Pray Brethren

Pray Brethren

Monday, July 16, 2012

Receiving Communion in the Hand

When considering the possibility of Communion received in the hand rather than on the tongue, the Holy See pointed out “certain dangers” of such a change. These included: “the danger of a loss of reverence for the august sacrament of the altar, of profanation, of adulterating the true doctrine.” But given that several bishops in Europe had already begun implementing this change illicitly, Pope Paul VI decided to take a vote on the matter rather than stomping it out altogether. Two-thousand bishops across the globe were polled and the results were as follows:
  • 59% of bishops said the laity of their diocese would not accept the new practice.
  • 62% of bishops did not want to see the practice begin in their diocese.
  • 66% of the bishops didn’t think the practice was worth addressing.
Despite the vote, in 1969 Pope Paul VI decided to
Pope Paul VI (pictured above) and
his successors never accepted
Communion in the hand. The pope's
compromise was to tolerate the
illicitly established practice via
indult in the places where it was
already in use while barring its
practice elsewhere.
strike a compromise with his disobedient bishops on the continent. Given “the gravity of the matter,” the pope would not authorize Communion in the hand. He was, however, open to bestowing an indult – an exception to the law – under certain conditions: first, an indult could not be given to a country in which Communion in the hand was not an already established practice; second, the bishops in countries where it was established must approve of the practice “by a secret vote and with a two-thirds majority.” Beyond this, the Holy See set down seven regulations concerning communion in the hand; failure to maintain these regulations could result in the loss of the indult. The first three regulations concerned: respecting the laity who continue the traditional practice, maintaining the laity’s proper respect of the Eucharist, and strengthening the laity’s faith in the real presence.
So how did Communion in the hand come to America?

In 1975 and again in 1976, Joseph Bernardin, the Archbishop of Chicago and president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) attempted in vain to garner two-thirds of the bishops to vote in favor of receiving Communion in the hand. The following year – which coincided with the end of Bernadin’s term as president – brought one final attempt. Bernadin appointed Archbishop Quinn, who became Bernadin immediate successor as NCCB president, to be the chief lobbyist for Communion
Communion in the hand
was certainly in the 'spirit'
of Cardinal Bernadin.
in the hand. During the proceedings a brave bishop requested a survey of the bishops be taken – this survey would ask each bishop whether or not Communion in the hand was widely practiced in his diocese, for without the practice’s current wide-use the first condition of the indult would not be satisfied.

Of course, everyone knew that Communion in the hand was not a previously established practice in the United States.

Though his request was seconded and supported in writing by five other bishops, Bernadin had the motion dismissed as “out of order”. The bishops then voted... only to once more fall short of the two-thirds majority. This, however, did not end the matter. Bernadin decided to begin gathering “absentee votes” from any bishop he could find – including retired bishops who no longer administered any dioceses. Consequently, the number was adjusted to meet the two-thirds majority so that one of Bernadin’s final acts as NCCB president was to disregard the will of the Holy Father and introduce Communion in the hand to U.S. Catholics.

Through the heavy-handed politcal maneuvering of Cardinal Bernadin, Pope Paul VI’s attempt to create a firewall preventing the spread of Communion in the hand had failed.


  1. The impact of receiving Communion in the hand has been devastating in terms of reverence for and belief in the Real Presence. It is disgusting to see how the Eucharist is being mishandled. Not long ago I attended a mass celebrating the 50th anniversary of a priest's ordination. There were a couple of dozen priests in attendance. When the time came to distribute Communion I was suprised to see that all of the priests in attendance remained seated while 10 or more Extraordinary Ministers distributed. As I approached the EM to receive I overheard the person ahead of me ask the EM for an extra host for his wife.....I was shocked when he was given one! As distribution progressed one EM ran out of Precious Blood and so she went to another EM who poured some of their consecrated wine into her chalice.

    My understanding is that none of the things I witnessed are licit; EM's are to be used only when there arn't enough priests available to distribute and pouring consecrated wine from one vessel to another while distributing is also illicit. Finally I could not believe that a person could be given an extra host upon request. Is not the host to be consumed immediately after receiving and in the sight of the EM or priest to avoid people taking a host for nefarious purposes?

    Our bishops are responsible for this travesty and they need to take steps to reign in these and many other abuses I've seen.

    1. Perhaps you would feel the reverence you seek by attending and receiving at a Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy, where Holy Communion is distributed by the PRIEST ONLY, under both species, (bread & wine)and placed directly into communicants mouth with a golden spoon. No "civilian" distributors - or what ever they are called in Latin Parishes ("EM"?)-- can be used to distribute; if there were 1,000 communicants lined-up to receive - it would just take a little longer.

    2. Vladimir,

      I would be honored to do so since the Byzantine Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy is in full communion with Roman Catholocism. At present I attend an FSSP parish where only the TLM is celebrated. Wine is not distributed. We receive the host on the tongue while kneeling. Still, I feel humbled and unworth when I receive.

    3. Iowa Mike - I'm honored and flattered you are knowledgeable of the Byzantine Catholic Church; most Latins in N. America are under the impression they are the only "Catholics", VS. just one of 26 or so Catholic Churches world-wide. I'm sure this is because Latins represent the largest of Catholic Churches in The U.S. We Ruthenian Byzantines are a much smaller - numerically - group, generally composed of Eastern Europeans,some Greeks. Actually, "older" Latin Catholics may better know us as "Greek Catholics"; a term we have since grown away from.
      In any case, things as in this discussion haven't affected us as we haven't changed ANYTHING, and continue to use the same Orthodox Divine Liturgy with which The Church began.
      Many of us do find it shocking, amusing, puzzling, etc., when we hear of The Latins coming-up with these things. And why? Do these people actually think these changes, after thousands of years, are proper and/or correct? Can they possible think these things are pleasing to Almighty God? Is a practice no longer "good" simply because it is "old"? Than that would also apply to many of us personally, along with the Church, and the concept of God. Let no True Believer be swayed by "fad", by "Popularism" -- these things lead to heresy and separation from the True Faith. Hold fast to The Truths as handed down and taught to us by our forefathers.


    4. Some day I will, God willing, attend enjoy the privilage of attending an Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy celebration. I am in awe whenever I enter a TLM mass or any faithful celebrations. I have actually seen a couple of NO masses that were very faithful....none of the nonesence we see now.

      The fruits of Vatican II have not been good...and I am thankful to God every single day that I can enjoy the privilage of attending a TLM mass; no crazy music, no dancing, no plays, no jokes, no immodestly dressed people, no talking in the nave, no children with toys, cookies, books, toys or anything else, no people coming late or leaving early, confession during mass up to the distribution of the host and then after, no shortage of alter BOYS (high mass always has at least 11 alterboys), no one on the phone, texting etc., no holding hands during the Our Father, no add-on's to the Our Father, no standing for communion, no reception in the hand (like anyone is worthy to do so!), meaningful homilies and most importantly straight Catholic teaching.


      God Bless

    5. Iowa Mike -
      Forgive my ignorance -- what is "TLM" Mass, and "NO" Mass?
      I am not familiar with these terms.

    6. Vladimir,

      TLM stands for the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM). Up to the Second Vatican Counsel it was the norm. After VII the mass was dramatically changes (protestantized in my opinion) and it is call the Novus Order (NO) and is the current norm. I only attend the TLM.

    7. Regarding "Vatican II" and many of these changes that came about after, is it not true that these things were ALLOWED for Latin Catholics if they so wished --- not "DEMANDED" to be implemented? This is my understanding from an outsiders viewpoint, and yet I am puzzled that so many Latins seem to feel (from my limited view) that they are REQUIRED.
      There is apparently a great deal of misunderstanding and/or baseless assumption regarding "Vatican II".


    8. P.S. -- Tomorrow - Aug. 15 is a Holy Day for all Eastern Catholics & Orthodox --- The Feast of The Dormition of The Theotokos. (The Mother Of God)"---More honorable than the Cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious than the seraphim; who, a virgin, gave birth to God the Word, you, truly the Theotokos, we magnify."

    9. Valdimir,

      You have a better understanding than most U.S. Catholics about the requirements of VII. This was an ecumenical counsel not a doctrinal one so there no element of dogma was changed. Changes to the mass have been completely distorted and abused. Unfortunately the fruits of Vatican II have been very damaging to the faithful.

      Quite right....tomorrow is the Feast of the Assumption and is indeed a Holy Day of Obligation.....Unfortunately I have a health issue that will prevent my attending mass but I will instead make a Seven Sorrows Rosary and pray the rosary.

    10. Iowa Mike -
      Sorry to hear you're having a problem; we shall remember you, and pray for you during today's Divine Liturgy.

      While the "Rosary" is not a tradition in The Eastern Church, we do have the so-called "Jesus Prayer" -- "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Have Mercy on me a Sinner". Which is repeated over and over, and, in fact, is an aid to meditation. And, while the Rosary "hardware" is not used, we do quite often use an aid akin to "worry beads".

      Re: your previously mention possible visit to a Byzantine/Eastern Church, and considering your health --- Divine Liturgy normally lasts at least an hour, possibly 1 1/2hr. with much (most) standing; little sitting - although you are free to do either as your circumstance demands. And, (hope I'm not insulting your knowledge here) -------
      *No females - girls, women, etc. allowed on the alter.
      *No musical instruments - parishioners sing all responses - lead by Cantor.
      *Priest DOES NOT face Parishioners - all face East - towards
      *The Icon Screen partially hides alter from view - reminding us we can never view Heaven in this life. (I think "The Communion Rail" in Latin Churches is the "remnant" of The Icon Screen)

      Hospodi, pomiluj; Hospodi, pomiluj; Hospodi, pomiluj
      (Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy)

    11. Vladimir....

      Well, my current health issue is sporatic. When I'm good I'm really good and when I'm not....well heck, I offer it up in reparation.

      You will be please to know that the Traditional Latin Mass, like the Divine Liturgy, does not allow women on the alter, female alter servers, no musical instruments, parishioners sing all responses following the choir positioned behind the congregation in the loft. The priest does not face the people but faces East towards Jerusalem. In the Latin mass the communion rail separates the sanctuary from the nave. When we receive we kneel, slip our hands under a white rail cloth, receive on the tongue and return to our pew. The Precious Blood is not distributed. I'm not aware of any connection between the Icon Screen and the alter rail. I thought the Icon Screen was to shield the consecration from view as a sign of ultimate reverence. The TLM takes between 1 and 1 1/2 hours and I have problem spending the better part of this time on my knees.

      Interestingly I have found a local Byzantine Church; St. John the Baptist Greek Orthodox Church - Interestingly it is only 25 minutes or so from my home. I will take the opportunity to attend soon. To prepare perhaps, if you are interested, you can friend me on Facebook and school me on the rubrics before I go; FB - Mike Malone, Omaha, NE

      Kyrie eleison, Kyrie eleison, Kyrie eleison
      (Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy).

    12. Iowa Mike -
      OK; even though I attempt, at all cost, to avoid the so-called "social contact/blog sites", I will check around w/the children-Grand children for access to Facebook and humbly provide some suggestions.
      This much I can tell you now - St. George Greek Orthodox Church is, in fact, a "Greek Orthodox Church" - not in union w/Rome. While their Liturgy is the same as ours, it is in Greek, not "Church Slavonic" (closely related to Ukrainian) as the Ruthenian Byzantine Church, which IS IN UNION.

      There is an Eastern Church in Omaha "in union" - that is "Assumption Ukrainian Catholic Church - 1513 Martha St 402-345-1552.
      Now, they are obviously NOT a Ruthenian Byzantine Church, but ARE in Union. About the only differences in Divine Liturgy = The Parishioners DO NOT sing responses as do the Ruthenians, and, may, in fact, use a choir.

      More via Facebook


    13. My thanks to you for taking me to school. Sometime ago our pastor talked about the Byzantine rite and recommended we stop in and experience it. So I'm no very interested in doing so but don't want to make any mistakes.

      Two more questions:

      1. If you prefer.....we could do this email?

      2. I wonder if you have more grandchildren than I do :-). I'm on the social networks as a police-grandpa, and a good thing too!

      Pacem Christi
      (Peace of Christ)

  2. What began as illicit practices were often secreted into the Church as if they were normal with catastrophic results.

  3. Thank you for this informative post and Mike for your discussion. The "Catholic Church in the USA" is in crisis and acts more like a political entity rather than the Beacon of Truth which Christ founded. Perhaps an initiative needs to begin with the laity and proceed up to the top like a tsunami advocating for orthodoxy. Perhaps a "petition drive" to advocate for communion in the mouth or to receive Jesus kneeling without fear of causing scandal. The current hour is bleak in America, and only Jesus has the remedy. The American Catholic Church is divided because of the rampant disobedience to the Vicar of Christ. May the Lord Jesus sweep the House clean!

    1. Tess Sain -
      Re:"Perhaps a "petition drive" to advocate for communion in the mouth or to receive Jesus kneeling" in your post --- forgive a Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic, (Eastern Catholic)where the Holy Communion practice is to approach the Priest standing, (no "helpers")and receive Holy Communion - in both species (bread & wine) via a golden spoon --- but if there are so many Latins who wish to return to the previous posture to receive - kneeling; from Priest only - why would it be necessary to start a movement or initiative? Why not simply - individually - do so why next you receive and every time thereafter? I'm sure if there are many others of the same desire they will see your lead and follow --- a movement away from popularism/non-reverence for The Holy Eucharist/"do what ever you want"/down the same path that many of our fallen-away brothers & sisters have taken away from The True Faith will have begun --- and a posture more respectful & worshipful restored.

  4. Paul A. Rahe, Professor of History at Hillsdale College, wrote an illuminating article on 2-10-2012 titled “American Catholicism’s Pact With the Devil” at This pertains to the really pernicious, absolutely corrosive influence of Cardinal Bernardin. “De mortuis nihil nisi bonum”, speak no ill of the dead, we are enjoined. However, the damage has been so severe, we all need to take stock of it.

  5. Pope Paul VI could have stopped it.
    He didn't.

    You can blame Bernardin all you want, but this was permitted by Pope Paul VI. If the Pope really didn't want it, it wouldn't have happened.

    If the Popes that followed him really didn't want it, it would go away.

    1. Good answer, Steve. In every diocese children are taught to receive in the hand, unless the priest instructs them otherwise. In our parish, run by the Society of Christ priests, the majority receive on the tongue. 98% of the immigrants from Poland all receive that way; a good number on their knees.

    2. I certainly agree that the indult authorizing communion in the hand was a blunder....BUT....the indult was limited and it has become the 'standard' which was not Pope Paul VI's intent. Still, it was a really, really bad decision. It appears to me he caved to pressure from the bishops by their defacto leader Cardinal Bernardin.

      But you cannot unring a bell. I want this horrible indult withdrawn but it will take preparation and time otherwise it will be ignored just like Pope Paul VI's Humanae Vitae.

  6. Steve, you are right.
    Bestowing the indult only to the countries where the practice was already established was giving an award to the disobedience.
    And what was this idea of taking a vote on the issue from the bishops as if the reverence due to the body of Christ was a democratically debatable question? Let's imagine the same way of proceeding for example in the issue of the ordination of the women to the priesthood.
    Was he the Pope or not? He had just to speak aloud and discipline the disobedient bishops, and the matter would have been settled for a long time.
    “De mortuis nihil nisi bonum”. I am a bit easier with that than John. I don't understand why the post conciliar popes would be holier than those we got for the 20 previous centuries.
    There is no wrong in criticizing the Renaissance popes and with reason since some were liars, thieves, murderers, adulterous. What a shame.
    Recent insights in the life of Paul VI are suggesting he partook in a common fault with Card. Bernardin. It was said that his beatification trial was stopped for that reason . Let's hope it will not start again
    In my opinion, Paul VI was the worst pope we got since the council. The havoc he waged in the RCC are not yet complete.

  7. John 8:7 - "When therefore they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said to them: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

    The Church as had its share of popes who have sinned, beginning with St. Peter. After all they are men and are only infallible when they speak from the Chair of Peter. I don't like communion in the hand and believe that allowing it is one of the greatest blunders ever. But it is only and indult and indults can be withdrawn. This is the goal we should seek because anyone with eyes can see that reception in the hand has been a catastrophe.

    Why Pope Paul VI allowed this to happen may never be known with certainty but I'm not going to throw a stone at him for doing so. After all he wrote the great and prophetic encyclical 'Humanae Vitae'. I think he was aware of the problems of Vatican II when he made the following statements:

    "The Holy Father asserts that he has the feeling that “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God” (da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio (Insegnamenti [1972], 707).

    Later, he is quoted as saying: “We believe … that something preternatural has come into the world specifically to disturb, to suffocate the fruits of the Ecumenical Council, and to prevent the Church from breaking out in a hymn of joy for having recovered in fullness the awareness of herself (Crediamo … in qualcosa di preternaturale venunto nel mondo proprio per turbare, per soffocare i frutti del Concilio Ecumenico, e per impedire che la Chiesa prorompesse nell’inno della gioia di aver riavuto in pienezza la coscienza di sé (Insegnamenti [1972], 708)."

    (notes and translations by R. Fastiggi)(cf.

    People should give this pope a break.

  8. Mike,
    Paul VI was the Pope and thus was divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit in the occasions he had to adress dogmatic issues on Faith and morals, as head of the Magisterium. And this happened too with the Renaissance popes so bad were they.
    But we must not forget that he erred in matters where his infallibility was not at stake, like the political ones.
    For example, considering the recent persecutions in Vietnam a few days ago by the communists (a priest beaten to death and many faithfuls tortured or jailed), I was remembering the time when Paul VI welcomed a delegation of the communist Vietcong, while he disregarded with contempt to receive the catholic president of the South Vietnam.
    For that reason and for many others I prefer not to speak about, this would be a shame that his beatification trial would be reopened.
    If you want to learn more on this pope, besides the official propaganda, you must read the book of Fr Luigi Villa, "Paul VI beatified?" That's hair raising.

    1. There is not a pope in history that has not made mistakes. That would include JPII and all popes preceeding him. No doubt Pope Paul VI made grave mistakes but I must point out that the selection of popes always involves the Holy Spirit thus I doubt he was a rogue pope.

      I acquired a copy of Fr. Villa's book (Paul VI, Beatified?)and will put it into my reading queue. In turn I recommend you read 'The Rhine Flows into the Tiger' by Father Ralph M. Wiltgen which is a history of Vatican II. I think you will find there were substantially more villains in Vatican II than Pope Paul VI. Fantastic read and one that caused me to soften my view of Pope Paul VI just as recent disclosures has caused me to rethink the popular condemnation of Pope Paul XII.

      I'm sorry you don't find The American Catholic a good source of research and Catholic information.

    2. Mike,
      There were too much "villains" orbiting around Paul VI, in particular freemasonic and/or homosexual prelates.
      Sad to say, many of them were appointed by the Pope, for example the Card. Bernardin who become one of the most prominent promoters of the homosexuality in the US priesthood, or Mgr Bugnini the great architect of the Novu Ordo Mass.
      Please read the Fr Villa's book first and let's talk after.

    3. jac, Unfortunately JPII and other popes have made some incredibly poor choices. Look at Marceil Maciel founder of the Legion of Christ. A close associate of John Paul II, Maciel was also a bigamist, pederast, dope fiend, and plagiarist. In the end it will all come out in the wash. So I urge you to look at the big picture and not focus on only the mistakes.

      The NO mass was not the product of just one or two priests. You should read "The Rhine Flows into the Tiber" to get an understanding of all that was done to undermine the mass and the papacy. In the attempt to strip the papacy of infallible decision making Pope Paul VI was deceived...but he is the one that put an end to that evil conspiracy.

      Christ founded the One, Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church, He Himself promised to be with the Church until the end of time. God does not deceive.......

      The arguments I hear in support of the SPXX are different from those used by Luther but both lead to the same place, apostacy.

  9. Cardinal Bernhading must be undergoing a horrible purgatory

    1. Pugatory....only if God, in His infinate mercy.

    2. Let's hope he is in Purgatory, not lower.
      If so, it is useles to pray for him.

    3. You are right those who are in the lowest of the three levels of Purgatory cannot benefit by prayers for them. But I always pray for all those souls in this level by appealing to God's infinate mercy and ask that he raise them up.

  10. Communion in hand has reduced the blessed sacrament to nothing but an item, not the true presence. It has also led to those that want to defile our lord like satanist easy access to it. Maria Simma stated that communion in hand was introduced by masonic cardinals.

    1. My children, back in the 90s were taught that Communion in the hand is like going to Grandma's house for a cookie. My parish, at that time, did not allow confession before first Holy Communion; I had to get special permission to have one of my sons receive confession only a year AFTER First Communion. Another child waited 4 years!

      I prepared my children myself, after studying to be a true catechist, for confirmation and got permission from a bishop in another diocese to have them confirmed there. Eventually, I had to move from my hometown to a faithful diocese because we could no longer endure the modernist version of 'church'.

    2. The Modernism is an heresy, it was condemned by several popes prior to VATII. Now a huge majority of the catholic clerics and faithfuls is modernist, even unknowingly.
      Paul VI cancelled the anti-modernist oath enforced by Pius X. Of course, he was himself a mopdernist;
      Therefore, one may consider that all the modernist priests who were ordained prior to that cancellation were true perjurers.

    3. absolutely Padre Pio is right, who do we think we are, receiving God standing and in our unconsecrated hands, didn't MOSES have to even remove his sandals when God spoke to him on the mountain in the Sinai !!!!
      I seriously doubt that priests and bishops who give the Holy Host in the hands, even believe in the Transsubstantiation.
      But as some 15 years ago one of my co-worker nurses told me : " we here in the States do our own thing, our Bishops they don't listen to Rome, they do whatever they want." That nurse was very proud of this.
      So what's the difference then between a Luther and them ??? Schismatics !!!

  11. All I can say is thank God for the SSPX. People have to realize that Vatican II was nothing more than a grand conspiracy by Masonic Cardinals and Bishops to destroy the Roman Catholic Church and replace it with their humanistic Novus Ordo religion. Bernardin, a homosexual deviant and alleged Satanist, was their main man in the U.S. I ask myself what will it take for people to see what's going on around them. They have desecrated and destroyed our churches and altars; and they have even 86'd Christ in the Tabernacle from our sanctuaries and put Him in a closet out of the way, and nobody can see the Malignancy in this?

    1. I can understand your frustration but I don't understand your conclusion. The SSPX is not the answer...Christ Himself promised to be with the Church until the end of time. He is still with the Church and we, the Church Militant, need to support the pope.

    2. My point is when the Novus Ordo Church collapses (and it will, just like the Episcopalians)the SSPX will still be there, never having strayed from Roman Catholic dogma and with full Apostolic Succession. Christ promised to be with the Church he founded circa 33AD, not the one founded by Freemasons and apostates in the 1960s.

    3. I agree that the SSPX is not the answer. Schism never is.

      Thanks be to God for Pope Benedict. This coming week will see three extraordinary forms of the Mass offered in my town. Little by little we are retrieving what was lost.

    4. I'm afraid you are misguided. The Catholic Church will continue to change and face challenges but Christ founded only one Church and He promised to 'be with you [the Church] until the end of time. God does not break promises. Papal and aplostolic succession, established by Jesus Himself, have not been suspended or changed because a handful of people won't accept VII. I think the fruits of VII are horrible but I believe it is because the counsel was hijacked by liberals who want to change the face of the Church. They failed miserably because VII was a ecumenical counsel and changed not one single iota of doctrine. There is a movement back to orthodoxy that the liberals cannot stop e.g. the LCWR will probably (I hope) be suppressed What will eventually pass away. The silly, irreverent, irrevelent liturgies and pagan practices (liturgical dance), the bad music, emphasis on pop-culture and most importantly most VII priests will finally retire and with them will go much of what we deplore in the Church today.

      We need to stick with and support the pope.

    5. The catholic Faith's fundamentals (dogma) are forever: They cannot be changed.
      Since the VATII council was not dogmatic, it is in no way binding on the faithfuls: One may ignore it in whole without sinning.
      Of course the council limited itself in often repeating or reaffirming previous infallible teachings but the council's modernist writers did this in ambiguous enough terms to lead many in thinking that some dogmas were changed, for example concerning the EENS dogma or the ecumenism.
      In that case if any VATII statement looks to contradict a previous dogmatic statement, it must be interpreted in the light of the Tradition (Benedict XVI said so) or disregarded.

    6. Once again, the council wasn't hijacked; it was a conspiracy all along by evil men, some useful dupes, and maybe one or two blackmailees. Their intent was the destruction of the faith. I pray to God every night that the heresy in the Church will be stamped out once and for all. And while we (Trads) see much promise, the sad fact is we are greatly outnumbered by parishioners who love the Novus Ordo and are utterly repelled by all things truly Catholic. Although some things might get tightened up if a good pope gets elected (Cardinal Burke, please God!), the Church will never return to what it once was and these debates will go on forever.
      And though the Novus Ordo can say dogma has never changed, the fact is much Catholic dogma has been conveniently forgotten - kind of like old laws whch are still on the books but completely disregarded or bypassed. (Magdalene's children were told there was no need for confession before first communion!) When is the last time anyone in the Novus Ordo heard anything about hell, purgatory, mortal sin, Satan, indulgences, final judgement? For that matter, how often do you hear about the Blessed Virgin, St. Michael,or the martyrs and saints? When I was in the service I went to a field "Mass" once and it wasn't until more than half way through that I realized it wasn't even a Catholic service. With the exception of not mentioning the pope in their "eucharistic prayer" the service was identical to a Novus Ordo service. And I can absolutely guarantee you I was the only Catholic in the whole bunch who realized something was wrong.
      I guess what it comes down to is the terrible choice between a church that is in schism or a church in apostasy.

    7. We are in violent agreement save what happened at VII. It was indeed highjacked both within the counsel and following it. Vatican II did not call for communion in the hand, removal of communion rails, turning the alter around (versus populum), removal of statues, positioning the muscians in the santuary, the dumbing down of Catholic dogma, de-emphasis of the Sacrament of Penance......that was and is being done by liberal Catholics who are secular progressive, relativists or both. They want to remake the Catholic Church into a pop-culture Church where personal conscience decides what's what (even though a well-formed Catholic conscience is only valid if it is communion with Church teachigs). This is an attitude that is totally relativistic and unacceptable before God.

      The Catholic Church will stand when Christ comes's up to the Church Militant...(you and me) to take up the cause and challenge heterodox views and practices to bring the Church back to orthodoxy. The enemy isn't the Church....Popoe Benedict, Cardinal Burke, Archbishop Chaput and on and on.....

      Pray for and support the Holy Father and God's Church.

    8. Pope St.Pius X was warning about these things fifty years earlier.

    9. Those who enshrine "tradition" and say that this is how it has to be forever, are clearly making God, tradition, and the church idols and you know how god hates those things. We all know that in the early church everyone at the Meal/Sacrifice/Mass....of course knelt---it is the tradition to kneel at a meal? Let us be reasonable...too many people claim abuses but the reality is that they are in fact blowing in the wind and exaggerating to try to pin up their point of view --poor Jesus!

    10. Must be nice living with rose colored glasses. You also might want to read sone of the church fathers like St. Justin Martyr and see how they acted at mass.

  12. I am 60. I don't remember how old I was when we started receiving Holy Communion in the hand, but I do remember feeling awed that God would let me hold Him in my hand. God became Flesh with the yes of the Virgin Mary and she held God in her arms. Every Christmas we commemorate this miraculous event and we too hold Our God in our arms. After His Resurrection, Our God invited Thomas to touch His wounds so that Thomas would believe. I am honored, humbled and awed to receive My Lord and My God in my hand.

    1. Thomas was made a priest by the Christ on the Holy Thursday Supper. Therefore he was allowed to touch the Body of Christ.
      On the contrary, the Christ resurrected appeared immediately after His resurrection to Magdalene Mary in saying: "Noli Me tangere" "Dont touch Me".
      The Eucharist is intended to be eaten, not to be manipulated. Touching the Body of Christ in no way provides the eternal Life, only eating It

    2. it reminds me of my mother telling us that when she did her first Communion, the Holy Host was sticking to her palate and her finger was going to her mouth and a nun who saw this came to her and hit her hand and punished her.
      We never receive Jesus in our hands because there might be tiny particles sticking to our hands and no matter how small the particle, it is still the Body of Christ.
      May the aw and reverence come back soon for God's Body and Blood

  13. I too feel the same but I also luv the sense of humility kneeling at an altar rail to receive Him on my tongue.....As long as I believe He is in the tabernacle.....that is all I need when the time comes He is not there may I then be with Him in eternity. I am 75 and close to going there thank God and get away from all this human judgment...again you who are without sin cast the first stone.....

  14. Why is Holy Communion received in the hand, especially after everyone has shaken hands for the Sign of Peace? Some people, as well meaning as they might be, do not have the same concept of hygiene. This is not acceptable.

  15. The holy Padre Pio, was ashamed aboout the communion in the hand.
    He said once: "If one truly apprehended what exactly the Holy Eucharist is, one would not come to receive It standing or kneeling, but in crawling.

  16. I agree that there's a lot of problems with Holy Communion in the hand. However the issue is poor catechesis, not what the bishops have decided.

    Before judging Cardinal Bernadin, I suggest a review of the document "Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the United States of America" which has continued the practice. It can be found at:

    It also quotes St Cyril of Jerusalem who wrote:
    "When you approach, take care not to do so with your hand stretched out and your fingers open or apart, but rather place your left hand as a throne beneath your right, as befits one who is about to receive the King. Then receive him, taking care that nothing is lost."

    It should also be pointed out the Communion in the Hand is permitted in many countries, not just the United States.

    I also blogged on the same topic. You may find my article here:

    1. These things like communion in hand, the tabernacle off in the corner, are all masonic influenced to discredit the true presence. If you don't believe that, then you might want to look at what has happened to the faith since these practices have been introduced. The church has been infiltrated by masons, communists and homosexuals.

    2. Seems you and Pope Paul VI have something in common after all, "The Holy Father [Pope Paul VI] asserts that he has the feeling that “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God” (da qualche fessura sia entrato il fumo di Satana nel tempio di Dio (Insegnamenti [1972], 707

    3. If you've read or heard of anything Fr. Malachi
      Martin has written, you know what i'm talking about.

    4. I think it's sad that you believe more in the masonic influence than the influence of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps you could pray for an increase in faithfulness, both for the Church and yourself.

    5. I first heard John XXIII appeared to be a Freemason not on some sedevacantist kook website, but on a Freemasonry site! The author stated John XXIII's pectoral cross was filled with masonic symbols. I have pictures of his cross as well as him wearing it if you'd care to see them.

    6. I have read Malaci Martin and other books on exorcism......

    7. @Paul, all you have to do is look at any of the post VII churches. Do these look like catholic churches? Why is the tabernacle off to the side? Where is the beauty and majesty of being in the presence of God? So this influence has to come from somewhere? @Gorbachenko, I really don't believe that blessed papa Roncalli was a mason. He was a beloved pontiff and a holy man.

    8. @backto: I didn't believe it either at one time, until I saw a mason saying it!

  17. @Paul Christopher Lim,
    The problem with Cardinal Bernardin was not only with the Communion in the hand. Cardinal Bernardin was gay friendly (and probably was gay himself). He introduced the worm in the apple, the wolf in the sheepfold and the homosexuals began to enter in the seminaries and the paedophilia scandal began to blossom in the US Church.

    1. I could care less if you didn't care for Cardinal Bernadin. But I think you go over to your 'scary place' that your therapist talked about when you blame him for homosexual priests and pedophilia.

      One day, we will all know the rhyme and reason for God's plans for the Church.

    2. Paul,

      Temper, temper. Cardinal Bernardin's Seamless Garment philosophy did incalculable damage to the Church and millions of faithful. Pope Benedict shredded the Seamless Garment philosophy in 2005.

  18. I ain't no fan of Cardinal Bernardin and his 'Seamless Garment' theory. The damage he's done to the Church cannot be measured.

    1. It cannot be measured, but you can be quite certain it was very well calculated.

  19. Has your immortal soul been eased into a heretic state against … God's must know Catholic Dogma, Dogma which you have never seen ?

    Has this fact placed you outside of God's Catholic Church ... which uncorrected causes the loss of your soul ?

    Is there a Catholic Dogma remedy ... for re-entering the Catholic Church ?

    Answer: The answer to all three questions is … yes. Please continue.

    You have been *profoundly* deceived ...

    Council of Florence, Session 8, 22 Nov 1439 -- infallible Source of Dogma >
    "Whoever wills to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic faith. Unless a person keeps this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish eternally."

    You must believe the Catholic Dogma to be in the Church ... Dogma you have *never* seen.

    Site > ... infallible Dogma throughout.

    The ... Catholic Sources of Dogma ... is the Faith. It isn’t “Bible interpretation”.

    Yes ... you have been *profoundly* deceived.

    - - - - - - - - - -

    Can a group which enforces the opposite, the opposite, and the opposite of the Catholic unchangeable Dogma be the Catholic Church?

    No, it cannot possibly be the Catholic Church ... and promotion of the opposite of the Catholic Dogma is exactly what the vatican-2 heretic cult does ... and has been doing since it’s founding on 8 December 1965 at the Vatican.

    The vatican-2 heresy does not have the Office of the Papacy ... only the Catholic Church has the Papacy.

    The Dogma cannot “change” or be “reversed” ... God does not “change”.

    The founding documents of the vatican-2 heretic cult … the “vatican-2 council” documents … have well over 200 heresies *against* prior defined unchangeable Dogma. Every (apparent) bishop at the “council” approved the mountain of heresy, which caused their automatic excommunication, see Section 13.2 of

    - - - - - - - - - -

    Section 12 > Anti-Christ vatican-2 heresies (50 listed) ... followed by many Catholic corrections.

    Sections 13 and 13.1 > Photographic *proof* of heresy at the Vatican.

    Because of … the Catholic Dogma on automatic excommunication for heresy or for physical participation in a heretic cult (such as the v-2 cult) …

    … we were all placed, body and soul, *outside* of Christianity (the Catholic Church) on 8 December 1965 … the close date of the “council”.

    Section 13.2 and 13.2.2 > Dogma on automatic excommunication for heresy or participating in a heretic cult such as ... vatican-2, lutheran, methodist, evangelical, etc.

    Section 13.3 > Matt 16:18, Gates of Hell scripture ... is *not* about the Office of the Papacy.

    Section 13.4 > The vatican-2 heretic cult does not have the Office of the Papacy only the Catholic Church has the Papacy.

    Section 13.6 > The Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Automatic Excommunication for heresy define that ... God has allowed Catholic Jurisdiction ... for Mass and Confession to disappear from the world. There is no such thing as Catholic Mass outside of the Catholic Church.

    Non-Catholic heresies such as “vatican-2”, “sspx”, “sspv”, “cmri”, etc. ... do not have Catholic Mass.

    Section 19.1 > Dogma on Abjuration for *re-entering* Christianity (the Catholic Church) … after being automatically excommunicated.

    Section 10.2 > Returning to a state of grace, in places and times when Confession is not available, like now.

    - - - - - - - - - -

    Second Council of Constantinople, 553 A.D. -- infallible Source of Dogma >
    "The heretic, even though he has not been condemned formally by any individual, in reality brings anathema on himself, having cut himself off from the way of truth by his heresy."

    Everything you must know, believe, and do to get to Heaven is on > >

    Our Lady of Conquest
    Pray for us

  20. These 11 short films that i personally published before the costliest natural disaster ever in the history of mankind described in detail the costliest natural disaster ever in the history of mankind and all before it occurred on 3.11 in 2011.




    1. These 11 short films that i personally published before the costliest natural disaster ever in the history of mankind described in detail the costliest natural disaster ever in the history of mankind and all before it occurred on 3.11 in 2011.





      If i needed to say 125mph winds and widespread devastation as a major hurricane hits New Orleans and breaches the city's levees leaving 80% of New Orleans under water it could and with more precision exactly be simply expressed as "Aug 29 2005" This the quickest, easiest way to express this permanently while multitasking threats of natural disaster also to New Zealand another island near by the month before the first New Zealand earthquake fatalities since 1968 occurred and the quickest way to do that for the deaf dumb blind lames who couldn't even count to two sheep in New Zealand two weeks before the tsunami Tohoku two weeks after two twenty-two on Tuesday oh you know whose day its the duke gook girt about the paps washing ton of dirty japs i made the pope retire with a tsunami. The eleven films published individually and all specifying in detail "June 15" and 1896" are actually part of a larger ensemble that includes three hundred emails to world leaders and about as many universities with the Manhattan "Me" Project. This film is just (1 of 11) that specifically describe in detail the "biggest ever Japan tsunami" before the "biggest ever Japan tsunami" and include my most highly unlikely prophecy of celestial superbolide airburst Tunguska two week notice I made the pope retire "event" ever. Jorge? Mario? You like a my fireball?
      Do the math
      Re: Numerical representation for biggest ever Japan tsunami
      "1896" is the one number before 3.11 out of all them that best represents the biggest ever Japan tsunami before the biggest ever Japan tsunami on 3.11 in 2011 that occurred after I published that very number a thousand times individually before 3.11 in 2011 when the costliest natural disaster ever in the history of mankind occurred so if you need to choose the only one number to best represent biggest ever Japan tsunami out of all of them the number is "1896". The logical number is 1896 because that was the year the previously biggest ever Japan Tsunami hit the same cities of the same island with the same thing and my publishing that number "1896" before 3.11 with "June 15" specifically a thousand times individually before 3.11 simply means mathematically I am forty year old king of the world no matter what and the next President of The United States of America or you won't want one honey bunny.

  21.,cd_max:march+11_2+2011&prmd=nvi&start=0&filter=0 +Buddy Rake​​​ +The White House​​​ +The Howard Stern Show​​ +*****​

    By publishing my 1000 Japan Tsunami WARNINGS including the date
    [ June 15, 1896 ] the exact date of "The Great Japan Earthquake" and biggest ever Japan Tsunami and publishing that date specifically 1000x in 1000 WARNINGS prior to "The Great Japan Earthquake" and biggest ever Japan Tsunami that occurred on
    [ March 11, 2011 ] when the single costliest natural disaster ever in the history of mankind occurred as "THE GREAT JAPAN EARTHQUAKE" and BIGGEST EVER JAPAN TSUNAMI with the EXACT SAME EPICENTER in the EXACT SAME SEA starting the EXACT SAME SIZE TSUNAMI striking the EXACT SAME SHORES of the EXACT SAME CITIES on the EXACT SAME ISLAND with the EXACT SAME THING as
    [ JUNE 15, 1896 ] I am the next president of the United States of America or you won't want one.