SEPTEMBER 2005 (part 2 0f 4)

Q - Why, if someone believes the Host is the Body of Christ, would they take it in their hands?

A. - This is a subject which still draws much debate, even to this day. But not always for the same reasons. Some feel that everyone should receive in the hand because it underscores for them their dignity as Christians and others want everyone to receive that way for hygienic reasons alone (which doesn’t make sense but it is still heard here and there). Others want communion only on the tongue because they feel that the US conference of Bishops fraudulently obtained the votes needed to request an indult from Rome. Others feel it’s a sacrilege to receive any other way or, at minimum, opens the door to irreverence.

That’s just to name a very few of the different views. And every one of them claims to have “texts”, “sources”, and “decrees”, even from early times to back them up. It can get quite heated. The attempt here is to cut through all the noise and give the facts of the current situation starting with:

1. The universal church law (even now) is to receive on the tongue. (startling – but true)

2. There are certain conferences of bishops around the world (including the US) who requested an indult from Rome to allow communion “in-the-hand”. This was to allow those communities where the practice was illicitly occurring to be granted permission for both manners of reception (with some conditions).

3. The history of how this came to be more or less goes like this:

There was a revamping of the liturgy following Vatican II. This was both legal and good, in and of itself. But it was a confusing time for many and here and there illicit practices popped up. One of which was communion-in-the-hand. So in ’69 the “Instruction on the Manner of Distributing Holy Communion” (Memoriale Domini) was issued. It mentioned what had occurred in various places and that a small number of individual bishops and bishops’ conferences had requested that the Vatican make this method permissible in their territories. The Holy Father decided to ask all the bishops whether they felt it “opportune to introduce this rite”. The document stated the Holy See’s concerns being that “a change in a matter of such moment (importance) 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….” (Memoriale Domini)

Overwhelmingly, the majority bishops worldwide replied that they believed it best to keep the traditional manner of reception as it was and not introduce anything else in addition or instead of. And so the Pope decided to keep the method of communion on the tongue as law and emphatically urged everyone to obey it. But – at the end of the document, an exception was made. Bishops’ conferences, in those areas where an illicit practice was occurring, were to carefully examine the situation and make whatever decisions were needed in order to regulate matters, by a secret vote and 2/3 majority. Their decision was to be sent to Rome, along with a detailed account of the reasoning which led to their decision. These would be examined individually by the Holy See and, where appropriate, an indult would be granted (a concession to do something not permitted by canon law). There were conditions and norms sent out with the indult, however, that had to be met. The letter listing them follows:

SACRED CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP, Letter "En response a la demande," to presidents of those conferences of bishops petitioning the indult for communion in the hand, 29 May 1969: AAS 61 (1969) 546-547; Not 5 (1969) 351-353.

In reply to the request of your conference of bishops regarding permission to give communion by placing the host on the hand of the faithful, I wish to communicate the following. Pope Paul Vl calls attention to the purpose of the Instruction Memoriale Domini of 29 May 1969, on retaining the traditional practice in use. At the same time he has taken into account the reasons given to support your request and the outcome of the vote taken on this matter. The Pope grants that throughout the territory of your conference, each bishop may, according to his prudent judgment and conscience, authorize in his diocese the introduction of the new rite for giving communion. The condition is the complete avoidance of any cause for the faithful to be shocked and any danger of irreverence toward the Eucharist. The following norms must therefore be respected.

1. The new manner of giving communion must not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional practice. It is a matter of particular seriousness that in places where the new practice is lawfully permitted every one of the faithful have the option of receiving communion on the tongue and even when other persons are receiving communion in the hand. The two ways of receiving communion can without question take place during the same liturgical service. There is a twofold purpose here: that none will find in the new rite anything disturbing to personal devotion toward the Eucharist; that this sacrament, the source and cause of unity by its very nature, will not become an occasion of discord between members of the faithful.

2. The rite of communion in the hand must not be put into practice indiscriminately. Since the question involves human attitudes, this mode of communion is bound up with the perceptiveness and preparation of the one receiving. It is advisable, therefore, that the rite be introduced gradually and in the beginning within small, better prepared groups and in favorable settings. Above all it is necessary to have the introduction of the rite preceded by an effective catechesis, so that the people will clearly understand the meaning of receiving in the hand and will practice it with the reverence owed to the sacrament. This catechesis must succeed in excluding any suggestion that in the mind of the Church there is a lessening of faith in the eucharistic presence and in excluding as well any danger or hint of danger of profaning the Eucharist.

3. The option offered to the faithful of receiving the Eucharistic bread in their hand and putting it into their own mouth must not turn out to be the occasion for regarding it as ordinary bread or as just another religious article. Instead this option must increase in them a consciousness of the dignity of the members of Christ's Mystical Body, into which they are incorporated by baptism and by the grace of the Eucharist. It must also increase their faith in the sublime reality of the Lord's body and blood, which they touch with their hand. Their attitude of reverence must measure up to what they are doing.

4. As to the way to carry out the new rite: one possible model is the traditional usage, which expresses the ministerial functions, by having the priest or deacon place the host in the hand of the communicant. [Alternatively, it is permissible to adopt a simpler procedure, namely, allowing the faithful themselves to take the host from the ciborium or paten. The faithful should consume the host before returning to their place; the minister's part will be brought out by use of the usual formulary, The body of Christ, to which the communicant replies: Amen.] [Note: Rome later rescinded the second option when it forbid the Communicant to take the Host themselves.]

5. Whatever procedure is adopted, care must be taken not to allow particles of the eucharistic bread to fall or be scattered. Care must also be taken that the communicants have clean hands and that there comportment is becoming and in keeping with the practices of the different peoples.

6. In the case of communion under both kinds by way of intinction, it is never permitted to place on the hand of the communicant the host that has been dipped in the Lord's blood.

7. Bishops allowing introduction of the new way of receiving communion are requested to send to this Congregation after six months a report on the result of its concession."

It could be legitimately argued, if one was inclined, as to whether or not the conditions were appropriately met. And some may even want to debate whether the bishops’ conference handled this in the right manner when voting on it.What isn’t arguable is the church’s authority to decide such matters.

Regardless of how it came to be approved – the bottom line consists in two things:

1. It was given an indult by the Holy See. So until or unless the Church decides to rescind that, it is permissible to receive either way.

2. It also is obvious that many haven’t been given the proper catechesis regarding the methods of receiving communion. Many of the fears that were first warned against have come true. Unfortunately.

Perhaps if one feels strongly about it, the best course of action would be to better educate others regarding any dangers the one method presents (ie, fragments left on the fingers; hosts left under pews/inside hymnals; those who would steal the sacred species to purposefully desecrate or use in occult practices; as well as the general “dumbing down” of doctrine and reverence that can happen after awhile, to name a few)

No one can dismiss your concerns as trivial because everyone knows that they are real and are occurring even to this day. The Church herself warns against all of this. That is why communion “in the hand” is the exception to the law. There are real drawbacks.

Please don’t criticize or judge those who choose to use this method however. They’re doing nothing wrong at all. (You can certainly encourage them - as does the church - to try the traditional method or to better inform them on the proper way to receive by hand at the very least.

Much more could be said on all this and the arguments used on both sides of the debate. And perhaps at a later date we will get into it more. For now, try reading some of the info below to educate yourselves a little better and remember: it is the Lord we are receiving. So no matter what method is used we should approach Him in a state of grace and with reverence, making sure we receive him with a ready heart inside and also with whatever appropriate outward gestures are prescribed (here in the US, it is a bow of the head). We shouldn’t let something like this divide the Church up even more though than it already is.

Recommended reading:

Memoriale Domini (Instruction on the Manner of distributing Holy Communion)

Immensae Caritatis (on Facilitating Reception of Communion in Certain Circumstances)

Redemptionis Sacramentum (on Certain Matters to be Observed or to be Avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist)

Expressions of the Catholic Faith (Kevin Orlin Johnson)