Concerning the Suspension of Communion on the Tongue: A Further Response to the Bishop

I made public my letter to the Vicar General of my diocese regarding the temporary suspension of Holy Communion on the Tongue. I am thankful to have received a reply. I will leave off what was said to me, as it was addressed solely to me. However, given that my response is more general in nature, I publish it below:

Dear *******,

Thank you for your reply. 

Two points jump out at me. First regards how much power a bishop actually has in his diocese, and how he is bound to Tradition. Let's just say that we live in a time where Catholics think a reference to "synodality" can change teaching on marriage and the natural order, a footnote in an encyclical can change the gravity of adultery, or that an edit in the Catechism can change what is clearly laid forth in the Bible and Tradition on the morality of the death penalty. This first point I will leave off, because it would take far too much time and effort to delve into. For both of us.

But the second point is this: you never did address whether or not Communion on the tongue has been a health issue in our diocese. I think we both know the answer to that. Safety perhaps is a relative idea. I teach. For the last 8 months I've been stuck in a small room with 20 other people. We all know there are germs everywhere, and that the kids have been seeing multiple people from around the province. Yet I go to work regardless. As a father I need to earn a living to support my wife and 4 children. It's just what dads do. I don't think twice about it. What of our spiritual fathers? I can tell you right now, what I do daily is far riskier than asking a priest to carefully put the Host on my 9-year-old's tongue. In fact, working forty hours a week at a daycare, restaurant, store, manufacturing plant, police station, hospital, dental office (and so forth) are all far riskier than what I have described about a priest giving Holy Communion on the tongue. Why are the priests exempt from any danger, and a most limited danger at that? Most especially since they are to bring us something far greater than a double double, new shoes, or packaged bacon - the very Body and Blood of Our Lord. I wish that Bishop Albert would understand that his sheep have lives to live, risks and all, and that his temporary decision is rather tone-deaf to what already goes on daily. I will only add that the bishop an hour and a half south of Bishop Albert came out with a clear, strong, and, yes, safe letter which is common sense and prudential in regards to Communion on the tongue. My family will travel to his diocese in the meantime to receive. And, it goes without saying, our collection offerings will travel with us.

Alas, I have spoken enough. I do thank you for taking the time to reply. And may our clear disagreements not remove the bond of charity between us that comes only through Our Lord Jesus Christ, "For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

In Jesus and Mary,

Dan Millette 


Popular posts from this blog

Some Concerns with the Exodus 90 Program

Why I Will Not Be Doing Exodus 90 Anytime Soon

On Wimpy Catholicism and a Return to Manly Fasting

Free Printables for Disconnected: The Broken Path

My First SSPX Mass

Breaking Bread 2021 Hymnal - A Review