Attack! With the swiftness and coy of a bird sweeping down upon its prey, the so-called reformers of the 1500s charged forward in an effort to strike down the Catholic Church. Their game plan went right to the top, seeking to take out the Church’s centerpiece, the King of kings, Jesus Christ in the Eucharist; and the guardians and dispensers of the hidden Jesus, the bishops and priests. In this spiritual chess game, the Masters of mischief included Luther and Bucer in Germany, Calvin and Zwingli in Switzerland, Cranmer and Cromwell in England, and other lesser known pawns, who openly attacked belief in the Mystical Body, the Catholic Church and its sacramental system, especially the Eucharistic Jesus. The masterminds knew that the Church produces the Eucharist, but that the Eucharist also produces the Church in a very special way. Therefore to destroy belief in the Eucharist, is to destroy the Catholic Church. They thought it was high time for their reformed religions to take over, but how to capture the hearts and minds of those who believed in that centerpiece, the hidden Jesus in the Eucharist? They knew that if the belief in the Eucharistic Jesus would fall, all of Catholicism would fall.
     Their game plan was clear; with fiery words, Martin Bucer, in England at the invitation of Cranmer to help spread the new doctrine, proclaimed in word the following sentiments of the Masters:

“Every superstition of the Roman Antichrist is to be detested ... I have no doubt that this usage of not putting these sacraments in the hands of the faithful has been introduced out of a double superstition; firstly, the false honour they wished to show this sacrament, and secondly the wicked arrogance of priests claiming greater holiness than that of the people of Christ, by virtue of the oil of consecration.
     “I should wish that pastors and teachers of the people should be commanded that each is faithfully to teach the people that it is superstitious and wicked to think ... that the hands of the ministers are holier than the hands of the laity; so that it would be wicked, or less fitting, as was formerly wrongly believed by the ordinary folk, for the laity to receive these sacraments in the hand; and therefore that the indications of this wicked belief be removed–as that the ministers may handle the sacraments, but not allow the laity to do so, and instead put the sacraments into the mouth–which is not only foreign to what was instituted by the Lord but offensive to human reason.
     “In this way good men will be easily brought to the point of all receiving the sacred symbols in the hand...”

     Needless to say, Cranmer’s new 1552 English Communion service devalued the priest and the Eucharist, implementing, among other practices, Communion in the hand. Earlier, Luther had started the practice of Communion in the hand, calling the Catholic belief a “subtle sophistry” and the Catholic Mass as “the greatest and most terrible abomination.” At this time, Cranmer’s English Communion service didn’t have the Catholic belief either, as he would say himself, “Christ is not received with the mouth but with the heart and entereth by faith.” This was the similar doctrine of Zwingli and Calvin and many other so-called reformers throughout Europe as well. Therefore, to promote their own doctrine, the people of the new religions were to become their own minister of the Eucharist. Surely, breaking the long-standing tradition of receiving Jesus from a priest on the tongue would help break down the sensibilities and beliefs of the “ordinary folk.” The like occurred in Germany, Switzerland, Holland and other countries throughout Europe. To the Protestant mind the Eucharist was fast becoming just common bread.
     Over 400 years later, the crazy 1960s rolled in, and the spirit of Bucer with it: Déjà Vu, Back to the Past: Part II. Back to Europe, where this time it is in Holland where the rebellion to Church authority and practice is on the march again. This time the masterminds of rebellion stay within the visible structure of the Church, and proceed with calculated acts of defiance of mandatory liturgical norms, becoming quite successful. Using “ordinary folk” as their springboard, they convinced them, often under false obedience, to “following their leaders wherever they may go,” even outside obedience to Rome. One cannot but hear the words of Bucer echoing, “In that way good men will easily be brought to the point of all receiving the sacred symbols in the hand...” Others, succumbing out of weakness, following the motto “see no evil, hear no evil,” and following the pied piper away from the wisdom of Holy Mother Church. Here, one cannot help but be reminded of the words of St. John Bosco, “The power of evil men lives on the cowardice of the good.” Despite being strictly forbidden by Church law, being defined as a grievous offense and mortally wounding, the practice of Communion in the hand is promoted, the wounds of Christ are opened anew, and like a cancer, is spread throughout Holland, Belgium, Germany and France. A blitzkrieg of defiance!
     Hundreds upon hundreds of years of Catholic teaching on the dignity and the manner of proper respect that needs to be shown toward the Eucharist is in peril. One just has to look back in history to the 1500s to realize that they were promoting the Protestant practice. This practice was one of the issues the Church responded to in the Council of Trent (1545-1563). In clear terms, the Council declared that receiving Holy Communion from the hands of a priest only was an Apostolic tradition. We only have to read from the catechism of that Council of Trent to see the mind of the Church:

“It must be taught, then, that to priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist. That this has been the unvarying practice of the Church, that the faithful should receive the Sacrament from the priests, and that the officiating priests should communicate themselves, has been explained by the Council of Trent, which has also shown that this practice, as having proceeded from Apostolic tradition, is to be religiously retained...”

     These words were nothing new, but only reechoing the practice that had developed in the Church under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For, in the 1200s St. Thomas, in his marvelous work, Summa Theologica, pronounced the same: that it was a priest’s job to distribute the Eucharist. St. Thomas states:

“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 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 deliver the consecrated gifts of the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence towards this Sacrament, nothing touches It but what is 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.” (Summa Theologica)

     The little poor man of Assisi, St. Francis, in his simplicity summed up the Catholic belief, “And I do this because, here on earth, I see nothing of the Son of the Highest God, except his most holy Body and Blood, which the priests receive and which only they give to others.” And these solemn secrets I will honor and venerate above everything and keep them in the most sacred places.” (Letter to the Faithful)
     We need to reflect here and realized that this profound theology of respect towards the Eucharist that had developed and grown under the guidance of the Holy Spirit from centuries upon centuries. In the early stages of development of the Church, Communion in the hand was permitted but it led to so many abuses that it had to be condemned. Like a child growing into manhood the Church had to develop and come a long way.
     As early as Pope St. Leo I (460-461), Communion on the tongue was in current use. The holy Pope stated, “One receives in the mouth what one believes by faith.” The great St. Gregory tells us in his dialogues (594-604) how Pope St. Agapitus performed a miracle during the Mass after having introduced the Body of our Lord into the mouth of a person: “When he placed the Lord’s Body in his mouth, the tongue which had so long been speechless was loosed, all those present were struck with wonder and wept for joy.” (Dialogue 3, 117) A local council in Rouen, France in 650 condemned Communion in the hand: “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or laywoman but only in their mouths.” In the 9th century, the Roman Ordo clearly admits to the fact of Communion on the tongue as the normal practice.
     Under the cloak that we are “gloriously returning to the spirit of ancient times,” many modern innovators of the 60s sought to bring people to primitive practices, as Communion in the hand. As this thought was already seeping into the Church in the 1940s, the great Pope Pius XII reacted strongly against this in his famous encyclical Mediator Dei (1947). In this document, he warned against such people who attempt to undermine the faith under such a pretext, saying such persons represent “a wicked movement that tends to paralyze the sanctifying and salutary action by which the liturgy leads the children of adoption on the path to their Heavenly Father.” Moreover, the Holy Father goes on in this same document, “the desire to restore everything indiscriminately 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 ... This attitude is an attempt to revive the ‘archeologism’ ... which the Church ... has rightly condemned.”
     If Pope Pius XII’s words were not enough, Cardinal Newman’s words should stop any innovator in their tracks. In his book The Development of Christian Doctrine he exclaimed that “a developed doctrine which reverses the course of development which has proceeded it, is no true development but a corruption; also that which is corrupt acts as an element of unhealthiness towards what is sound.” Today, polls show that only 30% of U.S. Catholics believe in the Church’s teaching on the Eucharist. THIRTY PERCENT! Did the practice of Communion in the hand have anything to do with this loss of belief in the Eucharist? Surely, Martin Bucer would like to have thought so.
     Clearly, during the Vatican II Council, 1962-1965, there was no change in the Church’s tradition of receiving on the tongue from a priest. This ancient practice was retained as nothing was declared to the contrary. Most definitely, if we truly followed Vatican II, there would be no Communion in the hand. Furthermore, in this same time period, the Canon Law in use since 1917 declared, “The priest alone is the ordinary Minister of Holy Communion. The deacon is the extraordinary minister, but he must have the permission of the local Ordinary or of the pastor, which may be given for grave reason, and may be legitimately presumed in case of necessity.” (Canon 845) Additionally, the 1962 book The Administration of the Sacraments, imprimatured by Cardinal Cushing, points out that if a deacon gives out Holy Communion without permission under normal circumstances he would be “sinning grievously.” With all of the Church’s might against such a practice, one can only wonder in amazement how this practice of Communion in the hand got its foothold today.
     His Holiness Pope Paul VI saw the dangers of this rebellion of the 1960s challenging him, and looked to the world’s bishops to support him. The Holy Father sent out a questionnaire to the bishops of the world to see if they felt as he did on this serious matter. The results that were in before March 12th of 1969 read: 567 bishops voting yes on Communion in the hand; 1,233 voting no on Communion in the hand, 315 of those yes votes with reservation. Great news for the Pope, as it was overwhelmingly rejected by majority of the bishops. However, on the not so good side, the rebellious practice was growing day by day–the spirit of Bucer was alive!
     Feeling the pressure of the situation, and afraid of losing his hold on the affair–which was clearly happening–Pope Paul VI sought to set things right by bringing forth a new instruction, Memoriale Domini on May 29, 1969. Bringing to light the bishops’ vote, the Holy Father’s instruction reads, “From the responses it is thus clear that by far the greater number of bishops feel that the present discipline should not be changed at all, indeed, that if it were changed, this WOULD BE OFFENSIVE to the sensibilities and spiritual appreciation of these bishops and of most of the faithful.” (emphasis added)
     Further, showing how he himself feels, the noted document states, “the Supreme Pontiff judged that the long-received manner of ministering Holy Communion to the faithful SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED. The Apostolic See therefore strongly urges bishops, priests and people to observe zealously this law.” (!)
     Moreover, in this document, the Holy Father admits Communion in the hand is an abuse! When talking about the practice, the document states, “In some communities and localities this rite (of receiving Communion in the hands) has even been performed WITHOUT OBTAINING THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE APOSTOLIC SEE....” Bingo! Here is the admittance that Communion in the hand is truly an abuse, and, by the way, is still objectively and grievously sinful at this time. Before we go forward, let us ponder on the Scripture passage, “By their fruits you shall know them.” (Matt. 7:17)
     Memoriale Domini was to forbid the bishops from the countries where Communion in the hand wasn’t in vogue, to start the practice up. However, puzzling indeed, the Holy Father, perhaps feeling a bit overwhelmed or at least, overly optimistic that the right thing would be done in this spiritual chess game, tragically drops his guard, and leaves an opening for the new way of thinking:

“If the contrary usage, namely, of placing Holy Communion in the hand, has already developed in any place, in order to help the episcopal conference fulfill their pastoral office in today’s often difficult situation, the Apostolic See entrusts to the conferences the duty and function of judging particular circumstances, if any.”

The Holy Father, however, did lay down serious restrictions for this indult:

“They may make this judgment PROVIDED THAT ANY DANGER IS AVOIDED OF INSUFFICIENT REVERENCE OR FALSE OPINION OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST arising in the minds of the faithful and that any other improprieties be carefully removed.”

     Could one not ask, by carrying out the practice that was grievously forbidden, wasn’t the danger already too great? Astonishingly, an open abuse is not corrected, but keys to the house are left with many known-to-be robbers of legitimate authority. The Holy Father apparently was just hoping and praying, in his goodness of heart, that the right thing would be done. The door is opened wider.
     Again, let us take notice once more of the Holy Father’s previous statement in this document: “THE SUPREME PONTIFF JUDGED THAT THE LONG RECEIVED MANNER OF MINISTERING HOLY COMMUNION TO THE FAITHFUL SHOULD NOT BE CHANGED.” This is the Holy Father’s wish, however, as history points out, the Holy Father does not always get his wish. We can see from this statement, that Pope Paul VI’s will is that all receive on the tongue. Most notably, he himself, until his death, would forbid the practice of Holy Communion in the hands in the Eternal City of Rome and all of Italy. Still, one can only ask how a practice that the Pope was personally opposed to, came to be.
     The spirit of Bucer began to spread. This new practice of receiving Holy Communion in the hand posed serious questions for the Catholic, and left many confused and weakened in faith towards the Eucharist. People, who had been taught from childhood good theological reasons why never ... never to touch the Host, except in a big emergency, were now told the opposite. During this time frame Catholics by the droves stopped attending the great Eucharistic mystery, and stopped believing in the hidden Jesus.
     In reading the document carefully, you will see serious fatherly warnings coming from the Holy Father, who was afraid that this would be the case:

Communion in the hand “carries with it certain dangers: the danger of loss of reverence for the August Sacrament of the Altar; of profanation; of adulteration of true doctrine.”

     In contrast, the Holy Father communicated the fact that Holy Communion received on the tongue “signifies the reverence of the faithful for the Eucharist ... provides that Holy Communion will be distributed with due reverence ... is more conducive to Faith, Reverence, and Humility .. Detracts nothing from the personal dignity of those who approach so great a Sacrament ... provides that the diligent care commended by the Church for even the fragments of the Consecrated Bread be maintained.”
     What can we say? We can say that Communion on the tongue is the law of the Church even today. Communion in the hand is an indult which can only be allowed if the conditions of the indult are met. In the document Memoriale Domini itself, we saw one condition of the indult, that the bishops can only make judgments for the indult “provided that any danger is avoided of insufficient reverence or false opinion of the Eucharist...” This is a condition that must be met; but the question in today’s unbelieving, uncatechized world is, can it?
     Further, and very importantly, there is a little-known instruction issued after Memoriale Domini, as can be found in the Acta Apostolica Sedis (pp. 546-547), given to the hierarchies who asked for and are granted permission to introduce the practice of Communion in the hand. The letter laid down seven conditions, of which–for brevity–we will concentrate on four. Please remember, Communion on the tongue is still the universal law, and Communion in the hand is only allowable when the conditions of the indult are met. Of these seven conditions, four seem to need special consideration for the indult:

1. “The new manner of giving Communion must not be imposed in such a way that the traditional practice is excluded...”;
2. “The rite of giving Holy Communion in the hand must not be used without discretion ... the result ... must be such as to exclude any appearance that the Church is weakening in any way her faith in the Eucharistic presence, and such that there is no danger of profanation or even the appearance of danger of profanation.”
3. “The possibility offered to the faithful to receive in his hand and to put in his mouth the Eucharistic Bread must not offer to him an occasion of considering It to be like ordinary bread or something merely blessed; on the contrary...”
4. “... one must take care to not drop or lose any particles of the Eucharistic Bread, one must also take care to see the hands are suitably clean...”

     Now, somebody has to decide if these conditions can be met, and this decision is often left up to the priest. He must answer these $128,000 questions: is every occasion or possibility of scandal going to be avoided, and is “all danger of irreverence towards the Eucharist” avoided? He, as pastor of the flock must see to it that no abuse of Our Lord will occur, that no lost particles will result, and that the faithful’s belief in the Eucharist will be strengthened rather than weakened. He has an obligation to weigh these factors out, with the utmost charity.
     Every particle contains Jesus Christ’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. Therefore, the loss of any particle would be sacrilegious. By ecclesiastical law, the priest is the minister and is responsible for the distribution of the Eucharist. Therefore, with great love, the priest must care for the Body of Christ and nourish the faithful, seeing that every particle is consumed. Simply put, he must see if this indult can be met. Again, the priest and the faithful must ask (considering today’s confusion and lack of true teaching on the Eucharist), could these conditions possibly be met?
     In America, as in other places, under false obedience many nuns and others were misled and told they had to take the Host in the hand. Some liberal publication falsely stated it was the wish of the Pope that this be done. The children were told, “take It in the hand.” With all that the children have not been told concerning the Eucharist, no wonder few believe in the Real Presence of Jesus. Through these methods, we can see Martin Bucer’s spirit is alive indeed. His words echo in our century, “In that way good men will be easily brought to the point of all receiving the sacred symbols in the hand...”
     Nevertheless, what was left to Pope John Paul II when he came to reign, was a practice firmly entrenched. Soon after being elected Pope, the Holy Father visited the United States where an event took place that showed his own feelings on the manner of receiving Holy Communion. What the television cameras captured was a nun attempting to receive Holy Communion with her hands stretched forward, whereas the picture focused in on the Holy Father instructing her to receive Jesus on her tongue. During that journey to our country the Holy Father stuck to his guns, and did not give Holy Communion in the hands. In time, however–feeling pressure untold no doubt–the Holy Father was to give in to the demands of others. However, Pope John Paul II was to maintain his principle of no Communion in the hand in Rome until the late 1980s. For many a year, the sign over St. Peter’s Basilica read in five different languages:

“By superior instruction it is herewith confirmed that the Most Reverend priests who celebrate or administer in this Basilica of St. Peter’s must not put the most Sacred Particles in the hands of the faithful.”

     Regardless of what the sign read, foreign priests often ignored the rules, and did their own thing. Communion in the hand became so widespread in the Eternal City, that it was eventually allowed.
     Of this Holy Father, it is all too clear of his preference for Communion on the tongue. In his Apostolic Letter Dominicae Cenae on February 1980, Pope John Paul II noted that since the introduction of Communion in the hand “cases of a deplorable lack of respect towards the Eucharistic species have been reported, cases which are imputable not only to the individuals guilty of such behavior, but also to the pastors of the Church who have not been vigilant enough regarding the attitude of the faithful towards the Eucharist.”
     The Holy Father further shows his preference in a more direct way in that same instruction, stating:

“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, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist.”

     Mother Teresa of Calcutta has seen to it that her community’s practice is to receive Holy Communion only on the tongue. Surely she sees, as Pope Paul VI did, that this traditional manner of receiving the Holy Eucharist on the tongue “is more conducive to Faith, Reverence and Humility.”
     Ultimately, the Holy Father has had such grave misgivings about what has become of practices regarding the Eucharist, that he ended his letter Dominicae Cenae with these words: “And I pray the Lord Jesus that in the future we may avoid in our manner of dealing with this sacred mystery anything which could weaken or disorient in any way the sense of reverence and love that exists in our faithful people.”

"We ask and repeat that no one handle in unconsecrated hands the Body of My Son! It will be defiled and discarded, unless only a legally-ordained priest, a man of God, with purified fingers of the Holy Spirit, give the Body and Blood of My Son to each one under his care." - Our Lady of the Roses, September 6, 1975

Our Lady of the Roses Bayside messages:
These messages came from Jesus, Mary, and the saints to Veronica Lueken at Bayside, NY, from 1968 to 1995.

REAL PRESENCE
"You violate your sacred trust. You have taken the Body of your Creator, the Son of your God in the Trinity, and violated Him. You must do your eating at home! When you come to the great Sacrifice, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, you come in reverence. You must go down upon your knees and do penance now for the offenses to your God! ...
    "As in the past, cannot you recognize the mystery of Heaven and earth? Did not the staff of Moses turn into a serpent in the will of God? Did not the river in Egypt turn into blood in the will of God? And cannot God, in His will, come to you changing the bread and wine into the actual Presence, the real Presence, the factual Presence of His Body and Blood?" - St. Michael, February 1, 1977

DESECRATION
"My child, you ask why I cry? I shed tears of great anguish. I watch anew the desecration to My Son's Body being committed upon earth. None shall place their hands upon His Body!
    "My Son has given you in trust those He has chosen among mankind to represent Him-your priests. None others shall carry My Son to mankind! You shall not defile His Body by giving Him into the hands of women, or those that have not been prepared by the Father as legally-ordained priests in the houses of God-laziness, preoccupied with the world and the pleasures of the flesh!" - Our Lady, November 1, 1974

Directives from Heaven

Articles

Bishop Laise speaks out against Communion in the hand
BishopLaise.htm 

Modernist and Protestant revolutionaries were behind Communion in the hand
CommunionInTheHand.htm 

Fr. John Hardon speaks out against Communion in the hand
Hardon.htm 

VIDEO: Bishop Athanasius Schneider on Communion in the Hand
BishopSchneiderOnCommunionInTheHand.htm

Communion in the hand should be rejected
VonHildebrand.htm 

Re-thinking Communion in the hand
cih.htm 

More reasons for rejecting Communion in the hand
cih2.htm 

Communion in the Hand: Documents and History (Bishop Juan Rodolfo Laise)
BishopLaiseBook.htm

The consecrated hands of a priest
ConsecratedHands.htm

 

Links

Profaning Our Eucharistic Lord Piece by Piece
https://liturgyguy.com/2017/09/30/profaning-our-eucharistic-lord-piece-by-piece/

Pope Benedict discourages Communion in the hand
http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/2008/05/pope-benedict-discourages-communion-in.html

Pope Benedict to Catholics: Kneel For Communion
http://newsblaze.com/story/20090801065749zzzz.nb/topstory.html

VIDEO: Pope continues to support Kneeling to receive Holy Communion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3zHpo3gtN0

VIDEO: New Vatican protocol for receiving Communion at Papal Masses
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeiE-lznSYE

Vatican official: Church should reconsider Communion in the hand
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0800606.htm

Regarding Communion in the Hand, Fr. Greg Markey
http://hughofcluny.blogspot.com/2008/12/regarding-communion-in-hand.html

Receptivity Fitting For The Lord, Fr. Roger J. Landry
http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/landry/00663.html

 

Videos online:

Vatican II Watch here...	World Monetary Crash Watch here...	Deception of the Century Watch here...	Third Secret Fabrication Watch here...
The Miraculous Story of Bayside Watch here...	A Pilgrimage to Our Lady of the Roses Shrine Watch here...	Jacinta's Third Secret vision: She saw Pope Paul VI Watch here...	Consecrate Russia Watch here (Part 1) (Part 2)

Email us:
sonia@nuestrasenoradelasrosas.org


| Home | Introduction | Bayside Messages | Directives from Heaven | Miracles & Cures | Veronica Lueken | Miraculous Photos | Videos |

Revised: February 23, 2018