Writings About Non Consecrated Hosts
Regarding Non Consecrated Hosts being given to the innocent
What we have published
Back in 1992 God revealed to miguel de Portugal, and then confirmed it in a multitude of occasions
in three countries, that unconsecrated hosts were being distributed as consecrated ones.
The purpose of this document is to publish in one single file the correspondence that we have
received, and responded to, in reference to our publication
wherein we denounce - with great details - the use of non consecrated hosts in many Roman Catholic
From JM @ USA - Published on June 29th, 2005
In Chronological Order
[Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul]
I went to Mass Saturday evening for the Vigil for Sunday. I was watching carefully to be sure that
all the vessels on the altar containing the bread and wine to be offered were beneath the priest's
hands as he performed the Transubstantiation.
I believe I saw that, after Father transubstantiated the bread and wine in the vessels before him,
Deacon P went into the Tabernacle, removed two gold bowls and placed them among the others on the
altar. Their contents were then part of what was offered to those receiving The Holy
My question is this: Does the bread remain in the
"Form" (of Our Lord) even though it may be unused for a particular Mass and brought out at a later
time or need it be transubstantiated for each Mass?
Yes. The Eucharistic Presence of Our
Lord continues to Be. However, there seems to be a problem with that practice.
First of all - In accordance to the Vatican Rules, most of the consecrated hosts given in a
particular Mass should have been
that same Mass, except when conditions simply prevent it, such as: Mass in St. Peter's Square or
the esplanade before the Basilica of Fátima and the like. Even though thousands of hosts are
consecrated then, the officiating minister must rely on previously consecrated hosts for the
communion of hundreds of thousands of communicants.
Nevertheless, what concerns us the most is that we are witnessing the practice that you have
reported in far too many Masses where there is no need
to do so
unless, of course, "the need" is to feed the Faithful unconsecrated hosts. This,
of course, would be in keeping with the times that we are living through. What better way for
satan to mount a full and final assault on those who try to remain strengthened by and through the
Bread of Heaven than by spiritual starving them?
Most homilies have become completely worthless
therefore, if to that absence one adds the withholding of the True Bread of Heaven... then, what
is that you have left? Nothing! - except the ever-present collection plate.
Our advice from here - and regardless who may get upset, the Roman Curia included - is: (1) Attend
Mass where you can be sure that the consecration is being done properly
and (2) That most hosts used in communion were consecrated right at that Mass and before you own
Frankly - with some notable exceptions - we have very little trust in the integrity of
those who today claim to be Shepherds for God's people
From JM @ USA - Published on March 16th, 2008
In reference to what appears to be the preference of offering communion at Mass mostly from hosts
which are in reserve in the Tabernacle...
I was drawn to a document called "Liturgical Norms Of the Diocese of Charlotte" and as I read the
document I was surprised to learn the following:
General Norms (bold script is
original, not my highlights)
12. Planning for the Mass should include providing for a sufficient number of hosts to be
consecrated so that all can receive hosts consecrated during that Mass, underlining the connection
between consecration and communion. Generally, reserved hosts
should not be brought from the tabernacle unless needed at a particular Mass.
This addresses the issue but works around the central question of the consecrated status of the
If hosts are to be consecrated during the Sacrifice of the Mass wherein they are to be consumed,
why so many "reserved hosts'? (2)
Have they been consecrated at some
previous Mass? Shouldn't by now any Parish could make informed and practical estimates on how many
would be needed at a particular Mass and thus avoid the "unless needed" and confusing issue of
bringing out and offering unconsecrated hosts?
(2) These hosts are reserved for the sick and for
those who could not be present at the Mass.
From KH @ USA - Published on March 22nd, 2008
Good Morning, dear Family, Thank you for your updates. Blessings and good wishes to you during
What JM has experienced [See posting of March 16th above] in his church seems to be quite common
for other churches in that diocese, in spite of what's stated in the diocesan norms. I visit a
half dozen or so Charlotte churches on a regular basis, and have seen Communion distributed
exclusively from the reserved hosts, and have
also observed how these many hosts have been questionably (in my mind) consecrated
(1) during the Sunday Mass, because of so many vessels on the altar and
these so distanced from the priest's extended hands during the Eucharistic prayers.
Even during daily Mass, when the consecration appears to be done properly, the reserved hosts are
often still withdrawn and distributed by the Eucharistic minister, which leaves half of those
present who may not be receiving the true Body and Blood.
I was just feeling sad about this after the Mass attended for Palm Sunday when I saw the above
mentioned posting. I was planning to begin a Novena today to the Blessed Mother in advance of the
Annunciation, so I think that I will pray that the Bishop will somehow enforce the norms that are
published for this diocese regarding the Holy Eucharist.
I'm running out of options as to where to attend Mass in this area, but I am sure our situation is
not exclusive... and I will follow your recommendations for this week and future, so as to not
offend God any further and to receive the benefits and graces that Jesus wished us to have when He
left us His Gifts.
@ USA - Published on January 9th, 2010
The Epiphany on the Feast of the
Epiphany ...should you want a title to my letter.
As I had some time to spare during my recent visit to New York City, I decided to visit St.
Patrick's Cathedral - where I had been baptized and where I was a parishioner. Approaching the
Cathedral I passed a very famous world class jeweler,
Cartier. In addition to holiday season decor in their
windows, they had a sound system piping Christmas Carols to the street.
When I passed it played - not Christmas carols - but rather the theme to the film
The Exorcist ('Tubular Bells'). No joke. I was rather
taken aback and stopped to listen - it was for real.
We discussed the Cathedral security. It is worse than I described before: some 12-15 security men
were all around the inside of the building, eying me suspiciously. Yet a mere handful of tourists
were inside (30 in a building seating 3000). I felt I was being watched... and I was. By them and
by more security cameras than I could count. All over the place. I was filmed more in those 30
minutes then in all my life!
This was mid-morning on a sunny day, yet the building was so quiet you could hear a pin drop. In
contrast to previous years when it would bustle with tourists whom you would have to push past to
get to a pew.
The overall impression of the interior was dark, somber, tomb-like. Reminding me more of a museum.
The interior is white and brightly lit by the stained glass alone. It appeared and "felt"....
dark. The phrase/concept "Hollywood stage set' flashed into my mind. All was its usual very clean
and well maintained state, yet something was now different. Even from a few years ago.
Rather then the former experience of it being a house of prayer weighed down by lovely works of
art and excessive candle/statue veneration... now it had been transformed (spiritually, not by
physical changes) into a a house of money, framed as a 'religious stage set'. The comic idea of
pushing it over as it was made of cardboard came to mind. A stage set for the liturgy as a
'performance art' for the consumption for the disoriented sheep. Run by the 'wolves' you have
alluded to... all carefully calculated.
All that was missing in this regard were the mechanically operated idols of ancient pagan temples
which would move, belch forth smoke, 'speak', etc... to keep the 'believers' believing, and
enriching the temple priests.
The Blessed Sacrament was in the Lady's Chapel, as it has been for many years now. Only two other
souls were there with me, praying. Yet I was being observed by at least 2 security guards and 3
cameras (or more....) in this small chapel. It had been recently and elegantly restored. A very
lovely 'stage set' was what came to mind.
While I cannot put into words what I felt, the impression of the Tabernacle as
"casa vacia" (empty house) was perceived. A lovely, but
empty, work of art, completing the 'stage set' of spiritual deception (as you have alluded to in
reference the now organized and universal deception of passing out mostly unconsecrated hosts as
Being aware of rather oppressive 'eyes' (like unseen yet very real red, glowing eyes of salivating
wolves observing prey while hidden in a forest) observing me, I made a Spiritual Communion.
Making my way out, I made a point of observing all of the many side altars and chapels (while
being eyed and possibly followed). Most had been well and expensively restored, via the gifts of
OD, Knights of Malta, et al, servitors of Mammon, as the donor plaques noted. Two of them had been
rebuilt as new shrines for the veneration of statues, using pieces of altars ripped out of two of
the churches demolished by Cardinal Egan. They were a hodgepodge of mismatched architectural
salvage pieces assembled by someone with no depth perception. Showy external 'piety' intended to
fool fools, concocted by someone reading the "Cliff
Notes" version of "Traditionalism for Dummies".
Shallow beyond belief.
One, in the former Baptistery, was a shrine to St. Jude - the patron of lost causes. No comment...
The other was a shrine to Polish saints, in the former side altar of St. Casimir. Now including
St. Faustina and many 'others' then I could count, including their Relics. It was visual, artistic
and spiritual confusion - with the seeming true point of
focus being the candle donation box. Ironically these, along with the Gift Shop are what you first
see, on opposite side aisles, as you enter. All that was missing was a slot machine.....
At the back, where there formerly had been statues of Sts. Peter and Paul, there were now
portraits of Benedict/Ratzinger and Archbishop Timothy Dolan. Enshrined as a Wal-Mart would have a
portrait of its founder, Sam Walton. Quite befitting a temple of Mammon, masquerading as a house
I left, passing Cartier's again..... and their sound system played the
"Exorcist" theme again.
(1) We are well acquainted with Mr. CB and we have
never had any reason to doubt the details and inside information he provides. His profession,
organist and organ restorer, caused him to work inside many Cathedral and parishes in the East
coast and at very close range of Cardinals, Bishops and local priests.
and again from CB....
From CB @ US - Published on October 25th,
Let's make sure that we know who we are praying to....
If I am your friend, and well known to you personally, you might ask me for my help in some
matter, or to "put in a good word" for you.
That is the basis of intercessory prayer with the saints. Key to this is the concept that we are
not "praying to
..." a saint, but rather requesting that
they pray for us. Mary always made this clear.
Many Catholics mistake the saint as the object
prayer, instead of a helper and friend.
Asking the intercession of any saint is certainly proper, just as is asking for the intercessory
prayers of the souls in Purgatory (as well as praying for them!).
Now, the thorny question is: What is the result of 'asking the
intercession of' (or praying to) a soul which is neither in Heaven nor Purgatory?
The Devil 'hath power to assume a pleasing form'; and to grant favors or even 'miracles' as if
they were of God. All of this is to deceive the unwary. (1)
But how would any Catholic fall into this trap?
First, let us look at the recent changes in the beatification/canonization processes.
"The office (of the Devil's Advocate) was established in 1587
during the reign of Pope Sixtus V and abolished by Pope John Paul II in 1983. This reform changed
the canonization process considerably, helping John Paul II to usher in an unprecedented number of
elevations: nearly 500 individuals were canonized and over 1,300 were beatified during his tenure
as Pope as compared to only 98 canonizations by all his 20th-century predecessors, which has led
many persons to question the validity of the process and whether all of those canonized today are
deserving of the recognition....." (2)
The answer is: Many Catholics simply do not know any better, as they are
every new 'Beati' or 'Saint' as
100% unquestionably legitimate. This goes hand in hand with the conditioned response to 'blanket
upon which such Beatification and Canonizations rest...
...like the proverbial 'house built on sand'.
We mortals have no right to judge the eternal destiny of a soul. Yet at the same time, we are
being asked to turn off our intuitive faculties as well as our spiritual discernment (which is
guided by the Holy Spirit of God).
Some questions are in order:
1) what if one is (innocently) asking the intercession of someone presented as a 'saint', who is
neither in Heaven nor Purgatory? (i.e. in Hell)
2) what if one is (innocently) venerating the image/statue or relics of the same alleged
3) what if a church builds a shrine or side chapel honoring the same alleged saint?
4) what if priests and bishops say the votive mass or feast day mass of the same alleged
Items #3 and 4 above have one meaning if the cleric who does such is ignorant of the reality,
while they have quite another meaning if done knowingly (even if only by a select few...),
nonetheless, both have the same net effect - the glorification of evil.
This could be equated with the global scam of distributing un-consecrated hosts for 'Holy
Communion'. It could also be done by both the knowing and the ignorant priest - nonetheless, both
have the same net effect: The next-to-the-ultimate deception to the Faithful who unknowingly is
receiving a false-host and not receiving the true-host - the Living Christ.
Perhaps some of this is what Mary referred to in La Salette:
"In the year 1864, Lucifer together with a large number of
demons will be unloosed from hell; they will put an end to faith little by little, even in those
dedicated to God. They will blind them in such a way, that, unless they are blessed with a special
grace, these people will take on the spirit of these angels of hell; several religious
institutions will lose all faith and will lose many souls.
"Evil books will be abundant on earth and the spirits of
darkness will spread everywhere a universal slackening in all that concerns the service of God.
They will have great power over nature: there will be
churches built to serve these spirits. People will be transported from one place to another by
these evil spirits, even priests, for they will not have been guided by the good spirit of the
Gospel, which is a spirit of humility, charity and zeal for the glory of God. On occasions,
the dead and the righteous will be brought back to life. (4)
The spiritual effects of items #'s 3 and 4 may have something to do with what I have 'felt' and
sensed in certain churches and prominent Cathedrals. When this is combined with what may either be
the continual or periodic absence of the Real Presence in the tabernacles of these churches - a
"different spirit' may be present in its stead.
Thank you for sharing your views and
logic with us. You have, through the Grace of God, "given flesh" to what our Heavenly Mother
warned us about in La Salette.
Our Lady of La Salette "keeps on talking" and that is why She has so many enemies in the sects and
other fanatical elements within the Catholic Church.
Published on January 18th, 2012
© Copyright 2012 - 2022 by The M+G+R
Foundation. All rights reserved. However, you may freely reproduce and distribute this
document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made in
the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made for it.
Please Note: If the above dated image does not appear on this document, it means
that you are not viewing the original document from our servers. Should you have reason to doubt
the authenticity of the document, we recommend that you access our server again and click on the
"Refresh" or "Reload" button of your Browser to view the original document.