“Whatever you can do to stop Communon in the hand, will be blessed by God.”- said Fr. John Hardon. : “With Communion in the hand, a miracle would be required during each distribution of Communion to avoid some Particles from falling to the ground or remaining in the hand of the faithful….” – Bishop Juan Rodolfo Laise.
Before we begin, let us start by giving a website which should be viewed regarding this serious problem in the Church. goo.gl/RWUWKi Priests and laity, you kneel to read what Fr. Richard Heilman has to say on this site. Fr. Nicholas Gruner, R.I.P., published several years ago the conditions contained in the Indult for this practice. He stated that one of the conditions was that people were supposed to look in their hands for Particles, lest they fall out of people’s hands. goo.gl/u2ryNk He said, ”If a Particle falls to the floor, a sacrilege has been committed, whether intentional or unintentional.” Fr. Ronald Tangen said, “You must look in your hands for Particles. That cannot just be brushed off! That is God there in your hand! This is very serious!” Now we can understand why the Blessed Mother told Father Gobbi: “It can now be said that there is a not a Eucharistic celebration in which sacrileges are not committed.” In Sri Lanka, Communion on the tongue is obligatory; Sri Lankan Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith has criticized Communion in the hand in his capacity as secretary for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments. The clergy have a most grave obligation to inform the people lest they be guilty of negligence.
I would also urge the clergy to do their research and read the book by Most Rev. Juan Rodolfo Laise, Bishop Emeritus of San Luis, Argentina – Communion in the Hand: Documents & History. See why he says, “With Communion in the hand, a miracle would be required during each distribution of Communion to avoid some Particles from falling to the ground or remaining in the hand of the faithful….
Deplorable! Blessed John Paul II, Dominicae Cenae, Feb 24, 1980: “In some countries the practice of receiving communion in the hand has been introduced… However, cases of deplorable lack of respect toward the Eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior, but also to the pastors of the Church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist…“To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained…”
Dietrich von Hildebrand, The Devastated Vineyand, p 67-68, 1973: “Unfortunately, in many places Communion is distributed in the hand. To what extent is this supposed to be a renewal and a deepening of the reception of Holy Communion? Is the trembling reverence with which we receive this incomprehensible gift perhaps increased by receiving it in our unconsecrated hands, rather than from the consecrated hands of the priest? It is not difficult to see that the danger of parts of the consecrated Host falling to the ground is incomparably increased, and the danger of desecrating it or indeed of horrible blasphemy is very great. And what in the world is to be gained from all this?”
Prophet of The People: A Biography of St. Padre Pio, Dorothy M. Gaudiose (Page 202): “Then he uncovered the chalice, but before he offered the unconsecrated wafer on the paten, he ran his fingers around the Host to make sure there were no loose particles.”
Pope Benedict XVI (Joseph, Cardinal Ratzinger) ‘The Spirit of the Liturgy’ (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000): “It may well be that kneeling is alien to modern culture – insofar as it is a culture, for this culture has turned away from the faith and no longer knows the One before whom kneeling is the right, indeed the intrinsically necessary gesture. The man who learns to believe learns also to kneel, and a faith or a liturgy no longer familiar with kneeling would be sick at the core. Where it has been lost, kneeling must be rediscovered, so that, in our prayer, we remain in fellowship with the apostles and martyrs, in fellowship with the whole cosmos, indeed in union with Jesus Christ Himself.”
Cardinal Medina Estevez, writing to some English speaking bishops: “It is a grave violation of one’s basic human right, to refuse to give holy Communion to one kneeling.”
Fr. Benedict Groeschel, C.F.R., EWTN Talk: “Also, I want to state very clearly that the experiment of giving communion in the hand has been a disaster.”
Most Rev. Juan Rodolfo Laise, Bishop Emeritus of San Luis, Argentina – Communion in the Hand: Documents & History (English translation – 2011): “All that has been elaborated on until now permits us to realize that the history of the reintroduction of communion in the hand is nothing other than the triumph of an act of disobedience. The consideration of the details of this history makes evident to us the gravity of this disobedience: in fact, it is very serious above all because of the very matter which it concerns; very serious
because it implies the open resistance to a clear, explicit and solidly founded directive of the pope; most serious by its universal extension; most serious because those who did not obey were not only the faithful or priests, but in many cases bishops and entire Episcopal conferences; most serious, because not only did they remain unpunished but they obtained a resounding success; most serious, in short, because it has succeeded in having the state of disobedience remain hidden, making it such that one might believe, on the contrary, that they were adopting a proposal that came from Rome.”
You can order online…”Communion in the Hand: Documents & History” – Laise, Most Rev. Juan Rodolfo [bishop emeritus of San Luis, Argentina]. Hear the other side of the story!
Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, 2001: “It is the grave responsibility of the Church to direct and regulate the celebration of the Eucharist and to protect this most precious gift from abuse and faulty teaching.”
Bishop Juan Rodolfo Laise, San Luis, Argentina, 1997: “With Communion in the hand, a miracle would be required during each distribution of Communion to avoid some Particles from falling to the ground or remaining in the hand of the faithful…. Let us speak clearly: whoever receives Communion in the mouth not only follows exactly the tradition handed down but also the wish expressed by the last Popes and thus avoids placing himself in the occasion of committing a sin by negligently dropping a fragment of the Body of Christ.” This was why Fr. Gruner would never give Communion in the hand, because he could never be absolutely certain profanation would not take place!
Cardinal Carberry, March, 1977: “At one time it would have been unthinkable for anyone without anointed hands to touch the Sacred Species. In this century there has been a steady diminution of outward signs of respect for sacred objects. When I was a boy there was a scale of values. It was understood that anyone could handle a ciborium or monstrance, but only the priest could touch the chalice because it was consecrated. Until recent times we priests kissed each sacred vestment as we put it on, we genuflected before and after touching the Sacred Host. The new rubrics abolished the kissing and reduced genuflections to a minimum. . . the loss of outward marks of respect lead the simple-minded to lose their sense of reverence. Some have begun to ignore the Blessed Sacrament. They do not genuflect to the Blessed Sacrament and do not kneel in adoration when they come into church.”
At Garabandal, Spain, where the Blessed Mother gave two grave warnings to the world, she lamented that, “less and less importance is being given to the Eucharist,” and she warned of many bad clergy in the Church: “Many cardinals, many bishops, and many priests are on the road to perdition, and they’re taking many souls with them…” Would she be referring to clergy who allow grave immodesty in the House of God, women indecent in God’s house, tempting men, and they say nothing? Silence implies consent. One lady who was corrected for her tight, immodest dress said the priest told her it was okay. Are they the dumb dogs Our Lord complained about to Isaias: “His watchmen are all blind, they are all ignorant: dumb dogs not able to bark, seeing vain things, sleeping and loving dreams.” 56:10. God commands them to cry out, “Cry, cease not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their wicked doings, and the house of Jacob their sins.” 58:1.
Fr. John Hardon, at a conference before he died, spoke of Communion in the hand, and he tld the people, “Whatever you can do to stop Communion in the hand will be blessed by God.” At Akita, Japan in the 70’s, the statue that wept 101 times, also bled from the right hand, while the left hand of Sr. Sasagawea bled. Mother Angelica, on her network, asked the question, “Could this be a sign from God of His displeasure with Communion in the hand?” If you really want to know the truth why Communion in the hand is now the norm, you need to read AA-1025, Memoirs of an Anti-Apostle. These are notes from a communist infiltrator who was sent in with hundreds of others, to infiltrate the Catholic priesthood from within. He details many of his ideas, Communion in the hand and many others in his book, that are in the new Mass.
Rethinking Communion in the Hand By Jude A Huntz
HOMELITIC & PASTORAL REVIEW March 1997
Has the practice of Communion in the hand really strengthened and clarified our faith in the Real Presence? The time has come to begin to do everything we reasonably and licitly can to discourage the practice of Communion-in-the-Hand. In fact, the time is long past that we started doing this. It is much better to receive Holy Communion in the traditional manner, than it is to receive the Sacred Host into our hands. In Canada and the United States, it is true that one may receive “on the hand,” with due precautions, but it is better to receive on the tongue. Even as we begin, it might immediately be objected: Communion in the hand is fully approved by the Church, and it is disloyal and disrespectful and therefore not allowed even to begin this discussion. In answer to that objection, let us begin with the legal aspects of the question.
1. The legal status of the two methods
It is the law of the universal Church in the Latin Rite (to which most of us belong) that we receive Communion in the traditional manner. To receive on the hand is only an “indult,” or concession that is in effect here and there. It does not exist in the greater part of the world. For example, for a while it was allowed in the Philippines, but then the bishops there changed their minds, and rescinded the permission. Another way of illustrating this same point is to recall that in those countries where the indult for Communion in the hand has been granted by the Holy See, an individual bishop may forbid the practice. But, no bishop has the authority to forbid the traditional way of receiving Communion: on the tongue. Thus from the point of view of liturgical law, the two are very far from equal. It must be further noted that the relevant legislation “strongly urges and exhorts” us all to receive Communion in the traditional manner, which is officially described as “more reverent.” One will search in vain for any encouragement of Communion in the hand on the part of the supreme authority of the Church. Indeed, the only time that it is mentioned in official documents is in a cautionary way. It can be done reverently, but be careful!
In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has been introduced. This practice has been requested by individual episcopal conferences and has received approval from the Apostolic See. However, cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the Eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behaviour but also to the pastors of the church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist. It also happens, on occasion, that the free choice of those who prefer to continue the practice of receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is not taken into account in those places where the distribution of Communion in the hand has been authorized. It is therefore difficult in the context of this present letter not to mention the sad phenomena previously referred to. This is in no way meant to refer to those who, receiving the Lord Jesus in the hand, do so with profound reverence and devotion, in those countries where this practice has been authorized. (Pope John Paul II, Dominicae Cenae, II)
In Memoriale Domini, which granted the original concession, and in the letter to nuncios which in each and every case accompanied the actual indult (L’instruction “Memoriale Domini”), the permission for Communion in the hand was hedged around with so many precautions, that some have concluded that even in countries where it would seem to be legal, actually, in the larger number of cases, it is still not allowed.
2. The fragments . . .
If we examine the practice of placing the Sacred Host in the hand of the communicant, one dogma of the Church comes immediately to mind: The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ. [Note 205: Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1641.] (CCC, 1377, my emphasis).
The Roman Catechism put it this way: Christ, whole and entire, is contained not only under either species, but also in each particle of either species. Each, says St. Augustine, receives Christ the Lord, and He is entire in each portion. He is not diminished by being given to many, but gives Himself whole and entire to each . . . . the body of our Lord is contained whole and entire under the least particle of the bread. Therefore, very great reverence, respect and care is to be taken of these fragments. Since this is the case, why would we multiply immensely the number of persons who are handling the Sacred Host, some of whom are clumsy, or cannot see well, or don’t care, or don’t know, etc. To this must be added the increased danger of dropping the Host on the ground and the increased ease of stealing the Body of the Lord for superstitious or horrible purposes. For those who believe with lively faith, this question ought to be enough to put an end to Communion in the hand: “What about the fragments?”
Remember, St Thomas Acquinas taught, “Nothing touches it except what is consecrated, and therefore the priest’s hands are consecrated for touching the Host.” Are your hands consecrated? I urge you to inform yourself, and learn the truth. Communion in the hand is a grave abuse, and should be rescinded .
If you have found this article helpful, please consider sharing it with your bishop, your pastor, and any others in your path of influence.