Bulletin Columns

by Rev. Matthew G. Suniga, Parochial Vicar

Well-meaning decisions sometimes bring about unintended, negative consequences. In 1963 Pope Paul VI published the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, widely known by its Latin name, Sacrosanctum concilium. Among other things, this document gives bishops permission to allow for the reception of Holy Communion under both kinds, i.e., under the species of bread and wine. Sacrosanctum concilium states:

“The dogmatic principles which were laid down by the Council of Trent remaining intact, communion under both kinds may be granted when the bishops think fit, not only to clerics and religious, but also to the laity, in cases to be determined by the Apostolic See, as, for instance, to the newly ordained in the Mass of their sacred ordination, to the newly professed in the Mass of their religious profession, and to the newly baptized in the Mass which follows their baptism” (SC, 55).

From these 83 words came the practice of receiving Holy Communion under both forms, which is now common at parochial Masses throughout the Catholic Church in the United States.

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) elaborates further on this practice, saying, “Holy Communion has a fuller form as a sign when it takes place under both kinds” (no. 281). The GIRM conditions that statement with the following directive to bishops and priests: “[T]hey should instruct the Christian faithful that the Catholic faith teaches that Christ, whole and entire, and the true Sacrament, is received even under only one species, and hence that as regards the resulting fruits, those who receive under only one species are not deprived of any grace that is necessary for salvation” (no. 282).

Such universal norms are applied through particular norms issued by the bishops of a given country, with the approval of the Holy See. In the document called Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America, the bishops of this country say: “[T] he need to avoid obscuring the role of the Priest and the Deacon as the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion by an excessive use of extraordinary ministers might in some circumstances constitute a reason for limiting the distribution of Holy Communion under both species” (no. 24). Clearly, the bishops desire that the sacramental theology of Holy Orders and the clergy’s proper role as the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion be upheld in the ministrations of the Eucharist.

There have been some unintended, negative consequences resulting from the frequent practice of receiving Holy Communion under both kinds. Some Catholics now believe that they are not receiving Christ “whole and entire” unless they receive Holy Communion under the appearance of bread and wine; this notion is simply false. In some places, the large number of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion is so common at weekly Masses that many children grow up without learning or observing the distinction between the ordinary and extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, which has implications for their understanding of the sacrament of Holy Orders.

The sign-value of Holy Communion under both kinds is important, but it was never intended to be promoted at the expense of the Church’s perennial teaching that Christ is really present even in the smallest crumb or most miniscule drop of the Blessed Sacrament. Over the years I have been at many liturgies in which the Precious Blood was accidentally spilled on the floor or on clothing, and I have been in a church with visible stains on the carpet where the Precious Blood was spilled time and again over several years. If the Blessed Sacrament can be so easily put in danger of mishaps and profanation, is it any wonder that the Catholic Church in the United States has many good-hearted, faithful people who nevertheless believe that the Blessed Sacrament is merely a symbol, a sign of Christ? The sign-value of receiving Holy Communion under both kinds—which often requires a great number of extraordinary ministers at Sunday Mass—is not more important than the reality that in a particular way, in His bishops and priests [and with the help of deacons associated with them], it is Christ Himself who feeds the flock with the fullness of His own Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, even when the faithful receive Holy Communion under the appearance of bread alone or, as is common among those with celiac disease, under the appearance of wine alone.

If we desire to instill in our children a right understanding of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, then we must think critically about certain commonplace liturgical practices—always doing so in accord with the mind of the Church and with obedience to the diocesan bishop—in order to help our children develop a deep sense of the sacred and eucharistic awe, or else we will do them a great disservice. Our children deserve the best; the greatest gift we can offer is to help them know, love and serve Jesus Christ who comes to them truly, really, and substantially in the Blessed Sacrament.

by Rev. David Angelino

Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

In my previous column I wrote about the recent Pew study and the misunderstanding of a large percentage of Catholics who attend Mass weekly regarding the Sacred Eucharist, and would like to continue reflecting on what the Second Vatican Council called the “source and summit of the Christian Life,” which is the Eucharist (Lumen Gentium 11). After the Consecration at Mass, the bread and wine are no longer bread and wine but the true and substantial Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus (Council of Trent (1551): DS 1651).

In that article I mentioned that in the United States, we have an indult to receive Communion in the hand. An indult is a term from Canon Law meaning special permission to deviate from the law. They are generally given for a specific time period or for a specific number of cases and can be revoked by the Holy Father at will. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that indults are “general faculties, granted by the Holy See to bishops and others, of doing something not permitted by the common law.”

In this specific case, the indult grants permission to depart from the world-wide liturgical norm of receiving Communion on the tongue. If you travel to other parts of the world, it will be hard to find someone who receives on the hand (in fact, at Masses Pope Francis celebrates St. Peter’s in Rome, priests are only permitted to give Communion on the tongue).

This special papal permission was granted in 1977 by Pope Paul VI, and it would be good to review some of what was said when this permission was given. Responding for the pope, the Congregation for Divine Worship (which oversees how the Sacraments are celebrated) said that where Communion is given in the hand, “care must be taken not to allow particles of the eucharistic bread to fall or be scattered. Care must also be taken that the communicants have clean hands and that their comportment is becoming” (Notitiae 5, emphasis added).

Permission to receive Communion in the hand has been granted, but we need to take care that the instructions that go with it are followed. I would like to call particular attention to the first part of the quote and elaborate some. It is very easy for particles of the Sacred Host to remain on the palm of the hand or on the fingers when bringing the host to the mouth. These particles can be very small, are rarely felt, and can be difficult to see, so extra care must be taken that none of them are dropped or stepped on (or even brushed into pockets and washed in the laundry). (It is for this reason too that I hold my thumb and index fingers together after touching the Sacred Host.)

I have seen such care taken by some religious sisters, and among the faithful too, who lick the palm of their hand and their fingers just in case any particles were left. If this seems like a lot of work, the practice of receiving Communion on the tongue is actually still the norm throughout the world and greatly reduces the risk of any accidental desecration of the Eucharist. Let us all be mindful of Who it is that we receive and take special care each and every time.

May God bless you,

Fr. David Angelino

by Rev. Matthew G. Suniga, Parochial Vicar

The celebration of the Holy Mass is the greatest act of worship and reverence that the Church offers to Almighty God. Within the Roman Catholic Church there are several rites of worship, all derived from certain liturgical traditions cultivated among the worshipping communities in various geographical centers of Christian life around the word and down through the centuries. Within the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church, there are two forms of celebrating the Holy Mass: the Ordinary form and the Extraordinary form. The manner in which the regular weekend Masses are celebrated at St. Theresa is the Ordinary Form of the Mass. The manner in which the Mass is celebrated in our parish chapel every Friday at 5:30pm is the Extraordinary Form, more commonly known as the Traditional Latin Mass. Contrary to popular misconception the Traditional Latin Mass was never “abolished,” and since 2007 the Holy See has permitted priests to publicly celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass without special permission from the local ordinary.

The celebrations of the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms of the Mass are governed by liturgical rubrics, little red-colored instructions in the Missal which direct the words, actions, and postures of the priest, other clergy, and the lay faithful during the Mass. The celebration of the Ordinary form of the Mass (again, the manner in which we celebrate our regular weekend Masses at St. Theresa) is further governed by the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, a legislative document which directs the liturgical actions of the priest and the people alike. As for the manner of receiving Holy Communion in the Ordinary form of the Mass, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 161, states: “The priest raises the host slightly and shows it to each [communicant], saying, ‘The Body of Christ.’ The communicant replies, ‘Amen,’ and receives the Sacrament either on the tongue or, where this is allowed, in the hand, the choice lying with the communicant. As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or she consumes the whole of it” (emphasis mine).

In the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass the communicant does not respond “Amen” when receiving Holy Communion, instead he or she remains silent. In fact, when receiving Holy Communion within the Eucharistic Liturgy of many other rites of the Catholic Church, the lay faithful also remain silent. Still, within the Ordinary form of the Mass in the Latin Rite, the lay faithful are directed to respond “Amen” before receiving the Blessed Sacrament on the tongue, or, if they so choose, in the hand. (Receiving Holy Communion on the tongue is the universal practice of the Church; however, the Catholic bishops of the United States have the Holy See’s permission for the faithful in this country to receive Holy Communion in the hand, if they choose to do so.)

The words and gestures prescribed for the celebration of the Holy Mass combine to form a sacred action. All the liturgical rubrics in the official books of the Church’s liturgy are important for rendering due worship to Almighty God. The rubrics are so valuable that we might think of them as “little rubies,” precious gems to be treasured as a means of offering divine worship with attention, reverence, and devotion. The priest and the people—together—should take great care to act in the liturgy according to the rubrics proper to each.