Why communion on the tongue

I am absolutely thankful that this decision was upheld. My family has watched in horror as members of the faithful kneel down with a tongue extended—in a time of a global pandemic. Of course, reception on the tongue is a valuable spiritual and devotional expression in normal times of life. I was taught in parochial school by nuns to never touch the Host.

It was considered a sin , and never no matter the circumstances touch the Host. Once on an Easter Sunday the Eucharistic Minister dropped the Host to the floor while giving me communion, I picked it up quickly and put it in my mouth.

Communion in the hand has now been lawful for over 50 years. People who argue for reception on the tongue on these bases are wrong. Outside of pandemic times, I prefer to receive on the tongue while standing, for example. My understanding is that reception on the tongue has to do with scrupulosity regarding particles of the blessed sacrament — to ensure all are eaten and none are unaccounted for.

Thank goodness for this! The giving of communion during the pandemic has not been without its challenges. Even apart from not being able to reach those who are isolated in nursing homes, hospitals, prisons and other locked-down facilities. Consequently, we see a parade of wet hands.

In addition, not a few people curl their hands around the host as it is being given. I get touched five or six times every mass. So far it seems harmless, but it is a cause of stress. I double-checked my understanding with a canon lawyer at a nearby seminary, who agreed. Do you suppose CL says anything about exercising extraordinary measures during a global pandemic? Surely it is best for souls that their bodies be safe from a potentially life threatening illness that can easily be spread to others.

Obedience to the norms of the Church, obedience to the Bishops. In times of difficulty e. Obedience safeguards the treasure entrusted to the Church. The measures given by the Bishops and Episcopal Conferences expire when the situation returns to normal. Both the power to govern AND the limits to that power. Receiving Eucharist in the hand or tongue is a minor issue. During this epidemic situation communion on the tongue is ltesting the Lord, after all that He has informed us via medical expertise.

Taking coominion in the hand is an act of Love to our brothers and the sisters in the Lord for their safety. Communion in the mouth could be infantile. If Jesus were physically living with us we would be invited to dine at table with Him. This is what he did in Palestine. Very interesting to read all these logically sound views. What is common is it seems like one has a right to the body and blood of Christ.

Deep within, if one believes in the true presence and a particular way to respect it, then perhaps one should wait till the time is right. God knows and sees everything. So, following the normal course of events, the Church worked toward a procedure which, in practice, reduces to a minimum the possibilities of the Eucharist being used for a purpose that does not respect its holy reality.

By placing the host directly in the mouth of the communicant, it becomes, if not impossible, at least extremely difficult for the latter to retrieve it and use it in any way other than for communion itself. And so, the first reason for the evolution of the rite of communion is practical. This motif has some importance, of course, but it is neither the only one, nor perhaps the most essential. Nevertheless, the rite of distribution of communion, apart from its practical aspect which evidently exists: it is necessary, in practice, that communicants receive the Holy Eucharist , possesses another, much more important aspect: it is a matter of expressing the reality of the Holy Eucharist through certain gestures, attitudes or words, of showing and, in certain respects, forming the interior sentiments of those who approach communion.

The symbolic register expresses, through body positions or verbal expressions, the inner feelings of the soul, without there necessarily being, in parallel, an immediate practical utility for this gesture. It is actually a symbolic expression of the homage of the living to those who fell for the homeland. It is mainly in the light of symbolism that the rite adopted by the Church should be examined, when she gives Communion in the mouth and no longer in the hand.

This is the true liturgical criterion. And it is necessary to judge this rite according to the most fundamental elements of the Christian faith, not according to foreign, profane considerations, which can undoubtedly have their interest in other fields, but which do not have to be manifested here.

In the rite of communion, the first point to be symbolically expressed is the real presence of Christ under the veil of the host, and consequently the reverence due to this most holy sacrament. This presence in the host of the most sacred of mysteries, the presence of God Himself, of Our Lord Jesus Christ in person, is particularly well expressed symbolically when only the sacred ministers, who have been consecrated especially by the rite of ordination, touch the holy species with their hands.

This is a remarkably effective symbolic rite for expressing the difference between ordinary bread which everyone is used to touching in everyday life and Eucharist bread, the sacred bread, which consecrated ministers alone may touch. Everyone spontaneously understands the meaning of this rite, including the child who cannot yet read. This is, without a doubt, the main motive for the change in practice made by the Church more than a millennium ago: to express more vividly and more clearly the faith of the Church in the real presence of Christ.

The Fathers, who saw around them the ancient rite of distribution in the hand, place great emphasis in their texts on the respect, the faith, the devotion, the veneration, and the adoration which are due to this precious Body of Christ.

These recommendations come back as a leitmotif, which tends to show that the old rite probably did not have all the symbolic effectiveness required to express by itself this central dogma of the faith. In certain cultures, including our own, the bride and groom often receive from the hand of the other a piece of wedding cake at the wedding banquet. When done with love and devotion and faithfulness, the small gesture signifies not only the care one pledges to the other, but also the concern a vulnerable spouse can expect from the other.

At the Wedding Feast of the Lamb, our humble reception of the fruits of his saving work likewise show our devotion to him, our Spouse, and express our abandonment into his care. This post originally appeared at SpiritualDirection. In many ways, the first canonized U. This news, confirmed Nov. Subscriber Service Center Already a subscriber? Renew or manage your subscription here.

Give a Gift Subscription Bless friends, family or clergy with a gift of the Register. Order Bulk Subscriptions Get a discount on 6 or more copies sent to your parish, organization or school.

Subscribe Support the register. Christopher Carstens Blogs December 20, Show Comments. Related Stories Latest News Blogs. Katie Warner Features. Peter Jesserer Smith Features. Michael Warsaw Publisher's Note. Edward Pentin Vatican.