Is Receiving The Body Of Christ In The Hand A Liturgical Abuse?

[HopefulBride]

[quote name='rkwright' timestamp='1295323784' post='2201242']
Interesting comments. But its hard to see where you're actually coming down on this - so liturgical abuse or not?
[/quote]

Are you asking for our opinions or what we know to be facts?

My opinion is I prefer to receive on the tongue that is how I was taught and that is what I prefer. I am not at all comfortable (myself) receiving in the hand.

So to answer whether or not I think it is abuse, I can't say because it depends. I look at what people do with the Eucharist and their demeanor as they receive rather than the manner in which they receive.

Edited January 18, 2011 by HopefulBride

[infinitelord1]

I was taught to receive it in my hand in my First Communion. Ive never done it any other way.

Edited January 21, 2011 by infinitelord1

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='infinitelord1' timestamp='1295589622' post='2202470']
I was taught to receive it in my hand in my First Communion. Ive never done it any other way.
[/quote]

As was I, but I think it's much more reverent to receive on the tongue, so I started doing that and yeah . . . good story rite?

I don't know if it's an abuse but it seems to perpetuate carelessness/irreverence so that's where I stand.

[Tally Marx]

Well, my bishop allows it, so I cannot say that it is wrong/a sin to receive in the hand. It is how I was taught to receive Him.
However, receiving Jesus on the tongue is the traditional way, and the preferred way. This is how I receive Him now. There are several reasons I switched.

1) If He is in my hand, little particles of Him might stick to my hand. And I don't want to be responsible for dropping any of Him.
2) Being able to hold Jesus is just something I think should be reserved for priests, because they consecrate the host and are ordained. They are marked and set aside to do just that. I'm not. No, I do not have some great theological argument to support this opinion. It's just my opinion.
3) Yes, I [i]can [/i]receive in the hand. But I also [i]can [/i]get away this receiving Jesus only during Easter, and going to confession only once a year. The point: I don't do what I [i]can[/i] just because it's permissible. I like to do the best I can. And doing what the Church [i]rathers[/i] (as opposed to what the Church merely [i]allows[/i]) typically means doing the best possible.

[sixpence]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1295326339' post='2201271']
It is also my personal belief (and constant prayer) that the indult allowing communion in the hand will be removed within the next five to ten years, Assuming we keep moving in the direction we've seen over the last few years.
[/quote]

that would be awesome

[fides' Jack]

[quote name='sixpence' timestamp='1295631794' post='2202536']
that would be awesome
[/quote]

Agreed.

[kafka]

[quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1295325433' post='2201261']
Cardinal Bernardin played a pivotal role in manipulating the American bishops into promoting Communion in the hand. As Our Lady’s warned on July 15, 1978:

"Again and again I wander to and fro directing My children to remain close to the Eucharist, the Bread of life. But do not become misguided: Do not accept My Son's Body in your hands. Satan, Lucifer, came as an angel of light and set his agents among the hierarchy of My Son's Church and deluded them. All manner of abominations are being committed upon My Son's Body now." - Our Lady, July 15, 1978

[/quote]
I'm curious which apparition this quote is taken from?

my opinion is that it is not a liturgical abuse. Nor is the mode of reception of Communion a matter of doctrine or dogma. It is a discipline, so the Church can permit one or the other from time to time or place to place.

The more important aspect of receiving Communion is interior reverence of the heart and mind. An exterior reverent practice or discipline may or may not assist reverence depending on the person. The Pharisees practiced many exterior disciplines and they were white-washed sepulchres, interiorly irreverant toward God and the things of God.

Finally we are permitted to consume the Host. This is much more intimate and thorough than touching the Host on the tongue or the hand (both are forms of touching). So no it isnt a liturgical abuse.

So it may be changed back in the near future but the more important aspect always remains: Interior reverence, cooperation with grace, living a moral life, acceptance of all teachings of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium, and so on.

Edited January 21, 2011 by kafka

[Nihil Obstat]

I don't believe that Communion in the Hand is conducive towards reverence for Christ in our current culture.

[kafka]

Reverance for Christ proceeds from the soul. So for a person who is interiorly reverent, a bow and reception in the hand can be a sufficient exterior expression or reverence before consuming regardless of culture.

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1295643249' post='2202632']
Reverence for Christ proceeds from the soul. So for a person who is internally reverent, a bow and reception in the hand can be a sufficient exterior expression or reverence before consuming regardless of culture.
[/quote]

True.

[MIKolbe]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1295642104' post='2202625']
I don't believe that Communion in the Hand is conducive towards reverence for Christ in our current culture.
[/quote]
just as a point of clarification, are you proposing or implying a causal relationship between receiving 'in the hand' and irreverence for Christ in our current culture? If so, clarify which causes which. If not, I totally misread you, my bad.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='kafka' timestamp='1295643249' post='2202632']
Reverance for Christ proceeds from the soul. So for a person who is interiorly reverent, a bow and reception in the hand can be a sufficient exterior expression or reverence before consuming regardless of culture.
[/quote]


[quote name='MIkolbe' timestamp='1295645694' post='2202649']
just as a point of clarification, are you proposing or implying a causal relationship between receiving 'in the hand' and irreverence for Christ in our current culture? If so, clarify which causes which. If not, I totally misread you, my bad.
[/quote]
I don't want to say right out that Communion in the hand *causes* irreverence, but I think it's one facet of an entire generation that is tending towards irreverence. I'm sure there are a few root causes. In a way, maybe it's the swinging of the pendulum. I don't really feel the need to speculate on that. So it's one symptom, if you will, and one which is aggravating the problem itself in my view. Goes hand in hand with a lot of other symptoms, all of which (or at least most of which) aggravate the problem.
On the flipside, I do think Communion on the tongue can in a certain sense 'cause' greater reverence, in that it can shock the person into further reflection, and in the sense that it forces you into an exterior show of submission before God. Lex Orandi Lex Credendi, right?
For me personally, I had received on the hand my entire life, because that's how I was taught. I decided to change that because of the intellectual arguments, and when I knelt at the Communion rail at my first Mass in the Extraordinary Form, I was shaking and completely overcome with (in a Christian sense) a fear of the Lord. For me, the exterior action reminded me and brought me to a far clearer understanding of the enormity of the Eucharist and the reverence due Him.

[Laudate_Dominum]

The quarterly CotH thread! Woot!@

[MIKolbe]

i think you mean CitH...

sheesh...

AT AT

[Laudate_Dominum]

Wrong thread. lol.

Edited January 21, 2011 by Laudate_Dominum