Once again time for a history lesson so the truth is back to the forefront.
The last Supper was more than likely a Seder Meal. There is nothing scriptural that refutes that so we must assume that is what it was. At a Sedar Meal things are done in a prescribed way following a certain formula. Various foods are consumed and wine is drunk. In this meal, the presider, patriarch or rabbi, leads the prayers performs the blessings and generally runs things.
The food is consumed in a special way. A small portion of each of the foods is consumed prior to the actual meal and wine consumed between eating these small portions. Various blessings are said throughout In small close settings, families, nomadic tribes and small religious communities, Christ was not the only nomadic teacher roaming around in those days, it was not at all unusual for the presider to place this small morsel of each of the foods in the mouths of those present. So while we do not know how the distribution went at the Last Supper it very well could have been done on the tongue. we don’t know.
As Christianity developed and moved away from the Sedar Meal aspect it became the norm to receive in the hand. Definitely. No doubt about it. The early Church did receive in the hand:thumbsup:
They had a logical reason for doing so. In those days, the Host was not a wafer as it is now, rather it was a substantial loaf/ Each family or solo member of the congregation brought their own loaf and all were consecrated together. When time came for distribution the congregation came forward and received. They did not necessarily receive the loaf that they brought. A small portion was consumed at the Church or home and the rest
TAKEN HOME FOR CONSUMPTION DURING THE WEEK
This fact is seldom if ever brought up by the proponents of communion in the hand.
Oh and by the way for those who don’t know we don’t bring the Host home with us any longer. At least we are not supposed to.
The reason the Church went to receiving on the tongue is simple. People started to lose sight of what the Eucharist was and was not. There were private expositions at homes for which admission was charged. Consecrated Hosts were sold as love charms, amulets to ward off sickness, good luck charms etc. It was common for people to carry a consecrated Host to ward off misfortune. They were also used in the so called Black Masses of Satanism Receiving on the tongue was instituted so that the people would once again realize just how special the entire experience was and to instill a sense of reverence that was sadly lacking.
Now could such things happen today on our enlightened times?:hmmm:
Well, people have tried to sell consecrated Hosts on E-Bay.:eek:
People have written on this forum asking the best way to preserve and expose the Eucharist at home.:eek:
Consecrated Hosts have been used for various purposes, miraculous healings etc in various places:eek:
Consecrated Hosts have been defiled and horrific acts of sacrilige have taken place.:bigyikes:
Now there is absolutely no assurance that receiving on the tongue would eliminate these abuses.
But it wouldn’t hurt.
Add to that the fact that I have never ever not even once seen a coherent reason for going to receiving in the hand in the first place.