Why Are We Still Talking About Communion in the Hand?

[@BrianHoldsworth]

I want to make it clear that I am not condemning Catholics who receive on the hand here. This is a reply to a cleric who claimed that it was better to receive on the hand and that this was the more "traditional" form Support the channel by visiting: brianholdsworth.ca/help-me

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

But you kind of are Brain, and because these matters are not within your authority to judge. You have authority over this matter and the Church has a History of is use.

[@GeraldHunt-i5q]

You in FACT put catholics down as not as "catholic " as you for receiving on the hand. You clearly ard confused between tradition and Tradition which is ironic considering you call yourself a traditionalist. Whether by indult or not POPES allow communion in the hand and so you need to stop laying guilt trips on catholics who receive that way. If you want it to change write your bishop or the pope. Stop causing division over this matter and acting like a superior catholic.

[@uncledot1868]

Thank you Brian, for upholding the dignity of Our Lord in the most Blessed Sacrament.

[@OniLeafNin]

I don’t think it’s better to receive on the hand. I do wonder why however, at seminary before I discerned out, none of the men received on the tongue, and we were told to receive on the hand. Even the more traditional guys would follow the directive of the rector/seminary.

[@stevedrake1861]

Before communion on the hand, Satanists used to put alum in their mouths to dry up their saliva. Then they could receive communion on the tongue and then later remove it from their dry mouth and use it in a black mass.

[@billo875]

Excellent. I’m a catholic Priest and anecdotally I believe abuse of the Eucharist is at an all time high. At every funeral I do that a mass is celebrated for I have to remind people with chewing gum that they will not receive the Eucharist if they come forward. And I’ve had to chase people down to the pews to consume it or else give it back. One young woman confronted me when I asked for it back. Which makes me wonder as to why she put it in her bag. It needs to be addressed. I’ve also started to put out kneelers for mass and allow those who wish to receive on the tongue kneeling to do so and the amount of people who do so now is amazing. Great witness. Thanks Brian.

[@jeffreyscottbrock]

Thank you Father for looking out!

[@OnehopeJMJ]

Thank you for putting out kneelers. I desire to kneel for communion but without them I’m afraid of accidentally knocking into the priest. I’m blessed to be near parishes that use the altar rail. As you use them, you will find more and more people coming to desire to kneel. Bless you!

[@ets9126]

Thank you much Father. You are in a difficult position of which I truly feel for you and all priests as the responsibility is great. I recommended, (although not sure if it helps) to state before the distribution of the Eucharist to announce that "anyone receiving Communion must be Catholic in the state of grace with the church". The priest in my parish has put out kneelers as well and so many more people are now kneeling. Also he announced that if one cannot kneel that they can stand and still receive the Eucharist on the tongue. I often think if I am sinning as I wander about all the little particles that may be on the floor and if I should remove my shoes before going in the Communion line. I know it sounds funny. God bless

[@BayouBandit6]

You obviously ain’t a Maronite Priest. You sound phony to me. A good Maronite can handle these types situations with class. No need to chase after and scare women with threats of taking their communion back. Who the hell gives you the right to decide who deserves communion? You don’t deserve to handle communion. You ain’t a Maronite.

[@Kitiwake]

Do not give the blessed Sacrament to those who don't reply "AMEN". That's 95% of them right there.

[@uncledot1868]

When you start to allow exceptions to the rules, the rules slowly disappear and the exceptions become the rules. Pray for our Church.

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

The rule is it’s allowed. The case is closed.

[@uncledot1868]

@@michaelspeyrer1264 Not for long.

[@Goncalo.]

@@michaelspeyrer1264 actually the case is clearly not closed

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

The Catholic Church is NOT a DEMOCRACY !!!

[@28-r8b]

@@michaelspeyrer1264 the case is by no means closed

[@heymikeyh9577]

Everyone needs to be vigilant for Eucharistic abuses: many years ago, the pastor in my parish noticed a woman turn away quickly after receiving, and thought he saw her remove the host from her mouth. He stopped the procession and called the ushers (God bless the KCs) who escorted her back to him. The lady was mentally disturbed and told father that she wanted to take Communion to her dog who was sick at home. Father obviously didn’t allow that to happen…

[@happylittletrees5668]

At my FSSP parish our Sunday ushers stand against the walls where the communicants pass by, watching with white gloves on ready to intervene in if abuse should occur.

[@ItsNotAllRainbows_and_Unicorns]

Oh my, today at a funeral a lady received with her hands and started to walk away. The priest stopped what he was doing and gestured to those around her to get her attention. She is clueless and a little off. (I know her). This isn't something you put in your pocket for a later time.

[@Rmezzi2]

That poor lady, she was doing the best for her dog with her mind at the level it was, I hope they explained to her kindly and loved her because she was trying to bring healing to her dog the best way she knew with her mental disorder.

[@heymikeyh9577]

@@Rmezzi2 He did-he was kind, but stern enough to get through to her that the Eucharist is believing Catholic humans only.

[@mystick93]

Satanists also use these in their blasphemous rituals.

[@Angel268201]

I Don’t Have a Latin Mass anywhere near me. Also, I’m disabled due to several strokes and heart conditions. I can’t drive. I go to the regular Mass in my Parish and I fall on my knees and receive on the tongue. My first Holy Communion was with alter rails, kneeling, and on the tongue. I am absolutely NOT worthy to receive my LORD in my hands. No, I won’t ever do it again.

[@GeraldHunt-i5q]

You are no more worthy to receive on the tongue

[@michellemcdermott2026]

Me neither

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

Angel. Jesus wants you to receive Him no matter how!

[@sighthoundlady15]

Please don’t injure yourself. 😢

[@michellemcdermott2026]

@@TheresaCronin-kc6wz Even if we are in mortal sin?

[@mak7587]

I was taught that only the priest was ordained to touch the host. We would receive communion on the tongue and as we did the second priest would hold a platen Under our chins so no crumbs would fall on the ground. That’s how sacred it was. The priest would then take the platen and scrape the crumbs into the chalice with the wine before drinking it.

[@LJC-sr7jl]

I go to a conservative Catholic Church with an altar railing, and people kneel to receive communion on the tongue. I feel that it is s wonderful experience having communion in that way.

[@philiphumphrey1548]

The priest was in error. A lot of error had crept in (as it always does over time) and one of the reasons for Vat II was to correct this.

[@annaru3814]

Not just "was," but Is.

[@annaru3814]

​@@philiphumphrey1548What exactly was the "error"?

[@mickeybrown9052]

A dude with a ponytail, bushy beard, and dressed in jeans and sneakers is our Eucharistic minister at Mass.

[@marygr8064]

I will always take Communion kneeling and on the tongue. 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@LJC-sr7jl]

That is great. Don’t ever change on that.

[@HaroldTheSloth]

I was raised Catholic, but turned Greek Orthodox (but in no way opposed to my Catholic friends). I think the big distinction is “taking” versus “receiving” communion. In the Eastern Orthodox tradition, the priest will give you the Eucharist on a spoon, feeding you the gift of life. In no way do I handle the Eucharist with my hands - it is given to me as a gift, and there is a certain beauty in that. From my youth, I was taught in the Catholic Church to receive the Eucharist in my hand. But it feels more like “taking” versus “receiving”. Being fed the Eucharist from a trusted priest hits your heart a little bit different. You are surrendering to your spiritual advisor and to Christ himself to receive the gift of life. In no way am I denigrating receiving the Eucharist by hand, but receiving by mouth communicates “surrender” a little better.

[@drjanitor3747]

He who eats outside the body has profaned. Your communion is illicit because Greek orthodox are in schism.

[@tomredd9025]

The last time I checked the Bible, Jesus said "take and eat." He never to my recollection said to "receive.". Why is wrong to go back to the original Tradition of receiving Communion in your hands that been sanctified by Jesus' wounds from being nailed to the Cross? Our hands are as sacred as our tongue.

[@BrieCracker]

@HaroldTheSloth Beautiful sentiment. Recieving on the tongue for me = no worries of mortifying accidents, worrying that my hands aren't clean enough or having to ever question if it might be offensive.

[@nicholaswilson2155]

​@@tomredd9025Our hands are not consecrated like a priests hands are. Also Jesus said that to the apostles, his direct disciples or the first priests, which we definitely are not even close to in holiness or authority.

[@annaru3814]

​@@tomredd9025 Whoa. Our HANDS have been sanctified by Christ's wounds? I thought it was our SOULS.

[@laurenatkinson1892]

Wow. This video is by far one of your best. Thank you for your boldness is speaking goodness and truth

[@williamscott3123]

As a child, I remember receiving the Eucharist on my tongue, but, by the time I was confirmed, many encouraged receiving the Eucharist reverently in the hand. As an adult, I have always received communion reverently in the hand because I feel that it is safer. I’m fairly tall, and feel there is a greater likelihood that the Eucharist will fall out the other way. I have never witnessed anyone taking the consecrated host out of their mouth and putting it in their pocket, but someone who is either that irreverent or has dark intentions would have no problem doing that whether they received on the tongue or the hand. When I was taught how to receive the Eucharist in the hand, I was taught to do it with great reverence, always placing it in my mouth before walking back to my pew. There have always been abuses at the Lord’s Table. Saint Paul even writes to warn the church about them, I believe, in one of his epistles to the Church as Corinth. Beyond teaching Catholics the proper way to receive communion, I don’t see how the Church can safeguard against these abuses. How do we know who is coming forward to the altar? Ultimately, God will judge those who blaspheme or who take communion in an unworthy manner.

[@arthurcosta6350]

I don't think the claim is that communion on the tongue will absolutely safeguard against abuses. There are obviously levels to which safety measures will work better than others, so we should adopt the more reliable (and more reverent) of the options.

[@TheDjcarter1966]

If you knees are strong enough you can always kneel and receive😊, I do

[@rafaeljonathanmonterrosoca8400]

Good morning. And have you meditated on the particles of the Host, have you looked for information about this? How do you check your hand and your fingers they both touch God.

[@arthurcosta6350]

@rafaeljonathanmonterrosoca8400 I think you're overthinking it. The host is meant to be consumed. If we have less stages of interruption before that happens, the better.

[@JohnAlbertRigali]

It's a duty and responsibility of Catholic clergy - especially the priests - to guard the Eucharist against desecration. Keeping it out of the hands of the laity is the best singular practice of guarding. Furthermore, I'd expect any sufficiently rational Catholic layman to not want the responsibility of guarding the Eucharist against desecration. ☝🏻

[@M5guitar1]

I saw someone walk away with a host at Mass. I confronted that person and had them stop and consume. That's enough reason to stop the practice. Lay hands are not consecrated. In the old Baptism rite, the infants tongue was, prepared to receive Communion with special prayers of exorcism and consecration. Post Vatican II rites stopped those practices. Why? I left my local NO parish because the elderly 70s era priest refuses Communion on the tongue due to "slobber"....his exact words. I found another parish that uses the altar rails to kneel and receive on the tongue.

[@StanleyPinchak]

Your priest is wrong. The faithful always have the right to receive on the tongue.

[@jim7576]

Me too, I drive across town to attend a more reverent Mass.

[@sighthoundlady15]

I wish we had the altar rails too. 😕

[@kokokola7725]

No it’s not. You are a liar and a modernist.

[@joeoleary9010]

@Roman-Labrador "Quite common." Sure it is.

[@hanmirz4803]

I have received the Holy Eucharist while kneeling on the tongue. However, I do acknowledge that receiving on hand is allowed by the Catholic Church. Just receive the Blessed Eucharist with reverence either on hand or tongue. Peace.

[@lzcontrol]

It's even better when it's accompanied by kazoos, bongo drums, banjos, and other innovations. What's best is when all kinds of people handle it.

[@hanmirz4803]

​@lzcontrol , don't get me wrong. I love if the communion on the tongue while kneeling becomes the norm again. I will always receive my Lord that way. But the Church approved communion on hand as well. As Catholic, we should accept the magisterium.

[@edukaeshn]

"And when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain, lest they be lost." [John 6:12]

[@littlerock5256]

The Council of Saragossa, 380, excommunicated anyone who dared to continue to receive Communion in the hand.

[@JohnAlbertRigali]

@hanmirz4803 Priests' hands are specifically consecrated in order to administer the sacraments, ESPECIALLY the Eucharist. My hands aren't consecrated, so no Holy Communion in the hand for me.

[@padraicbrown6718]

Since I didn't hear the sermon in question, I can't say for certain, but I think there is a possibility you might have missed the priest's point. And that comes back to the Catholic stereotypes you mention at the beginning. There are --- MANY --- traditionalists, here on KZbin and I'm sure in real life too!, who do hang on to Latin for Latin sake. These are the ultraradicalised, only the SSPX is the True Church, the new mass is a satanic - Lutheran prayer service, etc, etc. These are Catholics who will both straight up tell you that you're a heretic if you go to a "novus ordo parish" on the one hand and will proudly proclaim that to be excommunicated by fake pope Bergoglio is a signal honour. The point that priest was really making was literally that small-t traditions change! It wasn't some obscure Eastern Orthodox council that recommended taking the Eucharist in the hand. It was none other than major Church Father St Cyril of Jerusalem who, writing in the 300s, described communion in the hand as an early practice. This is not Gnosticism. This is not some esoteric teaching that a small cabal of inner sanctum priests lord over an ignorant congregation. This is literally stuff that you can look up on Catholic Answers. Frankly, I'm tired of the ubertraditionalists and their rhetoric. I'm as tired of them as I am of ugly churches, clown masses, and other modern abuses like forcing people to receive in the hand when they wish to receive on the tongue. It's just abuse in a different direction. As for why we're still talking about communion in the hand --- it's not because of the indult per se. The enemy loves it when Catholics turn against Catholics.

[@StanleyPinchak]

Communion in the hand in modern times is inextricably conflated with the loss of belief in the Real Presence.

[@bruno-bnvm]

Communion in the hand was emaciated by the logical progression towards communion in the tong.

[@padraicbrown6718]

@@StanleyPinchak -- This is a false conflation. Disbelief -- or belief -- in the Real Presence is a function of faith formation and catachesis. We could be receiving the Eucharist through a straw and that wouldn't affect either disbelief or belief.

[@Totoro-in-the-TARDIS]

@padriacbrown6718 I love the way you worded this comment! Completely agree! Praying for our continual conversions as Catholics.

[@catholicguy1073]

Communion on the hand is really only a thing in the US & Canada. This doesn’t happen in Latin America or even Spanish masses here in the US. And guess what ONLY the priests and the deacon give communion ZERO extraordinary ministers. Whatever that means. They are more serious and I would say there societies are more Christian than ours.

[@lisaeshleman754]

Brian, I show your previous video about this to my RCIA students each year. This one is phenomenal as well. Thank you! So succint and calm. much appreciated

[@mattmackmack9173]

As an Eastern Catholic I am interested in learning more about this unratified Eastern Orthodox council concerning communion in the hand. I find it curious since I can't think of any branch descended from Byzantine or Greek tradition that practices it.

[@BrianHoldsworth]

It was the Quinisext Council.

[@DjNC7]

Watching that lady take the Eucharist like that was painful to watch. 🥲

[@padraicbrown6718]

And receiving on the tongue is no guarantee against taking him out of one's mouth and pocketing the host.

[@climbinghumility]

😢😢😢

[@calebklingerman7902]

@@climbinghumility "This is my body. Take it and fondle it carelessly with a bored expression on your face" is her favorite verse of the Bible.

[@MNkno]

What bothers me is the nibbling around the edge. It's not a cookie. You don't chew it, either. And intincted wafers pressed in the hand are not the best alternative, it just gets "blood on your hands".

[@padraicbrown6718]

@@MNkno -- Yet ironically, this is exactly what Jesus said. Ho trôgôn mou ten sarka ... echei zoen aiônion. The one gnawing and nibbling my flesh has eternal life.

[@PNP96-l1n]

Cardinal Burke wrote a book about the need for reverence for Our Lord in the Eucharist and the need to end the practices of receiving in the hand and receiving while knowingly in the state of grave mortal sin

[@fantasia55]

Everyone who voted for pro-abortion Kamala is in a state of mortal sin.

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

I’m sorry but Burke is wrong. Communion in the hand dies not equal irreverence for Holy Communion. That is a ridiculous and baseless assumption.

[@PNP96-l1n]

First off, it's Cardinal Burke (not just Burke), who is a theologian and a priest, which makes him an authority, not you. Secondly, he's just one of thousands of priests and saints who've said the same thing over the 2 millennium of the Church. Several other comments bring up other examples. (St. Thomas Aquinas, Fulton Sheen, Padre Pio, etc) The group pushing communion in the hand is a small and mostly modern (post Vatican II/1970s) group. Thirdly, it's ironic that this issue was brought up in the video.

[@fantasia55]

@PNP96-l1n Communion on the tongue is an innovation.

[@edukaeshn]

@@fantasia55 Irrelevant to the conversation

[@ChanceandChoice]

For me, it's an act of obedience and submission to our Lord. My preferred way without thinking was to receive the Eucharist in hand. However, I started to recieve the Eucharist on the tongue, precisely because I didn't want to receive it in that fashion. That's just my walk with Christ though, and a small way to die to myself, my selfish pride. God bless you all.

[@duathellto1460]

Conditions for the indult to receive Holy Communion in the hand (number 3 is particularly interesting, given that no kneelers are provided for those that need them. number 5, given the rate of belief in the Real Presence in the US): 1) Communion in the hand had to already be presently in that country; 2) the bishops of that country had to have two-thirds majority vote in favor of Communion in the hand; 3) Communion in the hand should not be imposed in a way that would exclude the traditional manner; 4) the way of introducing this must be done tactfully; 5) Communion in the hand should not cause the person to think it is just ordinary bread; 6) one must be careful to not allow profanation or any fragment to fall.

[@idlecleric]

Thank you for addressing this crucial topic. I’m a Catholic priest and this is a matter I feel very strongly about, as I sense that the practice of receiving Holy Communion in the hand has lead to an overall weakening of faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. I’m not saying that it’s impossible to receive in the hand reverently; my question is ‘which way of receiving is likely to be most spiritually fruitful?’ One can receive the Lord physically, but it might bear no fruit spiritually, perhaps because of the presence of mortal sin, or the person receives unthinkingly and without fervour - Holy Communion is not like taking a pill which produces effects automatically. What happens at Holy Communion? God is giving Himself to us as our spiritual food. The way we receive therefore should express the fact that we are being fed and that this is not an ‘ordinary’ feeding activity for us. Receiving on the tongue from the hand of another [the priest] would convey those meanings well to us. Would receiving in the hand also convey them? Not as clearly, as there is still an element of ‘feeding ourselves,’ and we also tend to put out our hands to receive objects all the time - it’s nothing special. Is it possible for us to become over-familiar with things, or people or activities? Without doubt. Can this even happen with sacred things? This is also true, unfortunately. When we receive Jesus Christ in Holy Communion, we should almost be in perpetual shock at the idea that God should come to us, humble Himself in this way for our sake. If we receive Holy Communion frequently, the danger of over-familiarity is ever present: we should adopt the manner of receiving which minimises this danger, and which reinforces our faith. If our manner of receiving Holy Communion is not sufficiently ‘different’ from our everyday activities, if it does not ‘jolt’ us into realising something special and out of the ordinary is happening, then the likelihood of over-familiarity increases. And as that increases, the fruitfulness of our Holy Communion decreases. It is healthy for us to acknowledge that we are not God but created beings, and that we depend on God for life, for everything. We are not self-sufficient beings - only God is self-sufficient. If we receive on the tongue, it conveys the meaning that we are not self-sufficient - we depend on another, we do not control our lives, even that we are helpless without God. These meanings are present if we receive in the hand but here too, the symbolism is weaker as there is more of a control element on our part. With kneeling, this allows the body to instruct the soul that something utterly out of the ordinary is taking place, that our relationship to God is not one of equality, that we are not receiving an ‘object’ but the very Person of our Lord Jesus Christ. It lends itself to fostering humility, gratitude and love which should lead to a fruitful reception of Holy Communion. Your point about receiving in the hand being a possible occasion for irreverence or desecration is well made. Only yesterday I had to invite a person to receive on the tongue who had held out a hand covered in biro ink.

[@chardeOK]

I’m new to Catholicism. I want to one day participate. To answer your question of “why wouldn’t anyone want to receive it in the hand” the reason I was hoping to receive in the hand (as I seen that is what they did for the kids but not the adults) is because I have extreme trauma and CPTSD. To have to have someone put something in my mouth is incredibly distressing and EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT it feels inappropriate to me because of my past experiences. When I instead could have it in my hand that is a great relief. I don’t understand why it can’t just be a requirement to eat it or put it in our mouths ourselves right there in-front of who is giving it to us. I’m not asking for anyone to weigh in on this please, I am just letting him know why

[@Totoro-in-the-TARDIS]

Thank you for sharing! I receive on the tounge, but you bring up an important perspective 🤍.

[@nowelalalalala]

It’s my obligation to weigh in to your comment because truth must always prevail our wants. We all need to encourage our brothers and sisters in Christ to surrender their fears, doubts and anxieties to the Lord. We can’t shoulder that burden but the Lord can and commands us to! Matt 11: 28-30. God Bless sister, I pray that you may be set free.

[@NathanO1987]

“Truth”, if you believe receiving on the tongue is the only way you can receive you’re not speaking truth it’s just what you yourself perceive as truth even though it has been accepted by the church. You base this truth on absolutely nothing but tradition.

[@edukaeshn]

And when they were filled, he said to his disciples: Gather up the fragments that remain, lest they be lost. [John 6:12]

[@catolicohispanistayconservador]

What i've seen is that people prefer comunion in the mouth, are the ones that respect the mass the most.❤

[@PatriciaCooksey-wr8hd]

I totally agree that communion on the tongue is the only respectful way. What I want to say is that it is possible to celebrate the holy sacrifice of the mass in the novus ordo form with great reverence. Many common practices being regularly seen in parishes were only intended to be optional at most. At my parish these are common practices in the novus ordo: communion on the tongue kneeling at the communion rail; the priest leads the mass ad orientam; the common prayers such as the Kylie and Sanctus in Gregorian chant; and more. Try streaming the Sunday English mass from St John Cantius parish in Chicago to see what this looks like.

[@NathanO1987]

“Only respectable way”. That is just your opinion. I don’t find receiving on the tongue more respectful just people wanting it the “traditional” way. If you receive on your hand or tongue in mortal sin or living a double life that’s what God cares about the most.

[@crusader333ad]

You nailed it , Brian. Kneeling and on the tongue.

[@lzzgabriel-va]

In Brazil high clerics claim that receiving in the tongue is "medieval". Please pray for us

[@fantasia55]

Communion on the tongue was a medieval innovation.

[@saskilla1945]

@@fantasia55 we got a parrot here

[@andrefouche9682]

@@saskilla1945Can you state any sources to prove him wrong?

[@PaulDo22]

@@andrefouche9682 Can you state any source to prove him right?

[@andrefouche9682]

@@PaulDo22 You mean to show that receiving on the tongue started in misieval times and that Jesus didn't serve the Apostles on their tongues?

[@onlyjoshing]

In orthodoxy, only a spoon may touch the Eucharist. No hand touches the Eucharist.

[@BigPhilly15]

I’ve had priests refuse to place the Eucharist on my tongue.

[@LJC-sr7jl]

Try going to another church. I went to a different church one time and when I opened my mouth to receive communion, the priest looked disgusted, and just threw it in there. 🙄. I have not been back to that church.

[@edukaeshn]

Don't go back to those priests.

[@luciamacakova7516]

Your foolishness and pride is the problem. Bread of life can be accepted with only pure heart.

[@edukaeshn]

"And why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye?" [Matthew 7:3] @@luciamacakova7516

[@jamesMartinelli-x2t]

Ibid.

[@majordadto10]

What the heck Brian, this has been so engaging, how about explaining that the orans posture is actually prohibited. I admit it bugs me so much that I close my eyes.

[@bijogeojose7209]

There's no debate, in the East Syriac Church. Our Church Father Mar Narsai explains in his commentaries, that we have to recieve the Lord our God on our hands, which are placed in a cross shape, by placing the right hand over the left. This is the norm traditionally followed in the Syro Malabar church and the Chaldean Catholic church.

[@lzcontrol]

That's another rite.

[@bijogeojose7209]

@lzcontrol Yes. My response was to some people who are trying to say that receiving communion on the hands is not "Catholic", because it doesn't align with the Roman rite tradition. But the Church is Catholic because it values both these traditions, not becausr it's Roman.

[@vincentcoppola9832]

Thank you for posting this.

[@BobbyBobBob-d5l]

@@lzcontrol But the same Church!

[@petars4444]

that is based on wrong understanding of st. Cyril`s instructions - that way of a receivinig was for a priest. In eastern catholic tradition, priests receive that way and they give to the laity on the tongue.

[@johngermain3076]

Restore, in EVERY Catholic church, the communion rails. In my view only protestant churches do not have communion rails.

[@TheCatholicNerd]

8:44 A friend of mine was a sacristan at the cathedral in St. Louis. He told me this one time these people received and just left the host in the pew. He didn't think it was malicious, they were foreigners, probably Chinese and I don't think they understood what was going on. But that's just another example of potential abuses you have with communion in the hand

[@andrewsanford2020]

Yes, when I serve one of the ways we assist is by purifying the hands of the priest by pouring water over them into a bowl so none of the host stays on his hands. Extraordinary ministries do something similar after mass. The lay people do not do this when they receive on the hand.

[@thedon978]

I have never once seen the desecration of the Body and/or Blood of Christ at a Latin Mass. Never. And I have been a priest for 48 years.

[@jeffreyscottbrock]

It ought to be noted that attendees at the black mass, their belief in the Real Presence, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity is 100% as opposed to our small percentage of belief. There is a blockage on our end of view that must be removed. It took a while for me but persistent honest prayer worked so I do understand. Thanks Brian

[@trentsmith8427]

From the GIRM 160. The Priest then takes the paten or ciborium and approaches the communicants, who usually come up in procession. It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves. The norm established for the Dioceses of the United States of America is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, no. 91). When receiving Holy Communion, the communicant bows his or her head before the Sacrament as a gesture of reverence and receives the Body of the Lord from the minister. The consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or in the hand, at the discretion of each communicant. The Roman Missal: Renewed by Decree of the Most Holy Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, Promulgated by Authority of Pope Paul VI and Revised at the Direction of Pope John Paul II, Third Typical Edition. (Washington D.C.: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011), 50.

[@robertcoogan6421]

Thank you.

[@littlerock5256]

Why is the norm to receive standing? Where did that change originate?

[@bellottibellotti9185]

Than you for speaking up

[@jerrybaker1370]

The tongue, tongue only!!! I wish they would bring back the communion rails.

[@Ripplenator]

The modern hierarchy rewards disobedience and punishes adherence to tradition. It has done so since the 70s.

[@MalleusEcclesiae]

This is one of the few times I wish to intervene on the issue, as it's not a factional problem; it's an everyone-at-fault problem, including the clergy. I don’t often make commentary to other Catholics or the faithful on matters like this because, to be honest, much of my time is spent correcting the waves of misinformation Protestants spread about the Church. It’s sometimes exhausting, as these misunderstandings about doctrine, history, and practice require constant attention. It's worse so when a former protestant after 3 years of hard study is also spending time correcting cradle Catholics. First, let’s acknowledge that both forms of receiving the Eucharist-on the tongue and in the hand-are valid when done PROPERLY and with REVERENCE. This has been established by the Church’s Magisterium, and historically, we see both practices reflected in early Church teaching. For instance, St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the 4th century instructed the faithful on how to receive in the hand, saying: “Make your left hand a throne for your right, as for that which is to receive a King. Then, hollowing your palm, receive the Body of Christ.” His imagery is profoundly reverent-it’s not a casual act, but one of awe and humility. That said, concerns about sacrilege, abuse, or irreverence in receiving the Eucharist are completely valid. Desecration of the Eucharist, whether intentional or through carelessness, is a grave concern. Stories of people pocketing the host, walking away without consuming it, or even worse, using it for satanic rituals, are horrifying and heartbreaking. These incidents demand action-not just from the laity, but especially from our shepherds, and the clergy. However, I don’t believe the solution lies in restricting the faithful who prefer to receive in the hand, especially if they do so with the utmost reverence. Instead, the Church as a whole needs to take a firmer, more active stance in safeguarding the Eucharist. This means: Educating the faithful on the significance of the Eucharist should be a top priority as many Catholics, sadly, don’t even believe in the Real Presence. Without this foundational belief, it’s no surprise that some approach Communion casually or even irreverently. Catechesis must be prioritized at every level-homilies, RCIA, and even through broader parish initiatives. A well-formed Catholic knows that receiving the Eucharist is not just a ritual but an encounter with the living Christ. It is worth noting that upon my studies I would read about the build-up of poor catechesis pre-reformation, one of the root causes of the Protestant Reformation was a widespread lack of catechesis among the faithful and even the clergy. This led to misunderstandings, abuses, and a vulnerability to doctrinal errors that fractured the Church. If we neglect proper formation today, we risk repeating those same mistakes, creating an environment where confusion and irreverence flourish. This isn’t just about the Eucharist; it’s about ensuring the faithful have a solid foundation in the faith itself. Clergy vigilance and pastoral care: Priests, deacons, and Eucharistic ministers have a responsibility to protect the Blessed Sacrament. This includes being attentive to communicants, especially those who may be unfamiliar with the parish or exhibit strange behavior. Unfortunately, in some places, there is a tendency to focus attention on wealthy donors or influential parishioners (in my area at least), leaving others overlooked. True shepherds should care first and foremost for all souls entrusted to them, especially the lost, the vulnerable, and even those who may pose a risk of sacrilege. This doesn’t mean being uncharitable but being vigilant and prudent. Unity over division: Rather than arguing over whether Communion in the hand or on the tongue is “better” or “more traditional,” let’s remember what unites us: the Eucharist itself. Yes, Communion on the tongue has become the normative traditional practice for many reasons, and Pope St. Paul VI’s Memoriale Domini articulated this beautifully. Yet we also have evidence from early Church history that Communion in the hand was practiced with deep reverence. The real question isn’t about the “form” but about the reverence and faith with which we receive. We must be careful not to divide ourselves over preferences, but instead focus on fostering a deeper love and understanding of the Eucharist in all forms. Ultimately, I think it’s important to recognize that the Eucharist is a gift-a gift so profound that we can never fully comprehend it. It’s Christ’s own Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity given to us for our salvation. Our priority should be ensuring that this gift is received with the dignity and reverence it deserves, not creating unnecessary divisions among the faithful. I want to add that, as much as I value these discussions within the Church, we must be careful not to lose sight of the bigger picture. Much of my time is spent defending the Church against Protestant misunderstandings and accusations. Ironically, Protestants often mock our reverence for the Eucharist as “weird” or “idolatrous,” when in truth, their dismissal of the Real Presence has led to the very irreverence and fragmentation they accuse us of. For them, Communion has often become a mere symbolic act, stripped of its sacramental depth and connection to Christ’s sacrifice. As Catholics, we cannot afford to lose sight of what sets us apart-our faith in the Real Presence and our unwavering commitment to Christ in the Eucharist. I apologize for the wordy post but, let’s ensure that whether we receive on the tongue or in the hand, it is done with deep faith, reverence, and love. And let’s call on our clergy to lead by example, safeguarding the Eucharist from abuse while fostering a renewed sense of awe and wonder among the faithful. Christ deserves nothing less.

[@littlerock5256]

The Council of Saragossa, 380, excommunicated anyone who dared to continue to receive Communion in the hand.

[@kristinac4771]

I’m thankful for your reply. God bless you

[@AlixPrappas]

Many eloquent words can be uttered to explore this topic. You are good doing just that. Let us be curt though. The primary reason people take the Lords body in hand is likely because they feel uncomfortable having the priests hand so close to their mouth and tongue. It is an intimate action to get close to someone’s mouth or to place something in someone else’s mouth. It is understandable why they feel that way; it is a vulnerable position to be in. However, that aversion reveals the disordered priorities of the one who has it. Do we go to mass to be comfortable primarily? No, we go primarily to give the Lord the honor and worship He is due and to receive the grace He offers through receiving His body and blood. To receive the Lord in hand is to-as you said-raise the likelihood of desecrating the Lord, be it by theft as illustrated in this video, by dropping it, or by merely refusing to be vulnerable enough to accept it on the tongue. Does the Lord not require a priest to prepare the offering? Can a lay person do that in normal circumstances? No. So, if he is required to perform the ceremony, if his hands are consecrated to do so, why should we dishonor him by refusing his giving of the prepared body? May we return to tradition with reverent and contrite hearts. May we worship the Lord with all due honor and glory.

[@jamesedward9262]

Saint Cyril of Jerusalem said “When thou goest to receive communion go not with thy wrists extended, nor with thy fingers separated, but placing thy left hand as a throne for thy right, which is to receive so great a King, and in the hollow of the palm receive the body of Christ, saying, Amen” (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Cateches. On this authority, Paul vi said that properly catechized groups could receive in this manner.

[@edukaeshn]

That has nothing to do with the modern practice of Communion on the hand.

[@teresasnamesake4784]

​@@edukaeshnI agree with you, but could you explain more why it has nothing to do with the modern practice?

[@edukaeshn]

@@teresasnamesake4784 In the mode of reception you are referencing, the commonly accepted practice was for the faithful to have the Eucharist placed in their cupped right hand with fingers together so as to not drop Sacred Fragments on the ground; they did not touch the Eucharist with their fingers. They would receive Communion with their mouths directly from the palms of their hands while bowing reverently, and they were supposed to receive the Host completely, minding not to allow fragments to fall. The change to Communion on the tongue (with a paten) was in part due to the awareness that it is the best way to keep Sacred Fragments from falling to the ground.

[@edukaeshn]

In the mode of reception you are referencing, the commonly accepted practice was for the faithful to have the Eucharist placed in their cupped right hand with fingers together so as to not drop Sacred Fragments on the ground; they did not touch the Eucharist with their fingers. They would receive Communion with their mouths directly from the palms of their hands while bowing reverently, and they were supposed to receive the Host completely, minding not to allow fragments to fall. The change to Communion on the tongue (with a paten) was in part due to the awareness that it is the best way to keep Sacred Fragments from falling to the ground.​@@teresasnamesake4784

[@edukaeshn]

In the mode of reception you are referencing, the commonly accepted practice was for the faithful to have the Eucharist placed in their cupped right hand with fingers together so as to not drop Sacred Fragments on the ground; they did not touch the Eucharist with their fingers. They would receive Communion with their mouths directly from the palms of their right hands while bowing reverently, and they were supposed to receive the Host completely, minding not to allow fragments to fall. The change to Communion on the tongue (with a paten) was in part due to the awareness that it is the best way to keep Sacred Fragments from falling to the ground.

[@johnbrehany5966]

Hi Brian, thank you for the time and effort you put in to make all this amazing content. Big fan (and hearing Mr. Jernberg's music is always a treat!) I agree with you wholeheartedly on what the practice should be. I will play devil's advocate (pun intended) here and argue that an individual trying to steal a Host is not hampered by receiving our Lord on the tongue vs in the hand. It would be almost just as easy to keep Him in the mouth till nobody was watching and pocket Him, as it would to hold Him in the hand and pocket Him. I think setting up this argument as the best one lends itself to people thinking there aren't any arguments stronger than this, and thus not being conviced to change their ways. I think the stronger argument, which I've heard you make, is that priests are the only qualified persons to handle the Host due to the privilege granted that vocation. Our Lord calls all of us to different work. Through some hands, homes are built; through other hands, food is grown and harvested. Through others, children are birthed and people are healed. And through the hands of priests, the Sacrifice at Calvary is offered. In the same way that a random person cannot just walk onto a job site and handle the tools there without proper training, permission, and preparation, so too is the case in the particular privilege accorded to priests in handling our Lord. The training in seminary, the permission of the bishop (done both as an exhortation and through the blessing of the priest's hands at ordination), the preparation before each Mass and in saying the Mass (Introductory Rites, Liturgy of the Word), all of these are part of the steps that go into the priest handling our Lord. The consecrations the priest goes through in ordination are there because of Who the priest is holding once transubstantiation happens. That to me is the far stronger argument for why those who are not priests should not handle the Host with our hands.

[@alex_jermaine]

I saw someone put Our Lord in a bag secretly after receiving and when they were confronted they denied it and actually got away with it. All the ushers became aware and formed a circle and started to pray fervently.

[@daniellejarvis157]

@@TheXone7 um.... you are obviously unaware of all the sacriliges that happen to consecrated hosts, including particpiating in satanic rituals, which is a very real and disturbingly common practice. Don't put rose-colored glasses on to the realities of life.

[@alex_jermaine]

@ yes, that’s what I believe too. Especially since we all prayed together about it too

[@theoldtoby8407]

As a Byzantine Catholic, I can say that neither we nor the Orthodox take the Eucharist in the hand. The priest uses a golden spoon. Either way, your hands should never be anywhere near it.

[@KenDelloSandro7565]

Modernism is the SYNTHESIS of all heresies - Pope Saint Pius X (Pascendi Dominici Gregis).

[@JoshAlicea1229]

I think about Isaiah, who received the coal from the altar and had his speech purified. That’s one biblical reason to receive on the tongue.

[@palyddon]

Whenever I witness someone mishandling the Host, I get a sharp pain in my chest, as if my heart were suddenly squeezed in a tourniquet. Forgive them, Lord, for they know not what they do.

[@StanleyPinchak]

Reparations and penance are needed

[@LJC-sr7jl]

I sometimes gasp out loud. I’m so dismayed by it. I once was at a downtown Catholic Church on my city and the communion was being given out by a female layperson who accidentally dropped it on the floor. 😮🙄. I gasped in shock. And then I looked down. I couldn’t believe it. I then watched as she and the priest fumbled about trying to pick up this host. 😞

[@calebklingerman7902]

"Forgive for they know not what they do" is the perfect response. The church cannot restrain faithful Christians from receiving in the hands on the excuse that some would abuse His body. Do they think they should have prevented His body from falling into Pilate's hands?

[@calebklingerman7902]

@Roman-Labrador This is a valid point. You guys are essentially bragging about your own piety. This is not Christian behavior.

[@davidherbert415]

St Padre pio received Jesus on the tongue while kneeling out of reverence because we are receiving the king of kings the body of Christ Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and us Catholics believe that only a priest should hand out Jesus out at the Holy mass and not a Eucharistic minister.

[@slanz1]

You receive the Eucharist. You don’t take it. It’s only recently I really understood this. Never on the hand. Only consecrated hands to touch God. No Eucharistic ministers. Period.

[@Jjmiamjj]

For me it really is just about reverence, and showing the utmost respect I am able to to our Savior, hence I don't want any intermediary between the hand giving the Eucharist and my tongue, not even my own hand.

[@margeaupanforte]

I've come to believe over time, for the very reason you pointed out in that ghastly clip, that we should all go back to communion on the tongue.

[@LJC-sr7jl]

And preferably by kneeling.

[@maryvz345]

Communion in the hand received in early Church was not the same. One could not touch that Host back then either. So if people want to keep using that example, they really should do their homework. One person commented on whether we take or receive. Receive is the reverence. Putting the host in our mouths with our hand is self communicating….and so yes, this should still be discussed until we get it! It is Jesus Himself. He is worth this catechisms.

[@KaliaSoren]

You need to read some of what Bishop Athanasius Schneider has to say about this. It was a different way of receiving in the hand than how people receive now. But the reason it was ended is that the clergy knew that some of the crumbs were still falling on the floor and as it is known every drop of crumbs contains the Lord. It was changed to prevent the abomination of Christ in the Eucharist scandalized. Maybe you should look up how he said they received in the hand prior to the switch to communion on the tongue

[@tomredd9025]

I was scandalized by the Bishop's bizarre way to receive Communion. It looked like some kind of animal eating something. I very like the original Tradition of receiving Communion in the hand. It is holy, it is allowed by the Church and it is beautiful and is the original Tradition of the Church. It also follows Jesus' words to "Take and Eat.". My conscious is clear on this point. But Bishop Anathasius has unnecessarily scandalized a whole lot of good and holy people to push his personal unacceptable beliefs.

[@edukaeshn]

@@tomredd9025 You just make it up as you go, don't you?

[@luciamacakova7516]

Hardly possible that giving on tongue can produce less crumbs than giving into hands. DO NOT LIE AND DO NOT BELIEVE IN LIES.

[@edukaeshn]

@@luciamacakova7516 It's not only possible, it's testable and proven that it does. Ignorance is a choice.

[@Veritas39369]

My concern about receiving communion in the hand is the fact that particles of the body and blood of Christ are unknowingly being haphazardly discarded. The altar server used to have the paten under the recipient’s chin to catch any particles. The priest would then devoutly transfer them to the chalice and reverently consume them at the end of communion time. Too many people today question the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ in the Eucharist. More reference should be given to our Lord.

[@KeeperPlus]

Taking in the hand should be abolished

[@mariegatzmer829]

I am the only one who receives on the tongue in any Church I go. One Priest refused to give it on the tongue because he didn’t want to get Covid again. I stand out like a sore thumb, but I believe Priests hands have been consecrated for this purpose.

[@micahwatz1148]

Read Hebrews.

[@michaelmarsili5746]

Thank you Brian for that explanation. As a deacon, I'm often asked, usually at Bible studies, what is the more proper way, or more reverent way to receive the Eucharist. My answer always begins with making sure you've been to confession, and absolutely so if you are aware of mortal sin. That would seem to be obvious, but not these days. But I've gone over the fact the "normal", or traditional way is on the tongue, and that's the way I receive even as I serve at the altar. I have also seen abuses where people try to walk off without having consumed the Body of Christ--in every case I've witnessed, the priest stopped the person. But you are right that reception on the tongue does help ensure that the Body of Christ isn't profaned, and I'm going to include that in any future discussions I'm involved in. Satanic groups are on the rise, even out in the sticks where I live, and a consecrated host for desecration is of prime importance to these sad souls.

[@KayRichards-k8q]

Accepting Communion with your hands became a practice, in the practical sense, as a means of preventing the transmission of disease. It is not meant as an act of corruption. God wants us to use our common sense.

[@cozzwozzle]

In the Orthodox Church both the body and blood are spooned into our mouth and we never get sick. The body and blood of Christ does not carry disease.

[@edukaeshn]

@KayRichards-k8q You have no idea what you're talking about.

[@hiuszenoom809]

So blood and body of the Lord will transmit diseases?! You have no faith of our Lord Jesus Christ!

[@BeWe1510]

@@hiuszenoom809 It’s not about the host. We eat in anyway so the method of receiving it makes no difference, should it be loaded with germs. It’s about the hand of the priest. I don’t want his fingers to be near my tongue, maybe touching it occasionally, especially not moments after he has been doing the same with other people‘s mouths.

[@3ggshe11s]

This is exactly the complaint I had during COVID, with people terrified not just to be in church but to receive communion. It revealed to me how little faith most people really have, if they think the body and blood of Christ is a carrier of disease.

[@fr.joelhastings7056]

Great points. I like to challenge the antiquarian argument of Holy Communion on the hand being the original practice, and therefore the more traditional way by appealing to such examples of how rules of sports have changed as ways to make improvements and/or in giving greater depth to the object of the game: e.g.: if the original practice is that which is the purest form/most traditional way, then basketball needs to go back to mounting peach baskets at each end; American football needs to return to using leather helmets, etc. Authentic tradition is born from any change or addition leading to greater fulfillment and expression of the inherent meaning/essence of what is being practiced. In the case of Holy Communion, that posture which has the greatest capacity to express humility, childlike faith, and receptivity to the great gift of God’s love offered to us in the Eucharist is to kneel and receive from the hand of the priest directly in the mouth - as came to be understood and lived through living tradition over time and practice (just like steel basketball hoops on which nylon nets with open bottoms hang came to be organically through practice of playing the game and as a real development to improve the game of basketball).

[@LJC-sr7jl]

It’s a shame that more people don’t know about The Lady of Akita apparitions. There Our Lady made it clear that Our Lord and Saviour Jesus, was very much offended by people receiving him in the hand rather than on the tongue when they receive communion. People need to learn about what Sister Agnes Sasagawa was told and experienced at her convent. It’s one of the most important Marian apparitions in modern times.

[@drjanitor3747]

But the fake saint Faustina told us he wanted communion in the hand..

[@FSR431]

Well here's a thought: the Latin Extraordinary Mass was granted to occur on an indult. To state or allude that an indult is being granted 'for the sake to make an abuse normative' is truly a false teaching. The Magesterium has granted this as a valid way of reception of holy communion as canon law allows the local ordinary and/or the council of bishops to decide such matters. This is a failure to understand the nature of an indult or the Church's governance with the bishop having full authority (within the teachings and councils of the Chruch) over the sacraments.

[@vinciblegaming6817]

There's just other things I think should be returned before this one is done away with. We had a sacramental priest visit and point out that the breaking of the bread is happening quietly while we are saying peace but that should be a high point of the mass where everyone is paying attention because it's the breaking of Jesus's body to bring us life. But no one talks about that nearly as much as taking it in the hand.

[@sarahrowlandmoore5721]

I’m converting and in OCIA. This week in daily mass, this point of the mass you reference has struck me and even pains my heart when I watch it happen.

[@patrickbukamp6198]

If a priest would deliver a talk like this in Germany or Austria, he'd be shunned immediately. Even if he would cite Church Dokuments

[@Gabriel-h8m]

I appreciate the concern Brian has for people stealing hosts, it bothers me too, but you could pretty easily just keep the Eucharist in your mouth if you wanted to steal it….

[@generic_account2138]

again arguing from an edge case is not a strong argument. its weak whatabboutism. With CITH you can see the problem plain as day and there is a mountain of evidence against this practice.

[@Gabriel-h8m]

@ Oh I would say there are plenty of counter arguments against Brian’s position, I just happened to be countering one of them. To be honest it seems this argument blows the “satanists might steal the host” thing out of the water…

[@zalobo]

Since when, besides the Consecrated Hands of a Priest, is any human worthy to TOUCH CHRIST ?????????

[@jms1595]

I attend an Ordinariate parish where communion is given only on the tongue, no exceptions, because it is given by intinction (dipped in the Precious Blood first). I have never heard our pastor or any presiding priest have to make an announcement that someone walked away with the Eucharist without consuming It, and to keep an eye out for such things, but I've heard such announcements at other Novus Ordo parishes where Holy Communion is received by most parishioners in the hand.

[@GeraldHunt-i5q]

The interesting thing here is that intinction is not allowed .

[@femaleKCRoyalsFan]

What happens if somebody has Celiac and can't receive the host? I noticed that my tlm so it hasn't happened in a while and I don't know if the person switched to a different mass time or what but this person usually went last and he wore white gloves and he was given special permission to receive from the cup of precious blood I'm assuming because he's allergic to wheat and cannot receive the host.

[@jms1595]

@femaleKCRoyalsFan I have seen people provide low gluten hosts to be consecrated that are for them to consume I would think with some advance notice that arrangements could be made to provide the Precious Blood only if that were needed.

[@jamesMartinelli-x2t]

The first mass was in a dead language: Hebrew. "How Christ Said the First Mass" by Fr. James Meagher.

[@OliveMule]

Tongue+ both knees bent= amen

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

Yeah, that’s isn’t he teaching of the Catholic Church. And in every other rite of the Church they receive standing .

[@troybyrne2916]

​@michaelspeyrer1264 Christ is there King and God. We prostate during Adoration and other times, makes sense to kneel before Him when receiving

[@andrefouche9682]

I don't understand, when did the people vying for the Latin mass become the magisterium?

[@troybyrne2916]

@@OliveMule where did my comment go

[@troybyrne2916]

Christ is King kneel

[@jeanvaljean16]

One thing I would point out for those who receive in the hand. How many check for visible particles after receiving? I’ve never seen a single person check for visible particles after receiving. And the teaching is that Jesus is present Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity in every visible particle of the Holy Eucharist. So if you’re not checking for visible particles after receiving in the hand. You’re most likely dropping them on the floor to be trampled by others. If you Truly loved Jesus. Would you not take the upmost care to make sure not a single particle falls to the floor?

[@duathellto1460]

I used to check, when I received that way. I also once saw a nun (at a parish that used crumbly baked bread instead of hosts) go and start picking a rather large quantity of crumbs out of the carpet, where people were walking. That stuck with me.

[@jeanvaljean16]

⁠​⁠@@duathellto1460you’d probably be the only one. I’ve been to many churches over the world. And I’ve never seen anyone else do it. I never thought about it myself until seeing videos by Gabriel Castillo about the Holy Eucharist. And yea seeing someone picking up crumbs will make you think of it early on. And I wonder why they used leavened bread. The only rite that I personally know that uses leavened bread is the Byzantine rite. They also use intinction, and you must receive on the tongue.

[@duathellto1460]

@@jeanvaljean16 It wasn't leavened bread, it was just baked into flat circles that were broken, rather than pressed into hosts. But it did resemble Byzantine bread in texture and probably should have been received from a spoon. I know I'm not the only one, because I've seen others checking under the same circumstances. But I don't generally watch other people receiving Holy Communion.

[@JayRedding12_12]

Very well explained. I look forward to being worthy to Receive the Eucharist again, but then it will be on my tongue.

[@thatguyzwife]

You will never be "worthy" to receive Jesus. "Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof but only say the word and my soul shall be healed." You are only able to be properly disposed to receive Him.

[@edukaeshn]

@@thatguyzwife You're right, but I think he just meant "in a state of grace".

[@thatguyzwife]

@@edukaeshn I agree. Also, that's what being properly disposed to receive is.

[@BensWorkshop]

There are 3 reasons why receiving the Eucharist on the tongue is better than in the hand. You only mentioned 2. 1. More reverent. 2. Prevents sacrilege. 3. Allows those who's hands are not clean for what ever reason, to receive the Eucharist. How come people might have dirty hands? Well some people have jobs that make it hard to get all the dirt off their hands and other by necessity may have to fix things like cars which can be very very dirty.

[@FruitofSilence]

Thank you for this; good timing given Cardinal Cupich’s recent statement.

[@drjanitor3747]

“Cardinal”

[@SarahAnne44AVEMaria]

This was so eye opening!! Thank you!! 🥰

[@williampeters9838]

Lutherans do it either way but everyone kneels in a row and you wouldn't be allowed to walk away.

[@lennybaker5807]

No you have no right to touch them Body of Christ,unless you're a priest

[@claritasyoutubechannel3312]

The whole “Jesus and the Apostles didn’t speak Latin,” is becoming very much akin to the “Jesus isn’t white;” and frankly I treat it with the same amount of disdain.

[@edukaeshn]

As you should.

[@robertcoogan6421]

I imagine that you disdain many people. You are tight that rhetorical tricks are intellectualy dishonest, but the best is to concentrate on true debate over substantial material. In my standard Roman Missal here in Mexico, the ordinary of the mass and all the prayers are in Latin in an appendix. Since, in my day, Brooklyn high schools, including public ones, required Latin, I sometimes say Mass in Latin while on retreat. No one in my congregation has ever asked me to say Mass in Latin. Of course, I would never use the Tridentine rite, which has been supressed. I'm not a schismatic.

[@edukaeshn]

"It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy." [SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, POPE BENEDICT XVI] @@robertcoogan6421

[@edukaeshn]

"It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy." [SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, POPE BENEDICT XVI] @@robertcoogan6421

[@edukaeshn]

"It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy." [Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict XVI]@@robertcoogan6421

[@oldfashioned9461]

Brian, love your content! I used to only receive in the hand, for I thought receiving on the tongue was awkward and unnecessary. And also thought, hey if the Church permits it must be fine. But I can attest to reception on the tongue for me has increased my reverence for the Eucharist. I do a more thorough examination of conscience beforehand and naturally view the host as Christ, not merely a host in a symbolic sense to be thought of as Him. Not saying you can't receive in the hand and have great reverence, but from all I hear from other Catholics and my own experience on the tongue sure does seem to be beneficial for our faith.

[@annmarie3573]

This is true for me as well

[@samburton2978]

As I've mentioned before I'm a Protestant minister. I have seen similar pocketing of the bread. First was in a Greek Orthodox Church I was visiting in Florida. They presented a whole loaf, much like they believed Christ did in the last supper. They broke it in half, and then as people would come up, they would break off a bit. I saw one older woman tear off a whole huge chunk. She then took a bit of it and wrapped the chunk in a handkerchief and slip it in her purse. Several years before I had seen a woman do exactly the same thing at a church I was serving in Scotland. As her pastor, I went to see her the next day. She lived in a tiny cottage very near the church building. The minute I got it, I knew right away, she did it for food. So I said nothing to her, but I told some other people in the church, and they started taking food to her, and taking her to the shops to let her buy what she wanted. I believe the Orthodox lady was doing the same thing. But the lady you showed took a wafer. Weird. I found the video interesting. Thanks Brian.

[@vincentcoppola9832]

When I was in training a priest warned me to watch out for anyone walking away with the sacrament. He knew, from experience, that there are people who come and take the host for nefarious practices.

[@tonysaborio1150]

That's not Communion. Communion in the Orthodox Church isintincted and distributed with a spoon. What you saw was evlogia, the bread blessed and distributed at the end of some services. Not Communion.

[@kyrieeleison1243]

The thing you saw in the Orthodox Church sounds like the unconsecrated bread they give out at the end, which people are free to wrap up and take home. At the Orthodox Liturgy, The Eucharistic Bread is mixed into the chalice with the Precious Blood and consumed as a mush from a spoon. I don’t see how they could possibly put that in their pocket and walk home. Furthermore, the priest always administers it directly into the communicant’s mouth.

[@drjanitor3747]

Protestants don’t have the Eucharist.

[@jasbrg]

The thing you saw in the Orthodox Church was probably not the Eucharist, but rather antidoron. Literally “instead of the gifts” which is blessed, but not consecrated. Generally, to my understanding, Orthodox practice is to receive the gifts of the body and blood together from a spoon which thankfully leaves little opportunity for thieves to walk off and do Lord knows what with the gifts.

[@makethisgowhoosh]

Excellent, thank you for this. Incidentally, Cardinal Cupich of Chicago just came out with an instruction that kneeling to receive on the tongue interrupts the procession and the communal experience and so on. It's upsetting to hear about that sort of thing going on in the Church.

[@TheRealMagicBananaz]

I agree with everything said in the video. That being said; the novus ordo mass that I attend is very recerent. The one Latin Mass that I've attended because its nearby, just did not feel reverent to me. It felt as though it was rushed and that it was meant for the priest daying it only. The mass is a sacrifice offered up for the faithful; the one low mass I went to felt like intruding on a personal mass meant for the priest alone. Reverence is the main issue over everything else. Language doesn't matter if the priest is skipping parts of the mass because he thinks nobody can understand the Latin

[@Rubicon1776]

The mass is not for us, it’s for God!

[@edukaeshn]

I don't think you know what reverence means.

[@susanjorstad7667]

A low Mass is generally meant to be a silent Mass, which offers the beauty of prayerful contemplation. The Mass is offered to God, it is to worship him. Our participation is through witness and prayer. This does require shift in mindset from the typical novus ordo, which places the focus more on comraderie- a back-and-forth between the priest and people, rarely any silence or time to truly worship in quiet prayer.

[@Polones12]

I was saddened to see communion on the hand even in Portugal and Fatima itself as a common form 😞

[@stephenjohnson9632]

No one can desecrate the perfect Christ. Those who abuse the Eucharist in the hand, will receive the judgment they ask for. If this is the only or best reason to forbid communion in the hand, then the position is extraordinarily weak. Receiving on the tongue is an innovation, an old innovation, but still an innovation. Jesus didn’t place the unleavened bread (Body) on the tongue of those at the Last Supper, nor did He withhold the cup (Blood). Both of these small-t traditions should not be elevated over receiving in the hand or partaking of the cup.

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

Stop placing yourself on the judgment seat of the Pharisees over what Christ’s church permits.

[@stephenjohnson9632]

@ I’m not judging what is permitted; I’m judging what is wrongly being condemned and forbidden by some.

[@michellemcdermott2026]

Those at the Last Supper were priests

[@Gabriel-h8m]

@@michellemcdermott2026 I mean they weren’t yet, it’s only later that Jesus gives them priestly faculties…

[@stephenjohnson9632]

@ so you’re saying only priests can eat Christ’s flesh and drink His blood to have eternal life? No, Jesus was expecting them to offer to others what Christ offered to them.

[@matthewfleck747]

Brother, I agree with you 100%!! I’m a revert, and now see so many abuses liturgically and practically of clergy and laymen that concern me as I grow in my faith and journey with Jesus. Let us pray for them, for each other, and for Holy Mother Church! ¡Viva Cristo Rey! 🙏🏼🎚🔥💪🏼

[@cooperutley2502]

Thank you Brian. This could not have come at a better time.

[@denisemaslowski7052]

I’m Byzantine Catholic and we only receive one way and it’s not in our hands but I thought in the Roman rite the communicant is supposed to put the host in their mouth in front of the priest so he sees you do it so why are they allowing people to walk away with the host?

[@andrewsanford2020]

They are supposed to. But a lot of people put the host in their mouth as they walk away.

[@duathellto1460]

I think most priests are not well trained in how to kindly and firmly correct people who are doing things the wrong way, so in order to avoid hurt or irate parishioners, they simply do not correct such things. There often seems to be more of an emphasis on getting out of the way for the next person than on receiving Our Lord carefully and well.

[@marcondespaulo]

I my parish, there are many elderly, I recall one with a bad case of parkinson's trying to take comunion in the hand. The host broke on her lips, a part fell on the patena (the plate that the altar server carries) while she was trying to put all the pieces in the mouth. I noticed the discomfort (humiliation?) in her eyes. After that, she started receiving on the tongue.

[@jgl8194]

Outstanding! If we want to go back to the beginning then we ignore thevtrachings of the faith, no Eucharistic Adoration, no Rosary and nophysical Church. What has Communion in the hand brought us but care free attitudes and abuses?! Thank you for a fantastic video!

[@GeraldHunt-i5q]

Communion in the hand isn't a teaching. It's a practice. It's ironic that trads are confused about tradition vs. Tradition.

[@jgl8194]

@GeraldHunt-i5q the Church is three pillars of the faith: Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Teaching Magisterium. Tradition is the absolute foundation of the Church. We should hang on to our organic tradition by our teeth! It's what Luther hated most about the Church. Traditions have been organic over time as we have understood more over time, like the Marian Dogmas. Give me tradition over change 100%.

[@tomredd9025]

That is a false statement. Communion in the hand has brought me closer to God, by following Jesus' command to "take and eat." Nothing in the bible about "Receiving.". It is so beautiful and holy.

[@jgl8194]

@tomredd9025 what is false?

[@edukaeshn]

@@tomredd9025 Communion on the hand is sacrilege.

[@Hereticalable]

There's no Latin Mass in my country. Every Catholic church has communion by hand only. They also give the Host to ushers to distribute so we're often even receiving it from an ordained priest. No one says anything about the immodestly dressed women or people on their phones either. It's pretty hard to have the motivation or reason to go to such Mass to be honest.

[@duathellto1460]

You have a right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue.

[@SerhatAydın-z1i]

✝️I'm retired at 47, This video here reminds me of my transformation from a nobody to having over 75,000 biweekly profit, a honest partner and a good daughter full of love 🤍

[@davidwalter8478]

I'm feeling really motivated. Could you share some details about the biweekly topic you brought about up? 😊

[@SerhatAydın-z1i]

I raised 75k and Maria Luisa Clare is to be thanked. I got my self my dream car 🚗 just last weekend, My journey with her started after my best friend came back from New York and saw me suffering in dept then told me about her and how to change my life through her. Maria L. Clare is the kind of person one needs in his or her life! I got a home, a good husband, and a beautiful daughter. Note!:: this is not a promotion but me trying to make a point that no matter what happens, always have faith and keep living!!

[@StantonWeyand]

Wow 😱 I know her too Miss Maria Luisa Clare is a remarkable individual whom has brought immense positivity and inspiration into my life.

[@StantonWeyand]

I started with a miserly $1500. The results have been mind blowing I must say TBH!

[@JocelynRehelapolino]

I know that woman(Maria Luisa Clare) If you were born and raised in new York you'd know too, No doubt she is the one that helped you get where you are!!

[@Johnmccoyart]

I may be wrong, but I cannot imagine the disciples not breaking, passing, and consuming the Eucharist with their hands. As an artist my hands are especially important to me, and I personally consider it a beautiful blessing and moment when I hold the Eucharist briefly in my hands before consuming. Either way, it is a thanksgiving and I am deeply grateful to be able to receive my Lord in this holy sacrament.

[@susanjorstad7667]

Keep in mind, pre-Vatican II the Mass is visibly recognized by all as a SACRIFICE, evident through the deep reverence and postures of the priest and the faithful. Post-V2 innovations , it is often referred to as a communal meal, reflected in how many treat it very casually.

[@vincentcoppola9832]

"And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.”" Why is is wrong to take it and eat it?

[@mousakandah5188]

nothing is intrinsically wrong about taking the host and eating it it's wrong because current Church disciplines forbid it and it is wrong to violate Church discipline

[@Timidor23]

​@@mousakandah5188The Church doesn't forbid receiving on the hand. We have been doing it every week since I was a child.

[@jgl8194]

Did you not watch the video? Communion in the hand cheapens the experience of receiving Our Lord and leads to abuses. If you see him as the King of the Universe, he should be treated as with highest regard of royalty .

[@rebn8346]

Are you a priest like the Apostles? He had already consecrated them as priests at that point.

[@Timidor23]

@jgl8194 Why is a wagging tongue better than solemnly folded hands?

[@paulquist2475]

Thanks, Brian! Excellent!

[@NoSoupForYouu]

Really wish I didn't see that clip of that woman..

[@diegoborges3716]

Here in Brazil, most of the bishops are very progressive. Some of them oppenly preached against the communion at the tongue. And there's lot of cases captured in video of priest denying the Eucharistia to people how kneel to receive in the mouth. God help us!

[@BeWe1510]

You say it shouldn’t be a competition who finds the most obscure ancient text, to which I agree but just one sentence earlier you made it into a competition on who is a true faithful disciple of the Lord. I am in favor of a lot of traditional practices which have begun to slip away but communion on the tongue isn’t something I personally want to do. Why? Because it grosses me out. On the one hand that is a totally profane reason but I also want to cherish and long for the Eucharist, not lowkey dread it’s reception. Some people say that crumbs are getting wasted, when you receive it on the hand but the hosts we are getting do not get broken, they already come in the small round form and a main reason for why we no longer use every day bread for the holy communion was precisely to drastically reduce crumbling. So that really is a manufactured issue imo. I have great respect for people who choose to receive communion on the tongue, I think this is an amazing sign of reverence but that doesn’t mean that receiving it on the hand isn’t. And as for the argument that it is supposed to be an exception: The same is true for the TLM, so if one is cherry-picking for themself, they shouldn’t criticize others for picking different cherries. I agree with your criticism of the priest who argued against receiving it on the tongue with this old text, that is a pretty wild take from him but with the video title and some parts of the video, you also attacked communion on the hand, even tho your pinned comment says that this wasn’t the intention, and that part I am obviously disagreeing with. Peace to all and glory to God.

[@rebeccaalderman1393]

It's also cleaner bc our hands are dirty, and we don't want to defile Jesus in any way, especially with germs and dirt...just disrespectful in my opinion.

[@theendgamebeau]

James chapter 3 says the tongue is evil and full of deadly poison. It's just not more holy than the hand.

[@alhilford2345]

​@@theendgamebeau: The tongue is evil if you're in a state of mortal sin, but biologically, compared to your hand it's clean.

[@ristanraw9321]

I don't think it has relevance on how we receive communion but the mouth is probably one of the dirtiest parts of our body bacteria wise. That's why mouth bites are dangerous because of the increased risk of infections

[@rebeccaalderman1393]

Well, honestly we don't absorb food through our skin 🤣🤣🤣. It's really personal preference, no judgment here.

[@gunblade7610]

Yeah people think it's an appeal to tradition vs an appeal to novelty argument. No, my house and i have held that really should only be the priest handling the Eucharist because those men have consecrated hands we as the lay do not... yes I USED to be an EM when i attended novos ordro, no longer. The only exception would be bringing Christ to my wife if she is sick in absence of a priest who can do it and only because i am priest of domestic church and have spirifual authority and you bet your butt im nervous as a bunch of israelites transporting the arc of the covenant over a river and seeing it slip a little...... Imo, novos ordo vs tradition especially in regards to this is very "tit for tat" theyre only aaying that with the strawman argument of appeal to tradition just as a way to "own the chuds", i despise how politics permeates everything now. But we pray for everyone for a conversion of heart

[@GeraldHunt-i5q]

Consecrated hands have nothing to do with it. Proof of that is deacons whose hands are not consecrated ..

[@StanleyPinchak]

​@@GeraldHunt-i5qDeacons are most certainly concecrated in the sacrament of Holy Orders.

[@mr.e8432]

I prefer the Latin mass myself, but all this in fighting among Catholics just gets tiring after a while. The communion rail/communion in the hand battle is kind of like here in America with the Native Americans saying how they were here before the evil white man, so they’re the “true” Americans. But anybody that’s taking an anthropology class will tell you if you go back far enough in history “native Americans” aren’t even native to America. Communion in the hand seems to of been the norm for the first several hundred years and although I prefer the communion rail myself, I realize it was the 13th or 14th century invention. They’re never gonna dig up a scroll that’s going to describe the apostle Paul, or one of his disciples. carving communion rails out of limestone for the people of Ephesus, or any other church.

[@jonathanstensberg]

RE: meaning of *indult* for receiving on the hand. Both insults and dispensations are exceptions to cannot law, but there’s a massive distinction between the two. A dispensation is permission to not do something that is normally required, meaning the thing itself is good. An indult is permission to do something that is normally forbidden, meaning the thing itself is *bad*. Thus the indult for reception in the hand literally tells you it’s bad to receive in the hand, simply by virtue of being an indult!

[@tadhg841]

This is very misleading...I'd encourage you to remove or correct your post. An indult is permission to do something that is not normative. The church can never give permission to do something bad.

[@TheCatholicNerd]

1. The way the Roman rite has developed, is that communion on the tongue is the normative way 2. Though I don't think we have sources for this, the reason they probably switch from the hand to the tongue is probably the same reason why we need to stop communion in the hand. If done reverently as Saint Cyril described well that would be all good and well. But it's not. For practical reasons, we should restrict communion to on the tongue. Regarding extraordinary ministers, since many parishes wouldn't stand for communion that takes longer than 5 minutes, in my opinion, if you need extraordinary ministers. They should be men that are instituted as acolytes. That's actually one of my hotter takes, that anyone distributing communion should be an instituted acolyte and further anyone reading at Mass should be an instituted lecter, with the exception of the responsorial psalm if that's done by the choir or by some other musician. This would be resisted however, as only men could be instituted as acolytes and lecters.

[@Ellie49]

Why only men?