Archbishop from Brazil Mocks Communion in the Mouth
Archbishop José Mário Scalon Angonese, 64, of Cascavel, Parana, Brazil, has denigrated receiving Holy Communion with the tongue - as practised from the apostles until after the Second Vatican Council - as a "medieval" and "retrograde" custom.
He recently preached this nonsense in the parish of Nossa Senhora Consolata in Cafelândia, Paraná. All Byzantine and Oriental Orthodox churches distribute communion in this way, like the Eastern European space of the Catholic Church.
Monsignor Scalon Angonese wrongly said that Vatican II taught that adults should receive Communion "with their hands". For him it is disappointing when someone teaches or follows "these practices of the last century" because "the Eucharist is food".
After an outcry in Brazil, Archbishop Scalon Angonese issued a statement justifying himself rather than apologising.
He claimed that his sermon had been misinterpreted and taken out of context. His intention was "not" to undermine the traditional liturgy. He wanted more people, especially "young people", to find a sense of belonging and spirituality in the liturgy [while Communion in the hand is almost exclusively defended by the elderly].
The archbishop's wordy justification didn't fool anyone, and the outcry continues.
The following video sequence of the sermon, posted by @Luca Diste on Gloria.tv on 6 November, proves that the archbishop was neither decontextualised nor misinterpreted.
Hmmm-my FSSP parish has 3 packed Masses every Sunday filled with young families and young people who are so grateful to drive even long distances where Holy Communion is received kneeling and on the tongue by the whole parish - with great love and reverence! No one is dressed like they are going to the beach or the gym. There is a total rejection of the errors that communion in the hand have brought about - namely a lack of adoration and reverence for Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God the Son, not only during our worship but also in our daily lives!
To clarify, at issue is the cleric's denigration of anyone reverent enough of our Lord's body to receive it from the hands of someone consecrated to distribute the Eucharist directly upon their tongue. One doesn't wish to condescend to squabbling about matters where reverence should be shown, however, for the record, an excellent timeline of the tradition of distributing the Eucharist in this manner can be found at APOSTOLIC TRADITION: COMMUNION ON THE TONGUE for anyone so inclined. Pax tecum.
@Malki Tzedek...that is very interesting so thanks for posting although I disagree. As you already know Communion in the Hand was the practice of the early Church for 800 years according to Ratzinger. Therefore, Communion on the tongue cannot be Apostolic Tradition although many would have wished it to be. Of course, Communion in the hand is legitimate now alongside Communion on the tongue so both are certainly legitimate. This entire dispute is one of opinion. You have yours and I have mine. Mine depends on Christ saying 'take and eat' because the Eucharist is our Heavenly food, not open your mouth and stick out your tongue. Thank you.
Last Sunday, November 3, Archbishop Angonese administered confirmation in the parish of Nossa Senhora Consolata in Cafelândia. On this occasion, he was outraged that so many people “still” want oral communion.
Communion in the hand was the practice for the first 800 years according to Ratzinger so it cannot be wrong or inferior or heresy or Protestant. Communion is faithful to Jesus who said, "Take and eat", not open your mouth and stick out your tongue.
@chris griffin It is a famous quote found in the Doughy Rheims bible that says, Matthew: 15 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
When prelates start making the Faith into their own "image and likeness" they should lay aside their princely accoutrements and retire to a monastery to reflect and make amends with their Maker.
@Malki Tzedek Communion in the hand is not an issue of doctrine so it definitely cannot and does not be thought of as making our own "image and likeness". Communion in the hand was the practice for the first 800 years according to Ratzinger. Communion is faithful to Jesus who said "Take and eat", not open your mouth and stick out your tongue.
Communion in the hand is not an issue of doctrine so it cannot be thought of as disobedience. Communion in the hand was the practice for the first 800 years according to Ratzinger. Communion is faithful to Jesus who said "Take and eat", not open your mouth and stick out you tongue.
@P. O'B...K R Ross...What disobedience? When? Where? How? That is impossible. Communion in the hand is legitimate in the Catholic Church, not disobedient. You have 9 supposed Catholics agreeing with you that Communion in the hand is disobedient, which is untrue. You have made an untruth.
No, no. Communion in the hand was forbidden but as disobedience to the rule increased, this in the 1970s, the American bishops caved in and approved the practice.
@K R RossP. O'B Communion-in-the-hand is approved by the Holy See as an option for the United States, and for many other countries, including Italy. The following are the relevant parts of the documents governing this permission. In the following documents the citations refer to: Notitiae (Not.) - the official journal of the Congregation for Divine Worship (which now includes the Congregation for the Discipline of the Sacraments) Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) - the official record "Acts of the Apostolic See," in which authoritative teaching and legal decrees are published.
@chris griffin You have no idea what you are talking about, do you, Chris? I quote you: The following are the relevant parts of the documents governing this permission. In the following documents the citations refer to: Notitiae (Not.) - the official journal of the Congregation for Divine Worship (which now includes the Congregation for the Discipline of the Sacraments) Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) - the official record "Acts of the Apostolic See," in which authoritative teaching and legal decrees are published. You have cited nothing. You have simply mentioned Notitiae of documents that you have not quoted. Then you simply mention AAS where all magisterial documents are to be found. Again without quoting anything... ....proving strictly nothing at all. The Revolutionary, Freemasonically-Inspired FLIP: The Saga of "Communion in the Hand", or A "Disobedient Localized Liturgical Abuse", That Became A "Legalized Exception, Under Certain Circumstances", and then Became The New Pseudo-"Universal Norm" Supplanting the Traditional Universal Norm, Communion on The Tongue, which is now Relegated to Tolerated, Scorned, or even Banned Exception. "Let he who has eyes to see, see." Vatican II does not mention Communion in the hand as the Traditional Latin Mass was the universal norm for the Church as was Communion on the tongue from time immemorial. Memoriale Domini is a document issued by the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship on May 29, 1969. It addresses the manner of distributing Holy Communion, particularly the practice of Communion in the hand. While the document acknowledges the historical practice of Communion on the tongue, it also recognizes the changing liturgical landscape and the desire for greater participation among the faithful. It permits, under certain conditions, in certain exceptional circumstances, in other words as an exception to the universal norm, the distribution of Holy Communion in the hand. However, the document emphasizes the importance of preserving the traditional practice of Communion on the tongue, which is considered to be a more reverent way of receiving the Eucharist. It also stresses the need for careful discernment and the avoidance of any practices that could diminish the reverence due to the Eucharist. Essentially, Memoriale Domini provides a "balance between tradition and contemporary modernist neo-protestant practice". While it allows for Communion in the hand in certain exceptional circumstances, an abuse, which along with the New Mass, contradicts the Living Liturgical Tradition, it reaffirms as the universal norm, the traditional practice of Communion on the tongue. Redemptionis Sacramentum was published by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments on March 25, 2004. A quote this document: after acknowledging that communicants have “the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue,” and permission in certain areas to receive in the hand, the document states: "If there is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the faithful." This risk is present every time Communion is distributed in the hand, whether from the Host falling to the floor, or from the scattering of particles, or from the risk that someone walks off with the Host; hence, the practice of Communion in the hand should be suppressed as it was suppressed by the Early Church and for the same reasons. And whether or not the Church suppresses it, we ourselves can, and should, choose to return to the traditional practice of the Traditional Latin Mass and reception of Holy Communion on the tongue with a gilt paten held underneath the chin of the kneeling communicant by the altar boy. Conclusion: Despite the aberration of the New Mass, which is valid, but illicit, as 'it is not pleasing worship to God', and was fabricated 'ex tavolino', 'on a table' in a Roman restaurant by Protestants, the universal norm was and is Communion on the tongue as exemplified by the practice of Communion on the tongue by Popes JP II and Benedict XVI. The tolerated exception is Communion on the hand, which is a second aberration and sacrilege. Historical Facts Before the promulgation of Memoriale Domini in 1969 certain areas of Holland and the USA, without permission from Rome, started giving out Communion on the hand in disobedience to existing Canon Law, and to existing legislation. To deal with this embarassing situation, Paul VI promulgated Memoriale Domini with the intention of reaffirming the traditional practice of the distribution of the Host on the tongue, and also, in liberal fashion, dealing with the 'revolt' of unauthorized distribution of Communion in the hand by legalizing the abuse. In the document, the choice was not between 'two equal options of equal worth', but between the reverent universal norm, Communion on the tongue, which existed since time immemorial, and the localized, now tolerated exception-- "for pastoral reasons"-- of an abuse that had grown out of flagrant disobedience in very limited Catholic liberal areas of Holland and in the USA. In 1969, Communion on the tongue occurred in 99.9% of the time globally. Communion on the hand occurred in only 0.1% of the time globally. Today it is the opposite but back in 1969 before Memoriale Domini Communion in the hand was a very limited local liturgical abuse. In places where the 'Communion in the hand' disobedience had taken root, the disobedience was legalized for pastoral reasons. This in fact legalized the abuse as an exception. Today, in practice, the exceptional legalization of the abuse has now become the 'de facto' universal norm. Communion on the tongue has now become "de facto" the barely tolerated exception.
Chris Griffin -- we agree. Rome and the US bishops approved Communion in the hand after the disobedience to the former rule became widespread. But it started with disobedience.
@K R Ross...you admit that Communion in the Hand is approved by the Catholic church. You admit that Communion either way is a "practice" not Sacred Tradition. You admit that communion in the Hand was the standard practice for the first 800 years of the Catholic Church. You admit that millions of Catholics take Communion in the Hand daily. You admit that either way is a personal judgement of preference. All of you people are insulting me for abiding by the Catholic Church over "practice" which is church approved. Yall are very poor representatives of Christ.
Hi, Chris, Two Dogmatic Oecumenical Councils, one in the 4th century and one in the 7th century, condemned Communion in the hand and excommunicated those who promoted this sacrilegious abuse. The above facts destroy your argument that “Communion in the hand was the norm for 800.” This is false. It is a localized abuse condemned by two Councils. It does not matter that Benedict XVI supposedly supported your theory. If he did, then it was his opinion only and he is wrong. In 1968, he wrote a book full of heresies and never retracted his errors. Also do not forget that Benedict was no fan of Communion in the hand. He only distributed Communion on the tongue at the Vatican. The 2,000 year old traditional universal norm is Communion on the tongue. It is an apostolic tradition. At the Last Supper, the Apostles had been consecrated bishops by Our Lord. Hence, Our Lord and His Bishops “took and ate”. This phrase of the Roman Canon is therefore not directed at lay people but implicitly refers to Jesus Christ, High Priest, who says these words, and to His “full priests”, the Apostles, now bishops who received Communion from Our Lord. No lay persons received Communion at the First Mass. Chris, are your hands consecrated with Holy Chrism? No, only the priest’s hands are consecrated with Sacred Chrism, and, therefore, objectively holy. “Holy things are for the holy.” Therefore, it is a sacrilege for a lay person to touch the Sacred Host except in an emergency situation ex. fire, risk of profanation, etc. I stated that the disobedience, Communion in the hand, is a sacrilegious abuse that Modernist Rome illicitly approved post facto. Nothing more; nothing less. Just as the New Mass is illicit and a sacrilege; Communion in the hand is illicit, and a sacrilege. No pope has the authority to change or to suppress the 2,000 year old Traditional Latin Mass, nor the 2,000 year old, unbroken, uninterrupted tradition of Communion on the tongue. If a pope did change or suppress the above, then true Catholics would have to resist, and to disobey the pope unlawful commands in order to obey God. A child knows this through catechism…