Communion On The Hand

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='01 October 2009 - 01:05 AM' timestamp='1254355508' post='1975203']
I did read the letter. I also spoke to a priest of the diocese, who said that the bishop forbade him from distributing on the tongue. I didn't say anything about the bishop himself, only that he had no authority.
[/quote]


[quote name='StColette' date='01 October 2009 - 02:41 AM' timestamp='1254361286' post='1975311']
Did this take place at the same Church? It could be possible that one of the priests has misinterpreted this bishop's recommendation, it wouldn't be the first time two people have misinterpreted one another.
[/quote]
StColette beat me to it. It's possible that that priest misinterpreted what the bishop recommended, or that he is going beyond what the bishop recommended. For example, our Archbishop simply recommended that we not receive the Chalice, and receive on the hand (though the monks at the parish won't refuse to let someone receive on the tongue). I know of at least one parish, though, that has also removed the Holy Water, though the Archbishop did not put that in the recommendations, at least not the recommendations that I saw (I admit that I could have missed that). But the Benedictine parish still has Holy Water in their font.

Swine flu is a concern for me, since I'm pregnant and because there is a possible connection between getting the flu during the first half of pregnancy and the child later developing schizophrenia (there is a family member with schizophrenia). But personally I'm not sure receiving on the hand cuts down on the transmission of germs. Especially if I've just been holding the missalette, or getting something from my son, or whatever. But that's just my opinion.

[StColette]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='01 October 2009 - 12:09 AM' timestamp='1254370179' post='1975424']
the bishop recommended that the "measures be implemented"... in the Churches; he didn't just recommend that the faithful receive on the hand, but that all the churches implement measures to distribute only on the hand. This was outside the scope of his authority; or at least, is outside the scope of the pastors' authority, though this is clearly what he recommended the pastors to do: implement measures to only distribute on the hand. had he simply recommended that the faithful only present themselves for communion by the hand, it would have been acceptable as a mere recommendation; what he did here was clearly recommend that pastors only offer communion on the hand--something that according to the universal law of the Church, they may not do.
[/quote]

You try announcing to an entire diocese of Catholics, let alone just a parish of around 5,000 people that they should only receive in the hand. Most likely people aren't going to get the message or pay attention to the message. Working in a parish office you would be surprised by the fact that so many parishioners don't pay attention to simple instructions or information. Our PSR started over a month and a half ago, it was announced that registration was taking place for three weeks before then. It was announced at Mass and in the bulletin, but I still have people registering because they simply don't pay attention to announcements. So knowing how the fast majority of parishioners fail to pay attention to announcements or instructions, I don't see the problem with the priest implementing those measures, because most likely that's the only way it's going to be able to be implemented. Now, our priest made an announcement before Mass began explaining what was going on, but again majority of people probably didn't listen or weren't in their pews yet. They were informed but it doesn't mean they actually listened to it.

[Archaeology cat]

Hmm, it appears I was mistaken, and the Archbishop has said that parishes are required to not have Holy Water out. I've been meaning to get one for our home for a while now, and will have to get on that now.

Edited October 2, 2009 by Archaeology cat

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

[quote name='nunsense' date='30 September 2009 - 05:29 PM' timestamp='1254349770' post='1975133']
I am not saying that a person shouldn't ask for Communion on the tongue or that the Bishop shouldn't give it that way. All I am saying is that if it is between receiving on the tongue and not receiving at all (which some people seem to be choosing) then I don't understand it. Sometimes I feel we are a little spoiled in our "free" countries. I have read stories of oppressed people having to hide the host and/or the wine in the most amazing places and ways (a medicine bottle with eye dropper for the Precious Blood) just to be able to receive and/or to take Communion to others. They were so grateful just to receive Our Lord that they didn't fuss about the means/method they were forced to use or feel scruples about touching the Host with their hand (which is what is seems like to me if the only option is NOT to receive). Jesus will not be defiled simply because my impure hand touches Him - I am already unworthy to receive Him - on the tongue OR in the hand, but "only say the Word and I shall be healed".
[/quote]

For many people its not the fact that we feel unworthy to touch him with our hands. Its the fact that peices of the eucharist crumble off into your hands or get stuck to your sweaty palms and then the communicant just goes about his business as Our Lord is falling to the ground. Thats why the priest hold their two fingers together after they consecrate the bread into Christs body. After distribution they do the absolution, which rinses the pieces of Christs body off his fingers into the water where the species breaks down and is no longer Our Lord.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='StColette' date='30 September 2009 - 09:18 PM' timestamp='1254356325' post='1975223']
Well, when you're seven months pregnant and at a higher risk of death if you catch it then talk to me. I receive on the tongue each time I go to Mass, but when my Bishop asks me out of safety for myself and others to not receive that way for a short period of time, then I'm going to obey my Bishop. Now, as I stated during this time when we were asked not to receive on the tongue and I was holding my son, the priest didn't refuse to give me Communion when I had to receive on the tongue rather than trying to do a balancing act with my son and the Eucharist. I have yet to see any proof or instance of where someone was refused the Eucharist because they wished to receive on the tongue rather than in the hand.
[/quote]

Unfortunately that happened to me a few months ago, when the Bishop had given the recommendation of receiving in the hand etc. I went to receive from an EMHC and I had my hands folded behind my back (as a side note-- I find that easier to indicate that one is receiving on the tongue, especially if you are at a place where basically everyone receives in the hand and receiving from an EMHC). The man just held the Host and refused to give me Holy Communion. I politely whispered that I would prefer to receive on the tongue and he said 'no.' Instead of making a scene, I just received in the hand. I was tempted to speak to the pastor afterwards, but... I don't go to that church regularly.

I have to admit I was a little upset. Which was pathetic-- I just received our Lord of Lords and I was back in my pew all angry. I mean, it was frustrating, but... well, what are you going to do?

[StColette]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' date='02 October 2009 - 04:05 PM' timestamp='1254513930' post='1976372']
Unfortunately that happened to me a few months ago, when the Bishop had given the recommendation of receiving in the hand etc. I went to receive from an EMHC and I had my hands folded behind my back (as a side note-- I find that easier to indicate that one is receiving on the tongue, especially if you are at a place where basically everyone receives in the hand and receiving from an EMHC). The man just held the Host and refused to give me Holy Communion. I politely whispered that I would prefer to receive on the tongue and he said 'no.' Instead of making a scene, I just received in the hand. I was tempted to speak to the pastor afterwards, but... I don't go to that church regularly.

I have to admit I was a little upset. Which was pathetic-- I just received our Lord of Lords and I was back in my pew all angry. I mean, it was frustrating, but... well, what are you going to do?
[/quote]

Again it could have been a mis-communication. Our EMHCs were instructed to give Communion in the Hand only but if someone wished to receive on the tongue then you weren't to make a scene and you were to let them receive that way. Many people often misinterpret the words of the priests and thus things like the above situation you went through happen. A priest could say "recommend" and some people would interpret that as "required". lol Working in a Church office has taught me that you must be very very very precise with your instructions if not things like the above can happen.

[Apotheoun]

If the bishop is really serious about preventing the spread of swine flu he should simply cancel all liturgical worship in his eparchy.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='02 October 2009 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1254514996' post='1976380']
If the bishop is really serious about preventing the spread of swine flu he should simply cancel all liturgical worship in his eparchy.
[/quote]

kinda my thought, too. i really don't think receiving on the hand or on the tongue will make any difference at all. People are freaking out over nothing (the death rate of the normal strain of the flu virus is higher than that of the h1n1), and it is affecting worship. Not good. (of course the bishops could use this opportunity to reiterate that no more grace is received when the communicant receives under both species, thus it is only a fuller SIGN, not a fuller grace, which is received...)

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='02 October 2009 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1254514996' post='1976380']
If the bishop is really serious about preventing the spread of swine flu he should simply cancel all liturgical worship in his eparchy.
[/quote]

I agree, it is rather ridiculous. My parish discourages shaking hands during the sign of peace. But everyone is still breathing on everyone, especially if Mass is crowded. And how many people touched the missal I pick up every Mass?? Or had their hands on the pew?? Seriously.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='02 October 2009 - 03:23 PM' timestamp='1254514996' post='1976380']
If the bishop is really serious about preventing the spread of swine flu he should simply cancel all liturgical worship in his eparchy.
[/quote]

Especially since H1N1 is airborne.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='02 October 2009 - 02:49 PM' timestamp='1254516582' post='1976397']
I agree, it is rather ridiculous. My parish discourages shaking hands during the sign of peace. But everyone is still breathing on everyone, especially if Mass is crowded. And how many people touched the missal I pick up every Mass?? Or had their hands on the pew?? Seriously.
[/quote]
Placing communion in the hand is not very sanitary either, because the priest will still be touching hundreds of hands and spreading whatever germs are on them from person to person. Unless the priest intends to toss the host to each communicant.

[sacredheartandbloodofjesus]

I have a question for Apo in the tattoo thread...

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='TeresaBenedicta' date='02 October 2009 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1254513930' post='1976372']
Unfortunately that happened to me a few months ago, when the Bishop had given the recommendation of receiving in the hand etc. I went to receive from an EMHC and I had my hands folded behind my back (as a side note-- I find that easier to indicate that one is receiving on the tongue, especially if you are at a place where basically everyone receives in the hand and receiving from an EMHC). The man just held the Host and refused to give me Holy Communion. I politely whispered that I would prefer to receive on the tongue and he said 'no.' Instead of making a scene, I just received in the hand. I was tempted to speak to the pastor afterwards, but... I don't go to that church regularly.

I have to admit I was a little upset. Which was pathetic-- I just received our Lord of Lords and I was back in my pew all angry. I mean, it was frustrating, but... well, what are you going to do?
[/quote]
I try to make sure I go to the priest and not an EMHC because I know many of the EMHCs aren't as comfortable with distributing the
Eucharist on the tongue. And so that my son can receive a blessing, since an EMHC can't do that.

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='02 October 2009 - 09:59 PM' timestamp='1254517152' post='1976406']
Placing communion in the hand is not very sanitary either, because the priest will still be touching hundreds of hands and spreading whatever germs are on them from person to person. Unless the priest intends to toss the host to each communicant.
[/quote]
Yes, my thought exactly. Especially since each person receiving has been touching the missalette and the pew, and the kneeler, and whatever else.

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' date='03 October 2009 - 05:21 AM' timestamp='1254558076' post='1976655']
I try to make sure I go to the priest and not an EMHC because I know many of the EMHCs aren't as comfortable with distributing the
Eucharist on the tongue. And so that my son can receive a blessing, since an EMHC can't do that.
[/quote]

Yeah, in general I do that as well-- especially at new places (my home parish, for instance, almost everyone receives on the tongue so the EMHC's are very skilled at it). For whatever reason I think it was going to be awkward to try for that in my scenario.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Just skimming the forum and saw this. I receive on the tongue, but I also work in a school. Three kids in my homeroom of 20 students have H1N1. Another has mono. If my boss or priest asks me to receive in the hand to reduce the risk of passing on germs, I'll do it. Yes, the Church gives us the right to receive on the tongue, no a bishop can't really effectively tell us not to, but they can request, and they have good reason to.

There are ways to distribute Communion in the hand without touching the hands of the communicant or tossing the Eucharist, so that doesn't have to be a concern for germs.

As for anyone who wouldn't receive the Lord of the universe because they couldn't receive Him the way they wanted to and had to receive Him a different although perfectly licit way, that's just asinine, even if you don't agree with the reason for the request. If Jesus comes to your home and knocks on your back door, are you going to tell Him you won't let Him in unless He comes around to the front and keeps off the grass? Jesus wants to be with you, but you won't have Him. Jesus calls you, but you have your own plans: "Let the dead bury their dead" (Matt 8:22).