Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
The Sacrament of the Eucharist
Topic Started: Wednesday, 27. September 2006, 23:23 (1,480 Views)
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Reception in the hand can be a humbling experience. Who am I that My Lord should deign to come to me, personally? What a privilege, to be so close to Christ in an intimate way. He is God. He is also my brother and my best friend.

If Jesus were alive now, and he phoned and said he was popping round to see me, he would sit on my chairs. If I were to say "No, Lord, the Church is the only place fit for you" would he tell me not to be so silly?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Rose of York
Apr 7 2007, 03:25 PM
I see no implication there, that receiving Holy Communion in the hand is less reverent that reception on the tongue.

Even when reception on the tongue is officially described as "more reverent", you see no implication that reception in the hand is "less reverent"?

I think that's what is called a corollary!

Quote:
 
The preferred method of reception varies from country to country.


But, as the article I quoted says, whilst reception in the hand may be forbidden by bishops, reception on the tongue may not be forbidden!

Communion in the hand was allowed, as an "indult", reluctantly, as a result of disobedience.

Clare.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
PJD


Clare

I don't know what source you are quoting from, but even so we have moved on since those times.

The question of reverence is a matter that lies in the heart, and the heart should feel of 'equal love' whether the Lord is received on the tongue or in the hand.

Why on earth would you deny it as less reverent anyway; I mean by what logical reference.

PJD
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Memoriale Domini

Quote:
 
MEMORIALE DOMINI
Instruction on the Manner of Distributing Holy Communion
Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship

Issued on May 29, 1969.

...
Indeed, in certain communities and in certain places this practice has been introduced without prior approval having been requested of the Holy See, and, at times, without any attempt to prepare the faithful adequately.
...
This method of distributing holy communion (on the tongue) must be retained, taking the present situation of the Church in the entire world into account, not merely because it has many centuries of-tradition behind it, but especially because it expresses the faithful's reverence for the Eucharist. The custom does not detract in any way from the personal dignity of those who approach this great sacrament: it is part of that preparation that is needed for the most fruitful reception of the Body of the Lord.[6]
...
Further, the practice which must be considered traditional ensures, more effectively, that holy communion is distributed with the proper respect, decorum and dignity. It removes the danger of profanation of the sacred species, in which "in a unique way, Christ, God and man, is present whole and entire, substantially and continually."[9] Lastly, it ensures that diligent carefulness about the fragments of consecrated bread which the Church has always recommended: "What you have allowed to drop, think of it as though you had lost one of your own members."[10]

When therefore a small number of episcopal conferences and some individual bishops asked that the practice of placing the consecrated hosts in the people's hands be permitted in their territories, the Holy Father decided that all the bishops of the Latin Church should be asked if they thought it opportune to introduce this rite. A change in a matter of such moment, based on a most ancient and venerable tradition, does not merely affect discipline. It carries certain dangers with it which may arise from the new manner of administering holy communion: the danger of a loss of reverence for the august sacrament of the altar, of profanation, of adulterating the true doctrine.

Three questions were asked of the bishops, and the replies received by 12 March 1969 were as follows:

1. Do you think that attention should be paid to the desire that, over and above the traditional manner, the rite of receiving holy communion on the hand should be admitted?
Yes: 597
No: 1,233
Yes, but with reservations: 315
Invalid votes: 20

2. Is it your wish that this new rite be first tried in small communities, with the consent of the bishop?
Yes: 751
No: 1,215
Invalid votes, 70

3. Do you think that the faithful will receive this new rite gladly, after a proper catechetical preparation?
Yes: 835
No: 1,185
Invalid votes: 128

From the returns it is clear that the vast majority of bishops believe that the present discipline should not be changed, and that if it were, the change would be offensive to the sentiments and the spiritual culture of these bishops and of many of the faithful.

Therefore, taking into account the remarks and the advice of those whom "the Holy Spirit has placed to rule over" the Churches,[11] in view of the gravity of the matter and the force of the arguments put forward, the Holy Father has decided not to change the existing way of administering holy communion to the faithful.

The Apostolic See therefore emphatically urges bishops, priests and laity to obey carefully the law which is still valid and which has again been confirmed. It urges them to take account of the judgment given by the majority of Catholic bishops, of the rite now in use in the liturgy, of the common good of the Church.

Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow.
...


So, since Communion in the hand was only permitted in those places where it had already become established, without prior permission, how has it come to be, seemingly, the most common method of distribution everywhere else too?

Clare.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Clare
Apr 7 2007, 10:22 PM
Quote:
 
MEMORIALE DOMINI
Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow.
...


So, since Communion in the hand was only permitted in those places where it had already become established, without prior permission, how has it come to be, seemingly, the most common method of distribution everywhere else too?

Clare.

The Bishops Conference of England and Wales were charged with the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist here, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow.

I have no idea what special circumstances prevailed in this country, then or now, but the Bishops make the decisions and I am happy to respect their authority to do so.

Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
CARLO
Member Avatar

I have to say that the quotations from Memoriale Domini presented by Clare are fascinating and probably a great shock to those who are under the misapprehension that Communion in the Hand was some enthusiastic new development brought in by V2!

And whatever the 'special circumstances' might have been in 1969 in the UK they did not justify the ripping out of the communion rails in our Churches.

Veritas
Truth


CARLO
Judica me Deus
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Rose of York
Apr 7 2007, 11:21 PM
Clare
Apr 7 2007, 10:22 PM
Quote:
 
MEMORIALE DOMINI
Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow.
...


So, since Communion in the hand was only permitted in those places where it had already become established, without prior permission, how has it come to be, seemingly, the most common method of distribution everywhere else too?

Clare.

The Bishops Conference of England and Wales were charged with the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist here, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow.

I have no idea what special circumstances prevailed in this country, then or now, but the Bishops make the decisions and I am happy to respect their authority to do so.

Was Communion in the hand already being practised here then?

If not, then, it appears that they had no authority to authorise it!

Because, as far as I can see, the "indult" was only granted for places where it had been going on already (without permission having been sought beforehand!)

The rule was and is Communion on the tongue.

Communion in the hand is a tolerated aberration!

Clare.


S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
CARLO
Member Avatar

Clara

I don't really know.

In my Parish at the time everybody received on the tongue.

Then they ripped out the Communion rail. Some say it was sold to travellers.

Then everyone had to queue up and receive in the hand. Only a few continued to receive on the tongue.

I can't remember any debate or discussion about it although I do remember sadness about the communion rail and some anger.

Veritas
Truth


CARLO
Judica me Deus
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

I get the impression that for you, Carlo, the removal of the Communion Rails is of greater importance than whether Holy Communion is received in the hand or on the tongue.
Derekap
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
PJD


Very 'cool' answer that Derek. Wonder how Carlo will get out of that one (laugh).

PJD
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Gerard

Clare
Apr 7 2007, 10:19 AM
Gerard
Apr 7 2007, 10:54 AM
The Holy Spirit blows where He will.

:blink:

Yes Clare, frustrating is it not.

All these intricate rules, divided and subdivided, precision upon precision..

And then The Holy Spirit goes and blows where He wills.

:rofl:

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Gerard
Apr 8 2007, 08:29 PM
Yes Clare, frustrating is it not.

All these intricate rules, divided and subdivided, precision upon precision..

And then The Holy Spirit goes and blows where He wills.

:rofl:

Gerry

Gerry,

Yes, the Holy Ghost does blow where He wills.

I fail to see what that has to do with the widespread practice of Communion in the hand!

I know where I think the Holy Ghost is blowing!

:wh:

Clare.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
CARLO
Member Avatar

Derekap
Apr 8 2007, 05:12 PM
I get the impression that for you, Carlo, the removal of the Communion Rails is of greater importance than whether Holy Communion is received in the hand or on the tongue.

Derek

Clearly you are very impressionable!


Oremus
Yawn


CARLO :lol:
Judica me Deus
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Clare
Apr 8 2007, 10:38 PM
I know where I think the Holy Ghost is blowing!

:wh: 

Clare.

Clare is about to convene a Council to discuss the matter.

We await her new encyclical.

:D
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
PJD

When people went up to the Altar rails and took Communion on the tongue; half the congregation didn't go to Communion. Now everyone goes (or expected to go?).

In practical terms alone, leaving reverence aside, the old system either would not cope or it would be a very long service. Alternative of course, but some might not like this, instead of having just one lay person giving out the Host - you could have four or five lining up to take over from a rather tired priest.

PJD
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Locked Topic