I go to a parish that has both the TLM and NO masses at different times. We have two wonderful priests. I asked the TLM priest a question about receiving communion, and he said he would absolutely never put the host in someone’s hand. I wanted to ask why, but felt so ignorant. He is a kind man, good to both the TLM and NO folks, and has a good relationship with the NO priest. Why is he so adamant that he will not give communion in the hand even at NO Masses?
Historical Fact. Some pastors also will not allow altar girls, and some will refuse to even allow the “sign of peace” option in their parishes as well.
As far as “Communion in the hand”, well it was banned in the early years of the Church and then resurfaced in the middle ages, reintroduced by the Protestant Reformers to show their disbelief in the Real Presence.
It was re-introduced in the Catholic Church in Europe in the 1960’s, illegally by disobedient clergy who wanted to ape the “protestant” practice. [Edited by Moderator]
Later on in the 1970’s an indult was granted by Pope Paul VI for those Diocese where the “abuse” had taken hold.
That is just the short history of why we have communion in the hand in the Catholic Church- when still to this day “on the tongue” is the “normal meathod” and “in the hand” is “an indult”- a “special permission to deviate from the norm”.
Communion in the hand mimicks “Protestant” liturgical practice which is meant to show the doctrine of the Eucharist as not being the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ.
The reason because of this is he probably believes that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist.
Even though many people say they believe it, many just say they do, but don’t truly believe that He is present.
We must believe to the point of preferring to be killed rather than forced to commit sacrilege, to be rejected by others rather than give up our belief in the real presence. To not be embarrassed by genuflecting, by keeping silence or giving reverence to the Eucharist. To go out of our way to give honor to Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.
We must be hot not lukewarm, this Priest is not some wishy washy priest who allows for a lukewarm response to Catholicism but a radical committed stance which requires personal devotion and change.
This is not to say that we are not allowed to recieve in the hand when given permission, but the Priest is the one who gives us Christ and in the Mass as long as he is being faithful and not personalizing the Mass it is ok. It is always better to be more faithful than less.
Now if the Priest was doing something less faithful such as telling everyone to go stand up in the sanctuary with him then it would be cause for alarm as he would be encouraging a possible sacrilege.
I can understand his opinion, especially seeing that the practice resulted from an abuse, HOWEVER just because a priest gives communion in the hand doesn’t mean that they somehow don’t believe in the real presence, nor does it mean that this priest is more faithful simply for not giving it in the hand.
Also I am unsure whether he is allowed to deny communion in the hand for the NOM since there is an indult for it.
He doesn’t. He always offers the chalice at a NOM to avoid causing a fuss.
Justified completely- as many Bishops deny access to the use of the 1962 Missal in their diocese- currently allowed under indult also.
He is trying to make the point that he disagrees with communion in the hand.
Whilst I completely agree that it was not a good innovation, he is not making his point in a very good way, because it simply confuses the faithful when one priest insists on one thing and another demands the other. Also it creates a precedent for defying the bishop, or pressurising him if the bishop has reluctantly given him permission.