The real question is whether or not communion hand desecrates the Host. Because we believe that the entire Host, every half, every quarter, every particle is indeed our Blessed Lord, any particles remaining in a person's hand after receiving is still Jesus Christ transubstantiated into bread. The danger presented to me, as I am preparing to come into the Church this Easter vigil, is that many people are brushing our Blessed Lord on their pants and He is now trampled upon, mopped up, and otherwise mistreated. The instance that happened to me today was that a Eucharistic minister blessed me by putting her entire hand on my head. I drew my hand over my head and there were either dandruff or particles on my hand. I rinsed it off in the sacristy sink (the best I could do and understand was proper per the GRM) afterwards, but I have to ask myself if we are not somehow obligated to share this with all parishioners. Anyone care to answer?
Communion on the tongue is an Apostolic tradition. St. Sixtus I (circus 115): "The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord." St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church (330-379): "The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted ONLY in times of persecution." The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared to continue receiving Holy Communion by hand. Even Pope Paul VI: "This method [on the tongue] must be retained." ONLY THE HANDS OF THE PRIEST, WHICH IS CONSECRATED, CAN TOUCH THE CONSECRATED CORPORAL, CONSECRATED CHALICE, AND THE HOLY EUCHARIST. Ave Maria!
"In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen." Source: St. Cyril of Jerusalem (315 - 386), Catechetical Lectures. As we can see it is not a teaching of Vatican II but has been done centuries ago.
Pope Paul VI: "The smoke of hell have entered the Church." Instruction "Memoriale Divini" S.C.para of divine worship, signed by Pope Paul VI on 28 May 1969. Where Monsignor Annibale Bugnini, secretary, deceptively introduced that Communion in the hand also could be received. Annibale Bugnini entered into Freemasonry on April 23, 1963, with the mombre of "Buan".
I believe we can also include some other reason for receiving in the hand. In 2003, the Hong Kong Diocese experienced the epidemic of the SARS and hygiene became an important issue to prevent this disease. For the reason, the diocese stop providing the holy blood and stopped giving communion. I believe this could explain that there is some better reasoning than just being not discipline :) But anyways, for sure kneeling and receiving communion in the tongue is for sure by far the most humbling encounter with God that I can ever have.
One should also look at the weight and direction of a teaching as well. The Church still teaches that on the tongue is much much preferred but right now there are bigger battles to be fought. I see communion in the hand being accepted so easily as a symptom of a much deeper issue of Faith Crisis in the Church.
I understand when you say bigger battles must be fought but as a Catholic, the Eucharist is a sacrament, probably the most significant one, and although it doesn't seem to have direct detrimental implications, I would argue that those seemingly small details do in fact carry serious implications in the church. Belief in the Eucharist as the real presence is one of the central and unique aspects to the faith, and there has been a dramatic decrease in that belief along with an enormous rise in reception in the hand.
to me, the permission granted to our bishops takes away the part of the real meaning of the Eucharist, (I believe that was pushed by cardinal manoney) if I'am not mistaken, one of the very first things Pope Benedict XVl "mandated" when he was chosen, was to receive the Body and Blood of our Blessed Lord Jesuschrist on your knees and in your mouth, I do what he says, on my knees and in my mouth.
The Catholics in China (Diocese of Shanghai) used to receive communion in hand, but when the country was subjected to H1N1 influenza (2009) the parishioners were asked to receive communion in hand. Then after a year, the parishioners could receive either by hand or by tongue.
When I went through RCIA they specifically taught us to receive in the hand. Someone in the class mentioned the other option, but our instructor said they're trying to go in the direction of the hand. Since we do have an option, my preference is the hand for two reasons. One, I can see the devotional teaching we had to make our hands like a throne for Jesus. Jesus holds us in the palm of His hand and in some mysterious way, we hold Him in ours. Please correct me if that last part is heresy. Second and most importantly, at my parish we have tons of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion. These are not priests or even deacons, but regular people like me. If they can hold the Eucharist in their unconsecrated hands, what's the difference if the rest of us do? They would have to stop all people with unconsecrated hands from touching the Eucharist. I would love to hear a response on this second reason in particular if there is anyone who would know why it's permissible for some unconsecrated hands to touch, but not others. Thank you. Also I understand the abuses because at Easter vigil one year I and several other people witnessed one of the extraordinary ministers accidentally drop one of the Hosts on the floor. We all thought he didn't realize it so we started calling out to him. He looked down and said "I know I know," but just kept going and didn't pick up the Host until he noticed people getting very upset. Then he bent over, picked up the Host and put the Host in his pants pocket.
That's a very weak answer on receiving Holy Communion on the hand. Holy Communion was and still is only permitted with certain grounds. There's about 7 grounds which have to be met and if there not met by the communicant then it is not allowed.
St. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL. "Fear not my voice which is the voice of the triune God, who sent me to speak in his holy name for God must be, I not only loved but also respected and obeyed all consecrated and religious. they have not obeyed, they have had and have to pay their debts and mistakes in this life or in purgatory, not counting those who have gone to hell, God does not play nor can hide one behind the other, each is responsible for his actions, words, thoughts and omissions. in the Holy Catholic Church, obedience has always been a very important virtue, esteemed and practiced, but in the latter, is in decline for the rebellion and presumption. All this, work of satan and his demons, as is its seal, which has printed deception and fraud communion in the hand in the Catholic Church and all who give and take are wrong with a false obedience to the church and its hierarchy, because they are the most responsible for all who are committing sacrilege, and have roiled the fervor and devotion and worship the august Sacrament. It is a sacrilege leso that men who have anointed their hands by the Bishop, touch the Sacred Body of Christ with his own hands. The sacred is sacred and the profane is profane, but the devil has gotten them many, that everything is as sacred. And with this wrong teaching, he has lost respect and adoration to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. Everything is diabolical plan well prepared for hell. If the faithful and priests they saw with their eyes the face, what happens in every sacrilegious communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, I sure would not. When a priest puts the Sacred Host in the hand of a sinner who does not have them anointed by the ordinary, demons, there are around the priest several who know them gives way, jump for joy and make parties, and they go behind which he has taken in hand, to continue tempting him and deceiving him. And the priest who gave him point somewhat in their favor, for the day they can harass his soul in the particular judgment. And Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is derided in his painful passion, all this, he suffers mystically. And the guardian angels of the priest and the communicant, like all others who are around them with the saints in heaven, weeping sore and ashamed. I Miguel, I am the angel in charge of bringing souls to heaven, who have already finished their purification in purgatory, and in truth I tell you that there are many souls of priests and faithful, who gave and took communion in the hand, pudiendolo have avoided, giving it and receiving it in the mouth, voluntarily and freely without missing obedience ....... "message given on 2 October 2007. Spain to Little Soul.
Is it licit to kneel and receive Communion on the tongue in the parish where they practice giving in the hand? Can the priest refuse to give Communion on the tongue?
A priest should not refuse you if you do that. It's actually a horrible act not to give communion for that reason. If any priest does this, you should contact or bishop and also find another parish. Don't change your stance because a priest doesn't like tradition and respect.
Liberty Prime Thank you. My parish is traditional, but I heard stories about modernist parishes where all kind of stuff can happen, so now I know what to do. L.I.C.
+standev1 No the priest cannot refuse you communion on the tongue. Now, does it happen? Yes but rarely. But the priest is not supposed to refuse communion on the tongue. You have the right to receive either way, your choice.
In one diocese I've lived in, the bishop recommended receiving on the hand due to risk of illness spreading (during cold & flu season.) One priest then refused to give the Eucharist on the tongue due to this. Is that licit?
If the bishop seems to be in favour of reception of Communion in the hand then the handiest of excuses is to claim that they are trying to prevent the spread of a virus; in our diocese here down under the bishop issued a pastoral letter during an N1H1 scare a few years ago urging the communicants to receive in the hand. To the best of my knowledge this pastoral request was never cancelled after the viral scare had passed.
Sorry to disagree with you guys badly on this one! I think your answer here is not "Catholic" but "Americanized" at best. As A European I can tell you that communion in the UK and across much of Europe today, outside Rome, the Bishops encourage Communion on the hand and it is the norm in almost all parishes here today. Indeed from day 1 back in the late 1970s in Britain, nearly all clerics advised their parishioners to take it on the hand! I recall my own worry at the time that it may be disrespectful? But after suitable prayer and listening to various sides I was converted! Far from being disrespectful it harkens back to the Apostolic breaking of bread and reality that Jesus is in the Transubstantiated Bread. Lastly I should respectfully point out that this entire argument is basically ludicrous! As I once pointed out to two very important clerics . . . what does it matter if you receive the Eucharist on your hand or your tongue. . the only thing Jesus is interested in. . is how you receive him into your heart!!!! We are not a church of Pharisees that are only interested in form and we must keep away from the nitty-gritty arguments that exists today as they did in the past but which Our Lord was so angry to warn us about!
Communion on the hand is not protestant? Indeed what does that mean?? Communion was allowed to be taken on the hand by the will of the Bishops, Magisterium and Pope since the late1970/early 1980s. In Uk and Europe it is quite normal to see various churches - the majority in fact allow it. Even in Rome it is permitted variously. The idea that it is "Protestant" is uncertain because the RC Church and many protestant churches are very near in theology. Whilst the issue of transubstantiation remains a RC one so does the authority of the Pope and when a pope(S) with his Magisterium allows something in the RC Church, all the FAITHFUL should accept it. Therefore to take Communion on the hand is not Protestant because it is now Roman Catholic! Many in the Americas? I presume that is where you are located? seem to misunderstand the authority of the Bishop of Rome and far from suggesting that the host in the hand is protestant . .would understand that in history . .especially in the early church the host was always taken in the hand . . .
Firstly, this planet is part of God's creation and is in no way dirty. Neither the 'ground' or the air. Jesus shed parts of his body on the ground all throughout his life here and that didn't defile those body parts the least. So why, in the name of reason, would it all of a sudden bad after the ascension? Secondly, the consecrated host never ever touches the hand of the recipient, or even the tongue. This would be perfectly obvious if people had just a tad more understanding of science.
Traditionally, laypeople weren't allowed to touch the Host with our hands. Only clergy, whose hands are annointed and consecrated should touch the Host. However, during the very early times of Christianity, where the type of bread used is different to which we are using now, people received in the palm(and only the palm) of their right hands(never the left), but they are not allowed to feed themselves. Instead they lower their head to the level of their palms to receive the Sacrament. The Sacrament of our Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity isn't just "something". The Eucharist is Christ Himself, second Person of the Holy Trinity, Who is seated at the right of the Heavenly Father. The Eucharist is the Person Who will save us from eternal damnation, and Who will judge us after our death. I think your comment which addresses our Lord merely as "something" already proves how receiving Communion in the hand(assuming you practice so) can lead people into less respect and reverence of the Eucharist.
Traditionally, laypeople weren't allowed to touch the Host with our hands. Only clergy, whose hands are annointed and consecrated should touch the Host. However, during the very early times of Christianity, where the type of bread used is different to which we are using now, people received in the palm(and only the palm) of their right hands(never the left), but they are not allowed to feed themselves. Instead they lower their head to the level of their palms to receive the Sacrament. The Sacrament of our Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity isn't just "something". The Eucharist is Christ Himself, second Person of the Holy Trinity, Who is seated at the right of the Heavenly Father. The Eucharist is the Person Who will save us from eternal damnation, and Who will judge us after our death. I think your comment which addresses our Lord merely as "something" already proves how receiving Communion in the hand(assuming you practice so) can lead people into less respect and reverence of the Eucharist.
Since there is no evidence in the Bible or from any early Church Fathers from the first or second century that Mary was 1) sinless, 2) assumed into heaven, or 3) to be communicated with in direct prayer, Catholics are *forced* to admit that they either need to accept new revelation/inspiration or to admit that the doctrine was of men and not of God.
![[Live] : ONE 169 วันนี้!! "อนาโตลี vs อูมาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3YZVWuFJg/mqdefault.jpg)
![ปฏิเสธไม่ไหว (Crush on you) - LIPTA feat. No One Else [TEASER MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VC689EgdSIw/mqdefault.jpg)
The real question is whether or not communion hand desecrates the Host. Because we believe that the entire Host, every half, every quarter, every particle is indeed our Blessed Lord, any particles remaining in a person's hand after receiving is still Jesus Christ transubstantiated into bread. The danger presented to me, as I am preparing to come into the Church this Easter vigil, is that many people are brushing our Blessed Lord on their pants and He is now trampled upon, mopped up, and otherwise mistreated. The instance that happened to me today was that a Eucharistic minister blessed me by putting her entire hand on my head. I drew my hand over my head and there were either dandruff or particles on my hand. I rinsed it off in the sacristy sink (the best I could do and understand was proper per the GRM) afterwards, but I have to ask myself if we are not somehow obligated to share this with all parishioners. Anyone care to answer?
Communion on the tongue is an Apostolic tradition.
St. Sixtus I (circus 115): "The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord."
St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church (330-379): "The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted ONLY in times of persecution."
The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared to continue receiving Holy Communion by hand.
Even Pope Paul VI: "This method [on the tongue] must be retained."
ONLY THE HANDS OF THE PRIEST, WHICH IS CONSECRATED, CAN TOUCH THE CONSECRATED CORPORAL, CONSECRATED CHALICE, AND THE HOLY EUCHARIST.
Ave Maria!
"In approaching therefore, come not with your wrists extended, or your fingers spread; but make your left hand a throne for the right, as for that which is to receive a King. And having hollowed your palm, receive the Body of Christ, saying over it, Amen." Source: St. Cyril of Jerusalem (315 - 386), Catechetical Lectures. As we can see it is not a teaching of Vatican II but has been done centuries ago.
... and kneeling (except for those who can't).
I prefer the Holy Eucharist on the tongue. Please speak of historical reasons for the Eucharist on the tongue before taking it in the hand.
Pope Paul VI: "The smoke of hell have entered the Church." Instruction "Memoriale Divini" S.C.para of divine worship, signed by Pope Paul VI on 28 May 1969. Where Monsignor Annibale Bugnini, secretary, deceptively introduced that Communion in the hand also could be received. Annibale Bugnini entered into Freemasonry on April 23, 1963, with the mombre of "Buan".
I believe we can also include some other reason for receiving in the hand.
In 2003, the Hong Kong Diocese experienced the epidemic of the SARS and hygiene became an important issue to prevent this disease. For the reason, the diocese stop providing the holy blood and stopped giving communion.
I believe this could explain that there is some better reasoning than just being not discipline :)
But anyways, for sure kneeling and receiving communion in the tongue is for sure by far the most humbling encounter with God that I can ever have.
One should also look at the weight and direction of a teaching as well. The Church still teaches that on the tongue is much much preferred but right now there are bigger battles to be fought. I see communion in the hand being accepted so easily as a symptom of a much deeper issue of Faith Crisis in the Church.
I understand when you say bigger battles must be fought but as a Catholic, the Eucharist is a sacrament, probably the most significant one, and although it doesn't seem to have direct detrimental implications, I would argue that those seemingly small details do in fact carry serious implications in the church. Belief in the Eucharist as the real presence is one of the central and unique aspects to the faith, and there has been a dramatic decrease in that belief along with an enormous rise in reception in the hand.
No more new inspired words from God? Tell that to the Stigmata s!
We are not worthy to take communion in the hand!
to me, the permission granted to our bishops takes away the part of the real meaning of the Eucharist, (I believe that was pushed by cardinal manoney) if I'am not mistaken, one of the very first things Pope Benedict XVl "mandated" when he was chosen, was to receive the Body and Blood of our Blessed Lord Jesuschrist on your knees and in your mouth, I do what he says, on my knees and in my mouth.
The Catholics in China (Diocese of Shanghai) used to receive communion in hand, but when the country was subjected to H1N1 influenza (2009) the parishioners were asked to receive communion in hand. Then after a year, the parishioners could receive either by hand or by tongue.
Communion in the hand was started by Martin Luther.
When I went through RCIA they specifically taught us to receive in the hand. Someone in the class mentioned the other option, but our instructor said they're trying to go in the direction of the hand. Since we do have an option, my preference is the hand for two reasons. One, I can see the devotional teaching we had to make our hands like a throne for Jesus. Jesus holds us in the palm of His hand and in some mysterious way, we hold Him in ours. Please correct me if that last part is heresy. Second and most importantly, at my parish we have tons of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion. These are not priests or even deacons, but regular people like me. If they can hold the Eucharist in their unconsecrated hands, what's the difference if the rest of us do? They would have to stop all people with unconsecrated hands from touching the Eucharist. I would love to hear a response on this second reason in particular if there is anyone who would know why it's permissible for some unconsecrated hands to touch, but not others. Thank you.
Also I understand the abuses because at Easter vigil one year I and several other people witnessed one of the extraordinary ministers accidentally drop one of the Hosts on the floor. We all thought he didn't realize it so we started calling out to him. He looked down and said "I know I know," but just kept going and didn't pick up the Host until he noticed people getting very upset. Then he bent over, picked up the Host and put the Host in his pants pocket.
That's a very weak answer on receiving Holy Communion on the hand.
Holy Communion was and still is only permitted with certain grounds. There's about 7 grounds which have to be met and if there not met by the communicant then it is not allowed.
St. ARCHANGEL MICHAEL. "Fear not my voice which is the voice of the triune God, who sent me to speak in his holy name for God must be, I not only loved but also respected and obeyed all consecrated and religious. they have not obeyed, they have had and have to pay their debts and mistakes in this life or in purgatory, not counting those who have gone to hell, God does not play nor can hide one behind the other, each is responsible for his actions, words, thoughts and omissions. in the Holy Catholic Church, obedience has always been a very important virtue, esteemed and practiced, but in the latter, is in decline for the rebellion and presumption. All this, work of satan and his demons, as is its seal, which has printed deception and fraud communion in the hand in the Catholic Church and all who give and take are wrong with a false obedience to the church and its hierarchy, because they are the most responsible for all who are committing sacrilege, and have roiled the fervor and devotion and worship the august Sacrament. It is a sacrilege leso that men who have anointed their hands by the Bishop, touch the Sacred Body of Christ with his own hands. The sacred is sacred and the profane is profane, but the devil has gotten them many, that everything is as sacred. And with this wrong teaching, he has lost respect and adoration to Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. Everything is diabolical plan well prepared for hell. If the faithful and priests they saw with their eyes the face, what happens in every sacrilegious communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, I sure would not. When a priest puts the Sacred Host in the hand of a sinner who does not have them anointed by the ordinary, demons, there are around the priest several who know them gives way, jump for joy and make parties, and they go behind which he has taken in hand, to continue tempting him and deceiving him. And the priest who gave him point somewhat in their favor, for the day they can harass his soul in the particular judgment. And Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament is derided in his painful passion, all this, he suffers mystically. And the guardian angels of the priest and the communicant, like all others who are around them with the saints in heaven, weeping sore and ashamed. I Miguel, I am the angel in charge of bringing souls to heaven, who have already finished their purification in purgatory, and in truth I tell you that there are many souls of priests and faithful, who gave and took communion in the hand, pudiendolo have avoided, giving it and receiving it in the mouth, voluntarily and freely without missing obedience ....... "message given on 2 October 2007. Spain to Little Soul.
Is it licit to kneel and receive Communion on the tongue in the parish where they practice giving in the hand? Can the priest refuse to give Communion on the tongue?
A priest should not refuse you if you do that. It's actually a horrible act not to give communion for that reason.
If any priest does this, you should contact or bishop and also find another parish. Don't change your stance because a priest doesn't like tradition and respect.
Liberty Prime Thank you. My parish is traditional, but I heard stories about modernist parishes where all kind of stuff can happen, so now I know what to do.
L.I.C.
+standev1 No the priest cannot refuse you communion on the tongue. Now, does it happen? Yes but rarely. But the priest is not supposed to refuse communion on the tongue. You have the right to receive either way, your choice.
In one diocese I've lived in, the bishop recommended receiving on the hand due to risk of illness spreading (during cold & flu season.) One priest then refused to give the Eucharist on the tongue due to this. Is that licit?
If the bishop seems to be in favour of reception of Communion in the hand then the handiest of excuses is to claim that they are trying to prevent the spread of a virus; in our diocese here down under the bishop issued a pastoral letter during an N1H1 scare a few years ago urging the communicants to receive in the hand. To the best of my knowledge this pastoral request was never cancelled after the viral scare had passed.
This expert should really be a Protestant. He has very little catholic fibre.
Sorry to disagree with you guys badly on this one! I think your answer here is not "Catholic" but "Americanized" at best. As A European I can tell you that communion in the UK and across much of Europe today, outside Rome, the Bishops encourage Communion on the hand and it is the norm in almost all parishes here today. Indeed from day 1 back in the late 1970s in Britain, nearly all clerics advised their parishioners to take it on the hand! I recall my own worry at the time that it may be disrespectful? But after suitable prayer and listening to various sides I was converted! Far from being disrespectful it harkens back to the Apostolic breaking of bread and reality that Jesus is in the Transubstantiated Bread. Lastly I should respectfully point out that this entire argument is basically ludicrous! As I once pointed out to two very important clerics . . . what does it matter if you receive the Eucharist on your hand or your tongue. . the only thing Jesus is interested in. . is how you receive him into your heart!!!! We are not a church of Pharisees that are only interested in form and we must keep away from the nitty-gritty arguments that exists today as they did in the past but which Our Lord was so angry to warn us about!
Communion on the hand is Protestant
Communion on the hand is not protestant? Indeed what does that mean?? Communion was allowed to be taken on the hand by the will of the Bishops, Magisterium and Pope since the late1970/early 1980s. In Uk and Europe it is quite normal to see various churches - the majority in fact allow it. Even in Rome it is permitted variously. The idea that it is "Protestant" is uncertain because the RC Church and many protestant churches are very near in theology. Whilst the issue of transubstantiation remains a RC one so does the authority of the Pope and when a pope(S) with his Magisterium allows something in the RC Church, all the FAITHFUL should accept it. Therefore to take Communion on the hand is not Protestant because it is now Roman Catholic! Many in the Americas? I presume that is where you are located? seem to misunderstand the authority of the Bishop of Rome and far from suggesting that the host in the hand is protestant . .would understand that in history . .especially in the early church the host was always taken in the hand . . .
Firstly, this planet is part of God's creation and is in no way dirty. Neither the 'ground' or the air. Jesus shed parts of his body on the ground all throughout his life here and that didn't defile those body parts the least. So why, in the name of reason, would it all of a sudden bad after the ascension?
Secondly, the consecrated host never ever touches the hand of the recipient, or even the tongue. This would be perfectly obvious if people had just a tad more understanding of science.
How is touching the Eucharist with your hand less reverent? Why would anyone let a priest put something in their mouth?
Traditionally, laypeople weren't allowed to touch the Host with our hands. Only clergy, whose hands are annointed and consecrated should touch the Host. However, during the very early times of Christianity, where the type of bread used is different to which we are using now, people received in the palm(and only the palm) of their right hands(never the left), but they are not allowed to feed themselves. Instead they lower their head to the level of their palms to receive the Sacrament.
The Sacrament of our Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity isn't just "something". The Eucharist is Christ Himself, second Person of the Holy Trinity, Who is seated at the right of the Heavenly Father. The Eucharist is the Person Who will save us from eternal damnation, and Who will judge us after our death. I think your comment which addresses our Lord merely as "something" already proves how receiving Communion in the hand(assuming you practice so) can lead people into less respect and reverence of the Eucharist.
Traditionally, laypeople weren't allowed to touch the Host with our hands. Only clergy, whose hands are annointed and consecrated should touch the Host. However, during the very early times of Christianity, where the type of bread used is different to which we are using now, people received in the palm(and only the palm) of their right hands(never the left), but they are not allowed to feed themselves. Instead they lower their head to the level of their palms to receive the Sacrament.
The Sacrament of our Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity isn't just "something". The Eucharist is Christ Himself, second Person of the Holy Trinity, Who is seated at the right of the Heavenly Father. The Eucharist is the Person Who will save us from eternal damnation, and Who will judge us after our death. I think your comment which addresses our Lord merely as "something" already proves how receiving Communion in the hand(assuming you practice so) can lead people into less respect and reverence of the Eucharist.
Since there is no evidence in the Bible or from any early Church Fathers from the first or second century that Mary was 1) sinless, 2) assumed into heaven, or 3) to be communicated with in direct prayer, Catholics are *forced* to admit that they either need to accept new revelation/inspiration or to admit that the doctrine was of men and not of God.