How to recieve

[JoabAnias]

But when you start trying to convince others by hand is less than...it turns into something else. I think only the Church has the authority to discuss these matters myself. Especially if they think by hand is inferior. When the Church offers the option, nobody has the right to make others feel bad for exercising that option when the Church offered it in the first place.

Do you know the history of that indult? Its rather shocking.

 

[MichaelFJF]

Do you know the history of that indult? Its rather shocking.

Would this be another attempt to make those of us who receive in the hand less reverent?

 

[JoabAnias]

Would this be another attempt to make those of us who receive in the hand less reverent?

No not at all. Its a valid indult even if, originally, it was irregularly promulgated into one through personal initiatives. Could have been paradosis as far as I know. Obviously it got consensus from the Bishops and Rome. Thats more than good enough for me. I have received that way of clear conscience. Right now I personally happen to be appreciating our returned altar rail. That would never be to begrudge anyone the indult. Does because I kneel and receive on the tongue cause scandal?

I am glad we have both options as well as different various ways of showing reverence from a genuflect to a bow to the sign of the cross to an amen. Its all good right?

It gives lots of room for folks to be comfortable and honest with them selves about how they perceive the Eucharist. I don't believe sincere reverence can be forced or ever should be faked either.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Do you know the history of that indult? Its rather shocking.

I am curious.
I like to know these sort of things.
SPILL IT!

 

[JoabAnias]

I am curious.
I like to know these sort of things.
SPILL IT!

Do you want my short version for memory or are you going to make me work for it?

 

[JoabAnias]

I am curious.
I like to know these sort of things.
SPILL IT!

If memory serves me correctly; I have read that communion in the hand was initiated without permission during the last century by Bishops in South America from where the practice spread and was put into use elsewhere as well, long before an indult for anywhere was approved, and on previous occasion in some locals, petition for an indult even denied, but the practice still was not halted.

The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy #22 and canon 838 of the Code of Canon Law prohibits taking personal initiatives in the Mass.

Regardless, we have a rather curious phenomenon taking place in the Church that confuses many, where pastors and faithful, (as initially in the case of Communion in the hand as an example among several others), are promulgating personal initiatives into the Mass in disregard of the aforementioned canon and norms that have then resulted in indults which have actually been approved by the Holy See. There are even cases of indults expiring and not being renewed yet the praxis' that were permitted by those indults continue nevertheless.

I know of no other instance of this happening in the history of the Church until recent history. Before this recent history, an indult would require approval before it could be implemented. Recently, certain irregularities initiated via personal initiatives seem to have become indults long after they were put into use without approval. In effects, liturgical abuses are getting approved if they seem to work out rather than corrected.

As the Holy See has seen fit to approve the Bishops petitions for such indults in certain instances, re; the personal initiatives to change things, I must conclude, and chalk it up to a relaxation in discipline and a sort of acknowledgment of the process of paradosis.

I guess if we all decide to break the speed limit enough, we can force the authorities to raise it. (and we all hate to go the speed limit).

 

[Memento Mori]

I guess if we all decide to break the speed limit enough, we can force the authorities to raise it. (and we all hate to go the speed limit).

Sorry, I think I'm sabotaging that effort. I'm the one who always drives 5 below.

 

[JoabAnias]

Sorry, I think I'm sabotaging that effort. I'm the one who always drives 5 below.

Argh, your the one always in my way then!

I suppose if you stay in the right lane its ok.

 

[Memento Mori]

Argh, your the one always in my way then!

I suppose if you stay in the right lane its ok.

What do you mean, "the right lane"? I thought you were supposed to drive over that line they put in the middle of the road.

 

[Maggie893]

This debate drives me crazy because it does always seem to polarize people.

I receive both ways.

I've found most EMHC's are uncomfortable giving on the tongue and rather than create a risk that isn't necessary I will receive in the hand. I also receive in the hand from a few priests that rush so quickly through the communion line that you barely have time to say Amen let alone get your mouth prepared to receive the Lord.

I appreciate that many of you are EMHC's and as long as parishes are going to continue to use so many during Mass, I am glad that there are folks that will step up to fill the role. But I've actually had an EMHC say "Peace be with you." instead of "The Body of Christ". It's things like this that cause so many people to cue up for the Priest which always means that a bunch of EMHC's are just hanging around waiting.

I wish the whole process was reviewed and straightened out. We could lose all the EMHC's. If the priest didn't have to spend as much time setting up chalice and ciborium for each EMHC and then cleaning all of the aforementioned pieces following communion, we would likely have the same amount of time available for the priest alone or with one deacon to distribute to the whole church. Why we have to rush everybody up and out during the most important part of the Mass is beyond me and makes me crazy!

I agree Jim that a directive from the Vatican for one way would be best.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Nope, we have marble floors. The only church I have been in with a carpeted sacristy didn't had that problem. To much holy water around maybe.

Marble... You Catholics have all the answers!

I think it was that particular carpet, my present parish has carpet, but no zaps! We are free to receive both ways.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

You all know I'm not Catholic, but would you allow me, out of fellowship, to post why I prefer on the tongue?

If not, that's ok.

Respectfully,

Mark

 

[judechild]

Go ahead Mark.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Go ahead Mark.

Thank you for indulging me.

Our denomination holds to the doctrine of "In Persona Christi" regarding the Eucharistic celebration. For me the reception on the tongue is symbolic of our full submission to our Lord; from his hand directly to my mouth. We have no influence or part in the Divine Mystery, it comes from the Lord, through His word and the elements of bread and wine directly to us. By taking in the hand, for me, it's like I am taking part in the Eucharist rather than humbly submitting to our Lord's command.

Respectfully,

Mark.

 

[judechild]

Thank you for indulging me.

Our denomination holds to the doctrine of "In Persona Christi" regarding the Eucharistic celebration. For me the reception on the tongue is symbolic of our full submission to our Lord; from his hand directly to my mouth. We have no influence or part in the Divine Mystery, it comes from the Lord, through His word and the elements of bread and wine directly to us. By taking in the hand, for me, it's like I am taking part in the Eucharist rather than humbly submitting to our Lord's command.

Respectfully,

Mark.

That sounds good to me.

Really, I've never had any deep theology behind why I recieve on the tongue. I used to recieve in the hand because it seemed easier, but then I noticed a lot of parishoners who I really respect recieved on the tongue, and then I saw a little boy recieve on the tongue and while kneeling; his face looked so reverent that I ended up recieving on the tongue too.

 

[WarriorAngel]

If memory serves me correctly; I have read that communion in the hand was initiated without permission during the last century by Bishops in South America from where the practice spread and was put into use elsewhere as well, long before an indult for anywhere was approved, and on previous occasion in some locals, petition for an indult even denied, but the practice still was not halted.

The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy #22 and canon 838 of the Code of Canon Law prohibits taking personal initiatives in the Mass.

Regardless, we have a rather curious phenomenon taking place in the Church that confuses many, where pastors and faithful, (as initially in the case of Communion in the hand as an example among several others), are promulgating personal initiatives into the Mass in disregard of the aforementioned canon and norms that have then resulted in indults which have actually been approved by the Holy See. There are even cases of indults expiring and not being renewed yet the praxis' that were permitted by those indults continue nevertheless.

I know of no other instance of this happening in the history of the Church until recent history. Before this recent history, an indult would require approval before it could be implemented. Recently, certain irregularities initiated via personal initiatives seem to have become indults long after they were put into use without approval. In effects, liturgical abuses are getting approved if they seem to work out rather than corrected.

As the Holy See has seen fit to approve the Bishops petitions for such indults in certain instances, re; the personal initiatives to change things, I must conclude, and chalk it up to a relaxation in discipline and a sort of acknowledgment of the process of paradosis.

I guess if we all decide to break the speed limit enough, we can force the authorities to raise it. (and we all hate to go the speed limit).

O really?

Well, i wonder if the indult expired.
And if it was done without an indult in the first place [which is disobedient] then the whole thing kinda smacks of not being so good.
Since it stemmed from disobedience in the first place.

Thanks, i didnt know that.
I am glad my children have taken my lead and take it by mouth now.

That sounds good to me.

Really, I've never had any deep theology behind why I recieve on the tongue. I used to recieve in the hand because it seemed easier, but then I noticed a lot of parishoners who I really respect recieved on the tongue, and then I saw a little boy recieve on the tongue and while kneeling; his face looked so reverent that I ended up recieving on the tongue too.

Wow.
A child so reverent.

Now I am not picking on those who take it by hand - and just because of what i have witnessed doesn't mean i feel this way towards everyone...
But i noticed in a few parishes that folks who take by hand act extremely casual... even nonchalant.

I have seen some who take it by hand who do act reverent, and that what they have is sacred... which makes me smile.
But the majority just act like it's - i dont know the words - taken for granted?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

We were also taught to place the tip of our tongue on the top of our lower teeth, behind the lip, and curl the tongue forward. This gives the celebrant an easy target on which to place the host w/o touching the tongue.

 

[JoabAnias]

Marble... You Catholics have all the answers!

I think it was that particular carpet, my present parish has carpet, but no zaps! We are free to receive both ways.

I have an answer for everything and if not I can usually find it.

Yea, about the carpet, thats what I was thinking too but if I recall correctly I think static buildup also has something to do with the air conditions. The lack of humidity has to be just right I think. Then of course the scuffing across the carpet does it.

I was thinking humidifier.

"Removing or preventing a buildup of static charge can be as simple as opening a window or using a humidifier to increase the moisture content of the air, making the atmosphere more conductive. Air ionizers can perform the same task."
Static electricity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Or of course, splashing lots of holy water around.

 

[AMDG]

Yea, about the carpet, thats what I was thinking too but if I recall correctly I think static buildup also has something to do with the air conditions. The lack of humidity has to be just right I think. Then of course the scuffing across the carpet does it.

Aww--but somehow I really like the explanation of the powerful Holy Spirit, who "shakes things up" and leaves a person all "tingly".

 

[Memento Mori]

Thank you for indulging me.

Our denomination holds to the doctrine of "In Persona Christi" regarding the Eucharistic celebration. For me the reception on the tongue is symbolic of our full submission to our Lord; from his hand directly to my mouth. We have no influence or part in the Divine Mystery, it comes from the Lord, through His word and the elements of bread and wine directly to us. By taking in the hand, for me, it's like I am taking part in the Eucharist rather than humbly submitting to our Lord's command.

Respectfully,

Mark.

That makes sense, though on the other hand (or should I say, in the hand? ) I have heard people say that receiving in the hand is a better response to Jesus' "take and eat." He offers Himself to the communicant and the communicant accepts Him with an active gesture--raising the host to the mouth.

Both ways can have profound meaning to the individual, just as both ways can be abused by the individual. It seems to me like it's a matter of temperament.