Why Is CITH So Popular?

[Like]

It wouldn’t require “most Catholics” to read them, only their pastors and catechists who then disseminate the information to them. All it takes is a priest saying at Mass, “Today we will be receiving in the hand instead of on the tongue” a couple times, and poof. Combine that with a single year of catechists teaching children to receive their first Holy Communion in the hand, and double poof.

poof & double poof!

I like that

 

[Hotchkiss]

It wouldn’t require “most Catholics” to read them, only their pastors and catechists who then disseminate the information to them. All it takes is a priest saying at Mass, “Today we will be receiving in the hand instead of on the tongue” a couple times, and poof. Combine that with a single year of catechists teaching children to receive their first Holy Communion in the hand, and double poof.

LOL! A couple of times? Right…

 

[japhy]

LOL! A couple of times? Right…

You’re allowed to have your guesses and shot-in-the-dark statistics, I’m allowed to have mine.

 

[Phemie]

That’s interesting. That’s also an example of very poor catechesis. Still I don’t think that would explain the widespread popularity of CITH, but it might be a contributing factor in some locations.

I know that in this parish our children are not taught that they may receive on the tongue and I also know that my children, who received their First Communion in different parishes/dioceses, were also not taught that they could receive on the tongue. In fact, never having been in a parish where it was ever mentioned, until about 10 years ago I didn’t know that it was still an option in Canada.

It also saddens me to think of the scornful attitudes of some of the parish leaders including the former diocesan Catechetical coordinator toward those who receive on the tongue.

 

[Phemie]

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.

The priest’s hand “washing” is symbolic only and would not decrease the amount of germs on his hands significantly. Add to that that he shakes hands at the sign of peace and any cleansing he may have done at the Lavabo is cancelled out.

 

[Cat]

The local parishes in my disocese have only taught the kids to receive in the hand during their Sacramental Prep classes. In some parishes they are told they CAN receive on the tongue, but practice is only in the hand.

I was raised during the time when we did nothing but receive on the tongue, was a teen when we started receiving in the hand. BUT my husband and I stopped and began receiving on the tongue after Pope John Paul II said he preferred that it only be received on the tongue. Also, watching Masses that he said, at World Youth Days or other things, he NEVER gave out Holy Communion on the hand. That was enough for us.

We see so much lack of reverence as it is, we need to do whatever it takes to help our young folks learn what reverence really is and WHY it is so important in the presence of our Lord.

But again, what is reverent to one person is irreverent to another.

An earlier poster in this thread described how they feel rude sticking out their tongue, and one person described how they prefer keeping their head bowed as a sign of reverence, and receiving Communion on the tongue requires that they raise their head.

When the Church has given permission for bishops to allow Communion in the hand, then who are we to question this practice and claim that it is deficient in some way. If it were deficient, surely the Church would have said “No.”

For the many Catholics like myself who were raised Protestant and only recently converted, we have no history or background of receiving Communion on the hand or tongue, so to us, neither practice is inherently more reverent than the other.

When you say “We see so much lack of reverence as it is, we need to do whatever it takes to help our young folks learn what reverence really is and WHY it is so important in the presence of our Lord,” we don’t know what you mean. We have no frame of reference to understand why you think that receiving Jesus on your tongue is inherently more reverent than receiving Him in your hand.

What we former Protestants have seen is that many Catholics have left their Church and become Protestants, even back in the days when Communion was received only on the tongue. We knew these ex-Catholics and listened to them when they said that Catholicism was all ritual and no life. As I said, many of the ex-Catholics that I knew while Protestant were OLDER people, Catholics who grew up pre-Vatican 2.

Somehow, Communion on the Tongue and all the other supposedly “reverent” practices did not manage to keep these Catholics in the Church.

So we have our doubts as to whether a physical practice is truly the answer to teaching reverence for God. We believe that reverence comes from a heart overflowing with gratefulness to God for all His blessings.

Yes, of course, if the Church should decree that Holy Communion is to be received only on the tongue, we ex-Protestants would joyfully obey, even if we don’t understand or “get it.” That’s one reason we’re Catholic–we’ve come to see that we are not our own authority–Jesus is, and He has given His authority on this earth to His Church.

But the Church has NOT decreed, at least in the U.S. (which is where many of us are living) that Holy Communion is only to be received on the tongue. We have a CHOICE, and it seems to me that no one should criticize the Church-given choice of someone else.

Can’t we just assume that people, including children and teenagers, who are receiving Jesus in Holy Communion are trying their best to be reverent in thought and action, and stop assuming that “this person is reverent” and “that person is irreverent.” Surely it is not our place to judge what is in the heart of others. Surely we would be better off taking care of our own hearts and making sure that they are a worthy place for the Lord to dwell in.

And frankly, I don’t have the ability to read hearts. If I know the person, I could base my assessment of their reverence on their life–if they are living a life of blatant sin, I might be able to suspect that they are receiving irreverently, but even then, if they went to Reconciliation before Mass, they are clean and totally absolved of their sin, so who am I to judge them?

 

[EasterJoy]

The local parishes in my disocese have only taught the kids to receive in the hand during their Sacramental Prep classes. In some parishes they are told they CAN receive on the tongue, but practice is only in the hand.

I think that is really doing the kids a disservice. When I prepared kids for receiving their First Holy Communion, we taught both CITH (“make a throne for Jesus with both hands, with the hand you eat with under the hand you will receive with, the receiving hand nice and wide open, at such and so distance from the minister and below his or her elbow, if you can, don’t start walking away until you are sure the host is securely in your hand…and ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS consume the host right away, in plain sight of the minister…”) and COTT (“hold your mouth wide enough open and your tongue out far enough for the host to be placed on your tongue without touching your mouth–you can look in the mirror and see this, and how that feels, until it feels natural. Do not be concerned if the minister is surprised you are not receiving on your hand, you aren’t doing anything wrong, just give them a second, and don’t close your mouth after you have received until you are sure his hand is clear of your mouth…”)

We also taught that COTT is their right, while CITH is by permission. In other words, in some places CITH would not be a choice, so that they had to know how to do COTT. Most people in our parish receive CITH, including me, so if we don’t teach COTT and have them practice it to see if they prefer it, how will they know it? Are we going to have them go to Mass in Rome and not know how to receive Holy Communion?

I always told them to choose the way that seemed the most reverent to them–the most respectful of Jesus–and the least likely to result in dropping the Blessed Sacrament. That’s the main thing.

 

[bmadamsberry]

But again, what is reverent to one person is irreverent to another.

An earlier poster in this thread described how they feel rude sticking out their tongue, and one person described how they prefer keeping their head bowed as a sign of reverence, and receiving Communion on the tongue requires that they raise their head.

When the Church has given permission for bishops to allow Communion in the hand, then who are we to question this practice and claim that it is deficient in some way. If it were deficient, surely the Church would have said “No.”

For the many Catholics like myself who were raised Protestant and only recently converted, we have no history or background of receiving Communion on the hand or tongue, so to us, neither practice is inherently more reverent than the other.

When you say “We see so much lack of reverence as it is, we need to do whatever it takes to help our young folks learn what reverence really is and WHY it is so important in the presence of our Lord,” we don’t know what you mean. We have no frame of reference to understand why you think that receiving Jesus on your tongue is inherently more reverent than receiving Him in your hand.

What we former Protestants have seen is that many Catholics have left their Church and become Protestants, even back in the days when Communion was received only on the tongue. We knew these ex-Catholics and listened to them when they said that Catholicism was all ritual and no life. As I said, many of the ex-Catholics that I knew while Protestant were OLDER people, Catholics who grew up pre-Vatican 2.

Somehow, Communion on the Tongue and all the other supposedly “reverent” practices did not manage to keep these Catholics in the Church.

So we have our doubts as to whether a physical practice is truly the answer to teaching reverence for God. We believe that reverence comes from a heart overflowing with gratefulness to God for all His blessings.

Yes, of course, if the Church should decree that Holy Communion is to be received only on the tongue, we ex-Protestants would joyfully obey, even if we don’t understand or “get it.” That’s one reason we’re Catholic–we’ve come to see that we are not our own authority–Jesus is, and He has given His authority on this earth to His Church.

But the Church has NOT decreed, at least in the U.S. (which is where many of us are living) that Holy Communion is only to be received on the tongue. We have a CHOICE, and it seems to me that no one should criticize the Church-given choice of someone else.

Can’t we just assume that people, including children and teenagers, who are receiving Jesus in Holy Communion are trying their best to be reverent in thought and action, and stop assuming that “this person is reverent” and “that person is irreverent.” Surely it is not our place to judge what is in the heart of others. Surely we would be better off taking care of our own hearts and making sure that they are a worthy place for the Lord to dwell in.

And frankly, I don’t have the ability to read hearts. If I know the person, I could base my assessment of their reverence on their life–if they are living a life of blatant sin, I might be able to suspect that they are receiving irreverently, but even then, if they went to Reconciliation before Mass, they are clean and totally absolved of their sin, so who am I to judge them?

As an ex-Protestant, I don’t feel that way at all. Furthermore it is important to remember that the Church is only infallible on matters of doctrine, not practice. While I have no problem with people recieving Communion in the Hand, it’s a dangerous argument to say “because the Catholic Church okays it, then I shouldn’t criticize it”. Furthermore it doesn’t just matter if they are reverent in their hearts. Actions are important as well. Just because someone’s heart is in the right place, doesn’t mean that they can do anything.

I do agree with you, however, that I can’t criticize and look down on those that recieve on the hand. The reason I can’t is because, I believe, most people recieve on the hand because they don’t know differently. My girlfriend doesn’t do it because they were told that they couldn’t do it for their First Communion. And, because she never got comfortable, she feels awkward doing it. Furthermore no one else at our Catholic Student Association does it (besides me). I asked her mother and father why they don’t recieve on the tongue, and I got the same answer from them.

 

[adstrinity]

I didn’t read past half of the first page, but, I had never thought of those reasons, which are all very possible.

I know that Father Jonathan Morris (contributor on Fox News, and, where I know him from, Red Eye, a show on Fox News), who is VERY conservative and an EXCELLENT apologist and who does not distribute the Blood at his parish, says he HATES distributing on the tongue because people breathe on him and he just doesn’t want to get sick.

 

[otjm]

Call me cynical if you wish, but I would also add a group of progressives that want to do away with all traditions and then once this CITH completely catches on, they will start an in-the-pew communications or something similar just to be more progressive or to prove something. What has CITH really gained for the Catholic Church?

Ah, come on, you know better than that!

It is not doing away with traditions; it is returning to traditions that were part of the Church for almost half its existence, in the Latin rite.

As to what it has gained? I am not going to speak for the Church universally, nor even in the US, nor for that matter, in my archdiocese.

Just my parish. The vast majority of people in my parish receive in the hand.

We also have a very active minsitry to the poor.

We also have built the first Catholic grade school in 40 years in this archdiocese, and it is growing, and teaching the Faith.

We have had two men go to seminary - one ordained; one young woman join an order of nuns (who actually wear a habit).

We have an active ministry to returning Catholics.

We have Teams of Our Lady.

We have an active pro life group.

We have an active Knights of Columbus group.

We have an active Stephen’s Ministry.

We have an active group bringing Communion to the local women’s prison, and a support group for children born to women in prison.

We have several adult study groups.

And we have had 24 hour Perpetual Adoration for the last 15 years.

In short, Communion in the hand has done nothing to diminish the respect for and celebration of the Eucharist. It fits in with everything else.

 

[Hotchkiss]

You’re allowed to have your guesses and shot-in-the-dark statistics, I’m allowed to have mine.

Yours make no sense though. There’s something more to the great popularity of CITH than you allude to.

If the rolls were swapped and CITH became the normative way to receive communion WHILE COTT was pushed in catechetics it’s unlikely that COTT would catch on like CITH did.

 

[Hotchkiss]

The priest’s hand “washing” is symbolic only and would not decrease the amount of germs on his hands significantly. Add to that that he shakes hands at the sign of peace and any cleansing he may have done at the Lavabo is cancelled out.

Not if the ewer is filled with a 50% alcohol and water mix as it is at my parish…

 

[Hotchkiss]

But again, what is reverent to one person is irreverent to another.

An earlier poster in this thread described how they feel rude sticking out their tongue, and one person described how they prefer keeping their head bowed as a sign of reverence, and receiving Communion on the tongue requires that they raise their head.

When the Church has given permission for bishops to allow Communion in the hand, then who are we to question this practice and claim that it is deficient in some way. If it were deficient, surely the Church would have said “No.”

For the many Catholics like myself who were raised Protestant and only recently converted, we have no history or background of receiving Communion on the hand or tongue, so to us, neither practice is inherently more reverent than the other.

When you say “We see so much lack of reverence as it is, we need to do whatever it takes to help our young folks learn what reverence really is and WHY it is so important in the presence of our Lord,” we don’t know what you mean. We have no frame of reference to understand why you think that receiving Jesus on your tongue is inherently more reverent than receiving Him in your hand.

What we former Protestants have seen is that many Catholics have left their Church and become Protestants, even back in the days when Communion was received only on the tongue. We knew these ex-Catholics and listened to them when they said that Catholicism was all ritual and no life. As I said, many of the ex-Catholics that I knew while Protestant were OLDER people, Catholics who grew up pre-Vatican 2.

Somehow, Communion on the Tongue and all the other supposedly “reverent” practices did not manage to keep these Catholics in the Church.

So we have our doubts as to whether a physical practice is truly the answer to teaching reverence for God. We believe that reverence comes from a heart overflowing with gratefulness to God for all His blessings.

Yes, of course, if the Church should decree that Holy Communion is to be received only on the tongue, we ex-Protestants would joyfully obey, even if we don’t understand or “get it.” That’s one reason we’re Catholic–we’ve come to see that we are not our own authority–Jesus is, and He has given His authority on this earth to His Church.

But the Church has NOT decreed, at least in the U.S. (which is where many of us are living) that Holy Communion is only to be received on the tongue. We have a CHOICE, and it seems to me that no one should criticize the Church-given choice of someone else.

Can’t we just assume that people, including children and teenagers, who are receiving Jesus in Holy Communion are trying their best to be reverent in thought and action, and stop assuming that “this person is reverent” and “that person is irreverent.” Surely it is not our place to judge what is in the heart of others. Surely we would be better off taking care of our own hearts and making sure that they are a worthy place for the Lord to dwell in.

And frankly, I don’t have the ability to read hearts. If I know the person, I could base my assessment of their reverence on their life–if they are living a life of blatant sin, I might be able to suspect that they are receiving irreverently, but even then, if they went to Reconciliation before Mass, they are clean and totally absolved of their sin, so who am I to judge them?

Thanks, I appreciated your posting. Lots of good points. But I’m still curious as to why CITH is so popular?

 

[Hotchkiss]

As an ex-Protestant, I don’t feel that way at all. Furthermore it is important to remember that the Church is only infallible on matters of doctrine, not practice. While I have no problem with people recieving Communion in the Hand, it’s a dangerous argument to say “because the Catholic Church okays it, then I shouldn’t criticize it”. Furthermore it doesn’t just matter if they are reverent in their hearts. Actions are important as well. Just because someone’s heart is in the right place, doesn’t mean that they can do anything.

Be careful. Some suggest that because something is not proclaimed from the Chair of Peter in the form of an infallible statement that it’s open season. That’s wrong. Anything promulgated by the Church carries considerable weight – even an indult. No problem with voicing your preference in options. But to suggest the Church is wrong or that somehow you know better than the Church is a huge no-no.

I do agree with you, however, that I can’t criticize and look down on those that recieve on the hand. The reason I can’t is because, I believe, most people recieve on the hand because they don’t know differently. My girlfriend doesn’t do it because they were told that they couldn’t do it for their First Communion. And, because she never got comfortable, she feels awkward doing it. Furthermore no one else at our Catholic Student Association does it (besides me). I asked her mother and father why they don’t recieve on the tongue, and I got the same answer from them.

You’re making comments that you don’t have the facts to support. Nor does anyone else.

 

[Hotchkiss]

Call me cynical if you wish, but I would also add a group of progressives that want to do away with all traditions and then once this CITH completely catches on, they will start an in-the-pew communications or something similar just to be more progressive or to prove something. What has CITH really gained for the Catholic Church?

What do you mean by “traditions”? Like the ancient CITH from the first century AD?

I’m rather curious – how does your outlook grind-away at your spirituality? Isn’t it exhausting? Do you ever feel any joy?

 

[Cat]

Ah, come on, you know better than that!

It is not doing away with traditions; it is returning to traditions that were part of the Church for almost half its existence, in the Latin rite.

As to what it has gained? I am not going to speak for the Church universally, nor even in the US, nor for that matter, in my archdiocese.

Just my parish. The vast majority of people in my parish receive in the hand.

We also have a very active minsitry to the poor.

We also have built the first Catholic grade school in 40 years in this archdiocese, and it is growing, and teaching the Faith.

We have had two men go to seminary - one ordained; one young woman join an order of nuns (who actually wear a habit).

We have an active ministry to returning Catholics.

We have Teams of Our Lady.

We have an active pro life group.

We have an active Knights of Columbus group.

We have an active Stephen’s Ministry.

We have an active group bringing Communion to the local women’s prison, and a support group for children born to women in prison.

We have several adult study groups.

And we have had 24 hour Perpetual Adoration for the last 15 years.

In short, Communion in the hand has done nothing to diminish the respect for and celebration of the Eucharist. It fits in with everything else.

This sounds a lot like our parish! Are we neighbors?

I would say in our parish about 10% of the parishioners receive Holy Communion on their tongue.

And I would also say that there are many wonderful, faith-filled, GOOD Catholics in our parish who give money and time sacrificially, who make daily Holy Hours in our 24/7 Adoration Chapel, who are passionately involved in pro-life work, who are actively involved in good works and charitable endeavors through the Church, who have raised children who are now priests or religious, and who are helpful and enthusiastic about helping people to make the decision to convert to Catholicism. Many, in fact most, of these dear Catholics receive Communion in the Hand.

In our city, the Latin Mass has been offered daily and several times on Sat/Sun (by ICK priests) at the Oratory since the mid-1980s. We also have several parishes within easy driving distance that offer–I’m not sure what you call it, but it’s the OF of the Mass with lots of Latin, altar boys only, receiving Holy Communion on the tongue while kneeling at a rail, chant and organ only, etc. Finally, COTT is accepted and honored at ALL parishes by all priests in our city and I assume in our diocese (since we all have the same bishop)–I have never been in a parish in our city where people were made to feel awkward for receiving COTT; in fact, I’ve seen people kneel and receive Holy Communion on their tongue–no one is made to feel that they’ve done something “wrong.”

So perhaps those who are desiring a greater amount of tradition in the Mass have that option within easy driving distance (five miles or less for most people in our city), and therefore there is not so much unrest and dissatisfaction among the parishes, and this contributes to an atmosphere which makes it easier for everyone to pursue personal holiness and a deeper relationship with Jesus. We don’t have to waste time and energy complaining about abuses in the liturgy and sighing for more accountability from our bishop and priests. I can appreciate that this kind of thing–the constant futile search for a truly correct Mass free from serious abuse and the longing for correct theolgoy–could be very exhausting and discouraging to Catholics.

OP, I’m not sure what you’re looking for. We’ve all given you many good reasons why people prefer receiving Holy Communion in their hand. IMO, there’s no difference between saying “CITH is popular” and “CITH is preferred in the U.S.” I’m not sure if you see a difference in these phrases or not. Perhaps you can explain why the answers given so far are not answering your question. Thanks.

 

[Hotchkiss]

This sounds a lot like our parish! Are we neighbors?

I would say in our parish about 10% of the parishioners receive Holy Communion on their tongue.

And I would also say that there are many wonderful, faith-filled, GOOD Catholics in our parish who give money and time sacrificially, who make daily Holy Hours in our 24/7 Adoration Chapel, who are passionately involved in pro-life work, who are actively involved in good works and charitable endeavors through the Church, who have raised children who are now priests or religious, and who are helpful and enthusiastic about helping people to make the decision to convert to Catholicism. Many, in fact most, of these dear Catholics receive Communion in the Hand.

In our city, the Latin Mass has been offered daily and several times on Sat/Sun (by ICK priests) at the Oratory since the mid-1980s. We also have several parishes within easy driving distance that offer–I’m not sure what you call it, but it’s the OF of the Mass with lots of Latin, altar boys only, receiving Holy Communion on the tongue while kneeling at a rail, chant and organ only, etc. Finally, COTT is accepted and honored at ALL parishes by all priests in our city and I assume in our diocese (since we all have the same bishop)–I have never been in a parish in our city where people were made to feel awkward for receiving COTT; in fact, I’ve seen people kneel and receive Holy Communion on their tongue–no one is made to feel that they’ve done something “wrong.”

So perhaps those who are desiring a greater amount of tradition in the Mass have that option within easy driving distance (five miles or less for most people in our city), and therefore there is not so much unrest and dissatisfaction among the parishes, and this contributes to an atmosphere which makes it easier for everyone to pursue personal holiness and a deeper relationship with Jesus. We don’t have to waste time and energy complaining about abuses in the liturgy and sighing for more accountability from our bishop and priests. I can appreciate that this kind of thing–the constant futile search for a truly correct Mass free from serious abuse and the longing for correct theolgoy–could be very exhausting and discouraging to Catholics.

**OP, I’m not sure what you’re looking for. ** We’ve all given you many good reasons why people prefer receiving Holy Communion in their hand. IMO, there’s no difference between saying “CITH is popular” and “CITH is preferred in the U.S.” I’m not sure if you see a difference in these phrases or not. Perhaps you can explain why the answers given so far are not answering your question. Thanks.

I’m just curious as to why it’s so popular.

Yes you have provided reasons why people receive CITH. But I still really don’t know why CITH is overwhelmingly chosen over COTT in most locations.

 

[bmadamsberry]

Be careful. Some suggest that because something is not proclaimed from the Chair of Peter in the form of an infallible statement that it’s open season. That’s wrong. Anything promulgated by the Church carries considerable weight – even an indult. No problem with voicing your preference in options. But to suggest the Church is wrong or that somehow you know better than the Church is a huge no-no.

Putting words into my mouth…hmmm… I never said that I knew better than the Church. I agree that anything that the Church says carries considerable weight, but it does not contain infallibility unless it is about doctrine (agreed, it does not have to be proclaimed ex cathedra. I know that). To suggest the Church is wrong in a matter of practice is NOT a no-no. Furthermore there have been Saints who criticized some practices of the Church. But, again, I didn’t say that I knew better than the Church, but what I did say was that someone can disagree with a Church practice and that the Church can be wrong on practice. So maybe you should read someone’s posts twice, because one doesn’t seem to be working.

You’re making comments that you don’t have the facts to support. Nor does anyone else.

And you gave a crazy statistic without sources (furthermore, you said that Communion on the Hand was popular in the First Century, yet all you have given me is the one occurance in Scripture, which does not show that it was popular or prefferred).

 

[John_oxios]

Here’s my explanation as to why it’s popular. In the United States, showing the tongue or opening the mouth wide is simply not done in most settings. It’s considered rude or uncouth or simply inappropriate.

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.

As for sticking out the tongue, again, this is simply not done in most settings …

So my explanation is that most Catholics who did not grow up and see the majority of people receiving Holy Communion on tongues feel “rude” and “embarrassed” doing something that seems to them to be ill-mannered or inappropriate.

Of COURSE it’s not rude or ill-mannered to stick out a tongue to receive Holy Communion, any more than it’s rude for a women to lay back and spread her legs when the gynecologist approaches her with the warm speculum (this act would get a woman arrested in any other setting other than her own bedroom with her own husband)!

Yes, the setting of Mass is the appropriate time to open the mouth wide and stick out the tongue.

But it’s HARD to get people to get over their own apprehension, just as it’s very very hard for many women to go for their pelvic exam and Pap smear. Even though our MINDS tells us that it’s perfectly OK and acceptable and polite, our hearts tell us that it’s embarrassing and uncomfortable and even unseemly.

For those who grew up with Communion on the Tongue–of course it seems normal and natural to them. But for the past 40 years, it has not been the general practice in the U.S. and it’s very hard to people to overcome the “norms” of our culture and society.

Hi Cat,
Sorry can’t buy this either… At every wedding they sing the bride cuts the cake… and she then gives a piece to her spouse who is waiting with his mouth wide open and then he does the same to her.
hmmm. nobody complaining about ill manners,rudeness or anything else in fact it is celebrated.

Comparing hands folded head tilted back in reverence to a posture in a doctors office? I dunno. The Doctor is paid for his services… which if you don’t cooperate well he gets paid anyway… Sirach says, 38:1- 7 , “Hold the physician in honor, for he is essential to you and God has established his profession… from God the Doctor has his wisdom…his knowledge makes him distinguished…”
We do as the doctor says to maintain health and get better.

Jesus paid a debt for us he didn’t owe, he paid a debt for us we couldn’t possibly pay… I think we could swallow our pride, and modestly receive by the tongue kneeling without all the comparison to uncouth and inappropriate practice… because after all, Communion is a marriage, each and every time we receive we say ‘Yes’ to Jesus,

That is the major theme in the Bible, 'Nuptials, God and Man, Man and Woman.

and then again the Bible says,
Phl 2:10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

We all (Catholics) bow our at the mention of his name, So when the minister/ Priest stands before us and offers us the Body and Blood of Christ which they hold in their hands before us Kneeling, bowing before we put our hand out or tongue before we say ‘amen’ (Let it be so) ought not feel demeaning in front of the Christ, priest, ministers or the congregation.

Besides since when has kissing been considered inappropriate between a married couple?

God bless, :highprayer:
    john

 

[benedictgal]

Hi Cat,
Sorry can’t buy this either… At every wedding they sing the bride cuts the cake… and she then gives a piece to her spouse who is waiting with his mouth wide open and then he does the same to her.
hmmm. nobody complaining about ill manners,rudeness or anything else in fact it is celebrated.

Comparing hands folded head tilted back in reverence to a posture in a doctors office? I dunno. The Doctor is paid for his services… which if you don’t cooperate well he gets paid anyway… Sirach says, 38:1- 7 , “Hold the physician in honor, for he is essential to you and God has established his profession… from God the Doctor has his wisdom…his knowledge makes him distinguished…”
We do as the doctor says to maintain health and get better.

Jesus paid a debt for us he didn’t owe, he paid a debt for us we couldn’t possibly pay… I think we could swallow our pride, and modestly receive by the tongue kneeling without all the comparison to uncouth and inappropriate practice… because after all, Communion is a marriage, each and every time we receive we say ‘Yes’ to Jesus,

That is the major theme in the Bible, 'Nuptials, God and Man, Man and Woman.

and then again the Bible says,
Phl 2:10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

We all (Catholics) bow our at the mention of his name, So when the minister/ Priest stands before us and offers us the Body and Blood of Christ which they hold in their hands before us Kneeling, bowing before we put our hand out or tongue before we say ‘amen’ (Let it be so) ought not feel demeaning in front of the Christ, priest, ministers or the congregation.

Besides since when has kissing been considered inappropriate between a married couple?

God bless, :highprayer:
    john

Funny you should mention “kissing”. Pope Benedict XVI told the youngsters at World Youth Day that Jesus wishes “to kiss you” as they receive Holy Communion. It was quite an eyebrow-raiser.