Catholic Exchange

One Priest’s Thoughts and Experiences Concerning Communion on the Tongue – Part I

One Priest’s Thoughts and Experiences
Concerning Communion on the Tongue
Part I

When I was a child and preparing to receive my First Holy Communion, I remember being taught to do so the traditional way: on the tongue. In fact, if memory serves, we received Holy Communion via intinction that first time i.e. the priest carefully dipped the host in the Precious Blood before placing it on our tongues. (We were further instructed to allow the host to dissolve and not chew it; I believe this was very practical advice, for if we chewed it particles might have gotten caught in our teeth, which could then fly out if we coughed, sneezed, or just talked.)

Ever since that important day in my life – though there were many years when I did not go to church in-between – I have always preferred to receive Holy Communion on the tongue. It just seems right. And even now, as a priest, on the occasions when I simply attend Mass in choir, I still receive on the tongue.

In fact, once I was ordained and started reflecting at much closer range, so to speak, on these things – reflections often connected with practical matters, like how to distribute Communion well and efficiently, how to purify the sacred vessels properly, etc. – I went from having a personal preference against Communion in the hand to having serious misgivings about it for more objective reasons. I also started to be aware of the fact that many other priests shared these misgivings as well.

From the lack of reverence that many people show when receiving in the hand (oh, the stories!), to the dirty hands that they present… From the particles of the Sacred Host that most certainly end up on their hands and on the floor (Lord have mercy!), to the real possibility of theft for malicious purposes (which has happened in many places)… Communion in the hand has become something that greatly distresses me. I do not deny that the Church allows it – in the United States, at least – but I do not think that it is an advisable choice for us to make.

Fr. Bryan Jerabek

Regarding the very widespread practice of Communion in the hand, there are also particular problems with children receiving that way. Besides the fact that they frequently have dirty hands from playing before (or during!) Mass, they also often lack coordination and judgment: it has happened several times that children have dropped hosts that I placed squarely in their hands, due to their movements or a lack of attention.

I remember preaching about the proper way to receive Holy Communion in the hand on one occasion, in particular: about the need to form a “throne” with one’s hands, to consume the host right away, and then to check for particles on the hand, and so forth. And I noticed exactly zero change in how people approached and walked away from the Communion line at that very same Mass! It seemed to fall on deaf ears.

Why did it fall on deaf ears? I think it is because there has been a loss of faith in the Real Presence. Few Catholics would openly deny this dogma with their lips; but in practice, we see it denied all the time. I think this teaching has become something kind of “magical”, if I may put it that way: Christ is sort of mystically present in the host, but he’s not worried about crumbs. Even if such an erroneous belief is better than not believing in any sort of Real Presence, no matter: it is erroneous, not at all what the Church teaches.

Father Bryan W. Jerabek, J.C.L. is Rector of the Cathedral of St. Paul in Birmingham, Alabama and is Chancellor of the Diocese of Birmingham. He blogs at http://fatherjerabek.com.

Editor’s Note: In Part II, Fr. Jerabek discusses whose hands are consecrated for handling the Blessed Sacrament, what other priests and bishops think of the practice of receiving Holy Communion in the hand, and provides recommendations (and links) for further reading.

+

Art for this post on Communion on the Tongue: Partial restoration of San Carlo Borromeo comunica San Luigi Gonzaga (St. Charles Borromeo communicates St. Aloysius Gonzaga), tapestry by unknown artist, photographed by Giovanni Dall’Orto, June 22, 2007, copyright holder allows use for any purpose, provided copyright holder is properly attributed, Wikimedia Commons. Photograph of Fr. Bryan Jerabek used with permission.

Profile photo of Fr. Bryan Jerabek

About Fr. Bryan Jerabek

Father Bryan W. Jerabek, J.C.L. is a priest of the Diocese of Birmingham in Alabama, currently serving as Rector of the Cathedral of St. Paul in Birmingham, Chancellor of the Diocese, and Judge on the Marriage Tribunal. He received his License in Canon Law from the Pontifical College of the Holy Cross in Rome. His personal blog is fatherjerabek.com. Besides his native English, Father also speaks Spanish and Italian. He enjoys traveling and so far has been to 18 countries. Father’s present favorite food is Spanish tortilla.

Comments

18 responses to “One Priest’s Thoughts and Experiences Concerning Communion on the Tongue – Part I”

  1. Djk2450 Avatar
    Djk2450

    Receiving on the tongue is the only way to accept the Eucharist. As to allowing the Body to melt, the new formula of whole wheat flour takes forever. The old formula of white flour would melt in seconds. God bless you, Father, for your vocation. I have cousins in Birmingham who have all fallen away from the Faith. Peace and God bless.

  2. Kirry Avatar
    Kirry

    Thank you Fr. Bryan for your thoughtful post. I too have made a switch to receiving on the tongue and I have taught my children to do so as well. First of all, it just plain seems more reverent to me. Second, as you mentioned, there is just too much chance of crumbs being lost. I would like to see a return of altar rails and people kneeling to receive our Lord. I try when possible but I am often carrying a child with me during communion and its hard to kneel without some support with a kid in your arms. The lost of faith in, and respect for the true presence in the Eucharist I think can be traced to the church’s minimal requirements for showing due respect. If they don’t treat it like its true then who will believe it. I think all the removal of the outward signs of respect have created and lack of faith on the inside of the faithful. Sacraments are outward signs instituted by Christ to give grace b/c we humans need those outward cues to help us see the inward spiritual reality. Those outward signs were helping the faithful understand how important and real the presence of Christ is in the Eucharist. By requiring just the minimal sign of respect, it diminishes our collective faith in the true presence. Posts like yours give me faith that someday the church may return to her old traditions that maintained respect for the sacred spaces and the sacraments.

  3. tz1 Avatar
    tz1

    Personally, I prefer it on the tongue. But:
    The irreverence or not perceiving Christ’s real presence is there regardless. Changing the method doesn’t address the error. If they don’t think Christ is present, you could change the rubric but not fix the error. Was your homily about Presence, or table etiquette?
    You could go to intinctment.
    If we were about to shake hands and I spit on my hand, would you shake it? There were never any standards other than the eucharistic fast. Is my mouth cleaner than my hand? maybe we need eucharistic capsules that dissolve in the stomach to avoid the filthy mouth.
    As to particles, maybe we can find a less brittle host that doesn’t fragment, but how many centuries did we have this bad practice before we figured it out? Be like the church Fathers, those who died for Christ when they were so disrespectful? Infinitesimal, invisible fragments? What about those that blow away (many churches don’t always use patens, but they are too small to guarantee it). What about outdoor masses where there is a wind? What about those taken to the hospital and homebound or should that be banned? At some point you need to trust the omnipotent God and his grace can take care of himself when there is no evil intent and no visible fragments – do what is humanly possible, and don’t imagine the worst..

    Clean the inside of the person. Reinstill the eucharist is a representation of Christ’s bloody sacrifice, and that it IS his body, blood, soul, and divinity. You can’t fix ignorance with rubricks.

  4. Laurie Avatar
    Laurie

    Dr. Bryan, firstly, I would say “What is loosed on earth will be loosed in heaven.” That tells me if the Church has directed that communion on the hand is permitted, then it is permitted. The Church gives a choice of tongue or hand, so it is not fair to make people who receive communion on the hand feel guilty. I receive on the hand, with great reverence. I remember Sister Faustina’s writing about the host dropping into her hand and hearing the Lord say to her at that moment that He wished to lie in her hand, I would reference the passage if I could remember the # in her notes. This issue is really about the heart and about faith in the real presence whether on the tongue or in the hand, If someone receives either way without faith or reverence, then that person is being sacrilegious to the Blessed Sacrament. The challenge here is to teach about reverence for God in the heart and then how to approach His true Body and Blood. They should also be made aware of their culpability and the consequences of not receiving reverently or in a state of grace and the need to abstain if they do not believe in the real presence.

  5. Laurie Avatar
    Laurie

    Sorry Father…I meant Fr. Bryan not Dr. typo:)

  6. Dan Ruf in indiana Avatar
    Dan Ruf in indiana

    Observe a piece of the Blessed Sacrament that has fallen to the ground without anyone noticing and you would change your mind regarding receiving in the hand. I believe this is an act of humility and all the justification otherwise just points to pride alone.

  7. jdumon Avatar
    jdumon

    The local bishops are free to rescind the practice of the communion in the hand.
    This happened at least once in a diocese in Peru due to too many irreverences and sacrileges: The communion in the hand was abrogated forever.
    Indeed everyone is obliged to acknowledge that such irreverences and sacrileges are much easier with communion in the hand than on the tongue.

  8. brbg Avatar
    brbg

    We know that communion in the hand was one of the ways the KGB wanted to weaken the faith. In the 50’s they inserted approximately 2000 agents in seminaries with a “playbook” for destroying the Catholic Church. The other plans were for moving the tabernacle away from front and center, removing kneelers and having people stand or sit for the consecration. The list goes on and they have been very successful.

  9. From. Dan Hesko Avatar
    From. Dan Hesko

    Well written. I’m a parish priest for over 35 years and I believe the practice of ‘self Communion’aka communion in the hand is one of the biggest liturgical mistakes of the last 50 years. I pray for the day the indult is recinded

  10. CatherineA Avatar
    CatherineA

    I am so sick of this debate I am seriously considering leaving the Church.

    The world is on fire, yet we have endless debates about hand v. tongue, and those who receive reverently and licitly in their hand are made to feel like heretics, like public sinners, like enemies of the Church. Never mind that the human mouth has plenty of germs itself, and the tongue is the conduit of most of the sin in this world. As for microscopic particles, seriously? Maybe we should just keep Jesus on the altar and away from filthy sinners. Maybe He should stay safely in the tabernacle, or a monstrance. Maybe only priests should be allowed to touch Him. Problem solved.

    I have lost virtually all confidence in priests, between this obsession with tongues over hands, not to mention being told by countless others that I am in a state of mortal sin because I refused to vote for Donald Trump. I have just about decided that if I am to survive as a Christian, I’m going to have to get away from this madness.

    In the meantime, I’ve just quit receiving altogether, since it seems to upset so many of my fellow Catholics. I just keep my seat and make a spiritual communion.

  11. CatherineA Avatar
    CatherineA

    THANK YOU. Finally, a voice of reason.

  12. Catholic_Mom_of_6 Avatar
    Catholic_Mom_of_6

    Bella Dodd

  13. Alexander Albert Avatar
    Alexander Albert

    The Pope and most bishops in the world distribute only on the tongue. It is primarily an American practice to receive on the hands.

    Besides, the article isn’t about authority, it’s about answering this question: what is the most practical way to show reverence and care to *every* particle of the Eucharist? And this one: what is a practical (not verbal) way to remind people that the Eucharist is not an ordinary cracker?

  14. Alexander Albert Avatar
    Alexander Albert

    Father did not call you a filthy sinner.

    Father did not even say that it was sinful to receive on the hand. He only argued that many (certainly not all!) people are careless when they do. This is about general policy, not judging individual recipients. If you are reverent when receiving on the hand and careful about particles, I do not condemn you and I’m sure Father doesn’t either.

    Also, Father did not condemn you for not voting Trump.

    Dropping particles on the floor is not the same thing as giving it to “filthy sinners”

    This is one short article; hardly an “obsession” with anything.

    The Church has sinful members (clergy included), but there are really only two questions that matter: Is this the Church Jesus himself established? Is the Eucharist really what the Church claims it is?

    Whatever your crisis of faith is, it is not this article’s fault. I hope you find some answers and some peace.

  15. Crickeft Avatar
    Crickeft

    I agree with receiving Holy Communion on the tongue in principle. However, for me, that seems to work best when I’m able to receive kneeling. I have a visual impairment which affects my balance. The last time I tried to receive on the tongue while standing in line, I very nearly fell over onto the priest. True story! So now when I’m at NO Masses, I just receive reverently in the hand.

  16. 77reid Avatar
    77reid

    As an immediately post Vatican II baby; I learnt like the author and since Vatican II never taught it, I never learnt it. Even now First Holy Communion is received on the tongue (I suppose because it seems holier). Holy Communion in the Hand is the result of rebellious bishops in the Dutch church which lead to the Indult allowing it we are now learning that spread like wild fire through the Latin church.

  17. JM Avatar
    JM

    OK let’s go to the basics only through an Ordained Priest and at The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is Consecration possible.

    The United States bishops in 1968 asked for permission away from the norm of receiving communion kneeling on the tongue and still is the norm by the way

    Permission to instead receive communion on the hand out of the norm is receiving on the hand

    There have been several Covenants from God the last one from Christ during the Triduum Passion Death and Resurrection
    Where the nails were the pen Christs blood was the Ink and Christs Skin was the Parchment

    And last but not least on Holy Thursday the Apostles being the first Bishops received In the hand institution of Priesthood Sacrifice of the Holy Mass and institution of the Eucharist if in fact we are not an Ordained Priest like I said the Apostles were Bishops we in fact are not

    Yes most definitely I receive our Lord kneeling and on my tongue

  18. joanmariebernadette Avatar
    joanmariebernadette

    @CatherineA: Please, do not do this thing that you are considering. Please, read & pray over these Scriptures, below. Then, ask Jesus what He desires from you.

    “Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. [50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.
    [51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven. [52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. [55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.”. Jn 6:48-55 (DR)

    http://drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=50&ch=6&l=54#x

Leave a Reply