Rorate Caeli

It is not licit to deny communion on the tongue due to H1N1

The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments responded to a lay Catholic in Britain, in a diocese in which communion on the tongue had been restricted due to concerns related to the Influenza A virus, subtype H1N1 ("Swine flu") epidemic.

It does not make any scientific sense, either, as it is better when there is just one hand involved (that of the Priest). It would seem that it would be safer to have just one man distributing Holy Communion (the Priest), no "Extraordinary ministers" of any kind, and to have all faithful receive Communion in the traditional way.

Source: Rorate Reader


  1. Sigh. Wish they realized that in my Diocese.

    I'm generally far more worried about catching something from the person sniffling and hacking away one pew over than I ever am about receiving Communion.

  2. Anonymous5:35 PM

    No problems assisting at the Gregorian Rite of Mass with this.

  3. The timing of this letter is extraordinary - 24th July - one day after the diocese of Portsmouth in England put its own restrictions in place:

    Obviously, the "appropriate contacts" that were made were not comprehensive enough - the restrictions in Portsmouth were in place up until early November when the availability of a "vaccine" was used as a pretext to remove the policy.

  4. English Pastor6:00 PM

    In that people cough and sneeze into their hand, and being that tocuhing the hand is so frequent when distributing Holy Communion into the hand, it makes no sense to maintain this particular type of administering the Sacred Speices rather than on the tongue. However, it has to be said that it is far easier to distrubte on the tongue when people kneel: my experience is that when they receive on the tongue standing a number of people have a habit of nodding their head forward like a chicken, making contact with the tongue by the priest's hand very difficult to avoid. Lets just get back to kneeling and on the tongue asap.

  5. First off, I note that Rome did respond rather quickly here.

    Second, how very encouraging it is to note the language:

    "Be assured that the appropriate contacts will be made."

    I consider this yet another piece of anecdotal evidence that the Apostolic See intends to govern the Church.

    Please God!

  6. Anonymous6:08 PM

    Mandrivnyk is exactly right. All this has been more nonsense from some bishops. There is arguably only a tiny difference in risk between receiving in manu and in lingua. However, there is a MUCH larger risk, tens of times larger, simply from breathing the same air as one who has the virus.

    The real question, then, is whether or not some bishops will close churches altogether until the danger passes (as they did in Mexico a the outset). But what danger is there? Most who have died from this influenza have had pre-existing conditions. That makes it licit it for those people to avoid Mass in the first place.

    If you contract this flu and wish to live, you simply go to the hospital soon after the symptoms arise. If you don't wait around, you should be fine. If, on the other hand, you wait around for four or five days, you may have a real problem.

    Of course, you are far more likely to die en route to church in your car. In the U.S.A., that's how 50,000 people die every year. I don't see any emergency ban on automobiles, nor do I see a requirement to wear crash helmets while driving them (something which is logical if one wishes to impose same on motorcyclists).

    My ruling on Communion then: you may receive in lingua at all Masses but don't you dare drive to church without a crash helmet!



    It's Turkey day,
    It's Turkey day!
    All Saints come to
    My kitchen, hey!

    I'll cook and clean
    For suffering's merit.
    Get out of that wine,
    Saint Antony Claret!

    Cook books I read
    While sipping wine
    Get out of that pie,
    Saint Thomas Aquine!

    It's Turkey day,
    It's Turkey day!
    All Saints preserve... preserves!

    May the Saints preserve us all this Thanksgiving Day and especially the good Priests who give us Our Lord (with and without the flu) all year long. Happy Thanksgiving!

  8. Anonymous7:05 PM

    Turkey day? Not here in Canada. We had that in mid-October.

    Happy Thanksgiving, though, to all American bloggers here.


  9. Anonymous7:14 PM

    Since today is 'Turkey Day' for so many people, I wonder if H.H. could prove that he has a sense of humour and retire Kasper today.


  10. I received communion at a Novus Ordo mass last week, brought to the choir loft by an elderly woman who had just returned from heart difficulties. I admit, when I was asked if I intended to receive, and said yes, I was thinking that it was so that the choir director would know who was going down to receive the sacrament. So when the realization of what was about to happen dawned on me, I was between a rock and a hard place. I knew what I was going to do, and that the extraordinary minister probably wasn't going to like it, but out of respect for the sacrament and to avoid a confused extraordinary minister carrying the un-consumed sacrament around with her, I duly presented myself, replied "Amen", and opened my mouth. She looked at my hands, then looked up. I closed my mouth and quickly and softly said, "I don't receive in the hand." Her face hardened instantaneously, and I received the sacrament with a finger-nail poke to the tongue which fractured the host in my mouth. I should have known. When attending a Novus Ordo, just adopt the medieval sensibility and make a spiritual communion. Besides, it's an aid to mortification, and is helpful in preventing one from taking the act of communion for granted. One's duty is no less fulfilled. And for the sake of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, until the overpopulation of Extraordinary Ministers is reduced, it's safer.

  11. SamGamgee7:50 PM

    Perhaps the laity should stop putting money in the collection. There are an awful lot of nasties that can live on your money. I wouldn't want to think I was responsible for contributing for the spread of swine flu.

  12. All illness is a direct result of Original Sin.

    Even a moron like me knows that. Us morons also know the only one we should receive Holy Communion from is a Priest, and on our knees.

    It is sacrilegious to say we can get ill from anything blessed by our Lord. Holy Water dispensers that are safe? Make real Holy Water instead of blessed water, no problem.

    I don't care if our Lord smites my Priest and Confessor with a raging case of leprosy, lumbago, cancerous boils, and so on. He consecrates a Host, I'm taking it.

    In my home country of Mexico, the American Freemasons still have a firm grip on the Church Hierarchy; otherwise, our Catholic Priests would not have curtailed Masses over a simple thing like the black plague.

    “…to commune with my Maker, and ask Him first to forgive me my own sins, and implore him, second, not to forgive the people who ruined the Mass.." William F. Buckley.

    Mr. Buckley also may have added, “...those who have decatechized our Catholics….”

    May God our Lord in his infinite and supreme goodness be pleased to give us his abundant grace, that we may know his most holy will, and entirely fulfill it.

  13. No problems assisting at the Gregorian Rite of Mass with this.

    Unfortunately, Dan, you are mistaken - in England - in about three dioceses - this type of policy meant that traditional Catholics attending Latin Masses had to abstain from receiving sacramental Holy Communion. In a High Mass in Portsmouth Cathedral in the south of England, Holy Communion was not distributed to the faithful. Thank goodness this policy is now behind us.

  14. Anonymous10:05 PM

    Unfortunately, the Swine flu policy is still in operation here in Clifton in the west of England. In Cheltenham communion in the hand was even enforced at the weekly private Traditional Mass (the Mass has to be private because the Parish Priest won't allow it to be advertised)!

  15. Anonymous10:20 PM

    Will someone please let Rome know that the Archdiocese of Toronto has different ideas?

    Remaining Anonymous by necessity.

  16. Anonymous10:24 PM

    I need that doc in official translation!

  17. Anonymous10:28 PM

    Anon. wrote:

    "In Cheltenham communion in the hand was even enforced at the weekly private Traditional Mass (the Mass has to be private because the Parish Priest won't allow it to be advertised)!"

    Well, the answer to that, of course, is for the faithful to agree among themselves beforehand simply not to receive Holy Communion at all, which action they have every right to take.


  18. Anonymous1:18 AM

    Where does the letter refer to the H1N1? It merely refers to the general statement in Redemptionis Sacramentum but does not refer to any diocesan legislation banning reception in lingua on account of H1N1

    John Ashley
    Dartmouth, Nova Scotia

  19. I wish that Rome had also responded to the frantic letters from the Philippines regarding this matter. I even ghostwrote a couple of those letters.

    I will let out a little secret: the every-Sunday TLM in the Diocese of Paranaque, attended by a group of 250-300 faithful, was suppressed in June, 2009 because the core group of tradition-minded lay faithful in that parish resisted the parish priest's instruction that Communion in the Hand be imposed in the TLM. The reason? The swine-flu hysteria.

  20. You are right, it doesn't. Not explicitly.

    However, the sender did mention it in his letter, yet wishes to remain anonymous (which is why he removed his name from the CDW letter). And, if you need any evidence, just consider the timing: late Spring-early Summer 2009 was the time of the first wave of traditional Communion restrictions in dioceses throughout the world.

    The letter could not be clearer: no reason is good enough to deny ANY faithful Communion; and EACH OF THE FAITHFUL has a right to receive Communion in the regular (i.e. traditional) manner.


  21. Dear Mr. Palad,


    Just before reading your entry, I listened to a song, part of which has the following lyrics:

    A long time ago
    A million years BC
    The best things in life
    were absolutely free.
    But no one appreciated
    a sky that was always blue.
    And no one congratulated
    a moon that was always new.
    So it was planned that they
    would vanish now and then
    And you must pay before you
    get them back again.
    That’s what storms were made for
    And you shouldn’t be afraid for
    Every time it rains it rains
    Pennies from heaven...

    God writes straight with crooked lines. If He has so chosen to deprive some of us of the True Mass it is because we did not appreciate Him. If there is thunder and lightning around us (trouble within the Church hierarchy), it is our Father trying to get our attention.

    When we do enough penance, and beg for mercy sufficiently, He may grant us His grace once more.

    However, will He grant us His grace when we blaspheme that we can get sick from receiving Holy Communion? Or from a sacramental like Holy Water?

    Please pray for us as we shall continue to pray for the Philippines.

    Remember your prelates who have spoken the word of God to you; whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation, Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today; and the same for ever. Be not led away with various and strange doctrines."
    -Hebrews XIII:7-9


  22. This is terrible. Some dioceses have mandated sacrilege!

  23. Anonymous2:39 AM

    Dear Mr. Ashley:

    the dicastery in question does not need to refer to the case of the swine influenza specifically. The general prohibtion of an Instruction published in the A.A.S. trumps diocesan legislation because it is an act of the Holy See.

    As moderator of the liturgy in his see, the local bishop can restrict the distribution of Holy Communion; when necessary, he can even close churches to prevent an epidemic. But he simply does not have the authority to deny faithful Communion in lingua. Period. End of story.

    In cases where the law is not being followed, faithful should simply refuse to receive at all. Better to refuse to receive at all than to receive in manu, which is scandalous. I note that, under Canon Law, faithful are only required to receive Holy Communion once per annum and, while it is always good receive when one can, it can be better not to receive for a variety of reasons (e.g. feeling unworthy, not having observed the Eucharisic Fast, fear of infection in any event).

    This is not some huge emergency and it has been blown way out of proportion. If there is serious risk from receiving in lingua then there must be an unreasonable risk of receiving in manu as well. In both cases, it would be risky merely to be sitting in a common room of any kind full of people.


  24. NC: If the original letter could be posted, even if heavily redacted, or even just the relevant portion that refers to influenza, that would be helpful.

  25. In the Tridentine Rite, the priest purifies his hands with wine after Mass. I think this would help reduce any possibility of transmission of germs to the priest at the Ablutions.

    Some dioceses are now mandating the use of alcohol-based gels before the Ablutions. If only they would return to the traditional form instead!

  26. The response is ok but in order to make more clear the abuse of some priests with the excuse of the H1N1, it should referr the question posed in the letter.

  27. Anonymous11:15 PM

    Being afraid to get a type of illness from Holy Communion is, to me, lack of faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
    We receive the Body and Blood of Our Lord from a spoon in our Orthodox Churches. It is not supposed to touch a person's mouth, that is why we lower down, look up, and open out mouth (we don't kneel to receive it). But I am absolutely sure that sometimes the spoon touches a tongue or a lip, or a teeth.
    Nobody in the Orthodox Church will stop receiving Holy Communion because of this. There is no illness coming from the Lord Himself, and doubting this is a real act of disbelief.
    We approach the Lord the same way millions did before us, from babies after baptism to the end of our lives.

  28. Anonymous5:40 PM

    If you truly believe that you are receiving the Body of Christ, how can one be made ill from this?

  29. Anonymous9:44 PM

    I'm sorry but the last two sources are not correct: we certainly can receive influenza at reception of Holy Communion.

    The Eucharist consists entirely of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, and our Lord cannot contract influenza Himself in His glorified Body.

    However, our Lord is present physically as well as spiritually and there is nothing to prevent molecules of the flu from resting on a Host, just as they might rest on any other object. In other words, once cannot receive the flu IN the Host but one can receive it TOGETHER WITH the Host or ON the Host.

    Our Lord nowhere guarantees that this will not happen, just as He nowhere guarantees that we won't receive the flu anywhere else. When I open my mouth to receive, do I not receive some of the air around the Host? And yet this air is not part of Christ's Body. So we can receive more than the Host when we receive.


  30. Anonymous10:04 PM


    Bishop Henry of Calgary, who has always been a ‘problem child’, has now taken action which has forced the F.S.S.P. to cancel its Masses there.

    I have been informed of the developments every step of the way. He commanded all Communion on the tongue to end in order to prevent the spread of the swine influenza. He included the F.S.S.P. Masses in this. His action is ultra vires ab ovo because a 2004 Instruction of the C.D.W. already stipulates that faithful always have the right to receive in lingua, whether at the T.L.M. or at the N.O.M. Yes, he’s moderator of the liturgy in his see but he cannot override laws of the Holy See regarding the reception of the Sacraments.

    When commanded to distribute Holy Communion in manu, the F.S.S.P. celebrant there suggested instead that, given the risk of the influenza during a pandemic (which, by the way, has been wildly overstated by the C.B.C.), he would cancel distribution of Holy Communion altogether and counsel faithful to make a spiritual Communion instead. I note that, in law, it is the CELEBRANT’s right to decide if Holy Communion should not be distributed for some serious reason. For example, were Satanists to show up in their garb or were many people to be hacking and sneezing during a time of illness, the celebrant could make this choice on his OWN authority.

    But this has little to do with this media-generated fake pandemic. It is merely a way for Bishop Henry to shut down our Mass. How do we know this? Well, if there is a serious risk of contracting this influenza and if the risk of death is high, merely breathing the same air as infected persons incurs a grave risk, and Masses should be cancelled altogether, as was done by the Mexican bishops when this thing started.

    Anyway, Henry actually wrote a letter to the celebrant, telling him that Communion must be made available at his Masses for those who want it. Therefore, spiritual communion was not acceptable and he had to give Communion in the hand.

    When the celebrant was unable to resolve this, his superiors dealt directly with Bishop Henry. Henry has not changed his position and so the F.S.S.P. has cancelled the Masses. The question, of course, is whether or not Bishop Henry will allow the Fraternity to remain in his see. The disadvantage of proving a bishop wrong in law is that he can retaliate by throwing out your society. That's why we need our own international structure.



  31. Anonymous10:04 PM


    Incidentally, there is another matter which has not even been raised here. I was taught that responsible adults, those who can vote and serve in the military, have the authority to DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES what risks they will take. I would not consult Bishop Henry before deciding to bungee-jump or to drive a car too fast. As long as the Church makes clear the risks, what on earth is wrong with allowing responsible adults to decide this matter for themselves and their families? Nobody is forced by Church law to approach the Sacrament. The Canon Law only requires that we receive once per annum and, for a good reason, this no longer need be during the Paschal season (Canon 920, esp. Sect. 2).

    Bishop Henry is a pastor of souls, not of bodies. He is not the Public Health Officer of Calgary and has no M.D. Parents are primarily responsible for their children's health, just as parents and not schools are primarily responsible for children's education. It is for the Bishop only to take reasonable steps to reduce the risk of infection. Cancelling the traditional way of receiving the Blessed Sacrament is not a reasonable step, especially when it just happens to be a violation of ecclesiastical law. It would be another matter entirely if Bishop Henry had warned nobody of perceived risks or the Church had mandated that faithful must receive.

    While it is 'nice' for Bishop Henry to be solicitous for his spiritual subject's health, I suggest that he butt out of the legitimate health jurisdiction of individuals and of parents. We faithful ALSO enjoy moral and legal jurisdiction in some matters.


  32. The Guardian Angel Cathedral in Las Vegas is still saying "in the hand only"

  33. Anonymous1:41 AM

    Dear Tom:

    There are no T.L.M.s in that Diocese anyway, at least not on Sundays. I suggest that people who are stuck there go to the fascinating Italo-Albanian Divine Liturgy or the Ruthenian Divine Liturgy. Both are available there. Why go to the N.O. when you don't have to?


  34. In Canada, they are trying to force Communion in the Paw at the TLM

  35. Of course ,these trendy modern Priest is really far away from the least of holy men of the church!

    How they enjoy their sumptuous breakfast of ham and eggs ect.Do some of these priest ever fast may I asked? Will they go at length to save a soul? Any Father Damien in them?Would they go at length to give a communion to a leper?Do they have that kind of Christ-Love?
    These Priest ,you'll know them better by watching how they live their everyday life!

  36. I was reading the comments - and then recalled stories told by dear Fr. Ted Colleton CSSp of his many years as missionary in Africa.

    He travelled from church to church on his bicycle and when news of his impending arrival was broadcast, people would start walking to church for Mass. Many travelled for days for the privilege of attending Mass. More often than not it would be held outdoors and thousands might be in attendance.

    When I think of that and then think of those who are fussed about receiving the Sacred Host in the hand it makes me wonder if we are worshipping a rite rather than worshipping our Saviour, Jesus Christ. He is present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinty in the Holy Eucharist whether placed in the hand or on the tongue.

    Yes, I prefer to receive on the tongue and am not pleased with the disruption of the practice, but what should mean more to us is obedience to the Ordinary of the diocese, and the knowledge that we in North America are most privileged we may attend Mass daily and receive this most precious gift so as to fill our souls with Him who is our All in all.

    Indeed, let us turn our minds, hearts and prayers to more pressing matters.

  37. Francis Teresa Maria11:42 PM

    The letter is a little bit 'generic' in a sense that it did not mentioned the case of the question - the reason why the communion in the hand is implemented due to AH1NI.

    Carlos, you forgot that in Liturgy the Conference of Bishop of a country or the diocesan bishop has the right to set rules for the good of the local Church.

    Though in some countries the communion of the hand is implement - in encouragement - it doesn't mean that they are banning you to receive holy communion in the tongue.

    Why is it that liturgical questions or liturgical matters in this site is not answered by a competent liturgist. The explanation and the exposition of liturgical catechesis are sometime "out of the way."

    Sorry for expressing such feeling...

  38. Anonymous1:04 AM

    Dear Donna P.:

    I can't agree with all your comments about the means of receiving Holy Communion. I think that how we receive enormously influences how we regard the Blessed Sacrament. We are creatures of spirit *and* flesh. Even our language reflects this fact: some things are said to be 'untouchable'. I think of the hand of God touching the priests' hands at their consecration and then the consecrated hands of the priest touching His holy body and feeding us. In contrast, communicants can have differing attitudes to the Eucharist and some hands are clean, whereas others are not, and so forth. If we behave in a respectful way, this fosters a spirit of respect. We have lost faith in the Eucharist owing to Communion in the hand. It is a main reason why, in one U.S. poll, only 18% of Catholic respondents knew what the Sacred Host is. Many of them, in the additional qq., had not even heard the name 'transubstantiation'. They regarded the Sacred Host as only a symbol of Christ partly because a mere symbol can be handled by all and sundry.

    On another topic, you mentioned Fr. Ted Colleton. Is he still with us? I remember him well from my Toronto pro-life days in the early 1980s. I was the one who told him how to put a krytonite lock on Morgentaler's gate. It took them hours to get it off! How is he? I remember him as a very holy priest.


  39. Isn’t Christ in the species? Why than so apprehensive about the so called N1H1 virus. If only our Faith were that of the mustard seed? Gene546

  40. Grateful Mom4:12 AM

    In my Parish where TLM is always offered, everyone receives Holy Communion in tongue only despite the HINI scare. About the transubstantiation, my son with moderate autism is not very good academically due to his disability, but when I ask him what is meant the changing of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus, he would quickly and clearly answer: "Transubstantiation." If a disabled kid would be able to comprehend this word in God's grace, why can't we?

  41. Anonymous3:54 PM

    To clarify in Calgary - my understanding is that the Bishop suspended the FSSP from publicly celebration of the Mass. The FSSP did not "cancel". In any case, this issue is heating up - bishops and archbishops'illicit disobedience to Rome. I am very much awaiting the Vatican's response...

  42. "Carlos, you forgot that in Liturgy the Conference of Bishop of a country or the diocesan bishop has the right to set rules for the good of the local Church."

    No one is denying that.

    "Though in some countries the communion of the hand is implement - in encouragement - it doesn't mean that they are banning you to receive holy communion in the tongue."

    In what planet have you been lately?

    I know who you are, Mr. Troublemaker. Stop commenting on this blog or else.

  43. Anonymous6:01 PM

    For 3 plus yrs now rec'd communion daily if at all possible. Mega chronic non-contagious illness; however, never made sick by Holy Communion despite receiving almost exclusively on the tongue. And yes, due to big problems w whole wheat hosts even took from the chalice when available. I'll continue taking My Jesus in communion whatever way allowed --as long as I can-- as often as I can until the day I die. All the while hopefully totally respectful of His Beloved Church --praying for the sacredness of this sacrament to be better respected in Church law and in fact.

  44. I think the bishops had a canniption when they saw the photos from Rome which showed the Holy Father's preferred method of distributing Communion to the faithful and they just jumped at this opportunity to nip it in the bud.

    But it should be obvious to all that restricting Communion under both Species and the number of amateurs (EMHC), not to mention getting across the notion that one must be in state of grace, would go a lot further towards limiting the spread of pig flu than this sill measure.

  45. Elizabeth of Canada12:50 AM

    My parents who have been happily married for over 50 years have weathered many storms. Since my father's retirement, it has been beautiful to witness their relationship grow as my father now enjoys the leisure to attend the celebration of the Eucharist with my mother each morning. Since September however in the diocese of London, Ontario, Canada under Bishop Ronald Fabbro has mandated no communion on the tongue. Unfortunately, this measure has been enforced rigorously and without mercy by all the priests who, in all fairness to them, are only being obedient. As I am bi-ritual I invited all my family and relations to attend the Divine Liturgy as celebrated at the Ukrainian Byzantine Catholic Church where the sacred species is still received on the tongue. As beautiful and rich as the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is, it proved too difficult for many of the Roman rite to follow. As a result, many have returned to their parish church where they sit in the pew and make a spiritual communion. My father found that being ostracized from his beloved church where he loved to help the priest serve Mass felt as though he had been "kicked in the stomach." He moped around in silence for days trying to absorb the shock that such a little thing as a virus would mean he and his family would no longer be welcomed in the communion line. After six weeks of the Byzantine rite, he finally returned to the Latin rite. Now it is my mother feels betrayed and abandonned by her husband as she adamantly refuses to receive in the hand and they go their separate ways now to different churches. Did the bishop take into consideration the number of families who would experience discord and division in their own homes because of his decision?
    Words of scripture come to mind. Jesus said what father, no matter how wicked, would give his son a stone if he asked for a loaf of bread or a snake if he requested a fish? If a wicked man loves so, how much more does His Father in heaven. Is it not the primary calling of the priesthood to feed their children? How long does Bishop Fabbro intend to starve his flock? What shepherd neglects the lost sheep no matter how few? My heart is burdened with sorrow. The Eucharist is the core of our faith. The Eucharist is our bread of life. It is not a simple matter of preference; it is a matter of delicate souls sensitive to the awesome majesty of their Creator whom they are about to receive juxtaposed with their profound sense of unworthiness. Think of a virgin on her wedding night welcoming her Bridegroom. This is a mystical union and I fear for bishops who must answer to God. To whom much is given much will be expected.

  46. How remarkable that the bishop could expect such immediate compliance and yet when Redemptionis Sacramentum was released, it was declared Dead on Arrival.

    Your story is so sad. I've known elderly who were daily communicants when they were physically able. Always received on the tongue.

    Then, when they absolutely had to go off to a "Catholic" nursing home their enthusiasm waned as they were forced to "take Communion in the hand or don't take it at all."

    Truly scandalous. Even, perhaps more scandalous than corrupting children because these folks are closer to death.

  47. Brian1:39 PM


    Although not officially part of the diocese of Las Vegas, the TLM is offered at the local SSPX chapel, Our Lady of Victory. After 12 years at the Italo-Albanian and Ruthenian parishes you mentioned, I finally found my way to the traditional Roman rite. Although very appreciative of what I learned from the Eastern rites, I truly longed for the traditional Roman rite. I finally found it and was able to embrace it completely, thanks to the ministry of the SSPX! I can never stop thanking God for this great gift.

  48. Brian1:47 PM


    I'm sorry, in looking over the comments again I see that it was not you who mentioned the Eastern rites available in Las Vegas, you only stated that Guardian Angel Cathedral was still mandating Communion in the hand only. It was Anonymous who suggested trying the Eastern rites. Of course, I warmly invite anyone interested in the TLM to visit Our Lady of Victory, where I am blessed to sing with the choir at Sunday High Mass.

  49. Brian said:
    Although not officially part of the diocese of Las Vegas, the TLM is offered at the local SSPX chapel.

    A friend of the SSPX says Mass there. He receives kidney dialysis several times per week. Please remember Padre Otto in your prayers.

    A Brother in the SSPX returned to his home in Las Vegas a couple of years ago, and after much suffering, passed away. Please remember to pray for this good Brother. Brother Augustine was a Holy Man.

    Would the Padres who read this blog please remember Brother Augustine in a Mass?


  50. Anonymous7:24 AM

    Bishop Henry is a good man. No one can deny that, but on this one he is just WRONG!

  51. Anonymous2:10 PM

    Disappointed Parishioner Said:

    Besides not allowing Holy Communion to be received on the tongue?--are all Eucharistic Ministers abolished? Also, receiving from the Chalice? I wish!! Let's all get back to being able to have Mass offered pre-Vatican II in our churches--the Traditional Latin Mass, "the most beatiful thing this side of HEAVEN."

  52. Anonymous8:09 PM

    If the bishops who have suspended communion on the tongue really believed there was a danger to our health, they'd mandate it!

  53. Anonymous8:53 PM

    This whole issue is such a sad commentary on the (lack of) belief in the True Presence.
    Are we not receiving the very same God Who is keeping us in existence at that very moment and every moment, the One Who holds our life, our health and our welfare in His hand at all times. The same God who could rightfully and justifiably afflict us with any number of other ailments, related or unrelated, before or after communion, including death and we are concerned and worried, that at the very instant of receiving Him, something not according to His Divine Will will happen to us?
    If only the same people were as concerned and careful about being in the state of grace at that moment.

  54. I support this opinion

    some parish continue deny commnion on the tongue and Holy warter removed


Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.


(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!