My good friend, Fr Andrew Wise, of the diocese of Sale in Victoria (Australia), together with Fr John Speekman, has drawn up a petition to the Holy Father which reads as follows:
Your Holiness,
We are convinced of the great spiritual harm inflicted on the Catholic faithful, and the profanation of the Blessed Sacrament that often occurs by the practice of Communion received on the hand.
We implore Your Holiness to personally intervene to restore once again the normative practice of reception of Holy Communion on the tongue alone.There is also a blog in support of the petition. Andrew Rabel wrote a piece to give a little background to the petition, and Cardinal Arinze has written in support of the piece. Bishop Schneider has also written in support, and has signed the petition. I have also signed the petition. Many ordinary laity receive Holy Communion in the hand because that is what they were taught to do; in some cases they were told that it was the more proper, reverent, ancient, grown-up, or modern way to receive Holy Communion. Bishop Schneider's book "It is the Lord" (sold in England by Gracewing) answers all of the usual justifications for the practice and urgently recommends a return to the practice of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue.
Apart from the major concern over the danger of profanation with Communion in the hand, the "sign value" of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue distinguishes the act of receiving Holy Communion from an ordinary act of taking an ordinary snack to eat. Little toddlers recognise this if they accompany their mother to the altar rail: when Mum receives Holy Communion in the hand, they will often ask "Can I have one?"; this is much less common if Mum receives Holy Communion on the tongue. They are given an early lesson in the difference between the Eucharist and ordinary bread.
Sign the petition here.
6 comments:
Apparently this petition only has collected c. 1,000 signatures so far.
I hope that many more will result in consequence of this post.
I whole-heartedly agree but if this is reinstated there also need to be altar rails reinstalled and decent catechesis/instruction.
For 40 years people have not been taught to receive on the tongue, are not accustomed to receiving on the tongue and often self conscious about it. It would be a perfect accompaniament to the New Translation, but we would need instruction.
Yes, catechesis is needed - with simple instructions on what to do.
I think it would be good for more education and help on receieving on the tongue, as an option. I have never made my communion that way - and as a rape survivor I think I would really struggle with allowing someone to put something in my mouth. It is very hard for me to even let my children or husband touch my mouth area. Our children have known from their earliest trips up to the altar with us that we are not getting a snack - my daughter cries and begs to be allowed communion but that is because she wants Jesus so much to make His home in her, not because she wants a snack. So I think that appropriate love for the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ can be shown even when He is receieved in the hand. I actually do feel really upset at being forced to either let someone put the Blessed Sacrament in my mouth or stay away from communion.
When you have the parish priest from the ambo speaking against the practise, as happened in my parish in Australia, it is no wonder that the congregation want to continue with what father wishes.
A couple of matters. Communion on the tongue needs to be coupled with kneeling. I have often found it difficult to administer the Host on the tongue when people are standing. Secondly I am wondering what the profanation that is mentioned is. If it is walking away with the host rather than consuming it, it is possible to take the host from one's mouth as did happen prior to the Indult for Communion in the hand. When people come forward, genuflect or bow profoundly, and offer their cupped hands begging for the Sacred Gift, I sense no lack of reverence or devotion, quite the contrary.
Post a Comment