Receiving Jesus In The Hand...not A Good Idea

[Socrates]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='19 April 2010 - 08:57 PM' timestamp='1271725048' post='2096495']
You have just described my parish exactly. We have a retired priest in our parish who doesn't distribute because his hands shake, but every little old lady with shaky hands does.
[/quote]
lol - one reason I'm happy to belong to a FSSP "Trad" parish (officially became a parish last week!).

[Mark of the Cross]

Getting people to change from what they are used to, is extremely difficult. We have been told several times that we should bow before taking the Host. This is fairly recent and I don't know where the directive has originated from. Apart from observing one gent genuflect, I seem to be the only one who is obedient. Even as an extraO Minister others seem reluctant to follow my lead. Is this sort of thing common or are all our congregation peculiar not just me.

[quote name='Socrates' date='20 April 2010 - 11:54 AM' timestamp='1271721249' post='2096467']
I'm also against the common practice of unnecessary EMCHs. These are supposed to be [i]Extraordinary[/i] ministers of the Holy Eucharist, which means they are to be used in extraordinary circumstances, in which the priest or deacon is unable to deliver the Holy Eucharist (such as to infirm parishioners in remote locations). They [i]aren't[/i] supposed to be the [i]norm[/i].

But now in most places every "church lady" seems to think handling and distributing the Blessed Sacrament is her birthright, and in moderately-sized parishes at every mass there is a whole army of "extraordinary ministers" to distribute communion. I think this also contributes to a loss of the sense of the sacred about the Sacrament.
[/quote]
You must be fortunate to have plenty of Priests. I agree it's not a good thing, some EMs seem to be more aware of themselves than what they are doing and I can say from experience that training is poor. I had to learn by asking questions and making mistakes.
In our parish we're lucky to have one retired priest hold Mass. Every day is an extraordinary day and also the norm. When the aging Priests start to fall over, we are going to be in an even worse situation. Unless they start putting priests on those illegal boats from Shri Lanka and Afghanistan we could end up with lay people conducting the Mass. We have one lovely priest from Nigeria, its unfortunate that we cannot understand his Homily but his smiles get the message across.

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' date='20 April 2010 - 12:12 PM' timestamp='1271722370' post='2096482']
While I agree with you, it's important to note that [i]extraordinary[/i] is not meant to refer to circumstances, but rather to distinguish one from the ordinary minister of Holy Communion.
[/quote]

That's the way I understood it. Extraordinary is probably not a good description, it has the ring of being above ordinary rather than beneath it.

Edited April 20, 2010 by Mark of the Cross

[Socrates]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' date='19 April 2010 - 09:32 PM' timestamp='1271727172' post='2096511']
Getting people to change from what they are used to, is extremely difficult. We have been told several times that we should bow before taking the Host. This is fairly recent and I don't know where the directive has originated from. Apart from observing one gent genuflect, I seem to be the only one who is obedient. Even as an extraO Minister others seem reluctant to follow my lead. Is this sort of thing common or are all our congregation peculiar not just me. [/quote]
It used to be, [i]kneeling[/i] was the norm, and that was what people were used to. After Vatican II, a lot of changes (most of them unauthorized, and invalid) were made.
So I think saying that it is impossible to return to old liturgical practices because people aren't used to them isn't a good argument. There will always be some resistance, but that doesn't mean that priests and laymen shouldn't try to do the right thing liturgically.

[quote]You must be fortunate to have plenty of Priests. I agree it's not a good thing, some EMs seem to be more aware of themselves than what they are doing and I can say from experience that training is poor. I had to learn by asking questions and making mistakes.
In our parish we're lucky to have one retired priest hold Mass. Every day is an extraordinary day and also the norm. When the aging Priests start to fall over, we are going to be in an even worse situation. Unless they start putting priests on those illegal boats from Shri Lanka and Afghanistan we could end up with lay people conducting the Mass. We have one lovely priest from Nigeria, its unfortunate that we cannot understand his Homily but his smiles get the message across.[/quote]
Actually, we have a total of two priests (and until a few weeks ago, had only one). Granted, we're a small parish, but that doesn't invalidate what I've said. The parish of my soon-to-be in-laws is not a whole lot bigger, yet they have four EMs. It really isn't more efficient, either, since two of them distribute the Precious Blood, so two are used for one communicant. My former parish, while more "traditional" had a similar situation. A traditionally-minded pastor tried to cut back on the EMs, but the church ladies got angry that they were losing their jobs, and raised a stink, so they ended up staying.
In both cases, EMs were not truly necessary.
Sure, they save a little bit a time (probably 10 minutes at most is saved), but the point of the mass isn't cafeteria-line efficiency, and getting everyone in and out of the pews in as quick a time possible. Our priorities are skewed.
Originally, the idea was that the Body and Blood or Our Lord are so sacred that only the hands of a priest, or a least an ordained deacon, can handle them. Today, the job's open to anyone who wants it.
Is this lack of reverence really worth making the mass a few minutes shorter?
(And if making the mass shorter is our chief concern, our priorities are in the wrong place.)

[Semper Catholic]

Germs yo. Germs.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Semper Catholic' date='19 April 2010 - 10:11 PM' timestamp='1271733119' post='2096541']
Germs yo. Germs.
[/quote]

Avoiding germs should be less of a priority than reverence to our Lord.

[Maximilianus]

I don't buy the germ argument, there are plenty of germs passed around during the Sign of Peace.

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

[quote name='Maximilianus' date='19 April 2010 - 11:22 PM' timestamp='1271737322' post='2096575']
I don't buy the germ argument, there are plenty of germs passed around during the Sign of Peace.


[/quote]

That's one reason I'm not wild about the sign of peace.

[Slappo]

Even though I have a theology degree and a better understanding (at least bookwise, not necessarily in spiritual practice) of the Eucharist than most in my parish, I refuse to be an EMOHC for the sole purpose that I do not see a need for them in my parish.

We won't have any at my wedding even though there will probably be around three hundred in attendance. We will have two priests though .

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Socrates' date='20 April 2010 - 12:46 AM' timestamp='1271720816' post='2096460']
It's not necessarily contemptuous or judgmental of others to work to see that the Church's norms are restored in practice.

While it seems it's become un-pc to say so, some physical aspects of worship (such as kneeling and receiving on the tongue) are more reflective of and conducive to reverence than others. If the Blessed Eucharist is handled just like any old snack, it's no wonder that belief in the Real Presence is so low.

It seems many don't receive on the tongue because in many places this is no longer even treated as an option. When receiving in less "conservative" parishes, the priest (or if unavoidable, the "Eucharistic Minister") seems confused when I put out my tongue.
[/quote]
I do agree with you, just that I'm not as well-versed in this, and so I'm sometimes afraid of going a bit too far with it. Thank you. Oh, and yes, EMHCs can sometimes seem a little perplexed that I don't have my hands out to receive, though I try to receive from the priest whenever possible.

[quote name='Socrates' date='20 April 2010 - 12:54 AM' timestamp='1271721249' post='2096467']
I'm also against the common practice of unnecessary EMCHs. These are supposed to be [i]Extraordinary[/i] ministers of the Holy Eucharist, which means they are to be used in extraordinary circumstances, in which the priest or deacon is unable to deliver the Holy Eucharist (such as to infirm parishioners in remote locations). They [i]aren't[/i] supposed to be the [i]norm[/i].

But now in most places every "church lady" seems to think handling and distributing the Blessed Sacrament is her birthright, and in moderately-sized parishes at every mass there is a whole army of "extraordinary ministers" to distribute communion. I think this also contributes to a loss of the sense of the sacred about the Sacrament.
[/quote]
I would agree.

[quote name='Socrates' date='20 April 2010 - 02:27 AM' timestamp='1271726833' post='2096509']
lol - one reason I'm happy to belong to a FSSP "Trad" parish (officially became a parish last week!).
[/quote]
I might be jealous.

[quote name='Semper Catholic' date='20 April 2010 - 04:11 AM' timestamp='1271733119' post='2096541']
Germs yo. Germs.
[/quote]
There are jyust as many germs when receiving on the hand. It's very rare for a priest to touch my tongue; one time that I can remember that happening is because I'm taller than that priest and I didn't stoop down enough. Think I'll just start kneeling now that I am regaining my balance (the huge baby bump threw off my balance).

[quote name='Maximilianus' date='20 April 2010 - 05:22 AM' timestamp='1271737322' post='2096575']
I don't buy the germ argument, there are plenty of germs passed around during the Sign of Peace.
[/quote]
That, too.

[jeffpugh]

I just wanna say that for the sign of peace (if I go to an OF that does it), I usually just respectfully grunt in whoever's direction. It's not social hour. Listen, folks, the point of this desire to reform is to iron out the little acts of self-rightiousness and self-worship in our outward actions. Sign of peace is one. It becomes everyone's "right" to get all chummy with others around. It appears to be our "right" to have laity handle the hosts/chalices. The focus is all "me, me me". I'm all for there being a "ban" or whatever. I also understand certain cases like CatM requires people not to. But most of all, priests have to say something to their flocks. Otherwise, our whining is all for naught.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='20 April 2010 - 06:10 AM' timestamp='1271740245' post='2096594']
I just wanna say that for the sign of peace (if I go to an OF that does it), I usually just respectfully grunt in whoever's direction. It's not social hour. Listen, folks, the point of this desire to reform is to iron out the little acts of self-rightiousness and self-worship in our outward actions. Sign of peace is one. It becomes everyone's "right" to get all chummy with others around. It appears to be our "right" to have laity handle the hosts/chalices. The focus is all "me, me me". I'm all for there being a "ban" or whatever. I also understand certain cases like CatM requires people not to. But most of all, priests have to say something to their flocks. Otherwise, our whining is all for naught.
[/quote]

[Marie-Therese]

[quote name='Semper Catholic' date='19 April 2010 - 11:11 PM' timestamp='1271733119' post='2096541']
Germs yo. Germs.
[/quote]

I receive on the tongue out of reverence, simply because there is no way I could put my hands on the Lord and feel OK about it. I also receive the Blood at my parish, since we are pretty small and always offer both species.

I guess I am delusional, but I don't believe that the Body and Blood of Jesus would make me sick. I have a hard time conceiving that Jesus, in His Infinite Mercy, would permit sickness to be communicated to those who partook in His Supper. I may be naive, but that is why I, a nurse and total germophobe, can readily receive the Blood from a common chalice without even a second thought.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='20 April 2010 - 06:24 AM' timestamp='1271741074' post='2096604']
I receive on the tongue out of reverence, simply because there is no way I could put my hands on the Lord and feel OK about it. I also receive the Blood at my parish, since we are pretty small and always offer both species.

I guess I am delusional, but I don't believe that the Body and Blood of Jesus would make me sick. I have a hard time conceiving that Jesus, in His Infinite Mercy, would permit sickness to be communicated to those who partook in His Supper. I may be naive, but that is why I, a nurse and total germophobe, can readily receive the Blood from a common chalice without even a second thought.
[/quote]
Especially since the Eucharist is also a source of great healing, It is Viaticum.

[Slappo]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='19 April 2010 - 10:24 PM' timestamp='1271741074' post='2096604']
I receive on the tongue out of reverence, simply because there is no way I could put my hands on the Lord and feel OK about it. I also receive the Blood at my parish, since we are pretty small and always offer both species.

I guess I am delusional, but I don't believe that the Body and Blood of Jesus would make me sick. I have a hard time conceiving that Jesus, in His Infinite Mercy, would permit sickness to be communicated to those who partook in His Supper. I may be naive, but that is why I, a nurse and total germophobe, can readily receive the Blood from a common chalice without even a second thought.
[/quote]

Any physical ailments I may receive through communion are more than made up for by the spiritual healing received.

Maybe the physical ailment is my way to spiritual purification and perfection .


I don't receive from the Chalice as I see no need for an EHMC to be distributing it. Maybe if no one received the Precious Blood they would cut back on our EHMC army.


I think the best way to distribute both species is through intinction. This does not require a second minister and hardly slows down the process of distribution. If I were a pastor and my flock called for distribution of the Precious Blood I would do it via intinction. (Edit: Ideally... )

Edited April 20, 2010 by Slappo

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' date='19 April 2010 - 06:12 PM' timestamp='1271722370' post='2096482']
While I agree with you, it's important to note that [i]extraordinary[/i] is not meant to refer to circumstances, but rather to distinguish one from the ordinary minister of Holy Communion.
[/quote]
Actually the name "Extraordinary Minister" refers precisely to circumstances that are out of the ordinary in which a member of the lay faithful is temporarily deputed to distribute communion and this was made clear in the instruction [i]Ecclesiae de Mysterio[/i] (article 8, § 2). That said, the habitual use of Extraordinary Ministers is a liturgical abuse, and as such it should be avoided.