November 19th, 2012 - Michael-854732 said:
On the tongue or it is desecration of the host, per new ordinances. The Eucharist has become consecrated as the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and should be treated with all do respect. In the MASS much care is taken to not drop crumbs on the floor or throw broken leftovers in the garbage ,as such, How do we dare feel our unclean hands are capable of holding our savior.
October 8th, 2012 - Jacinta-80503 said:
I take Holy Communion on the tongue as I do not feel i am worthy to receive the Lord in my hands. I am a cradle catholic and also prefer to receive Communion at the Alter rails kneeling in front of the alter. Sadly many churches do not have alter rails. I also preferred the Latin masses as I used to sing in the choir and there was more reverence in churches then
September 14th, 2012 - Joy-855038 said:
The Eucharistic Ministers' apply hand sanitizer just before offering communion. The first time, I was taken aback by the taste of the sanitizer when I received the host. I take communion by hand and preferred it that way. But I am of the old school and would accept it by mouth if that was the norm in the church I was attending in a different locale.
September 17th, 2011 - Freddie-714102 said:
it never occurred to me that laymen are not competent to give communion, nor did it occur to me that it is not supposed to be handled with your hands like a tortilla chip. all this i learned while attending the traditional latin mass. God bless it all.
December 27th, 2010 - Yvonne-616339 said:
On my way to receive the holy communion, I always feel great of the chance to receive JESUS, body and blood. I don't think of any other things like how safe/clean the way they prepare it. I used to take either way, it depends upon whats the most common way people are using in a particular church. If i take it by hand, I just make sure there's no fragments/particles that left in my hand.
January 4th, 2010 - Ryan-196066 said:
I agree with Jack... Personally, I prefer to receive on the tongue as an added gesture of humility, submission, and reverence, but I think either way is perfectly acceptable -- the disposition of the person receiving the Eucharist is more important than which part of the body they choose to receive it on.
January 14th, 2009 - Christina-107357 said:
Although I recognize that it's a valid way to receive communion, I've seen too many abuses with communion in the hand: people drop It; take communion home; I saw one person put it in her purse and forgot about it, then dropped it at home when she pulled stuff out of her purse, and then put it back into her purse. I think people's intentions are good but the result is a disaster. Additionally, I believe that reverence is lost to some degree. I prefer communion by tongue. It solves a multitude of problems.
January 9th, 2009 - Ma-307949 said:
Not only do I receive His flash on my tongue but I also made a commitment to kneeling before the King of the universe in reverence . It seems that after spending time in adoration God has opened my "spiritual" eyes, a bit more. Now it just seems like common sense but yet I used to receive Him on my hands. Think about it, if U were to receive communion from the pope, would U kneel? But yet this is the same Christ & much more than the pope. Funny how it feels different too when doing so. I admit feeling a bit of Peer pressure or fear af critisism at times, but I promised Jesus not to "deny" Him. I feel that this is my small way of reminding others of His greatness & breaking the mundane, apathy I witness at times.
January 8th, 2009 - Mike-41230 said:
Gregory wrote "Mother Theresa once said something to the effect that communion in the hand is the worst thing that has happened to the Church."
I've read something similar to what Gregory wrote but I think it said the worst sin committed these days. I've received the Eucharist on the tongue since I've read that.
I avoid the Extraordinary Ministers as much as I can but sometimes that is not possible. When I have gone out of my way to avoid the Extraordinary Ministers I can feel the dagger eyes upon me from some female members of the community.
January 7th, 2009 - Colleen-245912 said:
By tongue is the only way that we should receive the most precious Body & Blood of our Lord Jesus. I also do not like to receive from lay ministers as their hands are not concentrated and neither are my hands for that matter. In observing Pope John Paul when he would celebrate Mass, he never gave anyone communion in the hand . . . . that spoke volumes to me. God Bless all!!!
January 6th, 2009 - Chris-139800 said:
Just a quick response to AnnaMarie.
EHMC I think is incorrect, it should be EMHC. This does not stand for Eucharistic Ministers of Holy Communion as that would be redundant. It stands for EXTRAORDINARY Minsters of Holy Communion. Meaning they are not the ordinary ministers. The only ordinary ministers are the priests.
Priests hands have been consecrated, not just washed, for this express purpose.
January 6th, 2009 - AnnaMarie-51087 said:
Reverence is with the receiver of the Eucharist. I know of a person who received the Eucharist in the mouth only to take it out of the church and home for all intents and purposes to desecrate the Eucharist. I know of another person who took it in their mouth and then threw it up in the toilet as this person was bulemic and purged themselves. that person has since converted and is no longer bulemic and speaks to youth groups about this disorder.
The Eucharistic Ministers of Holy Communion, (EMHC) in my parish process in with the lector and priest at the ebginning of mass. They wear robes, not an alb but a choir type robe covering their secular clothing. Immediately after the sign of peace they go into the sacristy and wash their hands. Immediately after distributing they dip theier fingerrs into a glass dish of water to remove any sacred dust or particles of the Eucharist and wipe their hands on a whie cloth-corporal. There are two EHMC's at the mass and each has a server including a server for the priest who holds a paten to catch any Eucharist that may fall. Those servers are very observant and are quite good at moving the paten for the height of the receiver.
My point is giving and receiving the Eucharist may be done in a very reverent manner in the hand or on the tongue. unfortuantely the reverse may be also true. If the receiver is not in the proper spiritual mind set, it can be irreverent no matter which way it is given and received.
January 5th, 2009 - Chris-139800 said:
First off, since HMC permits the practice of communion on the hand, far be it from me to condemn it.
That being said, HMC does not demand us to like what She does, merely accept with Faith. Therefore, while I accept this as permitted, it seems to me that it encourages irreverence and over familiarity with this most awesome of Sacraments.
I can't help but feel that there is absolutely no reason to receive on the hand when one could receive on the tongue. I agree strongly with Thomas that receiving on the tongue feels more like being fed, than feeding oneself.
All that being said, if HMC permits it, who am I to question? But please Lord, help our Mama the Church to bring back reverence to You in the Eucharist!
Peace to all.
January 5th, 2009 - Thomas-317320 said:
I used to receive (often in a state of mortal sin- pray for me), however as I got back to the Church and became more devout, only on the tongue. Why? Because:
In addition to the other practical matters written here (and I haven't read them all, so I might be repeating),
I am not a priest, so I don't think I am properly ordained or even trained to handle the Body & Blood; I entrust such responsibility to the priest; and
I am RECEIVING the Body and Blood, and I am BEING FED by Holy Mother Church; I am not taking and feeding myself. Amen.
I read somewhere that receiving Communion by hand distressed and saddened M. Theresa. I think I can see why. As for Extraordinaries, it's not my choice or decision or preference, but I trust HMC to appoint through the priesthood whomever she sees fit or necessary to distribute Communion- therefore I make no distinction (though I used to, and now I still prefer to receive from a priest).
Enough parentheticals? (I think so).
January 5th, 2009 - Michael-112734 said:
Do you believe it's the body of Jesus, or do you see it as just a wafer?
The priest washed his fingers and touched nothing except the host with those two fingers after washing them. Do you know for sure where the Eucheristic Ministers hands were before giving you the host? Was he using his hands to block a cough, picking his nose, scratching an itch, or shaking hands with someone else who did just before? And since the Eucherist Minister doesnt use a patton, what about all the fine particles stuck to his fingers or yours, or particles that have fallen to the floor and are being stepped on. ...or later on the body of Jesus will be sucked up in the vacuum cleaner by the cutodian along with everything else. Are you people nuts? Do you think it shows respect towards Jesus and the mass?
If someone put very fine gold dust into your hand, you would be very carful not to drop even the smallest particle. Is not the Body of Jesus more precious than gold? If you are truly Catholic there should be no hesitation or question in your mind to the correct answer to this question. Only an ordained Catholic Priest has been given the sacred right, honor and priviledge of touching the body of Jesus.
Maybie the real polling question should be:
Is it the body of Jesus, or a wafer?
January 5th, 2009 - Elizabeth-51838 said:
In the MOUTH ONLY. I don't trust myself to check for fragments. I know there are more germs in the mouth (or so my dad says) but I think it'd be worse if you had blown your nose and then received in the hand........if you receive in the hand, bring hand sanitizer so your hands can be clean enough to receive Jesus into the makeshift "throne" you create with your hands.
November 30th, 2008 - George-166509 said:
Two big reasons wy we should receive on the tongue and not the hand: (1) if we receive in the hand, particles of the Host, which are Eucharists, are flicked off the hand and are profaned. Why do you think the priest is so particular to ritually wash his hands? (2) there are many, many incidents of people, sometimes on purpose but sometimes out of ignorance (usually children) taking the Host in the hand and then placing It in his or her pocket and taking It out of the church.
April 1st, 2008 - De-315276 said:
While I prefer to receive Communion on the tongue, I will say that I have received it in the hand some times. There was a priest who could not see very well and asked that parishoners assist him by receiving our Lord in their hands because he wanted to ensure that Jesus did not fall to the floor. I've also received Communion from lay Eucharistic Ministers on the tongue and they seem hesitant. I wish that the only people handing out Communion were priests.
March 25th, 2008 - Joseph-2737 said:
Communion on the hand is on its way out and I predict will be banned canonically in our life time. The many practices that were born out of disobedience and then tacitly permitted, like communion in the hand, female altar boys, etc. are beginning to be addressed. Many people are unaware that women covering their heads was under force of canon law until 1983...not to mention that more importantly it is scriptural and a tradition going back to before the coming of Christ and reverenced by the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Kazakhstan, in a new interview has expanded his advocacy of reverence at Mass and receiving Holy Communion on the tongue. The Vatican Editing House recently released Bishop Schneiderís book "Dominus Est: Meditations of a Bishop from Central Asia on the Sacred Eucharist." The book contains a foreword by Archbishop Albert Malcolm Ranjith, the Vaticanís Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments.
At the end of the article is a link to an interview with this good bishop on Gloria.TV
March 24th, 2008 - Gerald-283546 said:
I gratefully receive on the tongue and think it is more appropriate because more humble.
A few times I have received in the hand because I had an upper respiratory infection and didn't wish to contaminate the priest's hand. However, I felt uncomfortable about it. Now, I am more inclined to refrain from Communion when infectious, and that only makes it more meaningful the next week.
In our modern era. I believe we need to recapture a sense of humility before Our Lord. Sure the Apostles received in the hand, but they were Apostles! They were, essentially, bishops. It is this need for humility that we all need to work on:
"My sacrifice, O God, a contrite spirit; a heart contrite and humbled, O God, you will not spurn."