Let me grouse about something

Sorry, but the first question that came to my mind was: Well, do you have nine heads?

Actually, the EMs in my parish never miss a beat. Could it be the parish or the part of the country? Poor training?

Not too pious at all. I regularly receive the Eucharist in the universal way (on the tongue) when receiving from a priest. They've had plenty of practice.

However, just to make it easy on the EMEs, I do the American thing with them. It's probably not easy for a little old lady 9 inches shorter than me to land the sacred Host on my tongue without bumping into my beard or my nose.

They could make it easier on themselves by standing on a step above the level of the person receiving Holy Communion, but they usually don't.

No, it's not too pious. I always receive on the tongue, and I always genuflect before I receive. I usually stick my tongue out a little to make it easier to hit correctly.

No one's tried to deny me Communion yet, and only a couple of times has an EM or a priest even looked confused. As I've said before, the USCCB slogan should be, "Uniformity of posture, not uniformity of faith."

I normally receive on the tongue as well, and like Beregond I usually genuflect just prior. It's never been an issue at my parish.

Incidentally, doesn't the new document on the Eucharist say they are supposed to be called extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion?

1. I do what RC says - I try to make life easy for the EMs.

2. Indeed, they are "Extraordinary Ministers of Communion" - the priest is not only the ordinary but also the only "Minister of the Eucharist."

3. I don't think it's "too pious" to want to receive on the tongue - I prefer it that way, and that's why I do so when receiving from a priest - but I'm not sure the issue should be whether your hands are or aren't consecrated. After all, your tongue isn't either, and as Ratzinger points out in discussing this issue, we often sin as much with the tongue as with the hands. See also the recent discussion of the issue on HMS - start here and follow the links backwards.

Of course: make that "EMHC" instead of "EME"!

Somebody look up the Latin term so we can abbreviate that. I'll guess: MESC?

1. I don't have the problem Richard describes, because I am only three feet tall.

2. In the Catholic News Service stylebook, calling EMEs "extraordinary" is verboten. They are "eucharistic ministers" only, unless they've changed it recently.

3. I always receive on the tongue, no matter where I am, or who is giving me the Host. I open my mouth and let him figure it out if it's unfamiliar. Canonically, receiving on the tongue is the normative way to receive.

Sorry, my pronouns were unclear: in the second-to-last sentence, I meant to say "let him figure it out if he doesn't know how to administer the Eucharist on the tongue."

I always receive on the tongue, but try to signal my intentions clearly by having my hands at my sides.

The only way to receive is to tilt your head back to allow the priest to get the golden spoon in there.

Your situation could be worse though. At the Roman branch of my parish, a group of parishioners were upset that they had to sing banal 1970's Marian hymns on the Feast of the Dormition. It was so "1952" apparently.

I always receive on the tongue, and _always_ save EMCHs from any troubles. I simply go to a priest or a deacon, even if it takes processional route to get there.
I don't like EMs - I have never seen ANY circumstance meeting the requirements for engaging EM that are put by the liturgical law. Not one instance.
(And I don't like those ushers imposing military drill, either. 'Present arms' and marching in line just don't belong there.) What else to mention? Uhh, I am sure there is more...

The most bizarre EM (whatever) encounter I had was at a parish where, upon seeing that I intended to receive upon the tongue, the EM said, "Body of Christ, please stick out your tongue."

Ummm...do you hear what you just said, Miss I'm-Clearly-Uncomfortable-WIth-This-Entire-Ordeal?

Until recently, I lived in Diocese of Arlington, where I always received on the tongue. Maybe 1/4 of my old parish did so or perhaps a bit less. Certainly nothing out of the ordinary.

Well, now I live in Diocese of Richmond. I had one priest flick the body of our Lord into my mouth. One EMHC tried to force it into my hands, which were clasped together below my waste. And one pour old soul tried to put it on my tongue but ended up putting his hand in my mouth.

What puzzles me is that the new parish is relatively orthodox by Richmond standards. Yes, I know it's not saying much. But, we have wafers instead of chunks of muffins. We have-and use!-kneelers. And, the Eucharistic Prayer is botched in a way that indicates inattention rather than dissent. Still, we'll probably always have the Haugen, the army of EMHCs, and the big tea pitcher for consecrating the blood of Christ.

Anyway, I've given up on receiving on the tongue unless one of the younger priests is distributing. Receiving on the tongue now feels more like a petty protest rather than showing devotion to Christ. I wish I could do it without being distracted.

Why did you receive from an EM? Was a priest unavailable? I always receive on the tongue and always from a priest.

I am one of those "extraordinary" ministers, who are not extraordinary but absolutely routine in my parish. I try hard to adjust quickly to how anyone wants to receive. But I haven't had lots of practice with the tongue thing, and I can't seem to do it without having my hand touch the person's tongue or mouth, just the tiniest little bit. That same hand then touches the next host,which winds up in the next person's mouth one way or the other. I suppose my nurse's training made me hypersensitive about this sort of thing even though I don't think of myself that way. Receiving communion is so much more important than a few germs. But, is there a trick to putting the host on someone's tongue without touching the tongue?

I truly don't understand why it would be so important to some of you to receive on your tongue rather than in your hands. But if doing it that way feels more reverent to someone, I respect that and I think anyone should. I don't understand why it matters to some of you that the priest gives you Jesus instead of a lay person. What matters is that Jesus is coming to you.

I feel a lot of joy when I do this...no matter how I felt earlier that day, if I was sad or anxious, or just blah, or when we sang some insipid song and I was irritated and resentful and composing letters to the liturgy committee in my head...when I am giving out communion that joy just wells right up in me.

So it sort of bothers me that some of you look upon my doing this as irreverant, or as not honoring Christ's presence, ...or however it seems to you that would make you switch communion lines.

Susan Peterson

by the way, the way this comment page is coming across on my computer, half the lines are blurred as if ,if it were paper, the paper is wrinkled and folder over, obscuring some of the lines. For instance,there is a "yes" or "no" option above, but I can't read what I would be saying yes or no to. No appears to be the default; I am leaving it that way.
SFP