web 2.0

A Matter of Reception

Before addressing the specific question about the manner of receiving Holy Communion, let’s briefly provide a little context.
 
The Mass has two principal parts, or movements: the Liturgy of the Word followed by the Liturgy of the Eucharist. As the name suggests, the Liturgy of the Word involves the proclamation of Sacred Scripture, further illuminated by the ordained minister in the homily. God’s Word should create in us a burning desire to receive Jesus—the “Word made Flesh”—in Communion (see Luke 24:28-35).
 
The Liturgy of the Eucharist has three parts. First, the gifts are presented and prepared. Then there is the Eucharistic Prayer, during which the gifts are consecrated and become the Body and Blood of Christ. The Liturgy of the Eucharist culminates with the Communion Rite, during which we have the opportunity to receive Jesus in the most intimate way we can in this life.
 
So how does the Church expect us to come forward to receive Jesus during the Communion Rite?
 
The overarching consideration is that we are receiving Christ Himself in Holy Communion. In what the Catechism of the Catholic Church calls “so great and so holy a moment” (no. 1385), Jesus comes to each of us personally as the Bread of Life and the Bridegroom of our souls. So clearly the manner in which we receive Him is not an insignificant matter. And clearly, our external actions should reflect an interior sense of reverence and awe.
 
We must be properly disposed to receive Communion. If we’re aware of having committed a serious sin, we should repent and go to Confession before presenting ourselves for Communion (CCC 1385; cf. 1 Cor. 11:27-29). In addition, the Catechism notes that in preparing for Communion, the faithful should observe the required one-hour fast, and their behavior and even their manner of dress "should convey the respect, solemnity, and joy of the moment when Christ becomes our guest" (CCC 1387).

There are two questions that frequently arise in the context of receiving Holy Communion. First, do we stand, or do we kneel?

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (“GIRM”) provides that the faithful may receive Communion standing or kneeling, as established by the conference of bishops in a given geographical area. It further says that if the faithful receive standing, they should first make an appropriate gesture of reverence. Kneeling itself is a reverent gesture, so no other sign of reverence is needed when one receives kneeling.
 
Are you with me so far?

The U.S. bishops have specified that the norm for reception of Communion in the United States is standing (GIRM, with U.S. adaptations, no. 160). The Holy See has emphatically added, however, that those who kneel for Communion are not to be chastised, let alone denied the Sacrament, as kneeling for Communion is a praiseworthy traditional practice that beautifully expresses adoration and reverence. Still, the faithful are gently called by legitimate Church authority to stand for Communion.

And since the norm is to receive standing, a “gesture of reverence” should be made before receiving Communion. In recent years the U.S. bishops have established a bow of the head as the gesture the faithful should make immediately before receiving Communion.
 
In my experience, well over 90% of the faithful receive without making any gesture of reverence. Of those that do, many genuflect, make a sign of the cross, or bow deeply from the waist. Certainly those are “gestures of reverence” and are much better than no gesture of reverence, but the Church asks us simply to bow our heads just before receiving Communion.

Next, do we receive on the hand or on the tongue? The brief answer is that the faithful may freely choose either option (leaving aside for now the relatively rare practice of Communion by intinction).

While in many places today Communion in the hand is commonplace, it should be noted that Communion in the hand is an exception to the general norm of Communion on the tongue. Canada, Mexico, the Philippines, and the United States are examples of countries that have been granted permission to deviate from the universal practice of receiving Communion exclusively on the tongue.

The Vatican has further stressed that if one chooses to receive Communion in the hand in a place where it is permitted, due respect for the Sacrament must be retained, which includes (a) coming forward with clean hands; (b) consuming the host before returning to one’s pew; (c) taking care not to lose fragments of the host; and (d) actually receiving the host on the hand rather than taking it directly from the paten or container (i.e., “self-communicating").
 
Next up: Communion from the cup!

Comments

Zach United States, on 2/2/2010 8:53:15 PM Said:

Zach

Great overview, Leon.  Can you comment a bit more on the sign of reverence the faithful should make prior to receiving?  You seem to indicate that genuflecting is better than nothing, but not preferred.  I admit that I've long genuflected prior to receiving--mostly, I think, due to reading Bishop Elliott's *Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite*: "In our Rite, a 'sign of reverence' to the Eucharist would be a genuflection (or a bow for those who cannot genuflect)."  

I realize that *Ceremonies* is not an official Church document, but it is widely-respected and consulted, and its implied hierarchy of genuflecting (preferred and most reverent), followed by bowing (less reverent and reserved for those who cannot genuflect), has always resonated with me.  Nevertheless, I don't want to be a Frank Sinatra Catholic ("I did it myyy way").  What do you suggest?

Also, what does the Church say about chewing the host?  

leon United States, on 2/3/2010 7:00:52 PM Said:

leon

For many years the Church didn't specify a particular sign of reverence, but just required that one be made prior to receiving Communion when one stands for Communion. The overwhelming 99% of the population (my unofficial poll!) made no sign of reverence, and those that did (myself included) tended to genuflect, for the reasons you clearly gave.

Later, after Msgr. Elliott came out with that book btw (and I'm a big fan of his), the U.S. decided to specify (with Vatican approval) a sign of reverence, choosing the bow of the head for several reasons. I would have preferred a genuflection, but I was nonetheless pleased that they were serious about the sign of reverence, and I think more people do it now.

I remember as a youth minister being questioned by a suspicious priest as to whether I was telling kids not to chew the host (because, after all, I hung out with "conservative" Catholics like the irrepressible Curtis Martin!). While some prefer not to chew the host--at all or for a time--out of a sense of piety and reverence, that's not required in any official document that I've seen. Rather, the biblical mandate is pretty clear: "Take and eat." When I eat, I chew. The important thing, no matter how we go about consuming the host, is to foster a keen awareness of what's happening during this crucial time in the Mass.  

Zach United States, on 2/3/2010 7:27:25 PM Said:

Zach

Thanks for your replies, Leon.  Very helpful!

leon United States, on 2/4/2010 11:52:46 AM Said:

leon

Hey Zach, you're right: the illustrious Aussie Peter Elliott is now an auxiliary bishop down under.

One anecdote might be helpful in seeing the dynamic that's "out there."

About ten years or so ago, my family went to New Orleans where I attended the Catholic Press Association convention. While down there, on two consecutive days in two different parishes, my family attended a morning weekday Mass. Nobody at either parish (from what I could tell, though I wasn't trying to be some sort of spy!) made any sign of reverence.

Meanwhile, our family, which came up last, genuflected before receiving (at that time the bow of the head was not the established norm; the faithful were to make any sign of reverence, with a genuflection being one of the principal options).

On each occasion, the priest didn't make a stink when my kids genuflected, but then when my wife went to receive and genuflected, she got chewed out--right there and then, on both days!--by the priest celebrant. It plainly was more important to the priests to exclude certain forms of reverence (i.e., genuflection) rather than to promote reverence. (This perverse mindset often comes into play when it comes to the standing vs. kneeling for the Eucharistic Prayer issue.)

When I got back home I contacted then-Archbishop Francis Schulte, charitably but candidly telling him how my wife was treated on consecutive days at different parishes in the archdiocese, and to his credit, he sent me a full apology.

Those who do other signs of reverence before receiving are not to be scolded, let alone have the sacrament withheld from them. I do think that the U.S. bishops' action in coming up with a normative sign of reverence has helped the overall approach to this subject, even if it's not the ideal. (It's kinda like the meat on Fridays thing in reverse, sort of--I'll explain when we get a little closer to Lent!)

And btw, after my wife was scolded for genuflecting, what did I do? Well, I bowed. The priests didn't seem to mind that . . .  

Dunia Digital Finland, on 11/30/2011 1:21:20 AM Said:

Dunia Digital

nice info you got here mate.. keep the nice blogging..

Add comment


(Will show your Gravatar icon)

  Country flag

biuquote
  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading