Why Is Communion In The Hand Still Allowed?

[Hubertus]

[quote name='Lil Red' timestamp='1343680607' post='2460369']
i wasn't saying it shouldn't be discussed, but the statement that we've never considered it needed to be shot down. (and i'm pretty sure that one of the past threads involved at least the first video in the OP.)
[/quote] Oh, alrighty!

[Hubertus]

It's true, the Church does allow Communion in the hand. And we should not tell one that they cannot receive in the hand. However, we may still encourage others to receive on the tongue if/when possible, strictly for their benefit, as we believe it to be the better option. It is possible that, while both options are allowed, one might still be better.

I used to receive in the hand all the time. It was what everyone did at my college parish, and I had asked the priest specifically which he preferred that people did, and he said receive in the hand, so that's what I went with.

But one day I happened to look down at my hand after taking Communion, and noticed two particles left in my hand. I had to lick my hand to consume them.

After that, I continued to receive in the hand, but each time after I received I checked my hand, and each time I noticed particles left over. This happened week after week, until I finally got tired of having to lick my hand, or lick my finger and touch my hand, (I never saw anyone else licking their hand and I didn't want to look like a freak) and began receiving on the tongue instead.

Then I was made aware of this video, by the same guy our friend beaverman linked to in his original post:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiUqDa_Gzj0&feature=plcp[/media]

And it only affirmed what I had been observing. But not only that, through the viewing of his other material (I'm not sure if it's on this video or not), I also learned that Communion in the hand became a practice in America even before it was allowed - it was allowed after the fact, and even then only if the faithful would cleanse their hands before and after, and be completely sure that all particles had been consumed.

So I really do think that Communion on the tongue is the better option, by far. The Church may allow Communion in the hand (and I do receive this way when there is a risk of the Eucharist falling, such as an elderly person with a shaking condition (did I mention how nice it would be to have the Communion-plates back?)), but it is still such a hassle that I'd much rather go the other route.

Also, the Church's allowance of this practice might be reversed at any time. Pope Benedict XVI seems to prefer administering Communion to the faithful on the tongue and at a Communion rail at his Masses.

[Annie12]

My pastor once gave a sermon about this subject. He said that while receiving in the hand is allowed by the church, God finds it extra pleasing to receive on the tongue. He said this is because a person has to have a certain amount of piety and humility to receive on the tongue and God takes notice.

[Amory]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1343660638' post='2460219']
Jesus put his body into the hands of the Apostles at the last supper. They weren't kneeling, they were probably reclining while eating.
[/quote]

I don't think there's any evidence that Christ put His Body into the apostles' hands. It's just as possible that He could have placed it directly on their tongues.

Also, while they were probably reclining while eating the rest of the meal, there's no reason they couldn't have stood or even knelt when Christ gave them His Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

[cmaD2006]

I receive on the tongue while kneeling 90% of the time.

The exceptions are:
a) when I am receiving within a group of people (ex: group of choir or music ministry members) where it is impractical to move from where I'm at and that there is a risk of the Host falling. I then take on the hand.
b) neocatecumenal Masses ... those who have attended would automatically understand why receiving on the tongue is impractical. I do have to be extra careful about particles, and all in attendance are very careful.
c) when I am at a parish where I don't know the priest ... at those parishes I tend to receive on the tongue but not kneel. I know that at the Lector/EMHC training the person doing the training spoke very negatively about those who kneel to receive. I just shut up (because I was only there to get the lector certificate so that I can organize our lectors in the spanish community; I've been a lector since 1995). It was also obvious that although the person was trying to be liturgically correct, she was quite liberal.

Having said this ... I agree with those who said "the Church allows it." If the Church allows it, then so be it. And ... it is important to know what the Church documents says.

There is a document (I have to look it up) that clarifies the kneeling aspect of communion. By no means is it NOT allowed. I choose not to make a big stink about it if I am visiting a parish, but if I was at my home parish I would.

The blessing is that at my home parish, there are a good number of parishioners who will kneel at receiving communion. I would say that the count is somewhere about 20%. And the large majority receive on the tongue (probably 80%) ... probably because in the home countries (I am at a spanish community) the norm is to receive on the tongue.

Edited July 30, 2012 by cmariadiaz

[Amory]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1343660500' post='2460218']
Because the Church allows it.
[/quote]

In some places.

And, of course, it was universally disallowed before--at least in the Roman rite--and could easily disallowed again.

[cmaD2006]

[quote name='Amory' timestamp='1343686794' post='2460405']
I don't think there's any evidence that Christ put His Body into the apostles' hands. It's just as possible that He could have placed it directly on their tongues.

Also, while they were probably reclining while eating the rest of the meal, there's no reason they couldn't have stood or even knelt when Christ gave them His Body and Blood in the Eucharist.
[/quote]

Unluckily there is no direct evidence that the Apostles DID kneel or stand at the moment of communion. I guess we will find out for sure when we are at last in His presence.

[Amory]

[quote name='cmariadiaz' timestamp='1343687007' post='2460409']
Unluckily there is no direct evidence that the Apostles DID kneel or stand at the moment of communion. I guess we will find out for sure when we are at last in His presence.
[/quote]

There's no evidence--direct or otherwise--either way. Thus, I don't think we should assume that the apostles' received in the hand nor that they received on the tongue. I was simply pointing out that the one is as possible as the other.

[Amory]

[quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1343679523' post='2460360']
Reverence is in the heart, not on the hand or the tongue.[/quote]

Of course, but we are not disembodied spirits. Man's body and soul exist in intimate union. Our external actions influence (and reflect) our internal disposition. There's also the pedagogical element: external gestures of reverence toward the Eucharist can help children and those new to the faith better to understand what the Sacrament is and how to relate to it. Although receiving in the hand isn't wrong--it is permitted by the Church in some places, after all--perhaps receiving on the tongue possesses some distinct advantages.

Edited July 30, 2012 by Amory

[MissyP89]

[quote name='cmariadiaz' timestamp='1343686832' post='2460406']
I know that at the Lector/EMHC training the person doing the training spoke very negatively about those who kneel to receive. I just shut up (because I was only there to get the lector certificate so that I can organize our lectors in the spanish community; I've been a lector since 1995).[/quote]

Was this in the diocese? Ughhhh people are ridiculous.

[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1343677907' post='2460336']
Why are brothers and sisters in the Church so anxious to play dime store Tertullian and hope or wish to restrict, condemn, berate, or play the 'how holy are you, really?" game with their brethren on an issue the Church permits?

[b]Let us be generous to one another where Mother Church is generous to us.[/b]
[/quote]

Amen and alleluia. You're the best.

Too, I wonder ... why do we waste our breath and energy on debates like this? The world is too divided and too in need of Jesus for us to draw lines among ourselves.

[Hubertus]

[quote name='MissyP89' timestamp='1343687923' post='2460418']
Too, I wonder ... why do we waste our breath and energy on debates like this? The world is too divided and too in need of Jesus for us to draw lines among ourselves.
[/quote] Isn't discussion profitable, though? I agree that it need not be a heated debate, and I usually put lots of effort into making sure my posts aren't "heated", but a calmer discussion can benefit all parties involved because it allows us to understand each other's viewpoints better. In other words, discussion is the method by which we get rid of any lines which we might have drawn among ourselves.

I know when I say that I think receiving Communion on the tongue is better, I don't intend to condemn, berate, or judge anyone who receives on the hand, but to explain to them my view and possibly persuade them to it.

[Amory]

[quote name='MissyP89' timestamp='1343687923' post='2460418']
Too, I wonder ... why do we waste our breath and energy on debates like this? The world is too divided and too in need of Jesus for us to draw lines among ourselves.
[/quote]

I think everyone here wants what is best for the Church. Although it is the pastors of the Church--the pope and bishops--who are responsible for making the decisions about what is (dis)allowed, they often make their decisions on the basis of reasoning that first originated among the laity. As long as the laity are in agreement with the Church's fundamental doctrines and are submissive to their pastors, there's nothing wrong with their expressing arguments why one ecclesiastical policy may be preferable to another.

Edited July 30, 2012 by Amory

[Skinzo]

Paul Kokoski has written an excellent historical summary on the practice which notes that two popes have expressed a preference that Holy Communion be distributed on the tongue and we must also remember Rome only granted permission to receive in the hand reluctantly. Communion in the hand started out as a liturgical abuse which was fairly common in the USA and other places before it was actually allowed.
[url="http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8616"]http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8616[/url]

S.

[cmotherofpirl]

I don't see the Church deciding to change something just because the laity goes ahead and does it without permission.

[Spem in alium]

A few people at my church receive Communion on the tongue, though most take it on the hand.
The Eucharist is the greatest gift. We are so lucky to receive it. It deserves the greatest reverence, but I don't think it is shown such reverence when people criticise others or question the Church on its teachings. True reverence comes through respect, piety and humility. A person who receives Communion on the hand can show great reverence - and perhaps even more reverence than a person who takes it on the tongue.

I would love to be able to take Communion on the tongue, however, for medical reasons I feel it's easier for the Priest/EMHC and myself if I take it on the hand. It's the only way I can see myself receiving Christ's Body without causing difficulty for others or for myself, so to hear arguments against the reception of Communion on the hand is quite saddening for me.