on Sundays. We receive standing.

Hello Hotchkiss,
I missed a few yrs… but didn’t posture Change When CITH became an indult? Weren’t we all kneeling and receiving COTT?

God nless,

John

 

[japhy]

didn’t posture Change When CITH became an indult?

Posture changed in 1967:
In accordance with the custom of the Church, Communion may be received by the faithful either kneeling or standing. One or the other way is to be chosen, according to the decision of the episcopal conference, bearing in mind all the circumstances, above all the number of the faithful and the arrangement of the churches. The faithful should willingly adopt the method indicated by their pastors, so that Communion may truly be a sign of the brotherly union of all those who share in the same table of the Lord. (Eucharisticum Mysterium 34a)

 

[Hotchkiss]

I’m going to make a guess that most of us who participate in CAF are just average folks with average jobs.

How on EARTH would any of us “make the effort to find out via valid statistical methods?!”

I work in a hospital lab, so I know all about validation studies and standard deviations and all that statistical analysis stuff. But I wouldn’t know how to begin to design a valid study that would yield useful information about the “popularity” of Holy Communion in the hand!

A survey? How would it be administered? Online? But lots of people never go online and don’t even own a computer. Through the mail? Who would pay for it? Over the phone? Who would volunteer to call? And who would write the survey and design the questions to yield useful information?

I doubt any diocese would be willing to take part of their funds away from useful ministries to pay for a study of popularity of Holy Communion methods, especially since it really doesn’t matter in the U.S. The bishops have declared that both methods are allowed.

I’m willing to bet that most of us on CAF are not in any position to approach our diocese and say, “I would like to do a statistical analysis of CITH and COTT.” I personally think my bishop’s staff would show me the door!

Hotchkiss, I think the best you’re going to be able to manage is anecdotal evidence from the Catholics that you ask, and frankly, I think for the particular question you’re posing, that’s probably adequate. “Popularity” is a very esoteric term and difficult to objectively analyze, as you’ve seen from this thread.

Basically what I’m trying to say (nicely) is “give it up.”

No, no – this would not be the work of an individual or likely even an (arch)diocese but the USCCB could do it for the USA for example. I think it would shed a great deal of light on the matter…

Like most everything else here it’s only a guess but I believe the notion that people receive CITH because they are taught that is the only valid method would be way, way down on the list of contributing factors.

 

[Hotchkiss]

Hotch – I and several other people have told you our theories, which are based on firsthand experiences at dozens of parishes throughout the US. Your response is to say, “nope, no way. I demand proof.”

Relax – this is a discussion forum and our theories are very reasonable. Your diocese is apparently commendable in this regard – perhaps you live in Peoria, or Lincoln Neb. – but I can tell you exactly what happens at a great many parishes. After catechesis on the doctrine of the Eucharist, the teacher discusses the procedure of receiving HC (if you’re lucky they’ll even mention that a bow is required), demonstrates CITH, and then the kids practice the CITH method. A mention is made of the traditional COTT procedure with description, but in the demonstration and practices, no one actually demonstrates COTT.

So don’t be so confrontational, i.e., “You’re not presenting facts. You’re presenting your opinions – what you suspect to be the truth.”

I have offered my evidence, which is the above scenario multiplied by several parishes, and extrapolated it to create a theory; one that can help answer your original question, at least regarding the under-45 crowd. If you had your thumb on the pulse of Catholicism in this country, you wouldn’t be so quick to doubt.

What evidence? You’re offering opinions. Just present them as that and not “facts.”

Sadly there are people here who do not like CITH for whatever reason. In order to take a shot at CITH they insist its popularity has a dark genesis – that only CITH is taught by most catechesists. They cannot let go of the COTT vs. CITH “debate” for even one thread. I found it interesting how they quickly discounted all the other reasons others suggested.

The indult for CITH was released in 1977. By far the greatest number of people enter the Church as kids and not through RCIA. Kids go through first communion at what age? Say 9? So those born in 1968 or so would be the first batch of those who have been the first group to have been given the option during their formation.

Most people I personally attend church will were born well before 1968. Almost none receive COTT.

Cathechesis (or lack thereof) did not cause people to flock to CITH… I seriously doubt it one of the larger factors for its popularity today…

 

[Hotchkiss]

…I have offered my evidence, which is the above scenario multiplied by several parishes, and extrapolated it to create a theory; one that can help answer your original question, at least regarding the under-45 crowd. If you had your thumb on the pulse of Catholicism in this country, you wouldn’t be so quick to doubt.

I think you were pretty much focused on taking a shot at CITH.

Your theory completely ignores the fact that almost everyone receives CITH in the USA regardless of age. Understanding why CITH spread so quickly to those that WERE catechized back when COTT was the sole option is important to understand.

It’s 2009 for a few more days. I would suggest that even 20-25+ years ago, almost everyone in the USA received CITH – back when even a larger number of the faithful were catechized when COTT was the sole option.

The great majority seem to prefer CITH hand and it would be nice to know why.

 

[Cat]

No, no – this would not be the work of an individual or likely even an (arch)diocese but the USCCB could do it for the USA for example. I think it would shed a great deal of light on the matter…

Like most everything else here it’s only a guess but I believe the notion that people receive CITH because they are taught that is the only valid method would be way, way down on the list of contributing factors.

I don’t think that’s going to happen, unless some wealthy individual gives a gift (of money) and insists that it be used only to do this study.

Frankly, I think that the USCCB has many other pressing issues to deal with at this time, and that “Popularity of methods of receiving Holy Communion in the U.S.” are not an issue for them.

The bishops have granted permission in the U.S. for the faithful to receive Holy Communion in the hand or on the tongue, and they have also made certain that the rubrics state that no one can prevent a Christian from receiving on the tongue. So it’s not an issue at all. We have the choice. It doesn’t matter if one method is more popular than the other–we still have the choice. It doesn’t matter if everyone in the parish except one person receives in the hand–the person who receives on the tongue is fine with his/her choice. No issue.

You have hinted that learning the answer to this question might help the Catholic Church to figure out a way to… what? You see, Hotchkiss, I don’t understand what the outcome would be. BOTH methods are acceptable by the Catholic Church here in the U.S. What would be the point of such a study?

I suppose it might help the Church to know how to catechize people, but I think that the Church has already stated many times that catechesis IS a very pressing issue in the U.S. and that the Church needs to develop more ways to catechize parishioners. They don’t to do a study to figure this out. They’ve already figured it out.

It might help bishops to p(name removed by moderator)oint which dioceses have poor RCIA programs and religious education programs that teach that COTT is NOT an option. But I think they already know this. They can’t force parishes to offer fantastic RCIA programs–this depends on the resources and available teachers/priests in any given parish. Parishes can only do the best they can with the people they have. Now if a parishioner “reports” a bad RCIA or religious ed teaching to their bishop (e.g., “A Christian is not allowed to receive Holy Communion on their tongue anymore.”), it’s up to the bishop to make the parish correct this teaching.

 

[japhy]

The indult for CITH was released in 1977. By far the greatest number of people enter the Church as kids and not through RCIA. Kids go through first communion at what age? Say 9? So those born in 1968 or so would be the first batch of those who have been the first group to have been given the option during their formation.

Not necessarily. CITH might have been promoted before the indult was received. If CITH were not widespread and been a prevailing practice, the US would not have applied for nor been eligible for the indult.

Cathechesis (or lack thereof) did not cause people to flock to CITH… I seriously doubt it one of the larger factors for its popularity today…

That’s your opinion on the matter. I don’t doubt it, even if I haven’t got the evidence to back up the hypothesis. That’s my opinion.

 

[bmadamsberry]

I’ve seen the same things that Benedictgal has. Those that are older tend to recieve Communion on the tongue and those that are younger in the hand (what I’ve seen at my parish, my girlfriend’s parish, and other parishes that I have been to). Furthermore, again in what I have seen at my own parish, those that recieve Communion on the tongue are those that read and know more about the Catholic Faith***.
These, again, are just based on my own opinions. I’m not starting a Communion in the hand vs. a communion on the tongue debate (because the Church has said that both can be done, I have no right to argue that you can’t do it).

*** I don’t mean, nor am I suggesting, that those that are ‘more intellegent’ or those that know more about the Faith are better than those that don’t. What I am suggesting is that those that know more about the Faith have found out that they can recieve Communion on the tongue (as in, they weren’t taught that in confirmation classes). Again, I think that those that go through confirmation classes are taught to recieve on the hand and not both ways. I attribute this based upon my knowledge of the confirmation classes at my parish, my girlfriend’s parish, and what was taught to my girlfriend’s father and mother (so, granted, only 4 parishes).

 

[Hotchkiss]

Not necessarily. CITH might have been promoted before the indult was received. If CITH were not widespread and been a prevailing practice, the US would not have applied for nor been eligible for the indult.

That’s your opinion on the matter. I don’t doubt it, even if I haven’t got the evidence to back up the hypothesis. That’s my opinion.

Necessarily. Yes the indult was almost certainly anticipated in some places but the number of such places and the number of individuals practicing the illicit act would have been relatively small and for a relatively short time – perhaps 2-3 years.

Once cannot not say that “If CITH were not widespread and been a prevailing practice, the US would not have applied for nor been eligible for the indult.” That’s simply not true.

 

[Hotchkiss]

It really bothers some people that CITH is so popular. I wish they would not have allowed their emotions to impact their responses. This thread was “Why Is CITH So Popular?” and not a soapbox for more tired rants about the evils of CITH.