Receiving Holy Communion: A Child Of God Being Fed The Bread Of Heaven
Chicagoans are featured in another chapter of a fracas that began in the late 1960s, in the wake of the Second Vatican Council.
Echoes of Another Time?
A noisy minority, one might say a minority possessed by a shortsightedness born of a spirit of an era given to anarchy, pushed for acceptance of communion in the hand. Despite a reminder of the Church's venerable practice of communion on the tongue, reception of communion in the hand soon became wide spread. Some would say the sainted Pontiff Paul VI gave in to pressure to permit communion in the hand. Given the wealth of evidence that has gathered over the past several decades like mountains of trash, the results of such a decision scarcely need to be described or subjected to lengthy longitudinal studies. The choice to allow communion in the hand has had devastating results.
- A loss of the sense of the Real Presence of Jesus Christ.
- Irreverence toward the Blessed Sacrament and indifference toward the nature and necessity of the Mass. I.e., people treat the Eucharist like a cookie and the Mass as mere entertainment.
- Hostility toward Catholics who reverently receive the Holy Eucharist on the tongue.
- Hostility toward reverent celebrations of Holy Mass.
- A loss of understanding of the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders.
- With a loss of reverence for the Eucharist, there has been a massive loss of vocations to the priesthood and religious life and a loss of fidelity in marriage.
- With the "source and summit of the Christian life" degraded, all the sacraments have suffered abuse
Others with perspectives:
“It may well be that kneeling is alien to modern culture – insofar as it is a culture, for this culture has turned away from the faith and no longer knows the One before whom kneeling is the right, indeed the intrinsically necessary gesture. The man who learns to believe learns also to kneel, and a faith or a liturgy no longer familiar with kneeling would be sick at the core. Where it has been lost, kneeling must be rediscovered, so that, in our prayer, we remain in fellowship with the apostles and martyrs, in fellowship with the whole cosmos, indeed in union with Jesus Christ Himself.”
This passage constitutes a rather robust reproof of Cardinal Cupich’s suggestion that kneeling is “contrary to the norms and tradition of the Church”; I didn’t write it – the author was Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI (The Spirit of the Liturgy). If kneeling is ever called for in the liturgy, it is at the moment one receives one’s Creator in Holy Communion.
- https://unavoce.ru/pdf/FIUV_PP/FIUV_PP3_CommunionFinal.pdf
- https://catholicherald.co.uk/the-latest-commotion-over-receiving-communion-highlights-how-culture-wars-in-the-church-make-parishioners-the-innocent-victims/?swcfpc=1
- https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/12/on-kneeling-a-response-to-cardinal-cupich
- https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2024/12/31/it-shouldnt-take-a-genius/
- https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/chicago-where-eucharistic-revival-goes-to-die
Consider the following:
Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. | St Matthew 18:3
Receiving communion on the tongue from the hand of a priest is a beautiful affirmation of our dependence upon Christ. We make ourselves vulnerable by kneeling, placing ourselves before our Creator Whom we are about to embrace as a little child fed by a loving parent. Our spiritual father, our father in religion, the priest, offers us the Lord of the Universe. Kneeling seems entirely appropriate and preferrable to standing considering we are mere creatures made holy by God. The least we can do is humble ourselves in the Presence of God by lowering ourselves and assuming a posture that acknowledges our reliance upon and gratitude to God for the Bread of Heaven.
- - -
Pope Saint Paul VI approved the following missive. [Notes by ATTBS]
MEMORIALE DOMINI
Instruction on the Manner of Distributing Holy CommunionSacred Congregation for Divine Worship
Issued on May 29, 1969.
When the Church celebrates the memorial of the Lord it affirms by the very rite itself its faith in Christ and its adoration of him, Christ present in the sacrifice and given as food to those who share the eucharistic table.
For this reason it is a matter of great concern to the Church that the Eucharist be celebrated and shared with the greatest dignity and fruitfulness. It preserves intact the already developed tradition which has come down to us, its riches having passed into the usage and the life of the Church. The pages of history show that the celebration and the receptions of the Eucharist have taken various forms. In our own day the rites for the celebration of the Eucharist have been changed in many and important ways, bringing them more into line with modern man's spiritual and psychological needs (Such as? In an era of licentiousness and disregard for authority, perhaps the Holy Father should have asserted best practices that preserve decorum and foster a deeper reverence for the Holy Eucharist. Pope St Paul VI did well to assert the Church's prohibition of artificial contraception. Bending best practices has resulted in countless sacrileges against the Body and Blood of Christ, against the Lord). Further, a change has taken place in the discipline governing the laity's participation in the sacrament. Holy communion under two kinds, bread and wine has been reintroduced. It had once been common in the Latin Church too, but had subsequently been progressively abandoned. (Abandoned with good reason, as the last 60 years should prove in diocesan communities.) This state of affairs had become general by the time of the Council of Trent, which sanctioned and defended it by dogmatic teaching as being suited to the conditions of that time.[1] (Human nature is prone to the infection of pride, and the proud person navigates according to his own compass. After a loss of innocence, common sense is usually the next casualty.)
These changes have made of the eucharistic banquet and the faithful fulfillment of Christ's command a clearer and more vital symbol (No, not really, given the evidence.). At the same time in recent years a fuller sharing in the eucharistic celebration through sacramental communion has here and there evoked the desire to return to the ancient usage of depositing the Eucharistic bread in the hand of the communicant, he himself then communicating, placing it in his mouth.
Indeed, in certain communities and in certain places this practice has been introduced without prior approval having been requested of the Holy See, and, at times, without any attempt to prepare the faithful adequately (An understatement?).
It is certainly true that ancient usage once allowed the faithful to take this divine food in their hands and to place it in their mouths themselves (when the faithful, those living under constant persecution and who often died to protect the Eucharist, took great care to receive the Body of Christ with the right disposition).
It is also true that in very ancient times they were allowed to take the Blessed Sacrament with them from the place where the holy sacrifice was celebrated. This was principally so as to be able to give themselves Viaticum in case they had to face death for their faith (So, exceptional circumstances have become the basis for a change where many people do not face a threat of death and have no sense of the privilege they enjoy by being able to freely and reverently receive the Body and Blood of Christ).
However, the Church's prescriptions and the evidence of the Fathers make it abundantly clear that the greatest reverence was shown the Blessed Sacrament, and that people acted with the greatest prudence. Thus, "let nobody . . . eat that flesh without first adoring it"[2] As a person takes (the Blessed Sacrament) he is warned: " . . . receive it: be careful lest you lose any of it."[3] "For it is the Body of Christ."[4]
Further, the care and the ministry of the Body and Blood of Christ was specially committed to sacred ministers or to men specially designated for this purpose: "When the president has recited the prayers and all the people have uttered an acclamation, those whom we call deacons distribute to all those present the bread and wine for which thanks have been given, and they take them to those who are absent."[5]
Soon the task of taking the Blessed Eucharist to those absent was confided to the sacred ministers alone, so as the better to ensure the respect due to the sacrament and to meet the needs of the faithful. Later, with a deepening understanding of the truth of the eucharistic mystery, of its power and of the presence of Christ in it, there came a greater feeling of reverence towards this sacrament and a deeper humility was felt to be demanded when receiving it. Thus the custom was established of the minister placing a particle of consecrated bread on the tongue of the communicant.
This method of distributing holy communion must be retained, taking the present situation of the Church in the entire world into account, not merely because it has many centuries of-tradition behind it, but especially because it expresses the faithful's reverence for the Eucharist. The custom does not detract in any way from the personal dignity of those who approach this great sacrament: it is part of that preparation that is needed for the most fruitful reception of the Body of the Lord.[6]
This reverence shows that it is not a sharing in "ordinary bread and wine"[7] that is involved, but in the Body and Blood of the Lord, through which "The people of God share the benefits of the Paschal Sacrifice, renew the New Covenant which God has made with man once for all through the Blood of Christ, and in faith and hope foreshadow and anticipate the eschatological banquet in the kingdom of the Father."[8]
Further, the practice which must be considered traditional ensures, more effectively, that holy communion is distributed with the proper respect, decorum and dignity. It removes the danger of profanation of the sacred species, in which "in a unique way, Christ, God and man, is present whole and entire, substantially and continually."[9] Lastly, it ensures that diligent carefulness about the fragments of consecrated bread which the Church has always recommended: "What you have allowed to drop, think of it as though you had lost one of your own members."[10]
When therefore a small number of episcopal conferences and some individual bishops asked that the practice of placing the consecrated hosts in the people's hands be permitted in their territories, the Holy Father decided that all the bishops of the Latin Church should be asked if they thought it opportune to introduce this rite. A change in a matter of such moment, based on a most ancient and venerable tradition, does not merely affect discipline. It carries certain dangers with it which may arise from the new manner of administering holy communion: the danger of a loss of reverence for the august sacrament of the altar, of profanation, of adulterating the true doctrine.
Three questions were asked of the bishops, and the replies received by 12 March 1969 were as follows:
1. Do you think that attention should be paid to the desire that, over and above the traditional manner, the rite of receiving holy communion on the hand should be admitted?
Yes: 597
No: 1,233
Yes, but with reservations: 315
Invalid votes: 20
Yes: 751No: 1,215Invalid votes, 70
Yes: 835No: 1,185Invalid votes: 128
From the returns it is clear that the vast majority of bishops believe that the present discipline should not be changed, and that if it were, the change would be offensive to the sentiments and the spiritual culture of these bishops and of many of the faithful.
Therefore, taking into account the remarks and the advice of those whom "the Holy Spirit has placed to rule over" the Churches,[11] in view of the gravity of the matter and the force of the arguments put forward, the Holy Father has decided not to change the existing way of administering holy communion to the faithful.
The Apostolic See therefore emphatically urges bishops, priests and laity to obey carefully the law which is still valid and which has again been confirmed. It urges them to take account of the judgment given by the majority of Catholic bishops, of the rite now in use in the liturgy, of the common good of the Church. (So what happened? The non serviam of the disobedient spread like a virus - a mind virus - and the rest is, as they say, history.)
Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow. (Given that common experience affirms the visible and widespread loss of reverence toward the Blessed Sacrament, so much so that people feel entitled to receive Holy Communion even when living in a state of mortal sin, one wonders whether or not Catholics will recover their identity when that identity is dependent upon a fundamental relationship of adoration for the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ?)
In such cases, episcopal conferences should examine matters carefully and should make whatever decisions, by a secret vote and with a two-thirds majority, are needed to regulate matters. Their decisions should be sent to Rome to receive the necessary confirmation,[12] accompanied with a detailed account of the reasons which led them to take those decisions. The Holy See will examine each case carefully, taking into account the links between the different local churches and between each of them and the Universal Church, in order to promote the common good and the edification of all, and that mutual good example may increase faith and piety.
Note: in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (pp. 546-547) the Instruction was accompanied by a sample of the letter (in French) which is sent to hierarchies who ask for and are granted permission to introduce the practice of holy communion on the hand. The letter laid down the following regulations:
1. The new method of administering communion should not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional usage... . (Apparently, Cardinal Cupich missed this sentence.)
2. The rite of communion in the hand must be introduced tactfully. In effect, since human attitudes are in question, it is linked with the sensibility of the person receiving communion. It should therefore be introduced gradually, beginning with better-educated and better-prepared groups. It is, above all, necessary that an adequate catechesis prepares the way so that the faithful will understand the significance of the action and will perform it with the respect due to the sacrament (And what of the required formation? Sadly, those in authority greatly underestimated the need for catechesis. That, and they were/are terribly naive to think people would inform themselves in an age of rebellion. How many souls have been lost due to profanation of the Blessed Sacrament?). The result of this catechesis should be to remove any suggestion of wavering on the part of the Church in its faith in the Eucharistic Presence, and also to remove any danger or even suggestion of profanation.
3. The fact that the lay person is now able to receive holy communion in the hand should not suggest to him that this is ordinary bread (But it does!), or just any sacred object. Rather ought it to strengthen his sense of his dignity as a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, of which baptism and the grace of the Eucharist make him a part. He will thus experience an increase of faith in the great reality of the Body and Blood of the Lord which he touches with his hands. His respectful attitude should be proportionate to what he is doing.
4. With regard to the manner of administering the sacrament, one may follow the traditional method, which emphasized the ministerial function of the priest or deacon, in having them place the host in the hand of the communicant. One may also adopt a simpler method, allowing the communicant himself to take the host from the ciborium (Nooooo! A thousand times no!). In either case, the communicant ought to consume the host before returning to his place, and the minister's role will be emphasized by his saying, "The Body of Christ," to which the communicant responds, "Amen."
5. No matter which method is adopted, one will be careful not to allow any fragment of the host to fall... .
6. When the communion is distributed under both kinds, it is never permitted to place in the hands of the communicants hosts which have first been placed in the Blood of the Lord (i.e., through intinction).
7. Bishops who have been permitted to introduce the new rite of communion are asked to send a report to the congregation, six months hence, on the outcome.
Translated by Rev. Austin Flannery, O.P. from AAS 61 (1969), pp. 541-547.
References
1. Cf. Council of Trent, session 21, The Doctrine of Communion under Both Kinds: Denz. 1726-1727.2. St. Augustine, On the Psalms, 98, 9.3. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogic Catechesis, V, 21.4. Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition, n. 37.5. Justin, Apologia, 1, 65.6. See St. Augustine, On the Psalms 98, 9.7. See Justin, Apologia 1 66.8. Instruction Eucharisticum Mysterium n. 3.9. Ibid., n. 9.10. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogic Catechesis V; 21.11. See Acts 20:28.12. See Vatican II Decree Christus Dominus, n. 38, par. 4.
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment
Your comments will be appreciated and posted if 1) they are on topic and 2) preserve decorum.
Stand by your word. Do not be anonymous. Use a pseudonym.