Skip to main content
I have designated communion on the tongue the 'middle of the wedge' between Protestant and Catholic culture.

Attached below is a good article on some of the practical aspects of this ancient and venerable practice of the Catholic Church.

Courtesy of SSPX.org

Communion on the tongue unsanitary?

November 22, 2013 
District of the US
Opponents of Communion on the tongue often assert that this practice is unsanitary compared to in-the-hand - but what is the reality?

Pastor's Corner for Sunday, November 24

First published in February 2012, we have republished this piece for reflection.
Communion on the tongue is unsanitary. So authoritatively stated an article published in the Australian Catholic Leader by Elizabeth Harrington, the education official for the Liturgy Commission of the Brisbane archdiocese:
…It is awkward for ministers to give communion on the tongue to people who are standing, which is the recommended posture for communion in Australia, and it is unhygienic because it is difficult for ministers to avoid passing saliva on to other communicants.[1]
This statement (often made by in-the-hand proponents) reveals an ignorance of the Roman Church’s traditional practice and the rubrics for the distribution of Holy Communion on the tongue.
In the first place, the communicant is supposed to kneel; obviously exceptions are made for the handicapped, who usually wish they could kneel. Not only does this show the communicants’ humility in receiving their Divine Eucharistic Lord (i.e., God), but this submissive posture also enables giving the Host on the tongue more practically, safely and… hygienically — in all three cases, much more so than Communion in the hand.
Another interesting aspect is that the traditional form of receiving Communion kneeling and on the tongue demonstrates the Roman character of practicality that pervades its namesake liturgical rite, resulting in a reverent and dignified manner of receiving the Bread of Angels, yet easily and efficiently.
The traditional rubrics of the Rituale Romanum[2] prescribe that the priest is to carefully pick up the Host by Its edge between his right thumb and index finger; no other digits may be used to perform this action. As diligently taught in traditional First Communion classes, the communicant is to tilt his head back slightly, open his mouth and extend his tongue a little creating what is often called “the pillow of the tongue”. The priest then easily places the Host on this “pillow” without touching the communicant’s tongue, mouth, or even lips — resulting in an absence of physical contact between the administrator and the communicant.
But with Communion in the hand, full hand-to-hand contact is made between the administrator (usually the ubiquitous Eucharistic Minister) and the communicants, who often have not washed (or sanitized) their hands prior to receiving. Hence with in-the-hand, there is a very real danger of spreading unwanted germs.
The fact is, before the progressivists’ clamor for Communion in the hand (something we might add episcopal conferences did without the Holy See’s approval[3]), the issue of hygiene was never raised concerning the traditional manner of receiving Holy Communion — and this during an era when the hygienic advocates were in full swing to make the world germ free.
The irony of this charge against Communion on the tongue is that those who promote in-the-hand for non-existent hygienic reasons simultaneously encourage the practice of “sharing the cup” (receiving the Precious Blood communally from a chalice) which the Roman Church ceased in ancient timesprecisely due to hygienic concerns (i.e., because of the backwash of saliva that inevitable occurs from a group of people drinking from the same vessel) — which in turn could lead to disdain of this Sacred Mystery.
This topic in fact provides just one more example of how through Holy Mother Church’s traditional practices, she is solicitous for both our spiritual and natural welfare. On the supernatural side, she provides us with a reverential manner in which we poor and unworthy sinners (“Domine non sum dignus” citing the sentiments of the Centurion) may receive Our Lord’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, yet in the natural sphere, in a way that does not jeopardize our bodily health.
Footnotes
1 This is the archdiocesan newspaper and the article was titled “Communion in the Hand” was published on February 12, 2012, in the column, “Liturgy Lines”. It is currently unavailable online without a subscription.
2 Three editions of the traditional Roman Ritual are currently available from Angelus Press, two in English, a pocket-size and Fr. Philip Weller's The Roman Ritual set (which he intended to also act as a catechism for the laity) and one in Spanish.
Cf. Bishop Juan Laise's groundbreaking book, Communion in the Hand: Documents and History and this webpage featuring a video extract from Cardinal Burke which includes many pertinent links about Communion in the hand.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...