7 Common Holy Communion Abuses(Catholic Caucus)

http://www.communion-in-the-hand.org/articles.html ^ | Jan 2011 | Rev. Fr. John Lankeit

[stfassisi]

A Letter from Our Cathedral Rector by Very Rev. Fr. John Lankeit, Rector, Ss. Simon & Jude Cathedral Phoenix, AZ January 30, 2011

Dear Parishioners,

I want to thank all of you who have recently started receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, not to mention those of you who already had been. This subject has generated a lot of buzz over the past few weeks, the vast majority of which has been overwhelmingly positive.

While my main objective in encouraging reception on the tongue is to deepen appreciation for the Eucharist, I also have a pastoral responsibility to eliminate abuses common to receiving in the hand. Such abuses are no doubt unintentional. Nevertheless, what I witness troubles me. And I'm not alone.

In 2004, responding to the problem of Eucharistic profanation, the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament released an official instruction entitled REDEMPTIONIS SACRAMENTUS: On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist. Regarding Holy Communion the document states:

"[S]pecial care should be taken to ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant in the presence of the minister, so that no one goes away carrying the Eucharistic species in his hand. If there is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the faithful." (Paragraph 92)

Here are just a few examples of profanation that I see all too frequently:

• Blessing oneself with the host before consuming it. (The act of blessing with the Eucharist is called "Benediction" and is reserved to clergy).
• Receiving the host in the palm of the hand, contorting that same hand until the host is controlled by the fingers, then consuming it (resembling a one-handed "watch-the-coin-disappear" magic trick).
• Popping the host into the mouth like a piece of popcorn.
• Popping the host into the mouth like a piece of popcorn.
• Attempting to receive with other items in the hands, like a dirty Kleenex or a Rosary.
• Receiving the host with dirty hands.

• Receiving the host, closing the hand around it, then letting the hand fall to the side (as if carrying a suitcase) while walking away and/or blessing oneself with the other hand.
• Walking away without consuming the host.
• Giving the host to someone else after receiving... yes, it happens!

We would never treat a piece of GOLD with the same casualness - especially in this economy! Yet many treat the Eucharist "piece" of GOD with casualness at best, indifference and irreverence at worst. Of course, much abuse is due to ignorance, owing to poor catechesis, which is precisely why I have written about this issue for four consecutive weeks.

Yet we have another great incentive...

When Holy Communion is received on the tongue... every single one of these abuses is instantly eliminated!

The way we treat another person says more about our relationship with that person than any words we might say. This is especially true of our relationship with the Divine Person, Jesus Christ. So let us continually seek to increase our reverence for our Eucharistic Savior, and to eliminate anything that degrades the respect He deserves.

God's Blessings... my prayers...

[Notwithstanding]

Perhaps you are frozen in time and don’t see that good things have been happening.

Whatever Mother Angelica said about the “electric church” was said about her observations made at least 10 years ago.

Mother would surely applaud the steps taken by B16 to fix the problems.

If your parish does things correctly, then you have hope for the future. Instead you expressed a lack of hope.

Digruntled grumbling is not how the Truth wins.

[Notwithstanding]

I am only desensitized because my parish enjoys Masses with zero innovation.

[netmilsmom]

>>Do you acknowledge that Benedict XVI is making progress to reform the reform?<<

I acknowledge that The Holy Father is attempting to “reform the reform”. However, “the reform” is long past what was intended by Vatican II and has blown into rampant progressive goo. And for every St. Louis and Lincoln NE, there are two Saginaws or Eries. Add to that all of CA and most of NY.

Now let’s assume that everyone adopts the new Missal. Then B16 has made progress. However, no one has been able to answer a simple question, “What if they don’t?” In my area, I know of parishes that would go through convulsions if they had to utter a phrase in Latin or Greek. Saying “And with your Spirit” is going to be “Just too hard on them” What will happen? A firmly written letter? Just like the handholding and glass vessels?

Talk to me AFTER the progress has been made.

[Notwithstanding]

The new translation is a bright line.

A watershed.

Those who ignore it will be dealt with harshly, I predict.

I don’t see in your attitude anything that will win people over to the Truth. I could be wrong. Is it your experience that sour and bitter work well to advance your goals?

[netmilsmom]

>>I am only desensitized because my parish enjoys Masses with zero innovation.<<

How do you know?
I’m not talking about abuse, I’m talking innovation.

Most people have no clue about what is innovative. It’s all just normal.

[Notwithstanding]

Your statements are a bit humorous in that you write to me as if you think I am not aware of how bad it has been and have not had to battle the @$$holes in the rectory and chancery.

I am fully aware of reams of detail of how bad it has been and is.

But I have been in places where Truth has prevailed and where it continues to win people over. I have hope! I have seen what is authentic work miracles!

Whereas I see God gifting us with a brakeman (B16), you are still complaining as if we are speeding off the rails with no hope of slowing down and recovering.

[Notwithstanding]

Innovation is abuse.

Why do you address me as if I am ignorant about these things?

I am a long-time overtly Catholic Freeper - that alone takes me out of the “most people” category.

In any event, I would be surprised if you know more about these matters than I do. We learn a lot when the folks in the rectory repeatedly tell us up is down and wrong is right. I became an expert real fast - probably the same way you did.

I am quite certain that I enjoy Masses without innovation because I know the GIRM and the related documents inside and out.

[netmilsmom]

>>Those who ignore it will be dealt with harshly, I predict.<<

You mean as has been done in past practice? LOL!

>>I don’t see in your attitude anything that will win people over to the Truth. I could be wrong. Is it your experience that sour and bitter work well to advance your goals?<<

And your Pollyanna attitude of “We’re fine, nothing to see here.” had been what has caused an entire generation of Catholics to have no clue what a proper Holy Mass looks like. In some ways one must Thank God for the Female Jesus in Denver that Mother Angelica saw. That lone person (and the libs that put her there) enlightened Mother to truly look at those VII documents and see that none of this “community centered” mass was called for.

Talk with one’s feet. Talk with one’s pocketbook. That’s what works.

[netmilsmom]

>>Innovation is abuse.<<

Wrong. Innovation is not abuse. Abuse make a Holy Mass ilicit. Innovation does not.

We are told in the GIRM what we are to do. We are not told what we cannot do. Therefore, holding hands for the Our Father is not an abuse because the laity is not given a posture for this prayer. One may fold one’s hands, hold hands or lay prostrate. While the last is a hazard to fire code, it is not forbidden. The Orans position for the laity is forbidden because the “Hands Extended” position is directed to the Priest and Deacon ONLY. For the laity to use it in the Holy Mass is an abuse.

See? And also understand that if you know the GIRM, you are not Most People. Most people have no clue that there are “General Instructions” at all.

[Notwithstanding]

I don’t have a pollyanna attitude.
I have a gospel attitude of thanksgiving and hope.

I simply mentioned that it is objectively wrong and harmful to use the labels “pre-Vatican-II” to mean “good” and “post-Vatican-II” to mean “bad”.

Your reaction was to go spew pessimistic rants about how terrible things are.

My counter-reaction was to note that we should be grateful and hopeful because our current pope is addressing these very issues quite clearly and forcefully.

Your reaction is that I am a clueless pollyanna.

Well, netmilsmom, whatever type of Mass you have at your parish, the good affect it has on you remains hidden. I suggest that now is the time to choose happiness.

[MomwithHope]

Nice to meet you, I am 59 and have never touched the Eucharist. When I was 18 I left the chuirch for about 15 years and upong my return I was shocked to see people receiving in the hand. Most people look like they are eating a chop at a party.

[netmilsmom]

>>Well, netmilsmom, whatever type of Mass you have at your parish, the good affect it has on you remains hidden. I suggest that now is the time to choose happiness.<<

I have. And your entire preface of Pre-VII vs. VII masses comes from this post #12.

“At my parish here in the Detroit area, we have not only a Pre-Vatican II Holy Mass (TLM) but also EVERY one of our masses are Historically correct VII masses, like you see on EWTN. No guitars, no talking in the main before or after, and proper dress. Although we don’t have an Altar rail, we have kneelers and receive kneeling by intiction on the tongue. I’ve even seen our priests hold a host up until a person opens his mouth.”

which was singing the praises of an Historically Correct VII (NO) mass. So I’m not sure where you get the “pre-Vatican-II” to mean “good” and “post-Vatican-II” to mean “bad”, but it wasn’t from me.

[Notwithstanding]

It is an abuse to subject people in the pews to innovations.

Innovation - as practiced in most dioceses and parishes - is most certainly an abuse because it is undertaken for all thr wrong reasons and often hides or masks or overpowers what the Church intends the Mass to say and achieve.

[Notwithstanding]

In your post 57 you embrace the good/bad dichotomy I decry, and you incorrectly note out that its the happy-clappy folks that don’t want people to employ those labels.

In fact, its the lefevbrites and the happy-clappys that typiclally use these labels perjoratively!

[netmilsmom]

>>Innovation - as practiced in most dioceses and parishes - is most certainly an abuse because it is undertaken for all thr wrong reasons and often hides or masks or overpowers what the Church intends the Mass to say and achieve.<<

MOST members of the USCCB see it differently. You need to talk to them not me.

Or encourage people to find a parish that does not use innovation in their Holy Mass. Which is exactly what I have done on this thread.

[netmilsmom]

>>In your post 57 you embrace the good/bad dichotomy I decry, and you incorrectly note out that its the happy-clappy folks that don’t want people to employ those labels.<<

Oh, you mean this, where I explain that while it’s easier to use the abbreviations TLM and NO, some don’t know what you’re talking about?

“And that is simply your opinion. It is much easier to write TLM and NO, but some do not know what you are talking about. Vatican II ushered in the hippies and libs to our Holy Masses. Mother Angelica helped people to see why we were uncomfortable there and start the long process back to a historic NO. To use VII and Pre-VII defines the innovation or non-innovation in the Holy Mass. Only the “Happy Catholics” prefer we not speak in this way.”

>>In fact, its the lefevbrites and the happy-clappys that typiclally use these labels perjoratively!<<

And EWTN. Which group are they in?

[Notwithstanding]

EWTN commendably does not use the preV2=good/postV2=bad dichotomy.

Why do you ask?

[Notwithstanding]

By now, its hard for me to not conclude that you find the preV2=good/postV2=bad dichotomy helpful and will use it even if it risks leading people to believe the Vatican II was not a legitimate work of the Holy Spirit.

This is far more than simply encouraging people to find Masses that are not innovative.

[Notwithstanding]

You have a legitimate beef with the faux “spirit of Vatican 2”.

You seem to have sadly allowed that to metasticize into a “V2=bad” cancer that you spread wherever you go.

[netmilsmom]

>>You seem to have sadly allowed that to metasticize into a “V2=bad” cancer that you spread wherever you go.<<

You have fallen to name calling instead of debate. Pretty irrational name calling at that.

Have your opinion, my FRiend. Lucky for me FReepers know where I stand on my love for a historically correct NO, such as the EWTN Holy Masses. Sorry you don’t see it.

Good day.