Sacrilege Regarding the Eucharist

[Shin]

What I cannot bear to think of is how many people, having Communion in the Hand, leave fragments of the Host everywhere.. to be trod upon. . . by all.

I must investigate this matter further, and I am doing so. I need to learn how severe it is.

[Brigid]

Those who commit sacrilege with the Blessed Sacrament need desperately to be prayed for as the chastisement that they face from Him is awesome to even think about.

[martin]

What I cannot bear to think of is how many people, having Communion in the Hand, leave fragments of the Host everywhere.. to be trod upon. . . by all.

I must investigate this matter further, and I am doing so. I need to learn how severe it is.

I've read an article concerning this matter many years ago and much of what I learnt will be a bit sketchy now but I do recall that the sacrament only persists while it remains sense perceptible, IE, able to be discerned by the senses.
This would mean that very small particles of the Host would not persist as the Body of Christ as long as they were undetectable by the senses (too small to be seen or felt for instance).

All sacraments must have this sense-perceptible aspect regarding the matter used as proper to the sacrament like for example in baptism, if so little water was used as to be invisible to the senses (if that were possible) then the sacrament would be invalid.

This however does not seem to be the case concerning the article you posted. The small particles were obviously visible to the priest and can easily be seen on the picture of the glove.
This is a grave cause for concern regarding Communion in the hand.

[martin]

We don't know people's hearts; we see the same of those who receive communion on the tongue;  I personally have seen veiled women talking and laughing after communion.  Let's not get carried away with judgment.

Do you think though Baily that one method of receiving might be better than another or are they all equal?
Considering that outward disposition is related to the inward and that reverence or lack of can be contagious, does it not ultimately become a case of Lex Orandi, lex credendi? 

[Brigid]

(as we pray, so we believe)

[Bailey2]

Do you think though Baily that one method of receiving might be better than another or are they all equal?
Considering that outward disposition is related to the inward and that reverence or lack of can be contagious, does it not ultimately become a case of Lex Orandi, lex credendi? 

Is this a trick question?   

[Brigid]

No, many would think it a matter of opinion, however the traditionalists among us do have a particular answer in mind .


We promise not to pounce on you (right Martin?) whatever you say. We will express our disagreement if such is the case, however no malice will be intended.

[Bailey2]

I am short of time for now to get into a lengthy discussion.  However, I have combed the catechism on this subject.  I find not one place where it says one way to receive is better than another in terms of hand vs tongue.  There is instead a lot about internal disposition, Eucharistic community, mass being a memorial, etc.  It is worth the read.
Later...........

[Brigid]

Internal disposition would be affected by how one receives.

BTW, the Baltimore Catechism #2: "The Mass is the sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine." So you'd want to add that to the definition that you have already stated.

[Bailey2]

Internal disposition would be affected by how one receives.

BTW, the Baltimore Catechism #2: "The Mass is the sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine." So you'd want to add that to the definition that you have already stated.

(real quick; hubby is home......)

I think how one receives is affected by ones internal dispostion....... and understanding thereof; not the reverse. 

Yes re: BC#2.  It says that in the new catechism also....... no lessening of that intended in my last post.
 

[Brigid]

Internal disposition would be affected by how one receives.

BTW, the Baltimore Catechism #2: "The Mass is the sacrifice of the New Law in which Christ, through the ministry of the priest, offers Himself to God in an unbloody manner under the appearances of bread and wine." So you'd want to add that to the definition that you have already stated.

(real quick; hubby is home......)

I think how one receives is affected by ones internal dispostion....... and understanding thereof; not the reverse. 

Yes re: BC#2.  It says that in the new catechism also....... no lessening of that intended in my last post.
 

I agree with you as to how one receives affecting ones internal disposition, however the Church does teach "lex orandi, lex credendi" and I believe that, too.

[Bailey2]

lex orandi, lex credendi

"the church prays as the church believes"......... that's what I said.  How we receive the Eucharist externally reflects how we believe inside.  But, I just think there is more to it than hands vs tongue.   

I also think that how we believe inside can be influenced by what we do on the outside.  Dress and talk like your friends and you will become what your friends are...........    Says a lot for where the church is these days in other ways besides the topic of this thread........... (and I'm sure Brigid you will agree with this and might take it as a support of receiving on the tongue even though that's not quite how I intend this to be interpreted).

Got to go help my son study now.........  I'm turning into my son!!

[Brigid]

Dress and talk like your friends and you will become what your friends are...........

Garbage in....... garbage out.

I wasn't taught in RCIA how to receive in any way other than my hands. I like feeling like a little bird being fed by Mother Church on the tongue. I like the humility it demands of me. Somehow it seems more "right" to receive on the tongue. I seem to remember reading that some bishops in the US started having their priests give Communion in the hand due to wanting people to approach Jesus as other adults approaching each other. Rather the same reason as them wanting to do away with kneeling.

Now the sacrilege is certainly there and although there have been some problems with the Eucharist always, they are more common now.

[Bailey2]

some bishops in the US started having their priests give Communion in the hand due to wanting people to approach Jesus as other adults approaching each other.

Actually, I think it was because they were kneeling in front of a priest with all the implications of that, but I understand your point.

[martin]

For me It really boils down to who God is and who I am.
He is Who is and (whether or not I believe or know it) I am nothing but the dust of the earth.
The only proper attitude fitting in the presence of the Almighty is that of humility.
If the angels feel it befitting in His presence to prostrate themselves on the ground, foreheads touching the floor.
then the very least I can do is go on my knees.
For sure I'll be on my knees before Him on the day of judgement trembling that He may call me to account for the times I stood proudly before Him as if I were His equal when He came to me in the form of bread.

Even today one can see dignitaries genuflecting to the queen of England as a mark of respect for the position she holds.
I really can't find even one reason, neither in reverence, humility or example that could justify receiving the Lord on the hand while standing. 

[Bailey2]

Even today one can see dignitaries genuflecting to the queen of England as a mark of respect for the position she holds.  

Can't help that I am an American patriot through and through.  The notion of kneeling to a Queen    is not in my blood!  

I really can't find even one reason, neither in reverence, humility or example that could justify receiving the Lord on the hand while standing.

Me neither; if one feels it is the best and only way.......... for every individual on the face the earth. 
(are you ready for me to leave yet Martin?   )