http://sedevacantist.com/communion.html

Communion in the Hand
A sure sign of heresy

There has been a lot written about Communion in the hand over the years, and I think all good Catholics would be aware of its shocking disrespectfulness and also that it is not at all traditional. However there is another aspect of it which nobody seems to have treated, and that is that as a practise it is evidence of heresy.

Let's firstly ensure that it is understood that actions demonstrate heresy as clearly as words. The following are well-known pre-V2 canonists quoted by da Silveira in his brilliant "Essay on Heresy."

"External heresy is that which is manifested by exterior signs (words, signs, actions, omissions of actions)." (Merkelbach, pg. 570)
"External heresy is an error against the faith, revealed by a word or by some other exterior indication." (Prummer, pg. 365)
"To incur such an excommunication "latae sententiae, specially reserved to the Sovereign Pontiff," it is necessary that the heresy, after having been interiorly conceived should be exteriorly manifested by a word, a writing or an action." (Tanquerey, Syn. Theol., Mor. et Past., pg. 475)
"External heresy adds to the internal heresy a sufficient exterior manifestation, expressed by such words, signs or actions as would be conclusive." (Wernz-Vidal, pg. 444)

The next point which should be understood is that Canon Law states that treating the Sacred Species with disrespect is an action which makes one suspect of heresy (CIC 2320).

Finally, one only has to spend a few minutes in a Novus Ordo chapel during "Communion" to witness the most abominable disrespect imaginable, on a widespread basis. These actions speak louder than words, but in this particular case we are not constrained to rely on the actions to tell us what is internal. Various surveys taken amongst "Conciliar Catholics" have revealed that as many as 70% deny the Real Presence.

Now, what does this tell us of the hierarchy which has imposed this outrage, and which tolerates in prefect peace the result (i.e. the widespread heresy)? Simply put, it shows us that they are not Catholics, that they have no authority, and that good Catholics are obliged to avoid them.


John Lane
January 25, 1998
Conversion of St. Paul

Yes indeed we are to avoid the Novus Ordo hierarchy including the old valid Bishops attached to that sect.  Those who left that sect and stayed Catholics are the ones that are the Catholic Bishops.  Shouldn't that be obvious?