Why Is CITH So Popular?

[Mintaka]

I don’t have any sort of traumatic story; but here goes.

When I was a kid, we were taught to receive communion on the tongue.

Sort of. By that time in the Seventies, people weren’t supposed to kneel to receive anymore. So we stood, and we were just little kids, so nobody taught us to tilt back our heads and stick out our tongues – just open our mouths. Short first grade kids are the perfect height for this to work.

But as you grow, it gets less comfortable to stand and receive communion on the tongue. If you’re an adult and standing, it’s really not particularly comfortable to tilt back the head and stick your tongue out. In the old days this was no problem, because everybody knelt. But in the new days when people were taught to not kneel, it becomes a real problem.

Also, Father stopped deploying one server with a paten to help him alone distribute Communion. Without kneeling and the communion rail, it took a long time. With Communion under both species advocated all the time, Father always needed an EMHC because there weren’t a zillion priests back in the rectory. Once there was one EMHC, why not have several lines for Communion and no patens at all?

Most people were uncomfortable receiving Communion on the tongue from a non-priest. Also, without a server with a paten, Communion on the tongue seemed very precarious, especially if the EMHC was a short woman trying to give Communion to a tall man who was supposed to keep standing. Some would cross to receive only from the priest (my grandpa for one), but most just gave up and received in the hand from some generic EMHC.

So… it’s not really that Communion in the hand is popular. It’s that the default option was systematically made almost impossible to receive on a regular and safe basis. I don’t think any of it was intended that way; but the unintended consequences were always bad for Communion on the tongue; and then people forgot that you could do it.

 

[ProVobis]

Please stick to the topic. Why is CITH so popular?

Because it was taught by progressives who had too much time on their hands maybe?

 

[ProVobis]

We open the mouth wide at the dentist’s office, when we are cheering at a hockey game, or when we are shovelling in food (which is ill-mannered), or when we’re screaming in pain, fear, or anger. That’s about it.

I work as pianist for a lot of choirs, and the directors have a dreadful time trying to convince the singers to OPEN their mouths! People in the U.S. feel rude or embarrassed or both doing this.

That sounds about right. Not to change the object, but I have to force feed my cat. I give her baby food with a medicine dropper and I give a little on her paws to see which is more effective. I’ve decided the medicine dropper on her tongue is a lot cleaner and faster and less wasteful.

 

[ProVobis]

When I distribute communion today, very few who receive COTT actually stick their tongues out – which can be problematic. Placement of the host becomes far more difficult and one’s fingers are more prone to getting wet…

Hotch, don’t take this the wrong way but I wouldn’t receive from unannointed hands on the tongue or in the hands. Not only unannointed but I don’t see EMHC wash their hands before like the priest does before Consecration.

 

[benedictgal]

I tend to agree with your comments. I would add that even those who were formed well before CITH was available ALSO share the fears of opening their mouths and sticking out their tongues so they too flock to CITH.

When I distribute communion today, very few who receive COTT actually stick their tongues out – which can be problematic. Placement of the host becomes far more difficult and one’s fingers are more prone to getting wet…

I have served as an EMHC and the majority of the communicants who have been in my line receive COTT, and, they are people of all ages. People have no qualms about sticking out their tongues. Furthermore, my parish has now begun administering Holy Communion via Intinction. The only way that one can receive via Intinction is COTT. That is mandated directly by the Holy See.

There is a way to place the Sacred Host on the tongue without absorbing moisture. In my time distrbuting Holy Communion, it is very rare for me to experience instances where I have someone’s saliva.

When I received FHC back in 1976, it was on the tongue while I knelt at the rail. In fact, as late as 1982, we were still doing this in my old parish. Now, I did go through a period while at UT where I received CITH, but, that was not too long of a time-frame and I went back to receiving COTT.

Do you have any reserach to back your statements other than your own opinions? I believe that this is a fair question to ask. Obviouslly you support CITH. That is your prerogative. However, we must remember that COTT is the default and CITH is the indult and indults can be rescinded at any time. In fact, the last time this happened was at the beginning of Pope Benedict’s reign when he rescinded the indult allowing EMHCs to purify the sacred vessels. As I stated in another post, one of the items at the last plenary sessoin of the CDWDS was a reconsideration of the issue of receiving CITH.

In fact, along the same lines, this is what the new Prefect for the CDWDS, Antonio Cardinal Canizares, said in an interview with LSN:

There is no resolution that forbids giving Communion in the mouth. In the same way, there is no norm that forbids Communion in the hand. Neither can be forbidden. Neither one nor the other. This means that Communion in the mouth has a long history and tradition that expresses in a profound way the sense of adoration, reverence in the presence of the body of Christ. Everything that is at stake in the real presence of Christ. If Communion in the mouth goes with the gesture of kneeling, it expresses in a stronger way, with stronger force, the real presence of Christ, the sense of adoration, the participation in the body of Christ that offers Himself for us.

If the papal liturgy is a sign, an indication for all the Church, we should promote Communion kneeling and in the mouth. But, this does not mean not permitting or forbidding Communion in the hand if it is done with due respect. With a previous gesture of adoration. This could be kneeling, or a genuflection or with a deep bow. And also in the moment of receiving Communion, the right hand should be placed under the left hand forming a cross expressing in this way the recognition of the real presence of the body of Christ offered for us. We should take care that no particle should be lost. And the body of Christ should be received in front of the priest.

We should recognise that frequently Communion in the hand many times is not received in this way.

It is very lamentable.

Granted, he was explaining the reason why the Holy Father has mandated receiving Holy Communion on the tongue while kneeling for those communicants who come before him, his comments are quite telling regarding CITH.

I do agree with Brendan, however, in that, unfortunately, a majority of the CCD programs are instructing their charges to receive CITH and not even telling them about their right to receive COTT. And yes, it happens in RCIA as well, as I have noticed in a couple of cities.

As I said earlier, it is your prerogative to receive CITH, but, please do not denigrate those of us who excercse the default mode of receiving Holy Communion.

 

[Cat]

Hotch, don’t take this the wrong way but I wouldn’t receive from unannointed hands on the tongue or in the hands. Not only unannointed but I don’t see EMHC wash their hands before like the priest does before Consecration.

Well, the priest doesn’t really wash his hands. A small amount of plain water (no soap) is poured over his hands, he rubs them together once or twice, and then he dries them off on a small hand towel. This isn’t really going to cleanse the hands of bacteria or viruses, or even get rid of any soil (although I doubt most priests will come to Mass with visibly soiled hands.)

Our EMHCs all sanitize their hands with Purel in plain sight of the congregation. They’ve been doing this for a couple of years now.

As for the anointed hands–will you receive from a permanent deacon? I don’t believe his hands are anointed.

With all due respect (I am not a cradle Catholic), I believe that there is no such doctrinal requirement for a Minister of Communion, either Extraordinary or Ordinary, to have anointed hands. It is a personal preference of some Christians, and I certainly respect your preference. But it is not dogma of the Church and I think it might be misleading to imply that “anointed hands only to distribute Holy Communion” is dogma. Again, if this is just your personal preference, that’s fine.

 

[ProVobis]

Well, the priest doesn’t really wash his hands. A small amount of plain water (no soap) is poured over his hands, he rubs them together once or twice, and then he dries them off on a small hand towel. This isn’t really going to cleanse the hands of bacteria or viruses, or even get rid of any soil (although I doubt most priests will come to Mass with visibly soiled hands.)

Our EMHCs all sanitize their hands with Purel in plain sight of the congregation. They’ve been doing this for a couple of years now.

I’ve served enough Masses to know that all priests washed their hands with soap thoroughly in the sacristy prior to Mass. That was over 40 years ago though and I don’t know if they still do. And you’re right, he only uses water just prior to the Consecration. (After communion in the EF, the servers pour wine over his hands but that’s another topic.)

I can appreciate your use of Purel in your parish. I guess after spending over two months with my dying father earlier this year in the hospital, I’ve become much more conscious and sensitive about everyone working with clean hands everywhere. And the hospital priest there always carried Purel with him when he was making his daily rounds with the patients and their visitors. They had plenty of hand sanitizing dispensers inside and outside the rooms as well.

And, yes, the deacon’s hands are annointed (they have received the sacrament of Holy Orders) and I have received from a permanent deacon at the communion rail. Nothing wrong with the bread lines but I’ve seen more and more uses of the communion rail in those parishes that have them. With everyone kneeling, it makes things a little smoother for the priest and server holding the paten.

 

[pnewton]

Sticking to the topic and yet speaking only for myself. I find the posture more reverent. When I receive in the hand, I am able to maintain a bowed head before the Lord. When I receive on the tongue, I have to raise my head to God. For me, it is reverence that mpels me to receive in the hand.

 

[Hotchkiss]

Because it was taught by progressives who had too much time on their hands maybe?

Not at all. Please think logically. Upwards of 90-95% of all Catholics I attend Mass with receive CITH where it’s allowed. These are people of all ages and the largest group (75%+) where catechized when COTT was the only way to receive communion.

“Progressive” slur aside, COTT is very popular with most Catholics in the USA and I’m curious as to why it is.

 

[Hotchkiss]

Sticking to the topic and yet speaking only for myself. I find the posture more reverent. When I receive in the hand, I am able to maintain a bowed head before the Lord. When I receive on the tongue, I have to raise my head to God. For me, it is reverence that mpels me to receive in the hand.

Fascinating! I would have never considered that! Thanks.

 

[Hotchkiss]

Hotch, don’t take this the wrong way but I wouldn’t receive from unannointed hands on the tongue or in the hands. Not only unannointed but I don’t see EMHC wash their hands before like the priest does before Consecration.

So? I have had my hands anointed MANY times in the Church.

Latin Rite priests hand’s are consecrated not merely “anointed” and neither has anything to do with one’s hygiene.

By the way, don’t ever receive communion from an ordained Byzantine Catholic priest – their hands aren’t consecrated either…

 

[Hotchkiss]

…With all due respect (I am not a cradle Catholic), I believe that there is no such doctrinal requirement for a Minister of Communion, either Extraordinary or Ordinary, to have anointed hands. It is a personal preference of some Christians, and I certainly respect your preference…

There isn’t any…

 

[peary]

In my opinion, it is popular because it moves the Communion line faster, and people don’t have to think about showing honor to the Eucharist. The Church dumbed down their own members!

 

[benedictgal]

Not at all. Please think logically. Upwards of 90-95% of all Catholics I attend Mass with receive CITH where it’s allowed. These are people of all ages and the largest group (75%+) where catechized when COTT was the only way to receive communion.

“Progressive” slur aside, COTT is very popular with most Catholics in the USA and I’m curious as to why it is.

And how are you keeping the statistical data? Are you actually counting the number of faithful who receive or is this just your own guess-timation? With all due respect, you have only provided your opinion and not any factual information to back your assertions.

 

[pnewton]

In my opinion, it is popular because it moves the Communion line faster, and people don’t have to think about showing honor to the Eucharist. The Church dumbed down their own members!

Do you prefer to receive in the hand?

One can address the topic by personal experience, by statistical information or conjecture and assumption.

 

[Hotchkiss]

Do you prefer to receive in the hand?

One can address the topic by personal experience, by statistical information or conjecture and assumption.

So very true…

 

[Hotchkiss]

In my opinion, it is popular because it moves the Communion line faster, and people don’t have to think about showing honor to the Eucharist. The Church dumbed down their own members!

So, using your logic, people receive in their hands because they want a shorter cycle time for receiving communion? Do you really believe that?

Further you somehow think one cannot for some reason show honor when they receive CITH but they can when they receive COTT? How so?

Where I do KNOW you are wrong is when you suggest “The Church dumbed down their own members!” That comment is offensively erroneous.

 

[bpbasilphx]

As has been pointed out, CITH started as an abuse or a defiance of the the sin of sacrilege. Do you know if this ancient practice was pointed out before the abuse was committed or rationalization after the fact? I would really like to know this. There always is a danger in mixing rites when this happens.

St. Cyril of Jerusalem in his Mystagogical Catecheses speaks of Communion in the Hand, as well as the proper way to so receive it, as the normal practice in his day.

It is called for by rubric in the Byzantine Liturgy of St. James and the Assyro-Chaldean Liturgy of Ss Addai and Mari.

Let it be known that when I HAVE received in my hand at these ancient Eucharistic Liturgies, I would also remain in my position until I had checked my hands for crumbs (or pearls, as we call them) before I would move away.

In the Assyrian Church, the faithful purify their hands in the smoke of the censer before they receive.

 

[bpbasilphx]

So? I have had my hands anointed MANY times in the Church.

Latin Rite priests hand’s are consecrated not merely “anointed” and neither has anything to do with one’s hygiene.

By the way, don’t ever receive communion from an ordained Byzantine Catholic priest – their hands aren’t consecrated either…

Good point, Hotchkiss.

And for what it’s worth, since Pius XII sometime in the 1950’s (I think it was) defined that the major orders are conferred in the Latin Church by the imposition of the Bishop’s hands with the appropriate prayer, it is clear that the anointing of the new priest’s hands, which comes later, contributes NOTHING, especially as there is no prayer associated with it.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

Because I was brought up to receive COTT, I prefer to receive it the way. It appears more reverant to me.

My pastor prefers people to receive CITH and, when he teaches RCIA, he does not even mention COTT so the people do not know this is an option and, therefore, it appears to me that most people in my parish receive CITH.

A friend of mine wanted to be an EMHC and he told her that she could not as long as she continued receiving COTT. She had to receive COTH for a while before he would allow her to be an EMHC.