In North Africa (including Egypt) the practice is mentioned by Tertullian,[1] Cyprian,[2] Augustine,[3] Cyril of Alexandria,[4] and John Climacus. For example, there is ample evidence that the exchange of peace between the people was practiced well into the Middle Ages in several European countries. 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? I beg to differ. So Indian Bishop conference have not got any Indult for communion in hand? It is also difficult to ensure that the person who receives Communion effectively consumes the host. For example, Augustine writes, Someone might say that the Eucharist should not be received daily. 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. It is now August 2020 and I can say that you have been proven wrong. Particularly in regard to this way of receiving communion, experience suggests certain matters requiring careful attention. Elizabeth Klein is an Assistant Professor of Theology at the, The Abandoned: Toward a Christocentric Phenomenology of Prayer, The Conclusion of Karl Rahner's Dissertation on the Origin of the Church from the Side Wound of the Crucified Christ. 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. 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). The most ancient practice of distributing Holy Communion was, with all probability, to give Communion to the faithful in the palm of the hand. 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! Yugoslavia, 1971 It is bad if it makes us prideful/judgmental and distracts from more important things. In light of some genuinely moving testimonies on the merits of reception in the hand, we cannot ignore that reverence for the Eucharist and belief in the Real Presence among Catholic laity has greatly declined since around the time in which this practice reenterred the Roman Rite after a millennium of absence. But as time passed it became the practice to receive Communion directly on the tongue in order to assure that the Host was received reverently. 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. With your hand hollowed, receive the Body of Christ and answer 'Amen'. 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. Christ himself at the Last Supper pleaded with his Father: "Holy Father, keep them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one just as we are as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us" (John 17:11, 21).Baptism has joined us to Christ and to one another as the vine and its branches. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? This would be done especially if it is very difficult or impossible to fulfill the necessary conditions as outlined in the documents above. Communion in the hand is no more hygienic than Communion in the mouth. One could have perfect adoration of Real Presence in humble posture and, at least in theory, miss the point of Communion. Receiving communion in the hand was the common practice of the Church in both East and West for the first 800 years of Christianity, and it was certainly considered reverent by the Fathers. They probably never foresaw its subsequent, and occasionally chaotic, development in some parts of the Church. Reverence can be good if it opens us to God & neighbor and makes us more loving. Pope Paul Vl calls attention to the purpose of the InstructionMemoriale Dominiof 29 May 1969, on retaining the traditional practice in use. Copyright 2023 Eternal Word Television Network, Inc. Irondale, Alabama. From this brief historical survey, however, we know that this need not be the case, and we can look to the Fathers for a pious example as we seek to foster reverence towards the Eucharist in the liturgy today. The life of Christ, the Holy Spirit, animates each of us individually, and all of us corporately and guides us together in our efforts to become one in Christ. God has come to live in us. I mean WHAT SPECIFIC REASONS were given for requesting it in the first place? What is the proper way of receiving Communion in the hand? 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. I dont think reception in the hand is destroying the Church like what some prominent leaders in the Church have implied, but this practice has still had wide ranging [and not entirely positive] ramifications in the Church over the last half century, far beyond the obvious choice of the individual communicant. The missal of 1570 eliminated almost all sequences and moved the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar to the beginning of the Order of Mass though the Council of Trent never said a word about either. The custom of placing the Sacred Particle in the mouth, rather than in the hand of the communicant, dates in Rome from the sixth, and in Gaul from the ninth century (Van der Stappen, IV, 227; cf. Paul W. Harkins ACW 31 (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1963). Have reverence for the honor which God has bestowed upon it, and do not lead it down to the vileness of sin.[27]. For Catholics: As Catholics, we fully participate in the celebration of the Eucharist when we receive Holy Communion. For pastoral reasons this manner of receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common form in the Latin rite. I did an internet search about the history of communion in the hand in the U.S. and the only thing I found was an article by the NLM. The way we communicate the Gospel message is almost as important as the Gospel itself. What's at Stake in the Debates Swirling Around Eucharistic Coherence. When the bishops reassembled, Cardinal John Carberry of St. Louis, a determined opponent of Communion in the hand, was quick to get up to set things straight. Your email address will not be published. To fit our bodies for a glorious resurrection. Basil the Great considered Communion in the hand so irregular that he did not hesitate to consider it a grave fault. Chad, 18 September 1969 awr. 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. 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. It seems appropriate to conclude this reflection on the Communion Procession and the reception of Communion with a quotation from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. Devotion and reverence toward the Eucharist in the case of communion in the hand. If he is a religious priest, what actions can a legitimate superior take as regards the member who denies Communion in the hand? 4. 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. As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or she consumes the whole of it. 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. Since Christ is really, substantially, sacramentally present but not physically, being OC over crumbs is not devotion. In comparing the indult list provided in this post with the brief history of Fr. 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! 161. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal says the following: 160. In fact, each time we move forward together to receive the Body and Blood of the Lord, we join the countless ranks of all the baptized who have gone before us, our loved ones, the canonized and uncanonized saints down through the ages, who at their time in history formed a part of this mighty stream of believers. The faithful receive Communion kneeling or standing, as established by the episcopal conference. [17] See Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 7.9.4. What a Priest Might Do If He Wants to Avoid It. The new manner of giving communion must not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional practice. Catholics use birth control, get divorced and fornicate at the same rate as society in general, with the sin of using birth control rarely confessed. The infamous coffee cup masses Dorothy Day describes in her book may have had good intentions behind them, but the way they appeared to trivialize the Holy Sacrifice of the mass lent no dignity to the then new Pauline mass. The communicant may choose whether to receive the Body of Christ in the hand or on the tongue. The same Instruction contained a reminder that the laws of the Church and the writings of the Fathers give ample witness of a supreme reverence and utmost caution toward the Eucharist and that this must continue. That said, there are dimensions to this discussion that I think are both valuable and havent been given much screen time overall. North Africa,October 15 1969 A perception such as this is a dreadfully inaccurate and impoverished understanding of what is a significant religious action. To continue the sacrifice of the Cross in His Church. On the other hand, this mode of communion is not anywhere associated with lay involvement or accessibility, nor is it thought to de-emphasize the role of the priest. 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 . Maybe this is part of a grand conspiracy by . The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared continue . Our souls ought to be purer than they, more holy, more brilliant. Uruguay,October 15 1969 The host will then be laid in the palm of the left hand and then taken by the right hand to the mouth. When permitted, the choice as to the form of reception falls upon the communicant and not upon the priest. A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to receive the Body and Blood of the Lord without prior sacramental confession except for a grave reason where there is no opportunity for confession. 51 (Feb), pg 62). There are many devout Catholics who find this practice helpful. It preserves us from mortal sin by exciting us to greater fervor and strengthening us against temptation. The Church understands the Communion Procession, in fact every procession in liturgy, as a sign of the pilgrim Church, the body of those who believe in Christ, on their way to the Heavenly Jerusalem. But to us our Lord has given both . South Africa, 1971 After stipulating the historical practice of Communion in the hand, Memoriale Domini: defends the development of discipline that led to Communion on the tongue In order to be properly disposed to . Ruff, I think we both agree that internal reverence is the most important aspect of this discussion (and therefore the ways each manner serves that) and I know many reverent people who do both. [25] Origen of Alexandria, homily in Ex. Henry Percival and ed. Councils establish principles (and rarely go into specific points) and then leave it to a commission to carry out the detailed work after the Council. Then he saw that it was futile. 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. A passage from St. Cyril of Jerusalem is used to persuade Catholics that Communion in the hand is an ancient practice legitimately restored after Vatican II. http://www.kathpedia.com/index.php?title=Handkommunion. My three hypotheses were less well researched opinions on my part, theyre not (that last one was a joke on Cdl Sarahs comments, sorry if that wasnt clear), but simply launchpoints in an honest discussion on the impact of Pope Pauls Indult, and the circumstances surrounding it, whether or not they hold any real merit. Here in India Communion is distributed both on tongue and in hand. Bishop Athanasius Schneider argued along the same lines at the end of February. It is not appropriate to reach out with the fingers and take the host from the person distributing. These guidelines replace the guidelines approved by the Administrative Committee of the NCCB in November 1986. 13.3, trans. According to Roman Catholic discipline, the Code of Canon Law does not object to the reception of Communion by Christians of these Churches (canon 844 3). Permission for administering Communion in the hand was granted by the Holy See to the following countries and regions under Pope Paul VI:[UPDATED 3-2-18], Belgium, 31 May 1969 5. Pope Benedict XVI 1927-2022 tribute page and access to resources here. When receiving in the hand, the communicant should be guided by the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem . A letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship to presidents of bishops conferences on May 29, 1969: AAS 61 (1969) 546-547; Notitiae 5 (1969) 351-353: In reply to the request of your conference of bishops regarding permission to give communion by placing the host on the hand of the faithful, I wish to communicate the following. 4. A quick example will be found . The bishop, however, might sometimes deal with the religious priest through his superior in these matters. For the first few centuries of the Church, receiving Communion in the hand was a common practice. But we doyes, verily. Roland Teske (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2001). Under the moral aspect will be considered, in reference to Holy Communion: necessity; subject; dispositions. FYI, the announcement that approval for Communion in the Hand was given (in 1969) to Belgium, France, Germany, Holland, and Chad appeared in Notitiae in v. 6 (1969), no. Copyright PrayTellBlog.com The fire of mercy has become for us a living sacrifice Australia, 26 September 1975 It is simply reading too much into this practice, and it is not correct to support something one favors by denigrating another practice. In the case of communion under both kinds by way of intinction, it is never permitted to place on the hand of the communicant the host that has been dipped in the Lords blood.. But back in the West, where most of us at PT are from, the Church is struggling. 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.". 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? However, since it is a permission, it does not generate an absolute right, and the pastors can rescind the permission, either generally or in particular circumstances if objective motives exist for doing so. The author claims that Communion in the hand could only be authorized in countries where it was an established practice but doesnt give a citation. The following norms must, therefore, be respected. All our lives we who believe in Christ are moving in time toward that moment when we will be taken by death from this world and enter into the joy of the Lord in the eternal Kingdom he has prepared for us. A. We are the Body of Christ, moving forward to receive the Christ who makes us one with himself and with one another. There are particles, and there are particles. Fast forward to 2004, when The Congregation for Divine Worship in its new Instruction named Redemptionis Sacramentum, stated: "Although each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice, if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the hand the sacred host is to be administered . vehementer hortatur retention of current practice while invoking the common good of the Church. [23], The great and divine Apostle Paul with loud voice calls man created in the image of God, the body and temple of Christ. Ireland, 4 September 1976 Gross Alexander NPNF 13, ed. We pray that our common baptism and the action of the Holy Spirit in this Eucharist will draw us closer to one another and begin to dispel the sad divisions which separate us. Think of what you receive in your hand and keep it clean of all greed and theft. Back issue of Notitiae are accessible via the new website of the Congregation for Divine Worship at: http://www.cultodivino.va/content/cultodivino/it/rivista-notitiae/indici-annate.html. Aaron, this describes what the countries are to do where Communion in the hand was being practiced. A frequent reception of the Sacrament of Penance is encouraged for all. Several readers pointed out that I made no mention of a text of St. Cyril when mentioning the historical foundations of the practice. 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. It is standard procedure so I wonder what the basis of this accusation is. If one is right handed the left hand should rest upon the right. To lessen our evil inclinations. Yet even here, the experts sometimes forgot the unrepeatable reality of original circumstances so that restoration is never quite the same. 160). This means that Jesus has no eyes but our eyes, no feet . divine life. [19] This list is by no means exhaustive, and it would be tedious to cite all of these references as a catalog, but let us turn to a few of them to see what the Fathers have to say about the meaning of this practice. The same Instruction contained a reminder that the laws of the Church and the writings of the Fathers give ample witness of a supreme reverence and utmost caution toward the Eucharist and that this must continue. A Journal of the McGrath Institute for Church Life, by Elizabeth Klein Per The Baltimore Catechism: So when received unworthily, it is not only useless, but it is harmful to oneself (a lifestyle of sin continues), our neighbors (increase of violence, arson, looting, murders), and society in general (take a look at the condition of our country), and is extremely offensive to God (hence the wide-spread suffering). Sacrilege is at an all-time high, yet use of the Sacrament of Confession is at an all-time low. can. The following norms must therefore be respected. St. What is the proper way of receiving Communion in the hand? (Original Latin text here, see pp. The Church in Europe struggled mightilyand some might say in futilityagainst centuries of violence, sect on sect, nation vs nation. Because, he says, one should choose the days on which one lives with more purity and self-control in order to approach so great a sacrament worthily. The author seems to think that liturgical reforms should consist of only what an ecumenical council prescribed. In the case of communion under both kinds by way of intinction, it is never permitted to place on the hand of the communicant the host that has been dipped in the Lords blood. Aaron, If one is left-handed this is reversed. Communion in the hand is legitimate only where permitted, and it remains in the realm of a permission. While we cannot admit them to Holy Communion, we ask them to offer their prayers for the peace and the unity of the human family. I am from India. [24] Trans. 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. It also rules out arguing for an intrinsic link between a rejection of the true presence and communion in the handthe Fathers, on the whole, speak of Christs presence in the Eucharist in highly realistic terms and also received on the hand. SACRED CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP, Letter En reponse a la demande, to presidents of those conferences of bishops petitioning the indult for communion in the hand, 29 May 1969: Acta Apostolicae Sedis 61 (1969) 546-547; Notitiae 5 (1969) 351-353. The condition is the complete avoidance of any cause for the faithful to be shocked and any danger of irreverence toward the Eucharist. Alternatively, it is permissible to adopt a simpler procedure, namely, allowing the faithful themselves to take the host from the ciborium or paten. 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. Communion received on the tongue and while kneeling. Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ's faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing" (Redemptionis Sacramentum, no. 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] Here is what Theodore says: Upper Volta and Niger, 20 February 1970 This is the reason why you say after him: Amen.[21]. If Communion is received in the hand, the hands should first of all be clean. Monaco, 31 October 1969 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. When one receives from the chalice, the same proclamation is made by the person distributing Communion and the Communicant again responds, "Amen." Now we feel our affluence threatened, and the Gospel gives no comfort on that front. Communion in the hand is allowed in the United States by decision of the American Bishops. It is not clear as to how widespread it was or if it was a regular practice. Does anyone have an explanation for why France, Germany, and the Low Countries were not quickly regularized once the opportunity was available? 5. A: The answer to this question is somewhat complex. The Council was a start, but we have allowed ourselves to get sidetracked in silly and divisive banter. Holt Orders cannot sustain the Church, no matter how much traditionalists preach priests are of the utmost importance. [5] In Jerusalem, we have the mystagogical catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem (or perhaps of his successor, John). They partake not of Him that is in them, they perceive Him not. In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. Communion should not be received on the run, as you're walking back to your place; it should be consumed before you leave the area below the altar. 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. These practices have wide evidence of use and in some ways never died out completely. All rights reserved. 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. 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. Interestingly, during the Middle Ages, the reception of Holy Communion was restricted to "on the tongue" because of abuses. Pakistan, 29 October 1976 On November 14, 1996, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops approved the following guidelines on the reception of Communion. For you hear the words, the Body of Christ and respond Amen. Be then a member of the Body of Christ that your Amen may be true (St. Augustine, Sermon 272: PL 38, 1247). 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. 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. As with all historical practices, one must examine the context and circumstances which are usually not repeatable.. Since practices vary from one church to another, we hope these guidelines help you feel more at home. Q. How should this evidence be brought to bear on the modern conversation? The General Instruction asks each country's Conference of Bishops to determine the posture to be used for the reception of Communion and the act of reverence to be made by each person as he or she receives Communion. Permission for administering Communion in the hand was granted by the Holy See to the United States on June 17, 1977 and has since become almost the universal norm in the Ordinary Form. If you are the body and members of Christ, then it is your sacrament that is placed on the table of the Lord; it is your sacrament that you receive. Come see, 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. In the light of the above, we can come to the heart of the matter as to whether a priest may invoke the question of conscience in order to refuse to distribute Communion in the hand. 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. 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). Im skeptical of the claim that collecting absentee ballots for bishops conference votes is unlawful. Communion in the hand is legitimate only where permitted, and it remains in the realm of a permission. 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. For example, to say that Communion in the hand is a sign of spiritual maturity, or that Communion on the tongue reduces the lay faithful to infancy, is belied by centuries of lay saints who received in this manner. It must also increase their faith in the sublime reality of the Lords body and blood, which they touch with their hand. Others claim that in the context of the discourse St. Cyril was referring to the clergy and not to the faithful. in Eph 3, trans. 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. However, he should not refuse to administer Communion to those faithful desirous of availing themselves of a legitimate authorization. In the United States, the body of Bishops has determined that "[t]he norm is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling"and that a bow is the act of reverence made by those receiving (no.
Affordable Houses For Rent In Sierra Leone,
Bryce Biggest Loser Australia Now,
Where Is Raro Drink Made,
Synthetix5 Quest Diagnostics,
Articles OTHER
