Do not take communion in the hand



The greatest treasure of the Church is the Sacrament of the Eucharist. The Holy Eucharist is nothing more nor less than the true Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, True God and True Man.

That is why St. Thomas Aquinas taught that out of reverence for this Sacrament, touching and administering it belonged to the priest alone.

However, after the Council, due to the sum of several unfortunate events, which I will allude to later, it has become common and widespread practice for many of the faithful to receive the Sacred Body of the Lord in their hands at the moment of communion. And many other lay people -men and women- known as "extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist" touch the Body of the Lord right and left, without the use of patens or any care as required by such a supernatural and exalted presence. This has brought more harmful effects than spiritual fruits, with the consequent desacralization of the Eucharistic liturgy and the loss of faith in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the consecrated form.

But what does the Apostolic Tradition and the perennial teaching of the Church say in this regard?

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his great Summa Theologica, says the following:

"The administration of the Body of Christ belongs to the priest for three reasons. 

"First, because he consecrates in the person of Christ. But as Christ consecrated His Body in the (Last) Supper, so He gave it to others to be shared with them. Consequently, as the consecration of the Body of Christ belongs to the priest, so its distribution belongs to him. 

"Second, because the priest is the designated intermediary between God and the people, therefore it pertains to him to offer the gifts of the people to God. Thus, it pertains to him to distribute to the people the consecrated gifts. 

"Third, because out of reverence for this Sacrament, nothing touches it but what is consecrated, since the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the hands of the priest to touch this Sacrament. Therefore, it is not licit for anyone else to touch it, except in case of necessity, for example, if it has fallen to the ground or in some other case of urgency" (III, Q. 82, Art. 13).

 That is why in the present liturgy it is commanded that in receiving Communion the Tray or Paten of the faithful should be used: "The communicant responds Amen, and receives the Sacrament with the Paten under his mouth" (M. Romano, n. 117). But who cares about the fate of the Holy Particles when receiving Communion in the hand? And how many Priests have hidden the Paten from the faithful!

  

Noli me Tangere - Do not touch me -

The teaching that only priests may touch the Sacred Host, that the priest's hands are consecrated for that purpose, and that no precaution was too great to safeguard reverence and avoid profanation, had been incorporated into the liturgy of the Church; that is, in the Old Latin Mass. 

Priests were instructed in the Old Mass to celebrate it with precise signs safeguarding the deserved reverence of the Blessed Sacrament. These meticulous signs were engraved in stone and were never optional. Each and every priest of the Roman Rite had to follow them with uncompromising precision. Even many priests today during the Eucharistic celebration continue this custom of extreme delicacy for Our Lord.


Some signs are these:


From the moment the priest pronounces the words of Consecration over the Sacred Form, he keeps his index finger and thumb together, and when he raises the chalice, changes the leaves of the missal or opens the tabernacle, his thumb and forefinger do not separate, touching nothing but the Sacred Form. It is also noteworthy that the Sacred Form is never left on the altar to walk the aisles of the church (especially before the fingers have been purified), to shake hands with the faithful in the rite of peace.


About the end of the Mass, the priest scrapes the corporal with the paten, and wipes it inside the chalice so that if the smallest particle remains, it is collected and reverently consumed.

The priest's fingers are washed over the chalice with water and wine, after Communion, to be reverently consumed, to ensure that the smallest particle is not susceptible to profanation.


Communion in the hand

Some say that this practice was introduced as a consequence of the Second Vatican Council, but the truth is that Communion in the hand was not mandated by the Second Vatican Council, but expresses utter defiance and contempt for centuries of Catholic teaching and practice.


Communion in the hand was inoculated under the guise of a false ecumenism, which was allowed to grow because of weakness in authority, endorsed by compromise and a false sense of tolerance, and has led to a profound irreverence and disregard for the Blessed Sacrament as the commonplace of abuse of the Blessed Sacrament,  and has led to a profound irreverence and disregard for the Blessed Sacrament as the commonplace liturgical abuse and dishonor of our age.

Indeed, in the sixteen documents of Vatican II, there is no mention of Communion in the hand, and it was not mentioned during any of the debates during the Council.

Prior to the Second Vatican Council there is no historical record of bishops, priests or laity asking anyone to introduce Communion in the hand. Quite the contrary, anyone educated in the Church before the Second Vatican Council will clearly remember being taught that it was sacrilegious for anyone to touch the Eucharistic Form except the priest.


(...) The only ones who received Communion standing and with outstretched hands were the Arians, who obstinately denied the Divinity of Christ and who could not see in the Eucharist more than a simple symbol of union, which they took and manipulated as they pleased.


What Happened?

After Vatican II, some ecumenically minded Dutch priests began to give Communion in the hand, imitating the Protestant practice. But the bishops, rather than doing their duty, tolerated it. 


As some Church hierarchs allowed the abuse to go unhindered, the practice spread to Germany, Belgium and France. But if the bishops seemed indifferent to this scandal, it was the indignation of large numbers of the faithful that prompted Paul VI to act. He canvassed the bishops of the world on the question, and they voted overwhelmingly to retain the traditional practice of receiving Holy Communion on the tongue only. It should be noted that at that time, the abuse was limited to a few countries in Europe and had not yet begun in the United States.

Instruction Memoriale Domini

It was then that on May 28, 1969, the Pope promulgated the Instruction Memoriale Domini. In brief, the document states:

Bishops throughout the world were overwhelmingly against Communion in the hand.

"This manner of distributing Holy Communion (that is, the priest placing the Host on the tongue of the communicants) must be preserved."

Communion on the tongue in no way diminishes the dignity of the communicant.

There was the warning that "any violation could lead to irreverence and profanation of the Eucharist, as well as to the gradual erosion of correct doctrine."

Thus, the Church does not permit, but tolerates communion in the hand, therefore, those who receive communion in the hand make use of an Indult. And it was only tolerated where the use was already entrenched and this for the purpose of "helping the Episcopal Conferences to fulfill their pastoral office, often more difficult than ever because of the present situation".

So, if this Instruction is so clearly stated, why is Communion in the hand so widespread?


Disobedience, rebellion and deception.

Naturally, the liberal clergy in other countries concluded that if such rebellion could be legalized in Holland, it could be legalized anywhere. They figured that if they ignored the Memoriale Domini and defied the liturgical law defined by the Church, that rebellion would not only be tolerated, but eventually legalized. That is exactly what happened, and that is why we have Communion in hand today.


In other words, Communion in the hand began by disobedience and rebellion and spread by deception by giving the faithful the false impression that Vatican II issued a mandate for its use when in fact it is not even hinted at in any conciliar document. The faithful were not told that the practice was initiated by clerics in defiance of established liturgical law, but rather appearing as if it had been a request from the laity. Likewise, it was not made clear to Catholics that the world's bishops, when consulted, voted overwhelmingly against Communion in the hand. And finally it was not mentioned that the allowance was only a tolerance of abuse when abuse had already been installed in 1969. 


Priests are falsely instructed that they must administer Communion in the hand, whether they like it or not, to whomever asks for it, thus throwing many good priests into an agonizing crisis of conscience.


It is obvious that no priest can be legally forced to administer Communion in the hand, and we should pray that more priests will have the courage to safeguard the reverence due to this Sacrament, and not be deceived into false obedience that makes them cooperate in the degradation of Christ in the Eucharist. They must have the courage to oppose this practice, remembering that even Pope Paul VI, in spite of his weakness, correctly predicted that Communion in the hand would lead to irreverence and profanation of the Eucharist, and to a gradual erosion of correct doctrine - and we have already seen that this prophecy has been fulfilled. And, if the opposition of priests to Communion in the hand should be ardent and firm, what can we say about the wrongly called "Extraordinary Ministers"?


Finally, the words of Cardinal Cañizares, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments: "It is advisable that the faithful receive Communion in the mouth and on their knees. It is simply to know that we are before God himself and that he came to us and that we do not deserve it. In fact, if you receive Communion standing, you have to genuflect or make a deep bow, which is not done" (Interview with Aci Prensa. July 27, 2011).


Communion in the hand has brought a total and complete desacralization of the liturgy and the things of God. The "sense of the sacred", of the mystical, has been set aside, and this ultimately leads to the loss of faith in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the sacramental species. And this is very serious, because we are talking about the most transcendent and essential of the life of the Church: the Holy Eucharist, the living presence of Jesus Christ among us. And this is another great Sign of the Times, which by its bitter fruits has fertilized apostasy.


Luis Eduardo López Padilla, www.apocalipsismariano.com