Eucharistic sharing in exceptional circumstances by other Christians requires permission according to the directives of the diocesan bishop and the provisions of canon law (canon 844 4). Theres no simple solution to this issue. But whatever the case, it is the Pope who decides to authorize it for countries, and it is indisputable that he did so. Surveys from CARA and Pew reflect this, though I admittedly doubted them until I attended mass with a fellow Catholic at church that predominantly received on the tongue and my friend jeering remarked, why dont they receive in the hand like normal people? R. E. Heine FotC 21 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1982). I similarly think Cardinal Sarahs frankly ridiculous comments about Lucifer are draining credibility from his cause (one that I admittedly align with sometimes), even if some of his proposals are good ones. The traditional and preferred method is the reception of the Host on the tongue: Step forward and kneel at the Communion rail or station (if you stand, make a sign of reverencesuch as a bow or genuflection or Sign of the Crossbefore receiving the Host and take care not to disrupt the Communion line). Their attitude of reverence must measure up to what they are doing. What is the proper way of receiving Communion in the hand? 160). It is not appropriate to reach out with the fingers and take the host from the person distributing. However, it was a brief exchange with ones immediate neighbors and at a time when men and women occupied separate aisles in the church. It should be noted that it is never permissible for a person to dip the host he or she has received into the chalice. However, he should not refuse to administer Communion to those faithful desirous of availing themselves of a legitimate authorization. Fire came down and consumed the sacrifices of Elijah Whatever one thinks about the practice today and its reemergence after Vatican II, it is important that our conversation be grounded in an accurate picture of the history of this practice. But one should not by his own judgment abstain from or return to communion, as he pleases. This reply aged like Milk (currently January 2022). It is still the practice of millions of committed Latin-rite Catholics all over the world and of many Eastern Churches who administer the Eucharist under both species on the tongue. ), Pray Tell: An open forum on faith in South Texas. II], St. [6] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogical Catecheses 5.13. Among Catholics, there is a sincere difference of opinion with respect to the opportunity of this practice, as to its possible spiritual benefits or detriments. With regard to the first precept, Origen of Alexandria cautions, You who are accustomed to take part in divine mysteries know, when you receive the body of the Lord, how you protect it with all caution and veneration lest any small part fall from it, lest anything of the consecrated gift be lost. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen. Leo P. McCauley FotC 64 (Catholic University of America Press: Washington, DC, 2000 [1970]). Todd, yes, the Church as a whole is growing thanks to the great efforts of missionaries in Africa and Asia (many are now coming back here), and yes, more people are receiving the Sacraments now than ever. can. Required fields are marked *. | Irondale, AL 35210 |. When receiving in the hand, the communicant should be guided by the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem . Monaco, 31 October 1969 In comparing the indult list provided in this post with the brief history of Fr. No wonder so many people there have given up on Christianity. St. Excelling, therefore, every sensible creature, he who by the saving Passion has attained to the celestial dignity, eating and drinking Christ, is fitted in all respects for eternal life, sanctifying his soul and body by the participation of divine grace. Notre Dame, IN 46556 USA. Of note for the modern debate, both John Chrysostom and the Council of Constantinople in Trullo argue that human beings, made in the image of God and capable of communing with him, are more worthy to touch the Eucharist than vessels of gold and silver. Care must also be taken that the communicants have clean hands and that their comportment is becoming and in keeping with the practices of the different peoples. are on the side of Lucifer. So it is not just tiresome traditionalists who worry about particles. Pope Benedict XVI 1927-2022 tribute page and access to resources here. Communion in the hand is legitimate only where permitted, and it remains in the realm of a permission. Dear Patrick, Uruguay,October 15 1969 [9] Theodore of Mopsuestia, Catechetical Homilies 6. Hence, my theory is that the wide granting of the indult exceeded its initially intended scope as continued prompting from advisors and larger-than-anticipated requests from conferences overcame the popes reluctance. The oldest reference to the Eucharist in the New Testament occurs in chapters 11 and 12 of the First Letter to the Corinthians, which has no reference to receiving Holy Communion on the tongue. Finally, the fact that the Communion Procession is a profoundly religious action tells us something about the way in which we should participate in this procession. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal says the following: 160. Why? God has come to live in us. 1. One said: When [the practice was] introduced in the U.S. Cyril of Jerusalem was quoted make your hands a throne for the King, take and eat.Is anyone denying the quote?, Concerning Communion in the hand, please consult the Mystical Catechesis of St. Cyril of Jerusalem for a description of the practice around A.D. 345. While we have the option of receiving holy Communion either on the tongue or on the hand, we must always be mindful of receiving our Lord respectfully. divine life. Q: When the bishop in a diocese allows the faithful to receive Communion in the hand or on the tongue, can a priest, who objects on the grounds of conscience, refuse to give the faithful holy Communion in the hand? Luxembourg, October 15 1969 The Council was a start, but we have allowed ourselves to get sidetracked in silly and divisive banter. [18] See Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.43.18. Take this from someone who receives in the hand sometimes, I would never do it if I thought it was enabling Lucifer to corrupt my soul. There is also evidence that this was a contested subject (i.e., about what sins prevent someone from receiving), as it would continue to be throughout the history of the Church. It may well be the case that the sudden change in practice after Vatican II decreased devotion towards the Eucharist and belief in the true presence, and it may well be the case that there were bad actors who in fact desired this result. It is therefore difficult in the context of this present letter not to mention the sad phenomena previously referred to. Will you not then much more carefully keep watch, that not a crumb fall from youSt. From the historical point of view, we can say that there is strong evidence that the practice existed in early centuries in some areas of the Church. Over and over again the prayers of the liturgy and the norms of the General Instruction emphasize this fundamental concept of the unity of the baptized, stressing that when we come together to participate in the Eucharistic celebration we come, not as individuals, but as united members of Christ's Body. The option offered to the faithful of receiving the Eucharistic bread in their hand and putting it into their own mouth must not turn out to be the occasion for regarding it as ordinary bread or as just another religious article. A parish priest, or the rector of a sanctuary, might have objective reasons for not applying the permission if there is any danger of profanation or lack of respect. Communion in the hand is allowed in the United States by decision of the American Bishops. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. [2] 2 Accept Communion in a state of grace. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCBs) mission is to encounter the mercy of Christ and to accompany His people with joy. In an even more elevated tone, Ephrem the Syrian, in a stunning passage, invites the Christian communicant to feel awe at what is placed in his or her hand, since even the Seraph did not take the divine coal with his hand, nor did the prophet Isaiah eat it (see: Isa 6:6). It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where the distribution of Communion in the hand has been authorized. Our procession should move with dignity; our bearing should be that of those who know they have been redeemed by Christ and are coming to receive their God! (or: Which Heresy Will You Give Up for Lent? Some scholars claim that this part of the Mystical Catechesis is not originally from St. Cyril but a later interpolation into the text. Devotion and reverence toward the Eucharist in the case of communion in the hand. St. Cyril of Jerusalem in 348 gave this instruction to his congregation: "When you approach Holy Communion, make the left hand into a throne for the right, which will receive the King. All of us should receive with great reverence and respect. Cardinals Thorne (Peru) and Caffarra (Bologna) have banned Communion in the hand, citing reasons of abuse and disrespect. Therefore I stand by what I wrote in the original: In this context I think it is fair to say that the present practice of Communion in the hand is not a simple restoration of a historical custom but rather introduced a new practice in new circumstances which, while it has some historical justification, is essentially motivated by current pastoral concerns in some parts of the world.. 1. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen. Phillip Schaff (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1889). [11] In East Syria (what we would now call the Middle East) we have evidence from Ephrem the Syrian[12] and Narsai. We would also do well to teach, as the Fathers do, that reverence is not only about proper reception of the Eucharist, but also about living the kind of life to which the Eucharist commits us. The following norms must therefore be respected. Do we accept an experience of the Real Presence only when the externals and the lingo of 1950 are seen and heard? 51 (Feb), pg 62). Instead this option must increase in them a consciousness of the dignity of the members of Christs Mystical Body, into which they are incorporated by baptism and by the grace of the Eucharist. On reverence for the Eucharist and belief in the Real Presence among Catholic laity has greatly declined I dont think this has ever been proven. In this way, the practice of Communion in the hand is different from other liturgical elements restored after centuries of disuse, such as the prayer of the faithful and the exchange of peace. When we move in procession, particularly the procession to receive the Body and Blood of Christ in Communion, we are a sign, a symbol of that pilgrim Church "on the way.". O Solomon, the thing which the Lord of your father Im skeptical of the claim that collecting absentee ballots for bishops conference votes is unlawful. My country is not on this list but holy communion is the norm. For some, however, the experience of the Communion Procession is far more prosaic, analogous perhaps to standing in line in the supermarket or at the motor vehicle bureau. It is adoration of Christ, meal of fellowship, union with other communicants (hence the Church wants us to sing during reception), sharing in Christs self-sacrifice, mystical union with angels & saints, sharing even now in the heavenly banquet, having the life of the Risen Christ in oneself, a call to charity and works of justice and making real on earth the peace foreshadowed in Communion, etc. enough bread and wine are made ready for the communication of the faithful at each Mass.45 As a general rule, Holy Communion is given from hosts . [24] Trans. Personally, I think that when a priest with the care of souls holds the view that Communion on the tongue is preferable to the alternative practice, then the best thing he can do is inform the faithful of the bishops permission. A frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance is encouraged for all. But back in the West, where most of us at PT are from, the Church is struggling. The Holy See has made it abundantly clear that both manners of reception of Communion - on the tongue and in the hand - are permitted, that Communion should be received reverently, and that the manner of reception should not become an occasion of division in the church. Ireland, 4 September 1976 They would find many more areas we all need to work on than just their main focus. [21] Theodore of Mopsuestia, catech. These views are sometimes strongly held. cites vote tallies to defend a claim that a large majority (longe plurimos) of bishops not only oppose introducing Communion in the hand but consider it tum sensui tum spirituali cultui [] offensioni On November 14, 1996, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops approved the following guidelines on the reception of Communion. Receiving the host in one's hand has been an option in the United States since the bishops authorized this in May 1977 and the Holy See confirmed it. Still, while not the direction eventually taken, I believe restriction to be the more natural reading of the Vaticans intent at that moment in time. 3. The fire of mercy has become for us a living sacrifice Paraguay, 27 September 1971 2. In this ordinance Christ ratifies his promises to his people, and they on their part solemnly consecrate themselves to him and to his entire service. Liturgical Press | School of Theology Seminary | Saint John's Abbey | Comments Policy | Contact Us Even if we presume the authenticity of the text we still do not know how long the practice lasted, whether leavened or unleavened bread was used and whether the practice was exclusive to the Church of Jerusalem. There is so much to Communion. For whatever reason, reception on the hand does not appear to convey the same level of reverence in the public consciousness as reception on the tongue. I have come to realize in the last few weeks how many of my Roman Rite brethren are actually understanding the Eucharist in a heretical way. Never receive Holy Communion by extending only one hand. The Eucharist may not be received while a person has mortal sin in their soul. That said, there are dimensions to this discussion that I think are both valuable and havent been given much screen time overall. 86). At the same time, it is not justified to claim that Communion in the hand is necessarily less reverent or inevitably leads to abuses. At Christ's invitation, extended by the priest acting in Christ's person: "Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb," the members of the community move forward to share in the sacred meal, to receive the Body and Blood of Christ which is the sign and the source of their unity. October 13, 2022. The new manner of giving communion must not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional practice. If he is a religious priest, what actions can a legitimate superior take as regards the member who denies Communion in the hand? 6. In order to be properly disposed to . If one is receiving in the hand the following is normative: upon approaching the minister of the Host extend the hands in the middle of the chest. Some of the online advocates of kneeling/tongue seem to focus only on adoration of the Real Presence and now a cardinal has said that those who receive standing in the hand most Catholics by far! Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread (1 Cor 10:16-17). Maybe this is part of a grand conspiracy by . The liturgical assembly of the baptized that comes together for the celebration of the Eucharist is a witness to, a manifestation of, the pilgrim Church. When one receives from the chalice, the same proclamation is made by the person distributing Communion and the Communicant again responds, "Amen." So then after having carefully hallowed your eyes by the touch of the Holy Body, partake of it; giving heed lest you lose any portion thereof; for whatever you lose, is evidently a loss to you as it were from one of your own members. For tell me, if any one gave you grains of gold, would you not hold them with all carefulness, being on your guard against losing any of them, and suffering loss? The condition is the complete avoidance of any cause for the faithful to be shocked and any danger of irreverence toward the Eucharist. For pastoral reasons this manner of receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common form in the Latin rite. First, Cyril: Coming up to receive, therefore, do not approach with your wrists extended or your fingers splayed, but making your left hand a throne for the right (for it is about to receive a King) and cupping your palm, so receive the Body of Christ; and answer: Amen.[20], To receive the Sacrament which is given, a person stretches out his right hand, and under it he places the left hand. Guidelines for Receiving Holy Communion. What if our way of calling our fellow Christians to a higher way were based on loving example and not polemics? However, this is likely to lead to many embarrassing instances for the faithful who approach communion unaware of the situation. [2] Cyprian, On the Good of Patience 14, On the Lapsed 16 and 26,and Letter 55.9. Your email address will not be published. Under the moral aspect will be considered, in reference to Holy Communion: necessity; subject; dispositions. I make no judgment about who is guilty of this- I dont know most of the people by far and am in no position to judge. So whats missing? If our reader had said that he believed that Communion in the hand was more prone to dangers of accidents and profanation, I would accept the argument. Mingle and flow into the palms of his disciples![22]. Space doesn't allow all the details, but the propaganda in the 1970s that was used to sell Communion in the hand to a trusting, vulnerable people was a campaign of calculated half-truths that didn't tell the whole story. Paul W. Harkins ACW 31 (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1963). Finally, to the end that their coming to this heavenly table may be completely worthy and fruitful, the faithful should be instructed on its benefits and effects, for both the individual and society, so that their familial relationship to the Father who gives us our daily bread, may reflect the highest reverence for him, nurture love, and lead to a living bond with Christ, in whose flesh and blood we share.. As to the way to carry out the new rite: one possible model is the traditional usage, which expresses the ministerial functions, by having the priest or deacon place the host in the hand of the communicant . His blood now flows through our veins. Gross Alexander NPNF 13, ed. Maybe this is part of a grand conspiracy by Satan to destroy the Church (ok, probably not that). Since the question involves human attitudes, this mode of communion is bound up with the perceptiveness and preparation of the one receiving. There is a twofold purpose here: that none will find in the new rite anything disturbing to personal devotion toward the Eucharist; that this sacrament, the source and cause of unity by its very nature, will not become an occasion of discord between members of the faithful. Bolivia, October 15 1969 The author seems to think that liturgical reforms should consist of only what an ecumenical council prescribed. It describes one of the purposes of the opening song of the Mass as to "foster the unity of those who have been gathered" (no. Eccl., VII, ix). I think the Holy Spirit was nudging people closer to the problem, which was already in evidence decades before the Council. [23], The great and divine Apostle Paul with loud voice calls man created in the image of God, the body and temple of Christ. But "the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly." This is the usual form of receiving communion in the Eastern rites. The divine coal is a common image of the Eucharist in Syrian theology. Bishops allowing introduction of the new way of receiving communion are requested to send to this Congregation after six months a report on the result of its concession.. in Eph 3, trans. I used the wordnecessarilyas an equivalent to in and of itself. There is no inherent reason why Communion in the hand is less reverent. I do make the point that reverence, while important, is not the only or most important aspect of Communion. It is advisable, therefore, that the rite be introduced gradually and in the beginning within small, better-prepared groups and in favorable settings. In this case, the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible (canon 916). And to demonstrate reverence and. Instead, this option must increase in them a consciousness of the dignity of the members of Christs Mystical Body, into which they are incorporated by baptism and by the grace of the Eucharist. Our bishops have argued that Communion in the hand is the proper way for the faithful to respond to our Lord's invitation: "All of you, take and eat this." What the bishops overlook is the fact . [12] Ephrem the Syrian, Hymns on Faith 10 and Hymns on Virginity 33.7. [18] Moreover, an early illuminated gospel, the Rosanno Gospels, depicts the last supper as a communion line, where the disciples receive in cupped hands while bowed. From a hygienic point of view, the hand carries a huge amount of bacteria. Phillip Schaff and Henry Wace in NPNF Second Series, 14 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1900). On the one hand, I think this evidence precludes describing communion in the hand as intrinsically irreverent. OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF. Care must also be taken that the communicants have clean hands and that their comportment is becoming and in keeping with the practices of the different peoples. It is reported that a bishop shouted out, On the tongue or in the hand?. It is simply reading too much into this practice, and it is not correct to support something one favors by denigrating another practice. Whether to receive Communion in the hand or on the tongue are liturgical disciplines, not dogmas. For this reason, since the question of Communion in the hand is not a question of faith as such, and it has been approved by the legitimate authority, I do not believe that a priest can invoke conscience as a motive for refusing to apply a legitimate law. Q. It is bad if it makes us prideful/judgmental and distracts from more important things. On the part of both the minister and the recipient, whenever the host is placed in the hand of a communicant there must be careful concern and caution, especially about particles that might fall from the hosts. To be honest, I dont really belong to either camp on this, and like you, I think the polarization on this issue is doing more harm than good.