V. ADDRESSING THE CHANGE OF RECEPTION OF COMMUNION AFTER VATICAN II 

Introduction:  

Much of the reaction against the second Vatican Council by Traditionalists has been due not so much to the council itself but the way it was implemented and the abuses that followed. I have already written about the unauthorized changes that were promoted through the Liturgical Conference who had hijacked the information pipeline. It was a few people who were in the right place that wanted to push change. There is a similar thing that happened with regards to the way Communion is distributed during the Mass. 

As you know, I have been promoting the use of the Communion Rail. Perhaps there are some that think that I am stuck in a pre-Vatican II mindset and that I should get with the times. But, as you have seen in my previous letters, and you will see in this one, that I am pushing for and promoting that we actually embrace what was given to us in the 2nd Vatican Council. I will address from where came the practice of Communion in the hand while standing. 

As I mentioned in the previous letter, there were two official documents before the advent of the 1969 Missal giving instructions. The only instructions for the distribution of Communion are found in Inter Oecumenici which state: “The formulary for distributing holy communion is to be, Corpus Christi. As he says these words, the celebrant holds the host slightly above the ciborium and shows it to the communicant, who responds: Amen, then receives communion from the celebrant, the sign of the cross with the host being omitted” (IO 48.i). But it nowhere advocates for standing to receive Communion or reception in the hand. 

How Did We Start Standing for Communion? 

As I have mentioned before in a previous letter, because of the apparently “authoritative” documents from the Liturgical Conference, Communion rails were removed, and Communion stations were introduced, effectively making standing the default posture for receiving Communion because of the awkwardness of persons kneeling down and getting back up without assistance of kneeler or Communion rail. In addition, this less efficient new arrangement of a communion station for the priest would effectively necessitate the use of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. The shift to receiving Communion in the hand followed naturally from the need to accommodate various heights and the logistics of multiple Communion stations and the awkwardness of having reach up to place the Communion host in a person’s mouth.   

Where Did Reception in the Hand Officially Start? 

This practice began out of disobedience in the early 1960s, particularly in Holland. Due to the spreading abuses in certain non-English speaking countries (Holland, Belgium, France and Germany), Pope Paul VI took a survey of the Bishops to ascertain the need. The majority of bishops worldwide favored retaining Communion on the tongue. On May 28, 1969 the Congregation for Divine Worship issued Memoriale Domini, which concluded: "From the responses received, it is thus clear that by far the greater number of bishops feel that the present discipline [i.e., Holy Communion on the tongue] should not be changed at all, indeed that if it were changed, this would be offensive to the sensibility and spiritual appreciation of these bishops and of most of the faithful." After he had considered the observation and the counsel of the bishops, the Supreme Pontiff judged that the long-received manner of ministering Holy Communion to the faithful should not be changed. The Apostolic See then strongly urged bishops, priests and the laity to zealously observe this law out of concern for the common good of the Church. 

Unfortunately, the abuses continued, so a compromise was struck. The pope did not authorize Communion in the hand, but he allowed an indult which would allow it under specific conditions. These are the conditions: 

• first, an indult could not be given to a country in which Communion in the hand was not an already established practice; 
• second, the bishops in countries where it was established must approve of the practice “by a secret vote and with a two-thirds majority.” 
• Beyond this, the Holy See set down seven regulations concerning communion in the hand; failure to maintain these regulations could result in the loss of the indult. These are the 1st three conditions: 
• respecting the laity who continue the traditional practice (of receiving kneeling and on the tongue), 
• maintaining the laity’s proper respect of the Eucharist, and 
• strengthening the laity’s faith in the real presence. 

Bernardin’s Campaign 

In the United States, Archbishop Joseph Bernardin led efforts to introduce Communion in the hand. Despite multiple attempts in 1975 and 1976, he failed to secure the necessary two-thirds majority of the Bishops conference. In 1977, with Bernardin’s term ending, he appointed Archbishop Quinn to lobby for the practice. When the vote fell short again, Bernardin gathered absentee votes, including from retired bishops, to meet the two-thirds requirement. 

The Church’s preferred practice 

It is clear then that Communion in the hand is only granted by an indult ... an exception to the rule ... this indult that came about through disobedience. The granting of the indult to the United States was granted because of the machinations of a Bishop who wanted to push his own agenda. Even though the indult has been granted, Rome could legitimately take it away which indicated that the clearly preferred practice is reception of Communion on the tongue. 

Other considerations 

Receiving Communion on the tongue at the Communion rail fosters a deep sense of reverence and humility, reflecting the sacredness of the moment. Kneeling to receive the Body of Christ is an act of submission and acknowledgment of the profound mystery unfolding before us. This posture encourages a deliberate focus on the sacred. It challenges us to fully appreciate the gift we are receiving and to approach the Eucharist with a heart filled with gratitude and a profound awareness of its significance. 

To be clear, I am not requiring anyone to receive Communion on the tongue or to kneel. Standing or receiving in the hand are a permitted practices, and I will not look down on anyone who chooses to reverently stand and receive Communion in the hand. I am merely giving you the background on how these practices came to be, and I ask you to prayerfully consider making the switch to kneeling and receiving on the tongue. 

ADDRESSING THE ABUSES 

Pope Paul VI approved the document Liturgicae Instaurationes published by the Congregation for Divine Worship on Sept. 3, 1970 to ensure the proper implementation of the 1969 Missal. 

The introduction the document states: Measured transition to new and fresh forms of worship, conducted with both the overall work of renewal and the wide range of local conditions as its criteria, has been welcomed by the majority of clergy and faithful. Still, there have been here and there both resistance and impatience. In the cause of holding on to the old tradition, some have received the changes grudgingly. Alleging pastoral needs, others became convinced that they could not wait for promulgation of the definitive reforms. In consequence, they have resorted to personal innovations, to hasty, often ill-advised measures, to new creations and additions or to the simplification of rites. All of this has frequently conflicted with the most basic liturgical norms and upset the consciences of the faithful. The innovators have thus obstructed the cause of genuine liturgical renewal or made it more difficult. 

In paragraph 1: No one should go beyond these defined limits; to do so would be to strip the liturgy of its sacred symbolism and proper beauty, so needed for the fulfillment of the mystery of salvation in the Christian community and, with the help of an effective catechesis, for its comprehension under the veil of things that are seen. [....] Accordingly the rites must retain their dignity, spirit of reverence, and sacred character. 

Paragraph 3:C: The Church does not bar any style of sacred music from the liturgy. Still, not every style or the sound of every song or instrument deserves equal status as an aid to prayer and an expression of the mystery of Christ. All musical elements have as their one purpose the celebration of divine worship. They must, then, possess sacredness and soundness of form,[14] fit in with the spirit of the liturgical service and the nature of its particular parts; they must not be a hindrance to an intense participation of the assembly but must direct the mind's attention and the heart's sentiments toward the rites. 

Paragraph 12: All earlier permissions for experimentation with the Mass, granted in view of the liturgical reform as it was in progress, are to be considered as no longer in effect. Since publication of the <Missale Romanum> the norms and forms of eucharistic celebration are those given in the General Instruction and the Order of Mass. 

Paragraph 13: Prompted by a ready obedience to church laws and precepts and by a spirit of faith, and putting aside purely personal preferences or idiosyncrasies, pastors especially should be ministers of the community liturgy through personal example, study, and an intelligent, persistent catechesis. They will thus prepare for that flowering spring expected from this liturgical reform, which looks to the needs of the age and which repudiates the secular and arbitrary as lethal to itself. 

These excerpts from the Congregation for Divine Worship make it clear that the pope was trying combat the innovations that were taking place, unfortunately, some of them have continued even to our own day. That is why we need to have a deeper understanding of what was intended, and to be humble enough to set aside our personal preferences.