Colleen Posted February 19, 2004 Share Posted February 19, 2004 Tounge I'm one of the few at my parish that receive that way.. and it's quite unexpected to see a teenager doing it! I always freak the Eucharistic Ministers out. It really annoys me when they miss and hit my teeth instead- wait till I open my mouth all the way, please! That happens to me too! What bothers me is that most of the time, the Eucharistic Ministers don't seem to fully understand Who they are distributing. It's almost like, "let's just get this done as quickly as possible." There's a lack of reverence. And yeah, they usually are really surprised when a young person receives that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Michael Posted February 19, 2004 Share Posted February 19, 2004 (edited) I receive by hand because that's how my parents (and most everyone else at St. Peter's in Galveston) always did it. My first Communion was by tongue, and the priest intincted it. The only time I take it on the tongue is when I attend a Mass that uses communion rails. Edited February 19, 2004 by Thomas Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 Can someone comfirm this? It is my understanding that the Pope requires communion on the tongue in the Diocese of Rome If you happen to watch any televised Mass from the Vatican you will see people recieving Communion both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantstopdancin9 Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 tongue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 If you happen to watch any televised Mass from the Vatican you will see people recieving Communion both ways. The Papal Masses I've seen televised from Rome showed people receiving on the tongue from the Pope, usually kneeling or genuflecting. I've only seen someone receive once on the hand from the Pope and it was very strange, there was a brief pause. I don't think a person would be refused for receiving on the hand, but the fact is it is not the norm, it's an indult and the Bishop does not have to allow it. And the documents of the Church strongly suggest it is the better practice. Also in diocese where it is allowed there are certain requirements that must be kept which are for the most part ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 Thank you for making my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 Thank you for making my point. T'was my pleasure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobk2000 Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 I receive in the hand becuz i serve and the priest gives communion to all the servers and we all consume @ once... altho every time i receive communion that way i always feel a little nervous... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAZEr Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 If you happen to watch any televised Mass from the Vatican you will see people recieving Communion both ways. Yeah, but CMOM that is because it is happening at a mass with people from all over the world in attendance. Just like the Pope has seen to it that no one is denied communion for receiving on their tongue, he has seen to it that no one is denied communion for receiving on their hand. Both are perfectly OK. But that still doesn't answer whether he has required it of the Churches in Rome. In other words, how is it taught in Rome and how is it normally practiced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yesygerm Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 I had this exact discussion with my mom not to long ago. I personally receive communion by tongue, it's the way I was taught. Majority in Mexico, where my mom is from (in Guadalajara were she grew up in), around 40 years ago received communion by tongue. It was very rare to see one extending their hand but now receiving communion by hand is more common and acceptable in Mexico. Now the one thing that I am not use seeing here in the states is that not many people kneel or bow their head before receiving communion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted February 20, 2004 Share Posted February 20, 2004 today on the bus some girl was talkin about how she hasn't been to mass in a while, and i was kinda coaxin her into coming again ( it was really weird, she said she prayed the Rosary and stuff, just didn't go to mass much ) anyway, she was like, is it right over left hand or left over right, i always forget, and i stuck my tongue out at her to clear up the confusion hehe, but anyway, both ways are perfectly acceptable. however, the hand is classified as an indult, i'm pretty sure. therefore, in a diocese where the tongue is the norm you are not supposed to receive in the hand and in a diocese where the hand is the norm it is perfectly fine to receive on the tongue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 (edited) I'm not trying to start a debate, and I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with receiving on the hand, it's approved by the Church and all that. But this has come up pretty much every time I've had a discussion with a member of the SSPX and even frequently with non schismatic traditionalists. Does anyone know if there was a time in the history of the Church when we know that people received on the hand? I am not aware of anything. And to say that the Apostles probably received on the hand doesn't count because they were ordained. The argument people make is that a priests hands are consecrated with Holy Chrism and that's why they are allowed to hold the Eucharist. And I know this is in St. Thomas' writings and even in Church documents! My argument against this is usually that this has more of a symbolic meaning having to do with the dignity of the priesthood and doesn't mean, strictly speaking, that only priests can handle the Eucharist. For example even in St. Thomas' time deacons could handle the Eucharist in certain cases and their hands are not consecrated with Chrism. Of course we know it's fine because the Church has approved it, but when you're talking to someone who hold the Church in suspicion this doesn't quite work. Edited February 21, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 I'm not trying to start a debate, and I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with receiving on the hand, it's approved by the Church and all that. But this has come up pretty much every time I've had a discussion with a member of the SSPX and even frequently with non schismatic traditionalists. Does anyone know if there was a time in the history of the Church when we know that people received on the hand? I am not aware of anything. And to say that the Apostles probably received on the hand doesn't count because they were ordained. The argument people make is that a priests hands are consecrated with Holy Chrism and that's why they are allowed to hold the Eucharist. And I know this is in St. Thomas' writings and even in Church documents! My argument against this is usually that this has more of a symbolic meaning having to do with the dignity of the priesthood and doesn't mean, strictly speaking, that only priests can handle the Eucharist. For example even in St. Thomas' time deacons could handle the Eucharist in certain cases and their hands are not consecrated with Chrism. Of course we know it's fine because the Church has approved it, but when you're talking to someone who hold the Church in suspicion this doesn't quite work. Yes recieving in the hand was the norm in the early Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted February 21, 2004 Share Posted February 21, 2004 Yes recieving in the hand was the norm in the early Church. thanks cmom! That will be useful for talking to SSPXers. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary's Knight, La Posted February 27, 2004 Share Posted February 27, 2004 tongue but it is a personal discipline I adopted to remind myself of my own sinfulness if asked to stop or not do so by a priest i would naturally but, most priests down here are older and seem to appreciate some traditions not totally dying out so they allow it. my mom however when she's allowed to receive again (marriage issues) says she'll receive in the hand b/c when she was growing up you couldn't which I an almost anyone who has been a child ever will understand hehe... mother to child: dont jump in the puddle child: splash mother: why did you do that? child: i dont know i just had to once you said dont hehhe..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now