A corporal work of mercy.

A corporal work of mercy.
Click on photo for this corporal work of mercy!

Friday 5 August 2016

Toronto parish of St. Leo's Mimico denies Holy Communion on the tongue

All the new marble and art work and beautification of a what had been a dirty, dilapidated, unworthy and terribly wreckovated Toronto church, means absolutely nothing. 

As much effort that was put into this has become worthless. Worthless if the liturgy is not worthy. As worthless as Canon Law and the Instructions from the Church, such as Redemptionis Sacramentum, as when a priest decides on his own what he will follow. His own clericalism, pride and modernist mindset.

"You denied me Communion," said the parishioner, a man known to me for at least a decade. "No," he replied, "I offered and you rejected Communion." 

This after the Communicant, who presented himself at the end of the Communion line with his little daughter in tow, knelt and put out his tongue to receive the Lord. 

This is clericalism. It is arrogance and a violation of the Law to dismiss the rights of the faithful. But with our current Pope, who cares about the Law? This is the Francis effect in the peripheries. The smelly sheep mean nothing to these men.


The renovation above is but a shell and fraud if this kind of abominable un-priestly behaviour continues.

There were twenty people at the Mass this morning and the father and his little daughter were the youngest. He was denied Communion on the tongue and told it was be "his choice," if he never came back. 

This generation of priests have no fruit to show. It is all a facade, just like much of what you see above.

This issue has been addressed previously on this blog, so many times and it keeps coming back. Within the last year, a similar situation happened at St. Pius X Church on Bloor Street, not far from St. Leo's, when another faithful Catholic was harassed over Holy Communion on the tongue and kneeling.


Fathers, is this what it takes to stop this? Do you have to be publicly "outed" to get it through your heads that you cannot do this?

It is not acceptable. It is scandalous and clericalist.

Far be it from me to target every priest with this statement, not all of you to be sure, some of you are friends and acquaintances so please forgive me -- but the rot from the Pocock, Carter and Ambrozic eras has a stench to it of effeminacy, modernism, clericalism and Arianism that is nothing more than a pussification of the priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It needs to be lanced no matter how putrid the smell.   


You will be held accountable for these games and you may even end up in Hell for it. 

Catholic people, do not let these clericalists and liturgical fascists manipulate you.

Oh, he'll be calling; you can count on it; and the last memory the little girl will have of this parish is to have this priest tell her father, "I don't care if you here for Mass anymore.

After 50 years of priesthood Father? Surely, you can do better than that.


The GIRM is clear in its instruction. I'd encourage those concerned to speak to the priest or archdiocese.

I thank the Director of Communications, Neil MacCarthy, for the public statement, affirming what the GIRM states. Clearly, the Cardinal and Chancellor, in spite of the many, many problems on their desks, don't need this. 

Priests of Toronto, smarten up! 

The laity do not need your shenanigans!

With everything else going on, does Cardinal Collins or the Chancellor, Father Camilleri really need to deal with this kind of thing!

From the General Instruction on the Roman Missal (Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite)
161. If Communion is given only under the species of bread, the Priest raises the host slightly and shows it to each, saying, The Body of Christ. THE COMMUNICANT REPLIES, AMEN, AND RECEIVES THE SACRAMENT [EITHER] ON THE TONGUE,or... As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or she consumes the whole of it.


Anonymous said...

GIRM paragraphs 160-161(EMPHASIS ADDED)


161. If Communion is given only under the species of bread, the Priest raises the host
slightly and shows it to each, saying, The Body of Christ. THE COMMUNICANT REPLIES, AMEN, AND RECEIVES THE SACRAMENT [EITHER] ON THE TONGUE,or... As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or
she consumes the whole of it.

Been there; done that. E-mailed and hard copied these paragraphs when we encountered problems. I sometimes daydream about the possibility of priests being fired.

Ana Milan said...

This priest is in defiance of Christ's instruction to His Apostles to "Feed my Sheep". Receiving Holy Communion on the tongue was the requirement prior to VII & only afterwards did there become an option to receive it in the hand but, even then, in a certain way before going back to one's seat. This instruction is rarely practised as most people shove the Sacred Host into their mouths & start chewing it on their way back to their pew & sit down, instead of kneeling & offering Post Communion prayers until the Host gradually dissolves in their mouths.

Even recently I had to speak to our priest for telling First Communicants that it was a meal & for allowing irreverent behaviour by both adults & children while waiting for Holy Mass to begin. He did make amends the following week & the response has been very good, but it does show a great lack of formation in the seminaries when such attitudes prevail amongst our clergy. I hope his Bishop speaks firmly to him and, if not, the Cardinal.

Sandpiper said...

The momentum is building, Vox. The modernists will implode one day. This is some serious scholarship:


Anonymous said...

Hmmm! Just to let you know that the National Catholic Reporter did a hit on you this week in their rag of a paper. Their was a column on the back page entitled. ; Self-appointed theo-bloggers are true Schismatics. Written by Phyllis Kagano. She attacks you not by name and defends the pour victim Thomas Rosica and his heresies. This week's July 29-August 11,2016 edition right there on the bottom of back page. It almost takes up half the page. Just thought you might make a comment on it next week. Thanks and keep up the good work.

Vox Cantoris said...

Thanks! I think that was the online screed a few weeks ago. Now she gets to decide on deaconettes.

Peter Lamb said...

Communion in the Hand:
Saint Thomas Aquinas:
"The dispensing of Christ's body belongs to the priest for three reasons. First, because ... he consecrates in the person of Christ ... Secondly, because the priest is the appointed intermediary between God and the people, hence as it belongs to him to offer the people's gifts to God, so it belongs to him to deliver the consecrated gifts to the people. Thirdly, because out of reverence toward this sacrament nothing touches it but what is consecrated, hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands, for touching this sacrament. Hence it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it, except from necessity — for instance, if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency."

Father Luigi Villa:
"With the Instruction, “Memorial Domini”, Paul VI authorized the Episcopal Conferences to grant the distribution of Communion in the hand. It was another sacrilegious act!
With the Instruction “Fidei Custos”, Paul VI, in 1969, authorized the “laity” to distribute Holy Communion, counter to the mission that Jesus had reserved for the Apostles and the Clergy."

Saint Hermenegild:
King Hermenegild, son of Leovigild king of the Visigoths, was converted, from the Arian heresy, to the Catholic faith, by the preaching of the venerable Leander, Bishop of Seville, one of my oldest and dearest friends. His father, who continued in the Arian heresy, did his utmost, both by promises, and threats, to induce him to apostatise. But Hermenegild returned him ever the same answer, that he never could abandon the true faith, after having once known it. The father, in a fit of displeasure, deprived him not only of his right to the throne, but of everything he possessed. And when even this failed to break the energy of his soul, he had him put into close confinement with chains on his neck and hands ...
It was the Feast of Easter. At an early hour of the night, when all was still, his wicked father sent an Arian Bishop to him, with this message, that if he would receive Communion from his hands, (the Communion of a sacrilegious consecration!) he should be restored to favour. True to his Creator, the man of God gave a merited reproof to the Arian Bishop, and, with holy indignation, rejected his sinful offer ... The Arian father raged, and straightway sent his lictors, bidding them repair to the prison of the unflinching Confessor of the Lord, and murder him on the spot. They obeyed; they entered the prison; they cleft his skull with a sword;... Miracles soon followed, whereby heaven testified to the true glory of Hermenegild; for during the night, there was heard sweet music nigh to the body of the King and Martyr,--King indeed, because he was a Martyr. It is said that lights were seen at the same time burning in the prison. The Faithful were led, by these signs, to revere the body, as being that of a martyr. As to the wicked father, he repented for having imbrued his hands in his son's blood; but his repentance was not unto salvation, inasmuch as, whilst acknowledging the Catholic Faith to be the true one, he had not the courage to embrace it, for he feared the displeasure of his subjects. When in his last sickness, and at the point of death, he commended his son Reccared, a heretic, to the care of Leander the Bishop, whom he had hitherto persecuted, but from whom he now asked, that he would do for this son what he had, by his exhortations, done for Hermenegild. Having made this request, he died, and was succeeded, on the throne, by Reccared, who taking, not his wicked father, but his martyred brother, as his model, he abandoned the impious Arian heresy, and led the whole Visigoth nation to the true Faith. He would not allow any man to serve in his armies, who dared to continue the enemy of the God of hosts by heresy."
(From the book of the Dialogues of Saint Gregory, Pope.)

Mark Thomas said...

"This is the Francis effect in the peripheries."

How is that the Pope Francis Effect? Nonsense about priests having refused to administer Holy Communion on the tongue has been reported for decades.

I have not seen every Papal Mass, but from what I've seen (and heard...a lot of Latin and Gregorian Chant), if each priest offered Sunday Mass in imitation of Pope Francis, then we would be on the way to uplifting celebrations of the Novus Ordo.

35 seconds of Holy Communion at a Papal Mass offered by Pope Francis. His Holiness administered Holy Communion via intinction.` (Cryptic...here come the Argentinian videos.)



Mark Thomas

rubyroad said...

Mark Thomas-He doesn't genuflect!

Vox Cantoris said...

Mark, this is indeed the FrancisEffect. No respect for Law.

Look at the foot-washing disaster as an example. He did not obey the law as a Cardinal and flouted it as Pope. He does not genuflect at Mass but he grovels to wash feet.

He has mocked those bishops and cardinals who uphold the Law.

He is a poor example for a parish priest!

Anonymous said...

Ana, just out of curiosity how are things overall with the Church in Spain? Is there the same trend elsewhere of younger priests and seminarians leaning more traditional and orthodox, or at least some of them? Spain was one of the most gloriously Catholic nations for centuries until the 1970s or so, and it is one of the places on Earth I most wish for a restoration of the Faith.

Unknown said...

That poor man needs to get himself out of that parish, and do so fast. On a side note, what kind of priest would go so far as to discourage this reverent and beautiful way to receive Communion? I can tell you what kind of priest - the kind who has lost faith in and love for the Jesus present in the Sacred Host. That is the only explanation for this coldness of heart.

DJR said...

Mark Thomas said... 35 seconds of Holy Communion at a Papal Mass offered by Pope Francis. His Holiness administered Holy Communion via intinction.` (Cryptic...here come the Argentinian videos.)


Not sure what's "cryptic" about it, but here's an "Argentinian video."

Disclaimer: SV site.


Dan said...

Sandpiper: "The modernists will implode one day."

I think so too, but I don't think that this means the FSSP and the SPPX will pick up many of those discouraged Catholics left after the implosion. I think the Church is headed for seeming irrelevance. Sad...

Peter Lamb said...

This excellent video of Bishop Schneider on Communion in the hand:

Mark Thomas said...

Vox said..."Mark, this is indeed the FrancisEffect. No respect for Law. He is a poor example for a parish priest!"

Vox, I don't believe that the priest in question had drawn his inspiration from His Holiness Pope Francis. Stories about priests who have refused to administer Holy Communion on the tongue existed long before the current Pontificate.

From what I've seen from Papal Masses, a priest who claims to follow Pope Francis' lead in regard to liturgy would not oppose the administration of Holy Communion on the tongue. A priest who follows Pope Francis' liturgical lead would incorporate the Benedict arrangement, Latin prayers, and Gregorian Chant into Mass.

I would think that, in one way after another, Pope Francis is a fine example for a parish priest to embrace. To speak for myself, Pope Francis has inspired me many in ways to become...well, attempt to, as I have, unfortunately, continued to sin...a better Catholic.

I view Pope Francis as a holy, humble, merciful, and peaceful child of God. To me, that is the authentic "Francis Effect."


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Vox said..."Look at the foot-washing disaster as an example. He did not obey the law as a Cardinal and flouted it as Pope."

Vox, I noted the following several months ago on your blog:


Boston Globe, March 19, 2005

O'Malley to wash women's feet in rite

Consults Vatican, changes policy

"(Archbishop) O'Malley's spokeswoman said yesterday that, as he promised last year, the archbishop had consulted with Vatican officials about his practice of washing the feet only of men on Holy Thursday, a ritual that imitates Jesus's washing of the feet of his disciples at the Last Supper.

"The Vatican said, according to the spokeswoman, that O'Malley could wash women's feet, as is the practice of many priests, including O'Malley's predecessor, Cardinal Bernard F. Law.

"O'Malley promised to consult with Rome, and yesterday his spokeswoman said the Congregation for Divine Worship, which oversees liturgical practices, had suggested the archbishop make whatever decision he thought was best for Boston.

''The Congregation [for Divine Worship] affirmed the liturgical requirement that only the feet of men be washed at the Holy Thursday ritual."

"However, the Congregation did ''provide for the archbishop to make a pastoral decision."

Catholic News Agency, March 22, 2005 A.D.

"According to the archbishop’s spokeswoman, Ann Carter, the Congregation for Divine Worship “affirmed the liturgical requirement that only the feet of men be washed at the Holy Thursday ritual."

"However, it said the archbishop could make a pastoral decision that is best suited for his diocese."

Perhaps during his days in Argentina, our future Pope had consulted the Congregation for Divine Worship and had received a reply in line with the reply that then-Archbishop O'Malley had received.

All that I can do is report the above.


Mark Thomas

Vox Cantoris said...

Perhaps he did, and if so; he should have released a statement as in Boston so that there was no scandal.

Therefore, since there was no statement, I will stand by the fact that he snubbed liturgical law for perhaps, decades!

Anonymous said...

Folks, let's be honest, we cannot blame this on Pope Francis. The communion battles have been going on for decades, with accounts and pictures all over the web of priests denying communion to people (including children, and there is one pathetic one even of a little girl in her first communion dress kneeling and waiting, and the priest ignores her). Cases of priests jerking and pulling people's arms (assault), including women, to force them to rise from their knees.

This is tacitly approved by bishops becasuse they cannot make a policy because they do not have the authority. It is not an option. Bishops and priests know it's against the basic (not needing to be specified, but it is that also) 'right' of a Catholic to kneel before God anytime, anywhere, any day, in or out of a church, in communion line or not! The priest never makes that choice, it is the God-given right of the Communicant.

Where is that famous Dubium? Wasn't it answered under Cardinal Arinze's office when he was CDW?

jac said...

We should pray a lot for these priests' souls once they will die because denying giving Jesus on the tongue denotes an awful lack of charity.
Their purgatory will probably be very long.

Anonymous said...

Well!Well! why don't all those who are up in arms in Toronto go to Communion at this prince of fools mass and all kneel at the altar rails until he gives us our sacrifice the way we want to offer it. Just imagine the poice trying to drag practicing Catholics offering their sacrifice out of the Church on a Sunday???

Anonymous said...

There was a federal liberal catholic politician who fought trudeau over his adulterous policies who in Nova Scotia even fought the parish priest and the Bishop over this problem and won. The bishop and priest were censured by Rome. I say try it you will like it, the battle I mean

Anonymous said...

Jac, these priests will be very, very lucky if they make it to purgatory.

I think Mike Hurcum has a great idea. Get 100 of us to this disgraceful priest's Mass, and all kneel to receive the Lord as is proper. See if he is willing to pull that stunt again.

Barnum said...

Maybe we need to put foot washing back where it belongs and was kept for centuries, in Maundy Thursday Masses at seminaries.

And if Modernists want a quicker Mass, kneeling at the Communion rail is the way to go. Tons of time wasted on handing out ciboria and chalices to EMs, no one says a thing about it.

Unknown said...

I will join with Mike's idea, name a day and time.