• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
    • Feasts Website
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

Communion in the Hand

Dr. Peter Kwasniewski · March 14, 2013

ERMISSION to receive communion in the hand is something the devil worked hard to achieve by influencing ecclesiastical authorities to relax a discipline that was longstanding, unchallenged, and wise. Satan derives a demented pleasure from seeing the Holy Eucharist profaned and desecrated. This happens in two ways: through negligence, as when people carelessly drop fragments of the host or spill the precious Blood; through contempt, as when non-Catholic visitors and tourists receive the Blessed Sacrament, or when anti-Catholics deliberately carry them away in order to destroy them, use them in Satanic worship, or sell them online.

Reports of sacrilege are on the increase. A few years ago we saw the sickening spectacle of a religion-hating professor who posted numerous videos of himself violently disposing of hosts he had carried away from Masses. In one video he drove a nail through the host before throwing it away; in another, he flushed a host down the toilet. It seems hard to believe that he bought hosts from a supplier and merely pretended to do all this. It is far more likely that he was collecting hosts at Masses, because there is rarely any vigilance when it comes to who receives, who doesn’t, and, in general, how the Blessed Sacrament is treated and cared for. All this has been made possible by that most foolish, most nearsighted of all decisions: to allow communion in the hand.

When we ponder the awesome mystery that in the Holy Eucharist is really, truly, substantially present Our Lord Jesus Christ, in his Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, the above-mentioned facts should cause us immense anguish, sadness, and righteous anger. To treat a host hatefully is, from a certain aspect, the worst possible sin a person can commit, and the most offensive to a believing Catholic.

Our Lord himself, glorified in heaven, is beyond all suffering; He is not directly harmed when the Blessed Sacrament is harmed. He is present in the sacrament as the Risen Christ seated at the right hand of the Father; after the resurrection He cannot suffer or die, but lives in the glory of immortality, bestowing that immortality on all souls that are incorporated into His Mystical Body and die in union with Him. The person who is harmed by desecration is the desecrator—and this shows us why Satan delights in desecration. Anyone who performs this act is committing the sin of Judas, the crime of betraying that which deserves our fidelity, the crime of hating that which most deserves our love, the crime of holding in contempt that mystery which deserves our heartfelt adoration on bended knee. It is a mockery of Christ; it is nothing less than a rejection of His adorable Person, and therefore a rejection of the Father who sent Him. As unfashionable as it is to say nowadays, it is Jesus Christ who, out of love for truth and righteousness, will send to hell all the souls who have rejected Him and consign their future bodies to the same eternal punishment.

No wonder the devil is eager to see hosts treated carelessly, disrespectfully, or blasphemously. These are steps along the same continuum, steps towards that ultimate separation from the infinitely holy God whom we must worship in spirit and in truth.

Apart from stories of Black Masses, there is the basic question of reverence. The priest’s hands are specially consecrated with holy oil, and why? So that he may rightly and fittingly handle the Blessed Sacrament. His hands are holy in view of touching and administering the holy gifts of the altar. A layman’s hands are not consecrated in this way. We receive the Holy Eucharist from the hands of a priest who is ordained to act in persona Christi, as a representative of the Lord Himself; we open our mouths to receive the nourishment of our body and soul, like a baby bird fed in the nest by its parent. From this symbolic vantage, it is wholly inappropriate that the priest put the host into our hands, so that we may then administer communion to ourselves. This gesture means: “I’m grown up and can feed myself, thank you very much, and my hands are just as good as the priest’s.” But this is simply false; we cannot feed ourselves, only Christ the High Priest can do so, and His ordained minister acts in His place, specially set apart by holy orders, with hands, too, set apart for the work of the altar. Communion in the hand helps create and support that fatal atmosphere of egalitarianism, horizontalism, and activism that has poisoned the spiritual life of the Church in the past forty years.

We must therefore do all in our power—with patience, yes, but also with a perseverance that never quits—to overturn the practice of communion in the hand and to replace it with a worthier manner of reception, namely, on the tongue of the kneeling communicant. Such a manner of receiving cannot, in and of itself, prevent unworthy communions from happening, but the evils will be limited, and the goods of devotion, piety, and reverence greatly increased and multiplied. As we know, it became the only way Pope Benedict distributed communion at his Masses. According to the universal law of the Church, it is a way in which each one of us, right now, can receive our Lord Jesus Christ, wherever we are, whenever we attend His Holy Sacrifice.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Filed Under: Articles Last Updated: January 1, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Dr. Peter Kwasniewski

A graduate of Thomas Aquinas College (B.A. in Liberal Arts) and The Catholic University of America (M.A. and Ph.D. in Philosophy), Dr. Peter Kwasniewski is currently Professor at Wyoming Catholic College. He is also a published and performed composer, especially of sacred music.

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    “Simplified” Keyboard Accompaniment (PDF)
    I’d much rather hear an organist play a simplified version correctly than listen to wrong notes. I invite you to download this simplified organ accompaniment for hymn #729 in the Father Brébeuf Hymnal. The hymn is “O Jesus Christ, Remember.” I’m toying with the idea of creating a whole bunch of these, to help amateur organists. The last one I uploaded was downloaded more than 1,900 times in a matter of hours—so there seems to be interest in such a project. For the record, this famous text by Oratorian priest, Father Edward Caswall (d. 1878) is often married to AURELIA, as it is in the Brébeuf Hymnal.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    ‘Bogey’ of the Half-Educated: Paraphrase
    Father Adrian Porter, using the cracher dans la soupe example, did a praiseworthy job explaining the difference between ‘dynamic’ and ‘formal’ translation. This is something Monsignor Ronald Knox explained time and again—yet even now certain parties feign ignorance. I suppose there will always be people who pretend the only ‘valid’ translation of Mitigásti omnem iram tuam; avertísti ab ira indignatiónis tuæ… would be “You mitigated all ire of you; you have averted from your indignation’s ire.” Those who would defend such a translation suffer from an unfortunate malady. One of my professors called it “cognate on the brain.”
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Father Cuthbert Lattey • “The Hebrew MSS”
    Father Cuthbert Lattey (d. 1954) wrote: “In a large number of cases the ancient Christian versions and some other ancient sources seem to have been based upon a better Hebrew text than that adopted by the rabbis for official use and alone suffered to survive. Sometimes, too, the cognate languages suggest a suitable meaning for which there is little or no support in the comparatively small amount of ancient Hebrew that has survived. The evidence of the metre is also at times so clear as of itself to furnish a strong argument; often it is confirmed by some other considerations. […] The Jewish copyists and their directors, however, seem to have lost the tradition of the metre at an early date, and the meticulous care of the rabbis in preserving their own official and traditional text (the ‘massoretic’ text) came too late, when the mischief had already been done.” • Msgr. Knox adds: “It seems the safest principle to follow the Latin—after all, St. Jerome will sometimes have had a better text than the Massoretes—except on the rare occasions when there is no sense to be extracted from the Vulgate at all.”
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    “Reminder” — Month of November (2025)
    On a daily basis, I speak to people who don’t realize we publish a free newsletter (although they’ve followed our blog for years). We have no endowment, no major donors, no savings, and refuse to run annoying ads. As a result, our mailing list is crucial to our survival. Signing up couldn’t be easier: simply scroll to the bottom of any blog article and enter your email address.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    Gospel Options for 2 November (“All Souls”)
    We’ve been told some bishops are suppressing the TLM because of “unity.” But is unity truly found in the MISSALE RECENS? For instance, on All Souls (2 November), any of these Gospel readings may be chosen, for any reason (or for no reason at all). The same is true of the Propria Missæ and other readings—there are countless options in the ORDINARY FORM. In other words, no matter which OF parish you attend on 2 November, you’ll almost certainly hear different propers and readings, to say nothing of different ‘styles’ of music. Where is the “unity” in all this? Indeed, the Second Vatican Council solemnly declared: “Even in the liturgy, the Church has no wish to impose a rigid uniformity in matters which do not implicate the faith or the good of the whole community.”
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Our Father” • Musical Setting?
    Looking through a Roman Catholic Hymnal published in 1859 by Father Guido Maria Dreves (d. 1909), I stumbled upon this very beautiful tune (PDF file). I feel it would be absolutely perfect to set the “Our Father” in German to music. Thoughts?
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Random Quote

“[Saint Jerome’s Latin] fairly frequently represents a purer text than does the existing Hebrew, sometimes yielding a plain sense when the Massoretic text fails to do so, and quite often providing a working interpretation of a passage where the Hebrew is doubtful.”

— Sebastian Bullough, O.P. (June 1949)

Recent Posts

  • “Simplified” Keyboard Accompaniment (PDF)
  • ‘Bogey’ of the Half-Educated: Paraphrase
  • Father Cuthbert Lattey • “The Hebrew MSS”
  • Re: The People’s Mass Book (1974)
  • They did a terrible thing

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.