Holy Communion in the hand or on the tongue ?

[Gabriela]

1 hour ago, <3 PopeFrancis said:

I believe this strongly because He is Our Lord and He will not harm us.

In a serious flu (or other) epidemic, the bishops commonly suspend the distribution of the Precious Blood, because they know that viruses and bacteria can spread even through that. You must remember that He is present under the species of material wine, which can carry bad stuff. It's not a lack of faith to abstain from receiving the Precious Blood because you're worried about getting sick.

2 minutes ago, LittleWaySoul said:

Wait I don't get it.

5

4

3

2

1

BOOM!!!!!

[LittleWaySoul]

1 minute ago, Gabriela said:

In a serious flu (or other) epidemic, the bishops commonly suspend the distribution of the Precious Blood, because they know that viruses and bacteria can spread even through that. You must remember that He is present under the species of material wine, which can carry bad stuff. It's not a lack of faith to abstain from receiving the Precious Blood because you're worried about getting sick.

This.

Quote

5

4

3

2

1

BOOM!!!!!

That was my first thought, but I still don't get how it relates to the topic? Maybe I'm thinking too abstractly about it, hah.

[CatherineM]

1 hour ago, LittleWaySoul said:

This.

That was my first thought, but I still don't get how it relates to the topic? Maybe I'm thinking too abstractly about it, hah.

Some of our biggest Phatmass fights have been on this topic. 

[Peace]

9 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

In the Latin Rite the universal law of the Church asks the faithful to receive communion on the tongue while kneeling.  An indult (that began as an act of mercy) in the Latin Rite allows the faithful to receive on the hand while standing. We are free to choose from what the Church asks and what she allows.

Interesting. This reasoning would seem to dictate that one should prefer the OF over the EF because the EF is also allowed under an indult.

9 hours ago, KnightofChrist said:

Also, communion on the hand today is not practiced in the same manner as it was in the time of Christ or early Church. In those days after first washing their hands the faithful would receive the Blessed Sacrament on right hand, not the left, they would then bow their heads and pick up the Host with their tongues.

I am not so sure about that.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202093.htm

Quote

It is good and beneficial to communicate every day, and to partake of the holy body and blood of Christ. For He distinctly says, He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life. John 6:54 And who doubts that to share frequently in life, is the same thing as to have manifold life. I, indeed, communicate four times a week, on the Lord's day, on Wednesday, on Friday, and on the Sabbath, and on the other days if there is a commemoration of any Saint. It is needless to point out that for anyone in times of persecution to be compelled to take the communion in his own hand without the presence of a priest or minister is not a serious offense, as long custom sanctions this practice from the facts themselves. All the solitaries in the desert, where there is no priest, take the communion themselves, keeping communion at home. And at Alexandria and in Egypt, each one of the laity, for the most part, keeps the communion, at his own house, and participates in it when he likes. For when once the priest has completed the offering, and given it, the recipient, participating in it each time as entire, is bound to believe that he properly takes and receives it from the giver. And even in the church, when the priest gives the portion, the recipient takes it with complete power over it, and so lifts it to his lips with his own hand. It has the same validity whether one portion or several portions are received from the priest at the same time.

The document indicates that in the church communion was received in the hand, and lifted up by the hand to the mouth. It does not say anything about bowing one’s head and picking up the host with one's tongue. This may have happened in some places, but at least from the above it does not appear to have been a universal practice.

[truthfinder]

31 minutes ago, Peace said:

Interesting. This reasoning would seem to dictate that one should prefer the OF over the EF because the EF is also allowed under an indult.

 

The EF is no longer under an indult. It has force of law through Summorum Pontificum. 

[Nihil Obstat]

I believe that the Church should remove permission for Communion in the hand and for reception while standing for Latin rite Catholics in general circumstances.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Nihil Obstat

[Guest]

B O O M !!!

 

[Nihil Obstat]

That is rude.

[LittleWaySoul]

6 hours ago, BarbaraTherese said:

B O O M !!!

 

[dominicansoul]

Kneeling, women veiled, sorrow in the heart for one's sins, free of mortal sin in the soul, thoughts lifted up to the Greatest Gift we could ever receive as unworthy and wretched as we are, all receive on the tongue.  

 

If this were the norm, I think we would change the world...

[KnightofChrist]

13 hours ago, Peace said:

Interesting. This reasoning would seem to dictate that one should prefer the OF over the EF because the EF is also allowed under an indult.

I don't care to debate. Summorum Pontificum made clear that the EF is not an "indult" Mass, that the EF was never abrogated, the faithful have a right to attended the EF, that priests do not need permission from bishops to offer the EF, and is the same Mass as the OF but a different form of the same Mass. So what Truthfinder stated.

13 hours ago, Peace said:

I am not so sure about that.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202093.htm

The document indicates that in the church communion was received in the hand, and lifted up by the hand to the mouth. It does not say anything about bowing one’s head and picking up the host with one's tongue. This may have happened in some places, but at least from the above it does not appear to have been a universal practice.

Again, I don't care to debate. What you've provided doesn't contradict what I've stated. It is natural and often required to bow one's head to eat out of one's hand. It also doesn't say that the faithful are to touch the Host with their fingers. Here are a number of sources in different media forms of the points I made. If you care to continue to object or debate against my points perhaps you should take it to the Debate Table. I can't promise I'll take part in it, I've danced that dance many times and would rather read a book instead lol.

Most Rev. Athanasius Schneider on Communion in the Hand (Video)

Holy Communion and the Renewal of the Church by Bishop Athanasius Schneider, ORC

Truth About Communion in the Hand While Standing by Ben Yanke

[Peace]

1 hour ago, KnightofChrist said:

I don't care to debate.

My dear Knight, nobody here forced you to participate in this thread. This is a discussion forum. You posted concerning the topic of the thread. You suggested that communion on the tongue is superior to communion in the hand because the Church encourages one while only permitting another. I responded to what you wrote, which is what people do in discussion forums. In fact, that is the main purpose of a discussion forum.

You can choose to respond to what I wrote, or you can choose not to respond. Either is perfectly fine with me. But if you choose to respond to what I wrote, as you did, you should not find it surprising that I or someone else should respond in turn.

Writing "I do not care to debate" and then proceeding to debate, is not a boat that will get you very far from the harbor. So let's either discuss the issue or do not discuss the issue. You are perfectly free not to respond to what I write if you do not desire to do so.

As for the rest of your post, I will respond to it later, as time permits.

Have a nice day.

[KnightofChrist]

54 minutes ago, Peace said:

My dear Knight, nobody here forced you to participate in this thread. This is a discussion forum. You posted concerning the topic of the thread. You suggested that communion on the tongue is superior to communion in the hand because the Church encourages one while only permitting another. I responded to what you wrote, which is what people do in discussion forums. In fact, that is the main purpose of a discussion forum.

You can choose to respond to what I wrote, or you can choose not to respond. Either is perfectly fine with me. But if you choose to respond to what I wrote, as you did, you should not find it surprising that I or someone else should respond in turn.

Writing "I do not care to debate" and then proceeding to debate, is not a boat that will get you very far from the harbor. So let's either discuss the issue or do not discuss the issue. You are perfectly free not to respond to what I write if you do not desire to do so.

As for the rest of your post, I will respond to it later, as time permits.

Have a nice day.

I answered a question on communion by @<3 PopeFrancis with my thoughts and what I believe to be true. I didn't want to debate. It's also clear others in this thread wouldn't care to have the Communion debate yet again (for like the 50 billzillionth time) in Open Mic. But yes you can challenge my thoughts, you are free to do so, though the Debate Table is a more proper place for it. Still that doesn't mean I have to engage in that type of discussion, when all I wanted was to give my thoughts to the op. What I said was true though, communion on the tongue is the universal law of the Church in the Latin Rite, universal in both time and location, it is the manner in which the Church asks us to receive. While communion on the hand is permitted or allowed by indult, limited to certain places, at this particular time in history. The two are not equal. Anyway, have a good day as well. 

By the way, Man of War and Weapons of War by M.R. Forbes is are some of the best Sci-Fi Military books I've read in a long time. I'd much rather derail this thread with discussions on Sci-fi than a debate. :D

[Peace]

40 minutes ago, KnightofChrist said:

I answered a question on communion by @<3 PopeFrancis with my thoughts and what I believe to be true. I didn't want to debate. It's also clear others in this thread wouldn't care to have the Communion debate yet again (for like the 50 billzillionth time) in Open Mic. But yes you can challenge my thoughts, you are free to do so, though the Debate Table is a more proper place for it. Still that doesn't mean I have to engage in that type of discussion, when all I wanted was to give my thoughts to the op. What I said was true though, communion on the tongue is the universal law of the Church in the Latin Rite, universal in both time and location, it is the manner in which the Church asks us to receive. While communion on the hand is permitted or allowed by indult, limited to certain places, at this particular time in history. The two are not equal. Anyway, have a good day as well. 

By the way, Man of War and Weapons of War by M.R. Forbes is are some of the best Sci-Fi Military books I've read in a long time. I'd much rather derail this thread with discussions on Sci-fi than a debate. :D

Thank you.

If you do not desire to discuss it, it would seem reasonable to me either 1) not to respond or 2) to respond simply by writing      "I do not desire to discuss it further".

But what you seem to have done is to suggest that one form is superior than another, and written various things in support of your position. You can call that whatever you want, or declare that you do not want to debate, but it seems to me that what you have done is in fact to debate. If you put forth reasons to support your position, I don't think it reasonable to expect that someone with an opposite view should not respond to what you wrote.

You seem to have a strong-willed personality (as I do). I would guess that although you don't want to have the debate over again, you would have trouble remaining silent if someone here wrote something contrary to what you believe. That is understandable, and I don't think it very realistic that one or both of us are going to just state our positions and leave it at that. If I post something that you disagree with you are likely to respond, and vice-versa. 

So it would seem to me that if either of us really doesn't want to get into it, then we should just stay out of it altogether. Once you start responding it is tough for it not to turn into a debate, again because both of us are fairly strong willed and opinionated. 

Peace

[<3 PopeFrancis]

Thanks so much.  Well, as long as it is okay when I was catechized to receive Him in the hand but receive Him on my tongue.  Whew!