Take it in the hand -
Or don’t take it at all.
Rather steady rumor has it the Vatican is reviewing the practice of Communion in the hand. For some priests, as well as faithful, how one received communion was a sort of litmus test as to whether one was liberal or conservative - in other terms, pre-Vatican II or not. We’ve all heard stories of people being refused communion because they desired to receive on the tongue while kneeling. In one case locally, the priest actually threw the host at the communicant forcing her to catch it.
Remnant and Wanderer newspaper readers, as well as traditional Catholics everywhere, have read stories for years on how the practice of communion in the hand was introduced illegally shortly after the Council. The custom becomes so wide spread “reformers” claimed it “sensus fidei” and therefore legitimate, and Rome reluctantly permitted it. However, if anyone dared object to liturgists, bishops and priests, they were usually deemed traditionalist radicals, or God-forbid, pre-Vatican II. In addition, it seemed as if the Vatican didn’t care, since we never heard anything to contradict the modernists.
Until now, praise God! Cardinal Ranjith, Secretary for the Congregation of Divine Worship, has determined the practice will be reviewed by the Vatican and possibly reversed. The post-Vatican II prelate is quoted as saying:
The Vatican wants the host “placed directly into the mouths of the faithful so they don’t touch it (with their hands)… because many don’t even realize they are receiving Christ and do this with scant concentration and respect,” Ranjith said.
The distribution of communion on the hands of those attending mass has been widespread since the so-called Vatican II Council - a series of reforms introduced in the 1960s aimed at making church celebrations more accessible to the world’s 1.1 billion Catholics.
But according to Ranjith the practice was “illegally and hastily introduced by certain elements of the Church immediately after the Council”.
“Some people keep hosts with them as a sort of souvenir, others sell them while in some cases the hosts have been taken away to be used in blasphemous Satanic rituals,” he said.
Ranjith said the measures to bring back “dignity and decorum” to mass celebrations were in line with Pope Benedict XVI’s wishes, but he did not specify when they would be introduced, nor if they would be issues as an order or a set of guidelines. - Entire story here.
February 25th, 2008 at 11:32 am
While watching midnight Mass from the Vatican I noticed that Our Holy Father only gave communion on the tongue.
Want I find amazing is how people (including the priests and bishops) don’t just take their cue from the Pope.
The Vatican is not prone to beat people with a stick. They expect us to be bright enough to say, “ah ha, maybe I should copy the Pope.” Ya think?
February 25th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
If the Pope says to go back to receiving Communion on the tongue, of course that’s how I’ll do it. But I entirely dislike the idea of it being a litmus test of orthodoxy.
February 25th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Same here Melody. I receive on the hand at parishes that do so, and on the tongue at parishes where that is done.
February 26th, 2008 at 7:36 am
Bit of a fallacy involved here : it’s not whether it’s local praxis that makes it a litmus tests ; it’s where communion in the hand is enforced that indicates something exceedingly suspect - for instance in seminary it was seen as a warning alarm of tridentinism if someone received on the tongue and in group masses [performed on coffee tables [once someone placed an upright brass crucifix on the table and it was picked up and thrown onto an armchair by the presiding priest] communion was distributed ilegally before the priest consumed - we were expected to sit there on our bean bags holding the host for up to five minutes ; when I was in a benedictine monastery being part of a team which took underprivileged families on holiday - the kids made their own communion bread which was consecrated - crumbs went everywhere all over the room and was subsequently hoovered up or swept off the kids’ jeans and sweaters…
My kids were seen as renegades at school because I had told them to disobey their headmistress and schoolteacher and only receive on the tongue; one got a severe dressing down and ended up in tears - they replied that they were doing what their father told them to do - the teacher’s response was ‘you do what everyone else does !!!’
I’ve seen priests have ‘hissy fits’ because a sacristan has brought out silver chalices and patens when they have demanded porous unglazed pottery [one of a certain priest's 'chipped mug chalices' was stained red/brown inside from years of non-purification...
One seminarian I knew used to genuflect before reception [his home parish was run by an old traditionalist lithuanian priest] - it was a significant contributory factor to his expulsion from seminary [quote: we don't want any of this pre-council rubbish here !!!]
we had liturgy lecturers who would be incensed beyond all imagining at suggestions that an altar was anything other than a wooden table - they ridiculed notions of reliquaries , ordered us that once we were ordained we had to ensure the tabernacle was removed from the sanctuary as soon as possible in our designated parishes, that benediction and adoration of the blessed sacrament was an obscene anachronism and that we should replace this ‘respect for Jesus’ by worshipping the ‘fully present’ Christ when the priest announced the gospel.
We were told that saying the Hail Mary at the end of the bidding prayers was ‘illegal’ , an english invention ‘banned by Rome!!!!’ and [get this] that the time when the consecration was completed [in other words Jesus was not fully present in the host and chalice until this point] was at the great Amen after the doxology!!! The participation of the congregation performed the contributory actions of the consecration - not the priest ???
Mother Teresa was asked what the most terrible thing in the modern world was - she was ridiculed, dismissed and mocked by replying ‘communion in the hand’…
I really don’t think people understand what is going on within the church - this neo-protestantisation has reached cataclysmic proportions - and thjor asault has been on the dignity and respect afforded to the blessed sacrament.
February 26th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
it may not be a litmus test for orthodoxy, but the results have shown the practice of receiving in the hand has decreased reverence for the Blessed Sacramnet every it is commonplace. So I guess you could reverse that & say that receiving in the hand is a litmus test for irreverence.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Paul, I did see some of that stuff in the ’70’s and ’80’s, but thankfully, I think it has gone the way of leisure suits in the majority of places ( I couldn’t say about the UK, I’ve never been there). I personally haven’t experienced the excesses described in at least 15 years; I think sometimes we beat a dead horse about these things.
February 26th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
I’m with Kat.
I always receive directly on the tongue. I also try to get in the priest’s line if Communion is given standing up as we line up like convicts or lost sheep-take your pick.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:50 am
cathy.. yup, I’m a line jumper too