Blame Fr. Diwa and other proponents of Communion in the Hand!

This is a screengrab of the "performance artist's" (ring a bell?  Yup. Carlita Celdran the tour gay of Intramuros.) Instagram account proudly showing his "art" in the form of the not-so-politically correct way of sending his message.  He claims to have collected "242 pieces of consecrated hosts" which he used to place on the concrete pavement to spell "pederasty".  You can read more about this here.

For the uninformed, Pederasty is the homosexual activity between a man and a pubescent or adolescent boy, or in today's language, before the age of consent.  This became prominent in the 6th century especially in Athenian Greece. It was evidently a jab against the Catholic Church and the sex abuse scandal.  It was evidently implying that there is a culture of pederasty in the Church.

To dissect this event we can look at it at both ways.

The Celdranite says that he was able to collect the hosts by attending Mass.  If we put that in numbers, he would have at least attended every single Mass every day for a whole year to accomplish that.  How would the hosts not deteriorated?

If he attended Mass 4 times in a day, it would have taken him at least 60 days to accomplish that collection.  If that were the case, does this guy even have a real job? Or he does

Or it could be that these hosts are not actually consecrated and are just used for publicity.

Well, the "artist", the organizers and the City Council of Pamplona who allowed this to happen got the publicity they got as lawsuits left and right are filed against them.

Which now begs the question...

Will this "collection" ever happen if Communion were distributed on the tongue?

News of host desecration, hosts being found under pews and on the floors of churches and chapels continue to abound.

And we have liturgists who flaunt their degrees and certificates in Liturgy but do not do anything against liturgical abuse?

I'd blame them for this!

I'd blame them for the continuing lost of the sens of the sacred of the people!

I'd blame them over and over again!

PS:  And we have seminarians being trained this way!

If we have future priests like this, God save your Church!

Self Communion

It is surprising that so-called great orators and defenders of the Faith are against this practice, but when it came to the Host passing at the Manila Cathedral and Luneta Masses of the Holy Father, they all pooh-poohed their usual criticisms after the CBCP president prematurely justified the self-Communion.

What gives?

I am pretty sure that they cannot cite any Church law justifying such a Communion, nor can the CBCP president find any Church legislation to defend it.


End this practice!

Host passing is NOT permitted!

Communion in the hand presents more risks of the Blessed Eucharist being desecrated!!!

Practice what you preach!

Christ is present in the Blessed Eucharist!!!  Defend him!!!

Prove what you say!!!

Communion in the Hand is the culprit

Now let's bring this discussion to what the archbishop said "extraordinary situation"

If that is the intent, why not just pass the ciborium and have the people get It themselves?

Wasn't that how things are being practiced in retreat houses? 

We have posted photos of self-communication Under "normal circumstances", the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the bishops, priests and deacons. NORMAL. BUT!

I am one of those who greatly admire you Archbishop.

The least you could do is to think and pray this over.

We have had a mega-Mass before in 1995.  I was there.  It did not happen.

And worst for this year, the hands of the people are all wet!  Putting the consecrated hosts in people's hands would of course

I have to look at the history of the Church, Her legislation, tradition and patrimony if there is such a thing as "extraordinary moment to receive Holy Communion".

There are 6 to 7 million reasons that the archbishop and those supporting this Host passing can cite.  But there is only one reason why we should not do this.

Maybe we could always allow this dear Archbishop Villegas for every Mass we celebrate at the Luneta where people pack the grounds.  The El Shaddai group always fills the grounds of their "church" in Paranaque.

Maybe we could've planned to tell the pilgrims to just line up near the Communion stations aka kubols so they can just pick the Host themselves.

Why does the Church even have ministers to give Holy Communion and not let people get the Host themselves and feed themselves with It?

Communion by the hand is a form of self-communion.  That defeats the symbolism of having the Lord feed us with his own Body.  The ministers give to us the Bread of Life to feed us.  We do not feed ourselves.  The Lord feeds us.

Trained or not, the EMHCs who distributed the Hosts should know that it is their job to be there to:

1.  Protect the Eucharist
2.  Disrtibute the Eucharist

Surprised?  Yes, you read it right.  The first job objective of anyone distributing Holy Communion is to protect the Lord.  There are instances where priests approach public sinners from approaching Holy Communion since they are not worthy tor receive the Lord.  Leo Cardinal Burke often mentioned it that if a politician advocating abortion would approach him for Holy Communion, he would have refused him Holy Communion.

Ok we maybe getting off track here, but we ARE NOT.  Those EMHCs who were in their stations at the Luneta Park are no Cardinal Burke and certainly not in a position to tell if one of the pilgrims is worthy of receiving Holy Communion, save for a fact maybe when the communicant approaches him with either the "666" or inverted cross on his forehead, or the Freethinkers or Carlos Celdran...

The hands of the communicants were also wet.  When you place the Hosts, thin wafers made of wheat flour, they absorb water.  With all those passing around, do you think the Hosts stayed dry?

Do you remember the claim of the great liturgist Fr. Genaro Diwa about pushing for Communion in the Hand to prevent the spread of SARS and that it is more "hygienic" than Communion on the Tongue?

Can't hear them now, do we?

For those talking about being too rubricist and holier-than-thou accusation...

Here is something for you.

I have talked to some EMHCs and even nuns who were stationed at the Communion Stations.  I asked them for their "experiences".

They found Hosts in the mud!

If those who defend this practice call this a pastoral response and about "feelings", then let us just throw away the Bible, the Catechism, the Code of Canon Law (which the Church wrote as a pastoral response to the pastoral needs of the Church).  We'll just all see fit what is proper and necessary based on our feelings, based on what the Spirit tells us, based on whatever tricks or creativities a bishop or priest can ever think of.

Wasn't the defense "based on the situation" the same defense that the pro-RH camps used?  Wasn't it their defense to say that if a couple has too many children and they cannot practice NFP, maybe the Church in this "situtation" can allow the couples to practice artificial contraception?  There are even "priests", catholic priests, yes with a small "c", who say that the Church must allow artificial contraception for the

We really made a world record that day at the Luneta.

In this digital age, this act will be replayed over and over again.

This is on the organizers and the EMHCs.

Make an Act of Reparation.

We all surely need the Mercy and Compassion of God for the Hosts that were treated that way.

Are we sure no one took home a Host?

And since we started this post about an "extaordinary situation", look at these pictures and ponder on what the archbishop said about "the situation".

In these situations we say like what our elders say:  Kung gusto may paraan, kung ayaw maraming dahilan.

FYI, no Communion was held at Tacloban according to my friends who were there.  Why?  Winds and rain was strong.  Better not have Communion or risk desecrating the Holy Eucharist.

Communion in the hand is like what we say in business school:  The Risks far outweigh the Benefits.

Think about that.

Think about what you just did.

Now if you still are sure of what happened was ok, write a letter and send it to Rome.  Tell them if that happened again, you'd do it again.

Communion in the hand is the culprit.  If it were not allowed, this would not have happened.

SPLENDOR OF KAYABANGAN

He was last reprimanded for not giving a blessing to cremated remains before internment in the columbarium.

Anong latest?

Getting  reprimanded for refusing communion by hand.

Pinadala ng isang tagasunod ng blog.

DEFEND COMMUNION BY TONGUE. Sign the petition to Stop Communion in the hand and take it from a priest, not a "minister" now!

Communion on the Tongue...only!

Watch this video and see how this priest reminded a communicant to receive only on the tongue.

It's on the 0:08 mark.

And look!  Even the deacons receive Communion kneeling...and by intinction.





While we have this happening in our retreat houses, chapels...

For those who are for this practice, show me a liturgical law that says you can receive Communion by yourself!

"Oh Pinoy Catholic!  You are so legalistic!  You are like the Pharisees!"

Oh really?

Did Christ abolish the Law of Moses?

He didn't.

And so must you not too!

And here is The Vortex video about Communion on the Tongue...only!






FYI, as per my investigation, the Philippines did not receive any permission from the Vatican to distribute Holy Communion on the Hand!

And here is the classic YouTube video about Communion on the Tongue and Kneeling by the not so well known cardinal named Francis Arinze...

In the Vatican: Caught on tape

Look at how this priest refused communion in the hand to a woman attending the Pallium Mass at the Vatican.

Communion in the Tongue is still the only was to receive the Lord in papal masses.

Simple fact.

Communion in the MOUTH is the NORM.

Communion in the HAND is the EXCEPTION TO THE RULE.

This priest was courageous enough to implement Church laws in the reception of the Blessed Sacrament.

Will your priest even do the same?

What is the Best Way to Receive Our Lord?

On this feast of Corpus Christi, literally meaning the body of Christ, it is imperative that we once again talk about the topic of receiving communion by hand, which has caused not-so-few heated discussions among Catholics.

Communion rails: it's time our churches put them back! 

Given that we have not committed any mortal sins prior to receiving the Lord, what is the best way to receive Holy Communion?

Is it by hand? Or straight to the tongue?

While we must emphasize that it is NOT a sin to receive communion by hand, when you talk about the best way to receive the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, for obvious reasons, you do not want to desecrate the host. Just before receiving communion, we want you to be conscious: where have your hands been since you last washed them?

That's the thing with receiving communion by hand:  people have no idea how dirty their hands are at any given time. A while ago at mass I saw this girl playing with her hair constantly during the mass, and she received communion through the hand. Now that's just hair. From the moment you last washed your hands, going to the mass, what are the things you touched that could be dirtier than you thought?

Let's see. If you left home, you're sure to open the door or the gate. Everybody touches door knobs, and so it's a source of dirt. Then you commuted to the church and held on to the railings of the jeepney. Another dirty place. Riding the jeep, you had to bring out coins. Dirty. In the mass, you bring out money again, this time for the offertory.

And then you receive communion by hand. Is this really the best way to receive the Lord?

We're not even talking about small particles sticking to sweaty palms, or under the nails. Worse, the desecration of the host happens when people are allowed to receive communion by hand. We know of people who do not receive communion, instead feeding the consecrated host to their chickens. These folks believe that doing so strengthens their chickens for the inevitable cock fight.

So I urge all Catholics - let us do away with this practice of communion by hand. As I said, apart from a clean heart, communion by tongue is the best - and actually preferred form - of receiving communion.

More on this from Cardinal Arinze.

No Communion in the Hand for you sweet old lady!

When it comes to receiving Communion, most people prefer the indult rather than the norm.

Yup.  Communion in the Hand is an indult, and not a UNIVERSAL INDULT.

But when it come to the Mass, most people would like the norm rather than the indult even if this indult is UNIVERSAL.

FYI.  The liturgical discipline of receiving communion only in the tongue in Papal Masses remains in force even if the discipline was instituted by Pope Benedict XVI.  Pope Francis has not rescinded it.

FYI.

Papal Mass: The Cardinal Deacons are back

And something else.......

The sight of that priest giving out Communion like he is handing out Oreos to kids is..............APPALLING!!

ANOTHER CALL TO STOP COMMUNION IN THE HAND!

Sign the petition now!

You can see the link and the petition in left sidebar.

From a TPC reader: Altar Arrangement and Communion in the Hand

 
Dear Pinoy Catholic,

Your blog is really good. [thank you very much!  A lot of work, a lot of enemies, but gained a lot of friends too.]   I have the same view as your in the communion in the hand. [Read the following horror!] I have seen the harm of it in my school one of the students is just putting the Body of Christ in his pocket and I am so gad I saw it and mad him consume it.  I have also seen liturgical horrors in the mass they would use song that are not appropriate. The more horrible thing is the drums and plenty of instruments it is like more of a concert than a mass and the actings in the homily.   Due to this reason I have been using doing all things that i can to make setting correct through my serving. I am putting the crucifix in the altar but sadly sometimes they would just remove it. I am also using the burse and the chalice veil.

Can you help me how to make the altar in a more reverent setting. It is just to candles at each side and the occasional crucifix. Can you also give me suggestion on altar serving to make it more reverent or add some thing from the EF mass to it? Thank you more power God Bless

***

First of all, thank you for writing.  I really do appreciate it.

Secondly, putting the cross and candles on the altar is the best that you can do to make the altar look, well, more like, uhm, an altar and not just any bare table.  Five-star hotels who set up a candle lighted dinner have candles on them.  Funny how these liturgists who always compare the ordinary meal with the Holy Mass refuses to put the candle on the table because, according to them "you don't have candles on the table when you eat."  DUH!

Read the General Instruction of the Romal Missal.  Follow the blog.  You'll find that altar arrangements are just the beginning of bringing back the sense of the sacred into the Mass.

Doing the "Benedictine" altar arrangement is laudable and is within the bounds of liturgical law.  It is NOT a liturgical heritage of the Church to put candles near the altar.  NEVER!  Whoever did that was just doing it out of novelty or worse, because they do not want the view of their faces obstructed.  Guess narcissists really want the attention of the whole world on them, eh?

And finally, I still have to find the benefits of having Communion in the Hand.

Seriously.

It did more harm than good.

For more resources against Communion in the Hand, click here.

Sign the Petition!

To the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI: Petition to Celebrate a Public Mass According with the 1962 Missal.

Sign here!

And do not forget to sign the petition to Stop Communion in the Hand!

How we Filipinos used to receive Holy Communion

Kneeling and properly dressed.

Now....

Communion in the Hand is an EXTREME failure!

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK

At our recent celebration of the occasion of First Holy Communion for our young people, I spoke to them about the love of their parents. When they were born, I told them, it wasn’t enough for their parents to simply look at them, or to be with them. A parent’s love for a child is so overwhelming and so powerful that he or she immediately reaches for the most passionate expression of love they can muster which is a kiss.

We tell our children quite rightly and often that God loves them more than anyone else possibly can, that God’s love is greater than any hu­man love. In his writings on the Eucharist, the Holy Father Benedict XVI likens the love of God for us in the Eucharist to giving us a kiss. If this be the case, then reception of the Eucharist in the hand is like giving the Lord a handshake when what He offered was a kiss. We all know what it means when someone refuses a kiss and responds instead with a hand­shake and it doesn’t mean a return of the affection offered.  [Great comparison if you ask me.]

For this and other reasons, I have come to believe that chief among the indults which have abysmally failed to improve Catholic faith and life as promised is this one which touches upon the central act of wor­ship: the permission to replace with Communion in the hand the normal, universal, and noble custom of receiving the Most Holy Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling.  [An indult which wasn't even formally asked of the Holy Father, but was rather an act of defiance orchestrated by the King of Charismatic Movements, the liberal Cardinal Suenens of Belgium, which is happily un-Christian now.  Guess this is the fruit of his work in his country, eh?  By the way, the cardinal is opposed to Humanae Vitae.  You have an idea what he'll say about the RH Bill if he were alive today.  Well, how about same sex marriage? Hmmm...]

If the liturgy is given so that we might grow in adoration and love of Jesus Christ truly present in the Eucharist, then the abuses that I and others have seen which have resulted from the handling of the Eucharist by the faithful are responsible for encouraging not only a diminishment of love for the Eucharistic Lord but even scandal and sacrilege as well. How this disaster is supposed to improve upon the worship of the people of God I cannot say.  [Well, for those in the Bukidnon school think otherwise. Works wonders here, no?  Bah.]


This indult, a special permission granted at the insistence of bishops in office years ago, is one among the other indults which have rendered many celebrations of the Catholic liturgy both unrecognizable from what came before as handed down in the Church from Christ and the apostles and also unrecognizable from the many church services offered by other ecclesial bodies who deny and attack Catholic teaching. In many cases, the indults have served only to distract from the primary purpose of the Sacrifice of the Mass: to meet, know, and love Jesus Christ.  [aka...we don't look different from the Protestants.  In fact a friend who belongs to the High Anglicans said that they now look more Catholic than the post Vatican II Catholics.  Can't complain about it.  He is right.  No wonder there is Anglicanorum coetibus.]

In what way has reception of Communion in the hand served to deep­en reverence or inculcate a more profound belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist? [Don't spend money on surveys.  The results are obvious.  Priests themselves have been complaining....well, those priests who care about their job and not those who care how to look entertaining and relevant and less boring...  Swswswshhhh] For over 40 years we have tried over and over again to explain the proper method for receiving Communion, the bow replacing kneeling and reception in the hand replacing receiving on the tongue.  [Sin of Sloth if you ask me.]

Repeated instructions have failed [like the posters!] to result in any deep or lasting change in behavior as the proposed practice as permitted by the indult has de­generated into a procession no different from that to receive the sacra­mentals of ashes. The communicants in many cases simply march for­ward and stand before the priest or other minister and sometimes hold out one hand like they are getting a handout, “ pop” the Body of the Lord into their mouths in a movement very much failing to reflect the sense that they are receiving One who is not ordinary food, and return to their pews. The indult is too difficult for our faithful and so it is simply not done properly.

There will always be those who have faith strong enough to survive any liturgical changes and who will respectfully adapt to any innovation simply because they would cooperate with anything the Church asks of them. This same group would happily have retained the noble cus­tom of reception on the tongue if they had been left happily enough alone. [They have even removed the kneelers in the pews and even the Communion rails.  Why?  They hate kneeling.  The liberal priests I mean.]

The answer to this disaster appears to be what many priests are now doing. They introduce all first communicants to the noble custom, use the practice for the celebration of First Holy Communion, and offer to all the people of God at every celebration of Holy Mass those things necessary for kneeling and receiving on the tongue in the kneeler and a server with paten.

We are saved by grace through faith in the One we receive really, tru­ly, and substantially in the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist. The manner in which we receive Him affects our faith either for good or ill. Offering the option of receiving on the tongue while kneeling encourag­es those who wish to express the greatest love and reverence for the Lord truly present and invites others to do the same.

[in other words, how can you lift the senses of the faithful into the divine and supernatural when you teach them to approach the supernatural with actions which are so trivial and mundane?  By golly!  Sticking out your hand even if it were cupped like how it was quoted from St. Cyril (albeit out of context ala Iglesia ni Cristo), does not teach the person the sense of the sacred!  Can you just go out and shake the hand of the Queen of England or the POTUS?  Hell no.  Then here come the priest who treat the Lord as if he were just a mere arcade coin token.  Goodness!]

***

The Church has granted indults.  Communion in the Hand is one of them and it is not only permitted by most bishops and priests, it is even being promoted.  Remember how the troops of Frs. AC and GD made posters on dressing properly for Mass and the proper way of receiving Communion in the Hand?  Yeah.

How about the proper way of receiving Communion directly on the tongue?

Where are the posters for that?

There are other indults in the Church right?

This one is the most recent.

Where is your poster for this Fr. Diwa?

Will you have the same gusto to promote this just as you promote this manner of receiving the Lord?

I'll repeat it once again.


COMMUNION IN THE HAND IS A LITURGICAL ABUSE AND AN ABOMINATION AND MUST BE STOPPED IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ASAP!

I am not shouting.  I am drilling a point.

Probably exasperated that this manner of communion is still not stopped, univesally.

Sign the petition now!

Look for the link in the left-hand bar.

PS:  Read this article about how the ugly practice of Communion in the Hand.  And visit the website dedicated to eradicating this practice.

Scene from the International Eucharistic Congress

How will you promote respect to the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament if you have communion during an International Eucharistic Congress with this?

Look! The girl is not even paying attention to what she was doing!

She might not even be saying "Amen." to the archbishop.

Singing the Communion Hymn while receiving the Blessed Sacrament?

Most probably.

Communion in the Hand is just so wrong!

Bishop Schneider distributing Holy Communion...........the right and reverent way!

From kreuz.net - here is the English translation from one of my fave bishops who deserves the RED HAT more than those who actually have them now.

I have mentioned some names here.

Imagine if that bishop I criticized here before were a cardinal, and then........

Imagine the wacko reaction of the looney tune from down South

Well...he needs a shrink.

Moving on!

***

 "The more committees, the more proceedings, the more fear of public opinion and the politically correct, the less there will be real reforms in the Church."  [Can I hear a very big and long AAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNNNN!!!]

This is what Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider from Astana in Kazakhstan said on Pentecost Sunday at the Swabian pilgrimage Maria Vesperbild.

For Msgr Schneider it is "more than clear that the Church has experienced a great crisis."  [Oooooo....The bishop is also a SECRET SSPX?  Ha!]


Communion is Handed out Like Bread

The crisis shows itself in its most gripping in the declining Liturgy, for the prelate: "Today's manner of receiving Communion spread throughout the world is a great wound."  [As I said before, it brought more harm than good to the Church.]

The body of Christ has been received "without recognizable sacral gestures of worship".

Hand communion leaves one with the impression as if one is taking a regular meal, which "one puts in ones' own mouth".


The Bible gives a different example of reverence

Msgr Schneider recalled that the angel and prophets in Holy Scripture knelt before Jesus Christ:

"How great is the contrast between today's widely spread form of hand communion with the minimalistic signs of reverence on the one side and the glorious examples in Holy Scripture and the examples of Catholics from the past two thousand years, and also the edifying examples of our own associates, parents, grandparents on the other side."


The example of the Pope

Msgr Schneider recalled then that Pope Benedict XVI has been distributing Holy Communion in the mouth since Corpus Christi of 2008 to the faithful on their knees:

"A true Catholic, and even more a Catholic Bishop, can not ignore the Pope's gestures."  [Well unfortunately, the modernists think they need to change and make the Church adapt to the times to make it more Catholic.  Right Fr. Percy Bacani and Fr. Genilo?]


That would be a true renewal

For the Auxiliary Bishop it would be a poignant sign of Faith if all the Masses world-wide "were brought back to clear signs of reverence, silence, the holiness of the music".  [Can I hear another very big and long AAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNNNN!!!]


He criticized the supper table very carefully: priests and people should interiorly and exteriorly look together upon Christ -- he said.  [That is why we should not be looking at each other across the table like what we do in dinner tables.  We should be looking toward the same direction, like in an ALTAR.]

All faithful should "receive the body of Christ self-evidently in the state of sanctifying grace, having gone too confession, and to receive it directly in the mouth with the piety of a child."

In this Msgr Schneider sees "powerful sings of a true renewal in the Church".

In such Masses a God fearing man should fall on his knees and say: "Verily, God is among you" [1Cor 14 24-25]


A Church of Believers -- not of Church-tax payers

The Auxiliary Bishop explained in his sermon an example of reform from Kazakhstan.

In the city of Karaganda the Catholics built one Church every 35 years under the Communists.

The authorities allowed only a lowly, utilitarian building without towers or a cross.  [And without bells.  Hmmm... that is some modernist nuns and priests do that.  When you see your church still missing a bell, you bet a dollar and a dime that whoever is in there hates anything traditional.]

For two years the faithful -- also the elderly and the children --- were occupied with the building.

They dug even in the earth, in order to put the church deeper in order to allow for a larger interior space.


Without Discussions or Commissions

After the completion of construction there was no Bishop far and wide who could have blessed the church.

Actually the parish priest -- he was called Pater Alexander Chira by everyone -- promised the faithful that God would send a Bishop.

On the day of the blessing he appeared himself with a mitre and shepherd's staff in the church. He was a secret Bishop.

According to a woman who witnessed the event, there were even more tears flowing than holy water.

The church blessing is an example for Msgr Schneider "of true reform of the Church without a lot of commissions and discussions."  [Take that BEC and PPC!  Ha!  The Church grew rapidly without these two before!]

***

I hate to sound like a broken record but it is true:  When we lost the Sense of the Sacred that everything in life becomes too mundane, instant noodles - microwaveable type of thing.

Contraception, divorce, abortion, same-sex marriage....there is this thing called SPOILED BRAT ATTITUDE.

You whine when you do not get what you want.  You CHANGE THE RULES if it does not suit to your liking and your caprices, even if it were the laws of nature and of God Himself.

That is what is all about Communion in the Hand.  Lose the sense of the sacred and you lose the sense of anything right or wrong in the world.  It should not come as a surprise then that we have a rise of cases of liturgical abuse in our Church, of priests committing horrible.....good God!  Of priests and nuns openly supporting the homosexual agenda, of defying Humane Vitae, Summorum Pontificum, Redemptionis Sacramentum....of being their own church because, well, hey, they say that WE ARE CHURCH.  No need for the Pope, the bishops and what the Faith that we received from the Apostles meant.  They are OLD, they need to be revised according to the signs of the times.  This is the fruit that we are harvesting for having Communion in the Hand.

It was never a practice of the ancient Church contrary to what these liturgists keep on referring to.

How could thousands of years of receiving Communion on the tongue and kneeling both in the Western and Eastern Liturgical Traditions be so wrong?  Both the East and West NEVER EVER HAD Communion done on the hand and standing.

I dare the supporters of this method of Holy Communion to cite me the benefits of this type of reception of Holy Communion and I will cite an actual BAD and EVIL instance why it should be stopped, ASAP!

***

PS:  It is just so frustrating to see so-called traditionalists and apologists receive Holy Communion on the Hand.  So frustrating!  Put your money where your mouth is!  Be the example of how it is to be FAITHFUL.  You do not win souls by just winning an apologetics debate!

Communion in the hand is from Calvinist!

The current form of hand communion stems from the Calvinists, so says Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

Gotta love this bishop!

Shared to me by a fellow Knight on my Facebook Wall.

Thank you Sir Knight!

From

***

The current form of hand communion stems from the Calvinists.

This is what Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider (50) of Astana in Kazakhstan said at the end of October for the videosite 'gloria.tv'.

"That was an abuse" [It still is!]


Calvinist self-communion was introduced in the 1960s by decadent Catholic Communities in the Netherlands.  [not in the early centuries as some creative liturgist would have you think!  There are no evidence to support such claim even that reference from St. Cyril of Jerusalem's catechesis.  What these liturgist would miss out from that reference is the instruction of St. Cyril to "hallow yourself by partaking also of the Blood of Christ. And while the moisture is still upon your lips, touch it with your hands, and hallow your eyes and brow and the other organs of sense." So, it is now a smorgasbord? Choose which part you like, eh? And why has the Church for hundreds of years did not follow this practice anymore? Read more from Bishop Schneider.]

This step happened in disobedience to ecclesiastical rules -- Msgr Schneider stressed: "That was an abuse and the Holy See forbid it in the 1960s."

Finally Paul VI († 1978) addressed hand communion in the Document 'Memoriale Domini' in May 1969 with a "heavy heart":

"In this document the Church said that this form is an exception and that kneeling Communion would remain the rule."

At hand communion the people would take the Host with their fingers and put it in their mouths themselves: "this particular gesture has never taken place in the history of the Church, never."  [NEEEEEVVVVVEEEERRRR!!!!]


It was a kind of self communion.  [Even some EMHCs take the Host for themselves and self-communicate which is forbidden!]

The Lutherans adapted themselves to the Catholics  [I was expecting the Lutherans to adapt something good from us.  Before it was the Lutherans who did something bad to the Catholic Church. Now it is the other way around!]

Msgr Schneider recalled the Episcopal Synod of October 2005 on the Eucharist.

During a recess Msgr Schneider asked an attending Norwegian Lutheran "Bishop" how his community gave the Lord's Supper.

The Lutheran answered that the Norwegian State Church had, up until about ten years ago, been giving supper only kneeling and on the tongue. Yet the influence of decadent Roman Catholics has caused hand communion to be introduced.

The Auxiliary Bishop asks that hand communion be prayed and worked against:


"We must deeply desire that this form of current hand communion, which has never been practiced in the Church, be abolished" -- he said with feeling.

Handcommunion is a minimal form of reverence. On the contrary, the Church ought never to be satisfied with minimalism.

Particles of Host on the floor

Msgr Schneider warned that giving hand communion will cause many particles to be lost.

The Hosts are often flaky.

The particles could also adhere to the fingers or remain on thepalm. They would fall on the ground and be trampled.

In Kazakhstan, according to the Auxiliary Bishop, Communion is only given kneeling and on the tongue.  [This is the rule!  And bishops can do it if they want to!]

"It so often happens to me and also to other priests, that there are a few particles on the paten."

Without Communion patens, these particles would fall on the floor or in the clothing of the people.  [Do you see Communion patens being used in your churches even for EMHCs?  Nah!]

Msgr Schneider also warned that hand communion simplifies the theft of Hosts as well.  [which happened a lot of times!]

***

That is why it is high time to Ban Communion in the Hand!  Sign the petition!  Spread the word!

Communion in the Hand was a form of protest

Against the real presence that is...




Profess with your body what your heart desires!

Communion on the Hand? Really?

Diocese of Phoenix on Communion in both kinds

Now here is a classic case of journalism bias.

One report writes the facts behinds the decision, while the other conveniently misses it out (I guess) and gives more space to hippie rants.

I posted here both articles with my usual banter, of course.

***
This one from Catholic Culture


The Diocese of Phoenix has announced that it will issue norms specifying the conditions under which Holy Communion may be distributed under both species.

“The new norms will promote unity in the celebration of the Eucharist all around the world, and come from the revised General Instruction of the Roman Missal, 3rd Edition, together with the final edition of The Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds for the Dioceses of the United States of America,” the diocese stated in a press release.


“In the Roman Missal (1975), 14 instances were provided when the chalice could be offered to the laity,” the diocese noted. “From 1975 on, the United States, United Kingdom and Oceania were given experimental privileges for the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds. [Now look out for this one here.] These privileges expired in 2005 and were not renewed by the Holy See. The new norms issued in June 2011 are what guide the liturgical practice today and in the future.”  [THERE WERE NORMS!!!  And the bishops did not tell us!  Then, why, pray tell, did the Philippines ever follow and are still DOING IT?!?!   Especially in convents and seminaries where seminarians and nuns receive Holy Communion ala Oreo Commercial, except the twist and lick that is.  They get their own Hosts and dunk it into the chalice!]

“These universal norms for the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds greatly expanded those times when the chalice could be offered to the lay faithful for most of the Catholic world (since in most countries their practice was virtually non-existent),” the diocesan statement continued. “In the Diocese of Phoenix, like other places where the practice of reception from the chalice became frequent or even commonplace, the new norms call for the practice of less frequent distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds than the faithful may have been accustomed.”
[Here are the RARE exceptions.]

The ritual books state that Holy Communion may be offered at the Chrism Mass and feast of Corpus Christi. Additionally, it may be offered to a Catholic couple at their wedding Mass, to first communicants and their family members, confirmation candidates and their sponsors, as well as deacons, non-concelebrating priests, servers and seminarians at any Mass, as well as community members at a conventual Mass or those on a retreat or at a spiritual gathering. In addition, a priest may select other important solemnities in which it may be offered, e.g., parish patronal feast days or the celebration of the dedication of the church building, provided the conditions are met.

“In normal circumstances, only priests and deacons are to distribute Holy Communion,” the diocese added; “when both forms of Communion are used frequently, ‘extraordinary’ ministers of Holy Communion are disproportionately multiplied.”

***
And this one from the Arizona Republic.  Guess this paper needs a really serious reporter who knows Catholic teachings and liturgy


The Phoenix Diocese will stop offering consecrated wine for Communion at most Masses, a change considered one of the most fundamental to Roman Catholic Church customs in decades.

A diocesan statement said the change was being made based on Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted's understanding of the church's new translation of the Mass, called the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, and other church documents.

However, no other diocese in the country is known to be following suit, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops told The Arizona Republic.  [So?]

An effective date has not been announced.

The change will be one of the most significant in the Roman Catholic liturgy since the 1970s, when the distribution of wine [Not just wine you idjit!]  was approved for the United States.

For many Catholics in the '70s, that change to Communion - the central act of worship in the Catholic Mass [ah, what?!] - represented a greater role for laypeople, [come again?!] who for the first time in centuries were able to take both forms of Communion, bread and wine, and help distribute it. Before, the use of wine was reserved only for clergy.

Communion, a sacrament that symbolizes a spiritual union with Christ, is a widespread practice among Christian churches, following the commands of Jesus in the Gospels. But the Catholic Church believes the bread and wine used during the service actually are transformed [uhm, geez....] into the body and blood of Christ.

The change in practice by the Phoenix Diocese stirred an immediate controversy among priests, deacons and laypeople. Wine will be limited to only special occasions.

"The majority of priests were stunned and aghast at the announcement, and I hear some are planning to meet to see how best to respond," said the Rev. James Turner, pastor of St. Thomas More in Glendale. [HIPPIE PRIEST ALERT!] "While the bishop has the authority to make this policy change, there is no scriptural, theological or sacramental rationale that makes any sense."  [Well ask this priest is there is any "scriptural, theological or sacramental rationale that makes any sense" as to the distribution of Communion under both kinds?]

But the Rev. John Ehrich, pastor of St. Thomas the Apostle in Phoenix, said the liturgical law of the church provides for only specific circumstances under which both forms of Communion may be distributed.  [Unless you are Fr. James Turner who thinks the Catholic Church is now the Episcopalian or Lutheran Church?!]

"Bishop Olmsted is merely expecting the priests to follow the teaching of the church in this matter," he said, adding that he imposed restrictions at his parish four years ago.  [The priest did it a loooonnnggg time ago and did you hear anyone getting "stunned"and was "aghast"?   Guess none!]

Sister Mary Ann Walsh, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, is not aware of another U.S. diocese enacting such a restriction, although she noted that local bishops have the authority to do so.

The Rev. Al Schifano, a top church official in the Diocese of Tucson, said that Bishop Gerald Kicanas encourages Communion using both bread and wine and that the diocese will not change that under the new Mass translations. [Guess the bishop has his own set of laws, right?]

The Rev. Anthony Ruff, [*belch*] a professor at St. John's University in Collegeville, Minn., called the move a step backward.

"It's sad to see," he said, because the move separates the church further ecumenically from others [what others?!  And you taught that this guy is a "world-renowned Benedictine liturgist".  No seriously.  He acts the same way as the OTHER GUY.]  and gives up "the gains we've made in the last half-century in our understanding of liturgy and sacraments."  [What gains?!  Empty churches?  Fewer priests?  More lay people at the altar?  Pro-abortion nuns?  Pro-RH priests?]

Catholic members of the community were as divided as the priests.

"I would think these church leaders would be more concerned about the droves of people leaving the Catholic Church as well as the worsening shortage of priests," said Dennis Kavanaugh, an attorney who attends Resurrection parish in Tempe. "These issues are much more substantial to the long-term health of the church rather than reinstating medieval rituals and directives."  [And the doomsdayers are here again.  These same group of people are the very same ones who said that if the Traditional Latin Mass gets regularized, droves of Catholic would leave the Church.  I guess it didn't happen.  Maybe they belong to that same group who predicted the end of the world, eh?]

Judi Wilson of Blessed Sacrament parish in Scottsdale said she will miss taking Communion wine, but she noted that the church teaches that Christ is fully available in bread or wine.  [God bless Judi!  And a laywoman knows and believes this!  But the attorney and that world-renowned Benedictine monk did not realize that, eh?  No, not the Filipino monk.  He did not say that.  But if he did, a package will be on its way to the Vatican, ASAP.  Bet on it!]

"It wouldn't make any difference," she said. "I will look forward to those times we can take the wine."

According to the diocese, the change was announced at a recent meeting of diocesan priests with Olmsted. [It was announced among the priests yet the priest in the earlier part of the news said that they will meet the bishop and were stunned and aghast!  Was he absent during the meeting?  He did not get the memo?!?!]  A diocese statement said new rules will be drafted and a time frame determined in the next few months.

Some priests said the date initially was supposed to coincide with the new Mass translation, which is set to debut Nov. 27. But negative reaction from some priests may have persuaded the bishop to hold off. [may!]

Olmsted declined a request for an interview. [Not with this reporter if you ask me!]The diocese issued a statement and a question-and-answer sheet to explain the move. 


New norms, or guidelines, that came out this year, the statement said, expanded the offering of Communion under the form of wine for most of the world, "but in the Diocese of Phoenix, the new norms call for the practice of less frequent distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds than the faithful may have been accustomed."

The option of offering both bread and wine for Communion has been in place since 1975. Catholics never have been obligated to take both and, until 1975, the practice had been forbidden since the mid-1500s. The church teaches that Christ and the full blessings of Communion are present in either form.  [And yet Fr. Anthony Ruff thinks this is a move backwards.  And the other priest were stunned and aghast!  Is this like a burger and fried thing?  Or pancake and syrup?  That you cannot enjoy the food without the other one?  Kinda like coffee and pan de sal here, eh?]

According to the diocesan statement, the United States is one of only a few countries where offering wine became common at Masses, often distributed with the help of non-ordained parishioners.  [Because the bishops of the USA, led by Cardinal Bernardin at that time, were the most stubborn and the ones who lead the dissent.  Poor Paul VI and John Paul II had to put up with them!]

The Rev. John Muir, a priest at the Newman Center in Tempe who is part of the diocese Office for Worship, said the change actually is a return to general practice of the church worldwide.  [That is what being Catholic is!  That is why Anthony Ruff and Anscar Chupungco despise the  Traditional Latin Mass because they lose their speaking engagements and won't sell books!  They need a Mass that they treat as a production number or a TV show!]

The use of consecrated wine for Communion "is a beautiful gift," he said, "to be given the right way, at the right time, with the right sacramental power."  [Ooooooo.....MST would hate this especially the underlined words!  Ha!]

He added, "Nothing in reality is being taken away. Catholics believe they receive the Precious Blood (the consecrated wine) under the species of bread."  [Unless you are talking to those two Benedictine monks and the theologians of MST, LST, Euntes and SVST.]

***

Read the actual statement from the Diocese and judge for yourselves.

Cardinal Prefect says Communion must be received Kneeling...ONLY!

Lima, Peru, Jul 28, 2011 / 01:56 pm (CNA).- Spanish Cardinal Antonio Canizares Llovera recently recommended that Catholics receive Communion on the tongue, while kneeling.

“It is to simply know that we are before God himself and that He came to us and that we are undeserving,” the prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments said in an interview with CNA during his visit to Lima, Peru.

The cardinal’s remarks came in response to a question on whether Catholics should receive Communion in the hand or on the tongue.  [Why should the Holy See just STOP COMMUNION IN THE HAND and get this thing over with?]

He recommended that Catholics “receive Communion on the tongue and while kneeling.”

Receiving Communion in this way, the cardinal continued, “is the sign of adoration that needs to be recovered. I think the entire Church needs to receive Communion while kneeling.”  [And not surprisingly, the bashers of that dissident liturgy blog, run by a suspected sex abuser, continued their attack on the Spanish Cardinal.]

“In fact,” he added, “if one receives while standing, a genuflection or profound bow should be made, and this is not happening.”  [The cardinal is talking about the current liturgical laws stated in the GIRM of the OF Roman Missal.  And where are the world-renowned liturgists to remind us not to forget this?  Nah.]

“If we trivialize Communion, we trivialize everything, and we cannot lose a moment as important as that of receiving Communion, of recognizing the real presence of Christ there, of the God who is the love above all loves, as we sing in a hymn in Spanish.”

In response to a question about the liturgical abuses that often occur, Cardinal Canizares said they must be “corrected, especially through proper formation: formation for seminarians, for priests, for catechists, for all the Christian faithful.”

Such a formation should ensure that liturgical celebrations take place “in accord with the demands and dignity of the celebration, in accord with the norms of the Church, [not the norms of some quack liturgist from, You-Know-Where!  Or from the books written by You-Know-Who!] which is the only way we can authentically celebrate the Eucharist,” he added.

“Bishops have a unique responsibility” [uhm.  Not going to happen here as long as a Benedictine acts like a SUPER BISHOP in matters of the liturgy.] in the task of liturgical formation and the correction of abuses, the cardinal said, “and we must not fail to fulfill it, because everything we do to ensure that the Eucharist is celebrated properly will ensure proper participation in the Eucharist.”

***

Other who are against this or simply do not want to and tolerate the practice because they are more for receiving Communion standing either/or on the hand, argue that it is the internal disposition that counts and not the outward expression.

Well, folks, I beg to disagree...VEHEMENTLY.

Your outward disposition is the expression of an internal reality.  You express what you think and feel.  Nobody can see what is going on in your heart and mind, so we have our bodies to express it.  If you say you love God but hate your neighbor, you are a liar, so says St. John in one of his epistles.  You cannot say you love your parents, your siblings and even your spouse, but do not express or SHOW it, then what is left is nothing but lip service.

Don't get me wrong.  The question of internal disposition applies to both forms of receiving Communion, kneeling on the tongue, standing on the tongue, standing on the Hand.  Internal disposition is NOT at issue here.  What is at issue is what happens OUTSIDE, that which the others can SEE.

Many Church authorities, among them the Cardinal-Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacrament and even the Pope himself, advocate the need to bring back the reverent practice of receiving Holy Communion, kneeling, because it is the RIGHT AND NOBLE THING TO DO.

Ironically, though, the very same people who advocate other liturgical abominations like the so-called Liturgical Dance. And the reasoning?  "We worship God with our bodies."

Huh?!

That maxim applies when it suits your agenda and liturgical bias?

And ironically, again, the world-renowned liturgist of the country DOES NOT WANT this practice.