"This is My Body," said Our Lord at the Last Supper.
The Catholic Church has always interpreted these words in their precise literal meaning, and as the centuries passed, this belief has been reflected in Her developing liturgical expressions of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament. This is why the practice of the laity receiving the Host in the hand changed to that of the priest placing It directly upon the tongue. The practice of the Church developed, as Pope John Paul II has reminded us recently, so that: "To touch the sacred species, and to distribute them with their own hands, is a privilege of the ordained".
The practice of Communion in the hand was revived by the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformers to signify their rejection of both the priesthood and the Real Presence. This invested the practice with an anti-Catholic signification. Nonetheless, it was adopted by rebellious priests in Holland after Vatican II in defiance of the liturgical law of the Church. The abuse spread rapidly. Pope Paul VI polled the bishops of the world who voted overwhelmingly to retain the traditional practice, but the rebellion spread and the Holy See capitulated and agreed to tolerate the abuse in country after country. In countries such as the U.S.A., it is now being imposed as the norm; deceitful propaganda is used to achieve this end with the knowledge of the American Bishops, and in their name.
This text is from "A Privilege of the Ordained" by Michael Davies. Published by the Neumann Press, 1990.
Pope Paul VI did not institute the practice of Communion in the hand. It was an illicit behavior that was simply approved by the Vatican. To read the Pope's concession, read the following:
http://wherethereispeter.blogspot.com/2010/01/holy-communion-on-tongue-or-hand.html
31 January 2010
Holy Communion on the tongue or the hand?
“L'Osservatore Romano noted in an interview with Monsignor Guido Marini, published Wednesday, that the Pope distributed Communion to individuals who knelt and received the host on their tongues during his apostolic trip last week to Brindisi in Southern Italy.
When asked if this could become common practice, the monsignor replied, "I believe so."
"It is necessary not to forget," he added, "that the distribution of Communion on the hand continues to remain, from the juridical standpoint, an exception (indult) to the universal law, conceded by the Holy See to those bishops' conferences who have requested it."
"The form used by Benedict XVI tends to underline the force of the valid norm for the entire Church," clarified Monsignor Marini.”
National Catholic Register (picture source) says "It's official, according to the Associated Press and Catholic News Service: Receiving the Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling before the pope will become the norm at papal liturgies."
National Catholic Register (picture source) says "It's official, according to the Associated Press and Catholic News Service: Receiving the Eucharist on the tongue while kneeling before the pope will become the norm at papal liturgies."
Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments
25 March 2004
2. The distribution of Holy Communion
[88.] The faithful should normally receive sacramental Communion of the Eucharist during Mass itself, at the moment laid down by the rite of celebration, that is to say, just after the Priest celebrant’s Communion.[172] It is the Priest celebrant’s responsibility to minister Communion, perhaps assisted by other Priests or Deacons; and he should not resume the Mass until after the Communion of the faithful is concluded. Only when there is a necessity may extraordinary ministers assist the Priest celebrant in accordance with the norm of law.[173]
[90.] “The faithful should receive Communion kneeling or standing, as the Conference of Bishops will have determined”, with its acts having received the recognitio of the Apostolic See. “However, if they receive Communion standing, it is recommended that they give due reverence before the reception of the Sacrament, as set forth in the same norms”.[176]
[91.] In distributing Holy Communion it is to be remembered that “sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those who seek them in a reasonable manner, are rightly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them”.[177] Hence any baptized Catholic who is not prevented by law must be admitted to Holy Communion. 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.
[92.] Although each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, at his choice,[178] if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the hand, in areas where the Bishops’ Conference with the recognitio of the Apostolic See has given permission, the sacred host is to be administered to him or her. However, special care should be taken to ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant in the presence of the minister, so that no one goes away carrying the Eucharistic species in his hand. If there is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the faithful.[179]
[93.] The Communion-plate for the Communion of the faithful should be retained, so as to avoid the danger of the sacred host or some fragment of it falling.[180]
Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship
Issued on May 29, 1969.
When the Church celebrates the memorial of the Lord it affirms by the very rite itself its faith in Christ and its adoration of him, Christ present in the sacrifice and given as food to those who share the eucharistic table.
For this reason it is a matter of great concern to the Church that the Eucharist be celebrated and shared with the greatest dignity and fruitfulness. It preserves intact the already developed tradition which has come down to us, its riches having passed into the usage and the life of the Church The pages of history show that the celebration and the receptions of the Eucharist have taken various forms. In our own day the rites for the celebration of the Eucharist have been changed in many and important ways, bringing them more into line with modern man's spiritual and psychological needs. Further, a change has taken place in the discipline governing the laity's participation in the sacrament. Holy communion under two kinds, bread and wine has been reintroduced. It had once been common in the Latin Church too, but had subsequently been progressively abandoned. This state of affairs had become general by the time of the Council of Trent, which sanctioned and defended it by dogmatic teaching as being suited to the conditions of that time.[1]
These changes have made of the eucharistic banquet and the faithful fulfillment of Christ's command a clearer and more vital symbol. At the same time in recent years a fuller sharing in the eucharistic celebration through sacramental communion has here and there evoked the desire to return to the ancient usage of depositing the eucharistic bread in the hand of the communicant, he himself then communicating, placing it in his mouth.
Indeed, in certain communities and in certain places this practice has been introduced without prior approval having been requested of the Holy See, and, at times, without any attempt to prepare the faithful adequately.
It is certainly true that ancient usage once allowed the faithful to take this divine food in their hands and to place it in their mouths themselves. It is also true that in very ancient times they were allowed to take the Blessed Sacrament with them from the place where the holy sacrifice was celebrated. This was principally so as to be able to give themselves Viaticum in case they had to face death for their faith.
However, the Church's prescriptions and the evidence of the Fathers make it abundantly clear that the greatest reverence was shown the Blessed Sacrament, and that people acted with the greatest prudence. Thus, "let nobody . . . eat that flesh without first adoring it"[2] As a person takes (the Blessed Sacrament) he is warned: " . . . receive it: be careful lest you lose any of it."[3] "For it is the Body of Christ."[4]
Further, the care and the ministry of the Body and Blood of Christ was specially committed to sacred ministers or to men specially designated for this purpose: "When the president has recited the prayers and all the people have uttered an acclamation, those whom we call deacons distribute to all those present the bread and wine for which thanks have been given, and they take them to those who are absent."[5]
Soon the task of taking the Blessed Eucharist to those absent was confided to the sacred ministers alone, so as the better to ensure the respect due to the sacrament and to meet the needs of the faithful. Later, with a deepening understanding of the truth of the eucharistic mystery, of its power and of the presence of Christ in it, there came a greater feeling of reverence towards this sacrament and a deeper humility was felt to be demanded when receiving it. Thus the custom was established of the minister placing a particle of consecrated bread on the tongue of the communicant.
This method of distributing holy communion must be retained, taking the present situation of the Church in the entire world into account, not merely because it has many centuries of tradition behind it, but especially because it expresses the faithful's reverence for the Eucharist. The custom does not detract in any way from the personal dignity of those who approach this great sacrament: it is part of that preparation that is needed for the most fruitful reception of the Body of the Lord.[6]
This reverence shows that it is not a sharing in "ordinary bread and wine"[7] that is involved, but in the Body and Blood of the Lord, through which "The people of God share the benefits of the Paschal Sacrifice, renew the New Covenant which God has made with man once for all through the Blood of Christ, and in faith and hope foreshadow and anticipate the eschatological banquet in the kingdom of the Father."[8]
Further, the practice which must be considered traditional ensures, more effectively, that holy communion is distributed with the proper respect, decorum and dignity. It removes the danger of profanation of the sacred species, in which "in a unique way, Christ, God and man, is present whole and entire, substantially and continually."[9] Lastly, it ensures that diligent carefulness about the fragments of consecrated bread which the Church has always recommended: "What you have allowed to drop, think of it as though you had lost one of your own members."[10]
When therefore a small number of episcopal conferences and some individual bishops asked that the practice of placing the consecrated hosts in the people's hands be permitted in their territories, the Holy Father decided that all the bishops of the Latin Church should be asked if they thought it opportune to introduce this rite. A change in a matter of such moment, based on a most ancient and venerable tradition, does not merely affect discipline. It carries certain dangers with it which may arise from the new manner of administering holy communion: the danger of a loss of reverence for the august sacrament of the altar, of profanation, of adulterating the true doctrine.
Three questions were asked of the bishops, and the replies received by 12 March 1969 were as follows:
1. Do you think that attention should be paid to the desire that, over and above the traditional manner, the rite of receiving holy communion on the hand should be admitted? Yes: 597 No: 1,233 Yes, but with reservations: 315 Invalid votes: 20
2. Is it your wish that this new rite be first tried in small communities, with the consent of the bishop? Yes: 751 No: 1,215 Invalid votes, 70
3. Do you think that the faithful will receive this new rite gladly, after a proper catechetical preparation? Yes: 835 No: 1,185 Invalid votes: 128
From the returns it is clear that the vast majority of bishops believe that the present discipline should not be changed, and that if it were, the change would be offensive to the sentiments and the spiritual culture of these bishops and of many of the faithful.
Therefore, taking into account the remarks and the advice of those whom "the Holy Spirit has placed to rule over" the Churches,[11] in view of the gravity of the matter and the force of the arguments put forward, the Holy Father has decided not to change the existing way of administering holy communion to the faithful.
The Apostolic See therefore emphatically urges bishops, priests and laity to obey carefully the law which is still valid and which has again been confirmed. It urges them to take account of the judgment given by the majority of Catholic bishops, of the rite now in use in the liturgy, of the common good of the Church.
Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow.
In such cases, episcopal conferences should examine matters carefully and should make whatever decisions, by a secret vote and with a two-thirds majority, are needed to regulate matters. Their decisions should be sent to Rome to receive the necessary confirmation,[12] accompanied with a detailed account of the reasons which led them to take those decisions. The Holy See will examine each case carefully, taking into account the links between the different local churches and between each of them and the Universal Church, in order to promote the common good and the edification of all, and that mutual good example may increase faith and piety.
Note: in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis (pp. 546-547) the Instruction was accompanied by a sample of the letter (in French) which is sent to hierarchies who ask for and are granted permission to introduce the practice of holy communion on the hand. The letter laid down the following regulations:
1. The new method of administering communion should not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional usage....
2. The rite of communion in the hand must be introduced tactfully. In effect, since human attitudes are in question, it is linked with the sensibility of the person receiving communion. It should therefore be introduced gradually, beginning with better-educated and better-prepared groups. It is, above all, necessary that an adequate catechesis prepares the way so that the faithful will understand the significance of the action and will perform it with the respect due to the sacrament. The result of this catechesis should be to remove any suggestion of wavering on the part of the Church in its faith in the eucharistic presence, and also to remove any danger or even suggestion of profanation.
3. The fact that the lay person is now able to receive holy communion in the hand should not suggest to him that this is ordinary bread, or just any sacred object. Rather ought it to strengthen his sense of his dignity as a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, of which baptism and the grace of the Eucharist make him a part. He will thus experience an increase of faith in the great reality of the Body and Blood of the Lord which he touches with his hands. His respectful attitude should be proportionate to what he is doing.
4. With regard to the manner of administering the sacrament, one may follow the traditional method, which emphasized the ministerial function of the priest or deacon, in having them place the host in the hand of the communicant. One may also adopt a simpler method, allowing the communicant himself to take the host from the ciborium. In either case, the communicant ought to consume the host before returning to his place, and the minister's role will be emphasized by his saying, "The Body of Christ," to which the communicant responds, "Amen."
5. No matter which method is adopted, one will be careful not to allow any fragment of the host to fall....
6. When the communion is distributed under both kinds, it is never permitted to place in the hands of the communicants hosts which have first been placed in the Blood of the Lord.
7. Bishops who have been permitted to introduce the new rite of communion are asked to send a report to the congregation, six months hence, on the outcome.
[Translated by Rev. Austin Flannery, O.P. from AAS 61 (1969), pp. 541-547.]
____________________________________________________________________________
St. Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274)
The dispensing of Christ's Body belongs to the priest for three reasons. First, because he consecrates in the person of Christ. But as Christ consecrated His Body at the Last Supper, so also He gave It to others to be partaken of by them. Accordingly, as the consecration of Christ's Body belongs to the priest, so likewise does the dispensing belong to him. Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people, hence as it belongs to him to offer the people's gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver the consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this Sarament, nothing touches It but what is consecrated, and likewise the priest's hand for touching this Sacrament. Hence, it is not lawful for anyone else to touch It, except from necessity, for instance, if It were to fall upon the ground or else in some other case of urgency.
___________________________________________________________________________
Reverence towards the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist led to a number of signs of devotion which were observed universally throughout the Western Church until the time of the Protestant Reformation wherein many or all of these signs of reverence were forbidden because they believed the bread and wine were no more than symbols of the Body and Blood of Christ. Catholics were accused of "bread worship", which they believed was idolatry. Protestants abolished every sign of reverence which was offered to the Blessed Sacrament. An even more radical Protestant, Martin Bucer, wrote: "I have no doubt that the usage of not putting these sacraments into the hands of the faithful has been introduced out of a double superstition: firstly, the false honor they wish to show to this sacrament, and secondly, the wicked arrogance of priests claiming greater holiness than that of the people, by virtue of the oil of consecration." He decided that every superstition of the Roman anti-Christ (the Catholic church) is to be detested ......... and the sacrament should be placed into the hand of the laity: "In that way good men will easily be brought to the point of all receiving the sacred symbols in the hand, conformity in receiving will be kept ......... if they are carefully taught they will soon conform themselves to the rest of the church and take the sacraments in the hand."
Thus the situation remained until the closure of the Second Vatican Council in 1965. When the Council ended, the Liturgical Revolution got underway.
The practice of Communion in the hand was introduced soon after Vatican II by ecumenically-minded priests in Holland who wished to ape the Protestant practice. This was done as an act of calculated defiance of liturgical law and legitimate ecclesiastical authority. The Dutch rebels soon found imitators among the progressive clergy in Germany, Belgium and France. Thus the practice, which had already become unacceptable to Catholics in view of the Protestant signification it had acquired during the Reformation, became additionally tainted as the symbol par excellence of liturgical anarchy, the banner of those who had defied the authority of Rome, and more than a thousand years of unbroken Catholic tradition.
Unfortunately, the Holy See made a calamitous error of judgment within the Instructions that had been sent to all Catholic Bishops. It agreed that, where the abuse had already become firmly established (by May 1969), it could be legalized by a two-thirds majority in a secret ballot of the national episcopal conference, providing that the Holy See confirmed the decision. Clerical rebels in such countries as England and the U.S.A. would conclude that if rebellion could be legalized in Holland, it could be legalized in any country. They decided that if they ignored Memoriale Domini, their rebellion would be tolerated and eventually legalized.
Their judgment proved to be only too accurate. Despite the appeal of the Holy See for bishops to observe zealously the traditional practice, despite the fact that they themselves had voted for the traditional practice, as the abuse spread from country to country the bishops first tolerated it and then voted for its legalization.The propaganda used to popularize the abuse in the U.S.A. entitled Teaching About the Eucharist, by Msgr. Joseph M. Champlin. It is a faithful popularization of an official publication of the American Bishops entitled The Body of Christ. Msgr. Champlin explains the introduction of Communion in the hand into the U.S.A. as follows:
"Around the time of the Second Vatican Council, some Catholics (laity), following the liturgical principles approved by the bishops, sought to have the ancient practice of communion in the hand restored as an option". The people requested it? This is an outright lie!
Pope Pius XII
Probably the most frequently reiterated argument in favor of the abuse is that it is a return to primitive practice. Pope Pius XII had condemned attempts to subvert the liturgy, under the guise of a return to primitive practice. "This is a wicked movement...... "the desire to restore everything to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table; ......... and pictures and statues excluded from our churches".
Pope John Paul II "Since the introduction of Communion in the hand cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the Eucharist have been reported." "... the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary! To touch the sacred species, and to distribute them with their own hands, is a privilege of the ordained..." Unfortunately, the Pope clearly believes that it would not be practical to attempt to enforce a return to the traditional practice during the present climate of anarchy within the Church. His attempt to persuade nuns who have abandoned their religious habits to return to them, even in a simplified form, has not simply been defied, but ridiculed.
What is to be done?
What, then, should be the reaction of a faithful Catholic to the abuse of Communion in the hand? Clearly, out of respect for the Blessed Sacrament, he should insist on receiving It upon the tongue from the consecrated hands of a priest, and, when possible, to receive It kneeling. Those who kneel to receive Our Lord upon the tongue are following the example of countless great saints throughout the centuries -- and acting in the manner which the present Holy Father clearly prefers.
However, we should certainly refrain from passing judgment upon any of our acquaintances who receive It in the hand. While the practice has certainly led to much irreverence, it does not necessarily denote irreverence on the part of every individual who now receives in this manner. Where the bishop and priest have made it clear that he wishes Communion to be received this way and an incessant campaign of cleverly slanted propaganda has been aimed at ordinary members of the faithful, it is hardly surprising that so many have succumbed. Any effort we make to achieve enlightening our friends regarding Communion on the tongue is an effort intended to increase reverence to our Eucharistic King, and surely we could engage in nothing more worthwhile than this.
