The head of the Vatican department overseeing liturgy is summoning the Catholic faithful to return to receiving Holy Communion on the tongue and kneeling.
In the preface to a new book on the subject, Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, writes: “The most insidious diabolical attack consists in trying to extinguish faith in the Eucharist, by sowing errors and fostering an unsuitable way of receiving it. Truly the war between Michael and his Angels on one side, and Lucifer on the other, continues in the hearts of the faithful.”
“Satan’s target is the Sacrifice of the Mass and the Real Presence of Jesus in the consecrated Host,” he said.
The new book, by Don Federico Bortoli, was released in Italian under the title: ‘The distribution of Communion on the hand: a historical, juridical and pastoral survey’ [La distribuzione della comunione sulla mano. Profili storici, giuridici e pastorali].
Recalling the centenary of the Fatima apparitions, Sarah writes that the Angel of Peace who appeared to the three shepherd children in advance of the Blessed Virgin’s visit “shows us how we should receive the Body and the Blood of Jesus Christ.” His Eminence then identifies the outrages by which Jesus is offended today in the Holy Eucharist, including “so-called ‘intercommunion.’”
Sarah goes on to consider how faith in the Real Presence “can influence the way we receive Communion, and vice versa,” and he proposes Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa as two modern saints whom God has given us to imitate in their reverence and reception of the Holy Eucharist.
“Why do we insist on receiving Communion standing and on the hand?,” the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship asks. The manner in which the Holy Eucharist is distributed and received, he writes, “is an important question on which the Church today must reflect.”
Here below, with the kind permission of La Nuova Bussola where the preface was first published, we offer our readers a LifeSiteNews translation of several key extracts from Cardinal Sarah’s text.
***
Providence, which disposes all thing wisely and sweetly, has offered us book The Distribution of Communion on the hand, by Federico Bortoli, just after having celebrated the centenary of the Fatima apparitions. Before the apparition of the Virgin Mary, in the Spring of 1916, the Angel of Peace appeared to Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco, and said to them: “Do not be afraid, I am the Angel of Peace. Pray with me.” (…) In the Spring of 1916, at the third apparition of the Angel, the children realized that the Angel, who was always the same one, held in his left hand a chalice over which a host was suspended. (…) He gave the holy Host to Lucia, and the Blood of the chalice to Jacinta and Francisco, who remained on their knees, saying: “Take and drink the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, horribly outraged by ungrateful men. Make reparation for their crimes and console your God.” The Angel prostrated himself again on the ground, repeating the same prayer three times with Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco.
Let us now look at how faith in the real presence can influence the way we receive Communion, and vice versa. Receiving Communion on the hand undoubtedly involves a great scattering of fragments. On the contrary, attention to the smallest crumbs, care in purifying the sacred vessels, not touching the Host with sweaty hands, all become professions of faith in the real presence of Jesus, even in the smallest parts of the consecrated species: if Jesus is the substance of the Eucharistic Bread, and if the dimensions of the fragments are accidents only of the bread, it is of little importance how big or small a piece of the Host is! The substance is the same! It is Him! On the contrary, inattention to the fragments makes us lose sight of the dogma. Little by little the thought may gradually prevail: “If even the parish priest does not pay attention to the fragments, if he administers Communion in such a way that the fragments can be scattered, then it means that Jesus is not in them, or that He is ‘up to a certain point’.”
The second track on which the attack against the Eucharist runs is the attempt to remove the sense of the sacred from the hearts of the faithful. (…) While the term ‘transubstantiation’ points us to the reality of presence, the sense of the sacred enables us to glimpse its absolute uniqueness and holiness. What a misfortune it would be to lose the sense of the sacred precisely in what is most sacred! And how is it possible? By receiving special food in the same way as ordinary food. (…)
In this regard I would like to propose the example of two great saints of our time: St. John Paul II and St. Teresa of Calcutta. Karol Wojtyła’s entire life was marked by a profound respect for the Holy Eucharist. (…) Despite being exhausted and without strength (…) he always knelt before the Blessed Sacrament. He was unable to kneel and stand up alone. He needed others to bend his knees and to get up. Until his last days, he wanted to offer us a great witness of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament. Why are we so proud and insensitive to the signs that God himself offers us for our spiritual growth and our intimate relationship with Him? Why do not we kneel down to receive Holy Communion after the example of the saints? Is it really so humiliating to bow down and remain kneeling before the Lord Jesus Christ? And yet, “He, though being in the form of God, […] humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross” (Phil 2: 6-8).
St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta, an exceptional religious who no one would dare regard as a traditionalist, fundamentalist or extremist, whose faith, holiness and total gift of self to God and the poor are known to all, had a respect and absolute worship of the divine Body of Jesus Christ. Certainly, she daily touched the “flesh” of Christ in the deteriorated and suffering bodies of the poorest of the poor. And yet, filled with wonder and respectful veneration, Mother Teresa refrained from touching the transubstantiated Body of Christ. Instead, she adored him and contemplated him silently, she remained at length on her knees and prostrated herself before Jesus in the Eucharist. Moreover, she received Holy Communion in her mouth, like a little child who has humbly allowed herself to be fed by her God.
The saint was saddened and pained when she saw Christians receiving Holy Communion in their hands. In addition, she said that as far as she knew, all of her sisters received Communion only on the tongue. Is this not the exhortation that God himself addresses to us: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt. Open your mouth wide, and I will fill it”? (Ps 81:10).
Full story at LifeSiteNews.
Well, one practical reason for receiving communion standing is that communion rails have largely disappeared and some of us older folks need that rail to kneel. I would be glad to see them return, but I am in the Los Angeles Archdiocese and am not holding my breath.
He seems to be pushing his own personal agenda
he seems to be pushing God’s agenda
You took the words right out of my mouth, drewelow. The Eastern Rite, whether Catholic or Orthodox, always stood to show their respect for the Holy Sacrament; the Latin Rite always knelt and received on the tongue as Kind David knelt to be anointed by the Prophet Samuel and Christ knelt in the garden.. Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI mentioned that is his book on the liturgy. Latin Rite Catholics have the right to a Latin Rite Mass as the Eastern Rite has a right to theirs. (Continue)
(Contiued) Somehow the Eastern and Protestant practices were brought into the Latin Rite. I think some priests, bishops and laypeople could not kneel very well, so it was forced on everyone. People who could not kneel always stood or sat in wheelchairs in front of kneelers to receive.
As Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI mentioned in his book, “The Spirit of the Liturgy”, the Bible says, “At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow.” — meant for those who can physically do so of course.
You raise a good point Anne TE: If the Eastern Rites stand for Communion, is the Cardinal saying that their practice is diabolical? If a practice is dabolical for some people, why is it not diabolical for all?
Anonymous, we have not read Cardinal Sarah’s full sermon or books here. I am sure he has no problem with the Eastern Rites doing what they have done for hundreds of years. The Eastern Rite churches have not fooled with their liturgies as much as the west. They still receive the Holy Sacrament by intinction. Most Eastern Catholic rites still have the priest face east — toward the crucifix over the altar or consecrate behind the iconotast (spelling?)
When Cardinal Arinze was over the liturgy, he asked people not to dance inside the church at Masses and gave good reasons for the ban, He told them such things should be done modestly in the hall or out on a plaza, but still some people abused the Mass in that way, even in my area. They knew it was wrong and did it anyway. I do not know about you, but I go to Mass to worship and honor God Almighty, not for entertainment.
God bless Cardinal Sarah.
By standing and receiving the host in the hand gives the appearace that we humans are on the same level as the Son of God. Though be that as it may, nothing like that could be further from the truth.
Part of Satan’s attack on the Eucharist is to talk about how we receive the Eucharist instead of that those committing adultery should not receive the body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus.
I am confused. There are no early records of Jesus teaching that receiving by hand was evil. He taught that receiving by the heart is what makes Communion wigh him proper. Does that mean the first Christians were not receiving Communion “correctly?” Does this mean public officials openly supporting abortion, but if they receive by tongue are reverant to Jesus? Are actions separated from the conscious?
Cheryl. it seems to me you are not looking for clarification, but confusing yourself unnecessary. Public officials openly supporting abortion, and anyone else who is NOT in state of grace, let alone openly antagonistic to church teaching on mortal sin, should NOT receive Holy Eucharist. Not in hand. Not on tongue. Not standing up. Not kneeling. Actions themselves cannot be reverent if the heart is not reverent and pure. Go back to the Catechism and learn the basics please.
Cheryl – thank you for raising these important questions. Cardinal Sarah is pursuing his own agenda and trying to line up votes for himself from the conservative cardinals in the next conclave. Pope Francis has found it necessary to “correct” Cardinal Sarah on numerous occasions. We’ll see how the Pope handles this instance of the Cardinal’s aberrant theologizing.
William Roberts-when one (you) has no valid argument against the message, one (you) attacks the messenger.
Cardinal Sarah is a light shining in the darkness and the clear sign in this current confusion. Thank God for Cardinal Sarah. And you Mr Roberts should learn and appreciate your faith.
I remember the old days when the whole Mass, including Communion, was fast tracked to meet a very tight schedule on Sundays. Some priests moved down that altar rail as fast as they go. Yes, some seem not reverential receiving when standing. But, in my opinion, most seem reverential and respectful of the sacredness of the moment.
It goes without saying that we must be free from serious sins before receiving the Eucharist, and I’m sure that Cardinal Sarah has written about that elsewhere. I went to a talk by Michael Voris recently in Orange County, and he told us that the early Christians used a towel to put over their hands when they received Holy Communion. But because of the of the abuses in receiving the Eucharist in this manner, they then received the Eucharist on their tongues. Jesus did not say how we were to receive the Eucharist. The Early Church Fathers had to learn, just as Abraham had to learn. God didn’t tell him everything either.
Well, Christ did say “take” and eat. Taking is done with the hand.
to the Apostles, whom Christ ordained as priests.
Anne TE. You are taking part of the scripture and leaving other parts. He was commanding all disciples when he said “Take and Eat” Otherwise, only Bishops would receive communion.
You can get on line and look up some of the other older Catholic rites and how they receive on the tongue by the priest, even though they walk up to receive. Here is one website where the priest faces Christ over the altar when consecrating and gives Communion to the people on their tongue. Most of the women have a head covering “St. Mary’s Catholic Church, Doha”, the Malayalam Rite. There is a Syro-Malabar Rite also started by the Apostle Thomas in India.
that ridiculous. You can “receive” on the tongue and on your knees just as well and with greater humility for the body and blood, soul and divinity of the dearly beloved Son of the Father.
You need to go back and read my other posts, as I agree with you on kneeling for the Latin Rite. It is not my job, though, to determine what should be done in any other rite.
Please google “Catholic Rites and Churches on EWTN” as you do not seem to understand that there are other smaller rites in the Catholic Church besides the Latin one, and they have their own approved way of doing things. Cardinal Sarah I believe is talking about the Latin Rite specifically. Others certainly can correct me if I am wrong about that, but I am not going to take the opinion of someone who posts as Anonymous without using either a real or penname. Michael McDermott is right.
I think what many people are desiring is a return to reverence at mass. All of the same concerns come to mind too much talking, immodest and sloppy dress, coming late and leaving early, and too much popular loud music.
Lisag: where do you attend Mass? The Mass in English I attend is very referential and the music is taken from the missal or a hymnal. Although I very much liked the folk Masses back in the day; they are now practically nonexistent.
The Traditional Latín Mass is making a comeback in California even at this adverse moment in time.
William Roberts :” Although I very much liked the folk Masses back in the day; they are now practically nonexistent.” Yes thank God in heaven they died out. May Cardinal Sarah be the next Pope and finish off the “spirit of Vatican 2”.
Where are you guys living that folk masses have died out? In my area they are the norm. BTW, if your parish uses OCP music, it’s probably a folk mass. Especially if guitars are played. And if your parish uses protestant evangelical praise and worship music with lyrics projected on a wall or screen, it’s definitely a folk mass. Folk masses are still here. Just what a folk mass is has been teched up quite a bit.
How long will it be before the Vatican thugs bring their jack boots down on the good Cardinal’s theological neck? Cardinal Sarah is a good man in a nearly impossible situation. He is a believer and wants to bring the joys of the proper and full Catholic liturgy to all. Of course he is correct. Christ deserves the most respect and reverence, not being treated as something coming out of a Lay’s Potato Chip bag.
Pope Francis will have another fit and we will be bombarded with apologies and all kinds of “explanations” to protect the Novus Ordo snowflakes from realizing what they are doing when they present themselves for communion. Pray for Cardinal Sarah.
Taylor Marshall has an excellent article entitled “Did the Church Fathers Practice Communion in the Hand? Not Exactly”. Anyone can google it. It seems when all the teachings of the early Church fathers are taken into consideration, Communion in the hand was only used in dire situations. The Vatican does not allow it because people were taking the Sacred Host home as souvenirs, which is a sacrilege. Now I am not going to post anything more.
Why? Because we no longer believe that the Sacred Host is the Body, and Blood, soul and divinity of Christ.
I do.
Communion in the hand is a sacralige period