They have this most interesting piece from AGI reporting on Holy Communion as received at the Papal Mass for Corpus Christi on Thursday. (A teaser for the article comes up in the AGI search results but I have not been able to get a link to the original article.) Here is my translation:
(AGI) – Vatican City, 22 May – Benedict XVI gave communion this evening to the faithful who knelt in front of him, following the tradition, that is, not giving the consecrated particles into the hands but putting them directly into the mouth. Both ways are allowed in the present liturgical norms but this way underlines more greatly the meaning of the Eucharist as the renewed sacrifice of Jesus, while the other is more in line with the protestant conception which emphasises more the dimension of the meal.Look at this video (courtesy of Gloria TV) and notice how the ciborium lid (which is used as a communion plate) is placed unambiguously under the chin of each communicant. It doesn't look as thought there is a choice offered here.
The Church of Papa Ratzinger is worried about the lack of respect for the Eucharist, evident from the ever increasing number of liturgical abuses which are committed in the course of celebrations. Recently, L’Osservatore Romano dedicated a whole page to this problem, giving space to a study of the theologian Inos Biffi, who denounced a crisis of faith in the mystery of “transubstantiation” that is, of the real presence of Christ in the consecrated host, as the cause of this phenomenon.
In an interview with “papanews.it”, Mgr Albert Malcolm Ranjith, secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, condemned the “inexplicable extravagances” committed by some priests in the liturgy, emphasising that it is “not their property but that of the Church”. “The Mass”, he affirmed, “is not a spectacle, but sacrifice, gift and mystery.” Regarding communion in the hand: “ I just believe” affirmed the Archbishop, “that it is necessary to review this practice: I speak personally, but I am convinced of the urgency of returning to giving the particle to the faithful directly into the mouth, without them touching it, emphasising in this way that in the Eucharist there is really Jesus and that all should welcome him with devotion, love, and respect.”
For Mgr Ranjith, further, “It would be a case also of returning to kneeling at the moment in which one communicates” as “an act of respect towards the gift and the mystery of the Eucharist.” “Beyond the role which I have in the Vatican, as a catholic” he concluded, “I ask and question: why be embarrassed by God? Kneeling at the moment of communion would be an act of humility and of recognition of our nature as sons of God.”
Fr Z has commented on this ( Corpus Christi Mass: Benedict XVI gives Communion only on the tongue to people kneeling) and Fr Ray Blake has heard from someone that there was serious discussion in Rome about not renewing the indult for communion in the hand. (cf. LOOK, no standing, no hands) I heard something similar on my last visit from an American priest who was visiting various dicasteries. Speriamo!
16 comments:
Praise the Lord for our beloved Pope. I went to a funeral recently in Liverpool where the priest was trying to force me to receive Holy Communion in the hand. I stood my ground and he eventually relented.
Mgr Ranjith must have good knees. Some of these guys give the impression that the only thing that happened in the last 45 years was the NO Mass. I got news for him: try abortion on demand, birth control on demand, rampant unchecked pornography, etc. Nah...it's all the fault of the NO.
Oh, I think that's unfair. His job is the Liturgy Congregation. the dicasteries that are concerned with Family, Pro-Life etc. haven't been silent on the other issues you mention. I'm sure if Ranjith was head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, we'd hear some pretty unambiguous teacher on that score.
The practice of Communion in the hand should be discouraged. It is an innovation and an aberration which should be stopped.
Reverence for the Body of Christ will not be restored until only the priest, whose hands have been anointed, touches the Blessed Sacrament.
No references to the feeding of the five thousand, or what was done at the Last Supper will suffice to justify this practice.
The Mass is not a memorial meal.
.
Dr. Peter, you're receiving the Eucharist on your unanointed tongue!
If Mgr. Ranjith wants to do us all a REAL favor, outlaw the frisbee style Hosts which do leave crumbs.
Fr. Tim, I object because Mgr. Ranjith proposes that he can read people's hearts and minds if they receive in the hand rather than the tongue. If he's that clairvoyant, then I wish he'd share some winning lottery numbers.
I'm sick and tired of people acting as if the NO is the sole cause of society at large going to hell in a handbasket. It's a poor mindset that thinks one automatically is more interiorly prepared to receive the Eucharist if one receives on the tongue vs. the mouth. Gnosticism takes many forms, both from the extreme right and the extreme left. I don't cotton to hand waving fainting down charismatics telling me I must have some sort of fainting down falling down experience to really feel the Holy Spirit, and people insisting that the only proper way to receive is on the tongue otherwise "you're not as holy as the rest of us" likewise drive me crazy.
Couldn't agree more peterhwright - what you've said with brass knobs on!!!!!!!
Archbishop Ranjith is absolutely right on the ball when he says, 'Kneeling at the moment of communion would be an act of humility and of recognition of our nature as sons of God'. You can't put it better than that - and of course I'm sure the good Archbishop would add (doesn't really need explaining) that if you are unable to kneel through whatever physical reason, then that's absolutely fine. It's what is in the heart that counts and not kneeling for reasons of pride or silly embarassment simply won't cut the cloth!
So the Eucharist is not a meal! Extraordinary. There has been some interesting correspondence about communion in the hand in "The Tablet". I have seen many people receiving in the hand with great reverence - it is all a matter of catechesis. We are not little children grovelling on our knees - we are Sons and daughters of God rejoicing in the Resurrection of Christ. When I stand to receive communion there is an encounter with the person who gives me the sacred host and the chalice and a mutual recognition of the Real presence. Could it be that giving communion too quickly has led to these "abuses"? Far from communion in the hand being an innovation it is a return to the practice of the early church and the apostles.
And, someone left a comment on my blog to say there were no concelebrants at this Mass!
John the organist: "Far from communion in the hand being an innovation it is a return to the practice of the early church and the apostles."
I believe several popes (one that I recall is Pius XII) warned us against this type of unhealthy archeologism and antiquarism and I don't see why that would be a valid argument for this practice because a) you are not living in the early church and b)our depth and understanding about the eucharistic mystery has developed and increased over the centuries that followed. If we follow that analogy why not recover the obligation for women to cover their heads while in church as St. Paul admonishes in his first letter to the Corinthians.
I am sick to always hear the left claim some obscure ancient practice or archaeological finding from the time of the apostles or early church (Mass Versus Populum, receiving communion in the hand, receiving communion while sitting, relax atmosphere, Mass in the vernacular) to support their agendas when most of the times their claims are not even 100% scientifically proven but at the same time argue that the rule for women covering their head while praying was only applicable to that specific time and culture. My dear friends I have news for you: you can't have it both ways!
gemoftheocean wrote: "Fr. Tim, I object because Mgr. Ranjith proposes that he can read people's hearts and minds if they receive in the hand rather than the tongue. If he's that clairvoyant, then I wish he'd share some winning lottery numbers"
I don't think Mgr Ranjith is claiming to know the mind of all the people that receive in the hand (some probably with great respect and love for the blessed eucharist) but I do think he knows the old principle of "Lex Orandi, lex Credendi" and that the way we pray (both in words and in body actions/postures) greatly influences how/what we believe. If we do not show proper respect/reverence/awe to the holiest of hollies and we take it (as some if not all do) like any other meal (could well be any cookie or potato chip) it reduces the importance and reverence we give to it.
If you pause for a moment and really meditate (and believe) that you are about to receive in your soul the flesh and blood of your creator and saviour wouldn't you prostrate in humility, love and reverence? I just think your bodily actions should follow and reflect your inner spirituality.
Actually it is disputed whether the apostles received "in the hand" - it is quite a credible suggestion to say that they were fed by Christ.
But leaving that aside, Bishop Schneider's pamphlet "Dominus Est" shows convincingly that the development away from the practice of communion in the hand in some liturgies of the early Church was an obvious one for the sake of reverence.
The modern way of receiving communion in the hand has much more in common with the Protestant innovation than with the practice described by Origen and St Cyril of Jerusalem.
Communion in the hand needs to go.
What we're defacto saying is: God I want control of you, instead of receiing Him...but I digress.
When I started Secondary School, we had a number of liberal nuns who automatically introduced communion in the hands. I had great difficulty with this having come out of a primary school run by very reverend nuns who brought across the true presence of Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist (for which, to this day I am very grateful).
We know the Host is sacred let us try and remember this when we refer to it as a frisbee.
There is so little sacred left in this world, let's at least teach our children that they are not worthy to touch the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ with their (not so clean) hands.
I personally dislike receiving the Host in my hands, for the reasons given by you and others. I remember being told (as a child)that was how Satanists got hold of Hosts for Black Masses. I also remember an incident years ago where a Host was found outside after Mass, in a drain (children were blamed.
Our Parish Priest used to take his cue from the communicant - but recently, because his eyesight is failing, he asked that we take it in the hand, and I have no problem with this - because it prevents the host falling to the ground by accident. I hope if the indult is rescinded, then allowances will be made for special cases like this.
Perhaps a little more mutual respect, a little less irony, might help prepare to put us in a better frame of mind to approach this difficult question. Personally, for the reasons already given by a number of participants in this debate, I prefer not to have to handle the Sacred Presence, however, having had the occasion to go to mass in a number of very different Catholic parishes, or monasteries, and not wishing to shock or engage in controversy, I have always adapted my attitude to that of the congregation. I have not found that it significantly altered the Communion which, for me at least, occurs when I return to my pew to pray. Over the years, I have only once had one disagreable experience, many years ago in Dunleary (south of Dublin) when the woman giving Communion was clearly furious at my desire to receive the Host directly on my tongue and pushed it angrily at me. That for me was scandalous and indicative of the necessity to maintain this debate at least in a spirit of mutual respect.
To be honest, I think that the comments here generally show a good deal of mutual respect within the conventions of a blog comment box.
There are no occasions in the Catholic Church when it is wrong to receive Holy Communion on the tongue. That way of receiving Communion is universally approved. Holy Communion on the hand requires an indult which many Bishops' conferences have obtained. But nobody should ever attempt to make communion in the hand the only accepted practice at any Mass.
Post a Comment