[Catholic Caucus] Vatican warns of ‘extremism’ in faithful who ‘raise issue of’ Communion in hand

LifeSite News ^ | October 28, 2026 | Emily Mangiaracina

[ebb tide]

[Catholic Caucus] Vatican warns of ‘extremism’ in faithful who ‘raise issue of’ Communion in hand

Receiving Communion on the tongue is important in part because the priest’s hands alone are consecrated to touch the Eucharist.

The Vatican has warned of “extremism” by those who “raise the issue” of receiving Communion in the hand and standing or kneeling.

In a summary of an ad limina visit of the Episcopal Conference of Panama at the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, the dicastery, led by Cardinal Arthur Roche, listed topics discussed during the meeting.

On the subject of the liturgy, the “danger of extremism in the liturgical sphere and of the instrumentalization of the Eucharistic celebration by certain groups of the faithful” was reportedly brought up.

“These groups tend to provoke division and confusion by raising issues such as receiving Communion kneeling and in the hand, or the use of the veil by women. It was reaffirmed that the Eucharist is the sacrament of unity and cannot become an object of contention,” the dicastery wrote on its web page about the visit.

Far from being divisive or confusing, raising the issue of Communion in the hand and standing is a very important matter of treating the Blessed Sacrament in a reverent, proper manner.

The tradition of the Catholic Church for well over 1,300 years, unbroken until after the Second Vatican Council, is that the lay faithful receive the Blessed Sacrament, administered by a priest, on the tongue while kneeling. This has been the traditional practice in part because priests’ hands are specially consecrated during ordination so that they may handle the Holy Eucharist, which is God Himself.

St. Thomas Aquinas has explained that this is one of three reasons why only priests are permitted to touch the Sacred Host:

… out of reverence for this Sacrament, nothing touches It but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands 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. (S.T., III, Q. 82, Art. 13)

In fact, receiving Communion in the hand began as an abuse and act of disobedience. As the late scholar Michael Davies has explained:

Communion in the hand was re-introduced into the Catholic Church as an act of rebellion soon after Vatican II. It began in Holland as an arbitrary act of defiance of legitimate authority; the practice spread to Germany, Belgium, and France. 

The consequences of this rebellion became so serious that the Pope consulted the Bishops of the world, and, after obtaining their opinions, promulgated the Instruction Memoriale Domini, in 1969. This Instruction is included and will be referred to from time to time. The principal points contained in it are:

1. The Bishops of the world were overwhelmingly against the innovation.

2. The traditional manner of distributing Holy Communion must be retained.

3. It is a sign of reverence which does not detract from the dignity of the communicant.

4. The innovation could lead to irreverence, profanation, and the adulteration of correct doctrine.

Therefore: The Apostolic See strongly urges bishops, priests, people to observe this law, valid and again confirmed, according to the judgment of the majority of the Catholic episcopate, in the form which the present rite of the sacred liturgy employs, and out of concern for the common good of the Church. 

Receiving the Eucharist in the hand also significantly increases the risk of profanation of the Blessed Sacrament and inevitably leads to losing particles of the Eucharist, which may fall on the floor or elsewhere.

Receiving Holy Communion while kneeling is also an important act of reverence towards the Blessed Sacrament. Scripture itself highlights bending of the knee as a gesture of reverence proper to Our Lord Jesus Christ: “That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth,” St. Paul wrote in a letter to the Philippians (2:10).

As God Himself, the Eucharist deserves nothing less than a posture of profound reverence. Whereas the posture of kneeling is proper to worship of God Himself, standing is a posture one uses when interacting with an equal. 

In addition, a recent study confirmed that traditional liturgical practices surrounding the Eucharist, including the manner in which He is received, increase belief in the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist.

In fact, Dr. Natalie Lindemann, the author of the study, suggested reinstalling altar rails and offering kneelers during Holy Communion at churches to increase belief in the Real Presence.

---

TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Worship
KEYWORDS: anticatholicpinglist; blasphemoussspxer; cockroche; disobedientsspxer; ebbspam; liesitenews; multipledailyspam; sacrilege; sacrilegioussspxer; sinningschismatic; sspxcommunicated; sspxhereticpinglist; synodalchurch; xcommunicatedanyway; xcommunicatedxtrmst

[ebb tide]

In fact, receiving Communion in the hand began as an abuse and act of disobedience. As the late scholar Michael Davies has explained:

Communion in the hand was re-introduced into the Catholic Church as an act of rebellion soon after Vatican II. It began in Holland as an arbitrary act of defiance of legitimate authority; the practice spread to Germany, Belgium, and France. 

What became an abuse in the conciliar church is now the norm in the synodal "church".

[ebb tide]

Ping

[bantam]

Why doesn’t the Catholic Church just come out and say we are no longer the Catholic Church. We are a crumbled little huddle mass of what the church once was. Proceed any way you wish!!

[lastchance]

. “It was reaffirmed that the Eucharist is the sacrament of unity...”

That is a falsehood. The unity is found in corporate sharing of The Word and hearing the homily. Holy Communion is the memorial of Our Lord’s passion brought forth to us so that we truly receive His Body and Blood.

If it was the sacrament of unity NO ONE COULD BE BARRED FROM IT. As doing so would destroy that unity. The Eucharist is exclusionary for a very good reason. Attending Mass is inclusive and that is where unity is found.

[lastchance]

While we are sort of on the subject. Just how many extraordinary ministers are really needed?

[ebb tide]

Zero.

The Catholic Church had managed without them for 1,300 years.

[ebb tide]

More about the the synodal popes' resident Cockroche:

Threatening Like a Bully - Cardinal Roche and the Traditional Roman Liturgy

[T.B. Yoits]

As Christ Himself celebrated the Passover Supper, Christ broke the bread, gave it to His Disciples, and said “Take this and eat it.” He didn’t say, “Don’t touch it. I’ll put it on your tongue.”

[stanne]

“While we are sort of on the subject. Just how many extraordinary ministers are really needed?”

Very very many

In our chapel we have one old but able-bodied priest. At Saturday vigil mass there are about 100 congregants plus kids. During communion 6-8 Eucharistic ministers loll up to the altar, wearing jeans, sleeveless and various inappropriate attire unsuitable for mass, much less the altar.

The priest administers communion to them, plus the altar girls whose parents have replaced boys on the altar, the choir ladies- who belong up in the choir loft but who have taken over the altar to make mass entertainment using Girl Scout campfire songs

While this lengthy procedure goes on, and on, and on, the congregants wait. There is nothing to do. The choir is busy. The priest is very busy. The piano player fiddles. There’s no hymn to sing. Last week he actually gave us a beautiful rendition of the strictly non-liturgical Over the Rainbow.

I have timed it- I could be praying, but if there were anyone I could present my argument to I would want o have it ready-it takes longer for this than it would for the priest to approach the rail and administer communion on the tongue- and not touching anyone’s tongue as they are taught to do (you can imagine the aversion to receiving communion on the tongue from the local insurance salesman) dipped in precious blood, to the entire congregation in considerable less time

It is as unreasonable -if communion is the goal- as this article. What are they saying? What particular issue. You’re supposed to bring it up? You’re not supposed to bring it up?

At a funeral my cousin had to be chased by the priest. She didn’t put the Eucharist into her mouth. She walked away with it. The reaction from many of the other cousins was “what was he doing? That was a ridiculous disruption!”

They know better. They’re all Catholic, having received all sacraments and catechesis. But years of this nonsense has distracted them into not believing in the true presence.

Since that’s the bad fruit that has come from the Eucharistic ministers, known as EM, which originated as Extraordinary Ministers, having become ordinary in this bait and switch, then one can hypothesize that was the intent

[stanne]

“ Zero.

The Catholic Church had managed without them for 1,300 years.”

Or this.

[aumrl]

We have the Body

But where is the Blood ?

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

The priest says a prayer before touching the eucharist, washes his hands before and after, does bot touch anything else until after washing.....but the laity is.....good!

[lastchance]

I agree. They should be used for extraordinary circumstances.

A lot of people wanting to receive during Mass is an ordinary circumstance in my view.

[stanne]

“ A lot of people wanting to receive during Mass is an ordinary circumstance in my view.”

Everyone goes up for communion

Back in the day when everyone realized it was the real presence, they were aware it was a sin to receive if you weren’t in a state of grace. Back when confession was a regular thing

[stanne]

Everyone goes up for communion. That’s extraordinary. It used to be people would stay back if they couldn’t receive. If they hadn’t been to confession appropriately

Back in the day when everyone realized it was the real presence, they were aware it was a sin to receive if you weren’t in a state of grace. Back when confession was a regular thing

[fortes fortuna juvat]

What became an abuse in the conciliar church is now the norm in the synodal “church”.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Catholics who know and understand the doctrines of the faith rightfully abhor any and all non-traditional deviations of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that were forced upon them by the heretics who participated in the Satan-controlled Second Vatican Council.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

But where is the Blood ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Where the blood usually is, of course!

[fortes fortuna juvat]

Back in the day when everyone realized it was the real presence, they were aware it was a sin to receive if you weren’t in a state of grace. Back when confession was a regular thing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Before the Satan-orchestrated Second Vatican Council things were obviously different.

[stanne]

I’m not sure if it was Vatican Ii or its interpretation but the situation coincided also with many things such as the rejection of the still-valid papal encyclical, ‘Humanae Vitae’, the use of non traditional sacred music at Mass-with chaotic time signatures and effeminate themes, among other cultural changes that were incompatible w Catholicism that Catholics embraced and turned away from the Church.