Reverence or Convenience: Receiving the Blessed Sacrament

The Indiana Jones movies were very popular, especially the first and the third ones. Archeology Professor Indiana Jones was introduced in the first movie, seeking the Ark of the Covenant, along with some characteristics that begged answers in later episodes (such as the scar on his chin and fear of snakes). Some of these were covered in, what I think, was one of the best sequels, “The Last Crusade.” Aside from bringing in Sean Connery as his father, this movie included some amusing incidents (such as throwing the Nazi off the zeppelin for “no ticket”); fly, yes, land, no; and interesting background on Indiana’s early years (he was named for the dog).

To get access to the Cup of Christ Indiana had to solve some riddles, the first of which dealt with being penitent before the Lord. If Cardinal Cupich had his way, Indiana Jones would have been beheaded before gaining access to the Holy Grail. The solution to the first problem was to kneel. But Cardinal Cupich considers kneeling before the Lord to be disruptive.

It would seem that the Cardinal Archbishop is more concerned about the procession and the gathering of the congregation than the actual real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. Perhaps he is one of those prelates who does not actually believe that Jesus is really and truly present in that host: body, blood, soul, and divinity. We know that there are many in the clergy who do not believe, but one would hope that someone whose calling is supposed to emulate the “Good Shepherd” would be a true believer and would err on the side of reverence and even encourage it. “The Good Shepherd ought to be the model and ‘form’ of the bishop’s pastoral office.” (CCC 896)

When I lived in the Arlington Diocese (Northern Virginia) the norm for receiving communion was on the tongue and no distinction was made for kneeling or standing. In my current parish in the Richmond Diocese (the rest of Virginia), we have set up kneelers at the front of the communion line so that those who desire to receive kneeling and on the tongue can do so. I have not heard of any objections (although I am sure there have been some) and many (myself included) take the opportunity to kneel while receiving Our Blessed Lord. I also appreciate the kneeler as I am getting older, and it gets harder to get up without the help of the kneeler (which would be more disruptive). The consensus in my men’s group was that we would welcome an “old-fashioned” communion rail, if it could be worked into the church design.

I am not surprised, though, that Cardinal Cupich has made such a declaration of policy, even though contrary to the instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum of 2004 (Congregation for Divine Worship). The instruction “On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided regarding the Most Holy Eucharist,” in article 91 states, “Therefore, it is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing.” After all, Cardinal Cupich has said that the “Traditional Latin Mass ‘Impoverishes’ the Church.”

One of the basic tenets of the Catholic faith is that our lives set an example for others. As such, it is incumbent upon us to be witnesses to our faith in our actions, including the reverence and respect we have for the Eucharist. This means in public as well as privately. We hear many complaints in parishes today about the noise in the church at the beginning of mass. While there is importance in communion with our Catholic brethren, the real reason we go to mass is the Eucharist. Without the celebration of Christ’s sacrifice and the receiving of His Body and Blood, mass is fairly meaningless.

We can engage in social communion with others almost anywhere, but the worship of Jesus and His sacrifice for us is special. Without the true presence (some sects have a “eucharist,” “Supper of the Lord,” or similar celebration) we are just engaging in symbology. In 2021 the former bishop of the Brooklyn Diocese, Bishop DiMarzio told a story in The Tablet, the diocesan newspaper, that illustrates the truth of the Eucharist.

For many, there is a Protestant reform notion that it is only a memorial, or a remembrance, of what the Lord did at the Last Supper. I have a story that taught me something when I was a young priest that involved the Ecumenical Movement, especially around Thanksgiving, which was a time of many ecumenical services.

There was a Reformed Church down the street from the parish at which I was stationed at the time that was responsible for the service that year. Prior to the date, I went to a meeting at the Reformed Church preparing for the upcoming service. In my naivete, I looked around the church and saw that there was a table that said, “Do this in memory of me,” but I saw no tabernacle. I questioned the minister and asked, “Do you celebrate the Eucharist?” to which he replied, “Yes, we have the Lord’s Supper once a month.”

In looking for a tabernacle, I asked, “But what do you do with the remains of the Eucharistic elements?” “Well,” he replied, “I open the window, and I throw it out to the birds because it returns back to nature.” With all of the theology I learned in the seminary, nothing made such an impression to me to recognize what I believed about the Eucharist had been lost in the Reformation; that this was merely a symbol, that it was not really the Lord who was with us.

I wonder, does Cardinal Cupich keep the Blessed Sacrament in the Tabernacle or does he toss it out for birds after mass. Archbishop Chaput wrote a book, Things Worth Dying For. Bishop Sheen tells a story of a young girl during World War II who, after the Nazis had broken into a church and scattered the hosts on the ground, would sneak into the church nightly and, without touching the Blessed Sacrament, knelt down and picked each one up on her tongue and consumed it, before the Nazis caught up with her.

Fr. William Casey, in his book, You Shall Stand Firm: Preserving the Faith in an Age of Apostasy, noted “We cannot fail to observe that many routinely receive our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament with obvious indifference, nonchalance, and sometimes even irreverence.”

All who are physically able should kneel before the Eucharist (Christ) and it should be encouraged, not restricted. As for restricting flow, just watch how smoothly distribution of the Blessed Sacrament occurs in a TLM church (with a communion rail). I’m old enough to remember mass before Vatican II when all received communion kneeling and on the tongue. It was never a problem then and it shouldn’t be now. I wonder, does the cardinal intend to kneel before the Lord at his judgment. Somehow I don’t think he will be given the choice.