Receiving Holy Communion (1)

Zak Portelli (The Sunday Times, May 16) is missing the point. What was decided in 115 AD does not (and normally will not) affect today's practice. First and foremost, one must avoid any myopic approach to religion. The Pharisees, so harshly criticised by Jesus, had such an approach.

All fanatics and extremists get bogged down in fine details and ignore the fact that Christianity, first and foremost, involves love of neighbour.

Until a few decades ago, the faithful had to fast from midnight in order to receive Holy Communion the next day. This has long been whittled down to an hour before Communion. These customs can be added and removed according to the teachings of the Church and the needs of the times.

The Catholic Church is dynamic. It does not exist in a time warp. It is for all people and for all times.

Risking the spread of disease is surely not brotherly love.

It is immaterial which part of the body touches the Sacred Host. To Christians, the whole body is considered to be a temple of the Lord. The tongue will never exist on its own, and both hands and tongue form an integral part of the whole body.

Mr Portelli must remember that nowadays, lay people are allowed to distribute the Eucharist. Admittedly, these are specially selected and have their hands blessed, but they are not ordained, not even as sub-deacons. Thus, anyone can ask to be likewise blessed and thus there will no longer be any qualms of conscience.

Perhaps the most plausible solution would be for certain 'fanatics' to be able to have a private Mass (which is already the case in some communities). But the average churchgoer should not be asked to receive Holy Communion on the tongue and risk infection.