Archbishop Marcelo Colombo

The Vatican has reportedly intervened after two Argentine bishops introduced measures discouraging Catholics from receiving Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue. The intervention raises the question: why have dioceses and bishops’ conferences established “norms” discouraging practices which remain fully licit under universal Church law? The Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has reportedly intervened with two Argentine bishops after restrictions were imposed on Catholics wishing to receive Holy Communion kneeling and on the tongue. According to the Argentine Catholic outlet El Wanderer , officials from the dicastery held discussions with Archbishop Marcelo Colombo of Mendoza, president of the Argentine Bishops’ Conference, and Bishop Gabriel Barba of San Luis over measures introduced in their dioceses concerning the manner in which the Eucharist may be received. The report said Vatican officials reminded both bishops that “the faithful have the freedom to receive Communion according to the methods established by the Church, and this freedom cannot be restricted”. The intervention follows months of controversy in Argentina after Archbishop Colombo and Bishop Barba both introduced policies widely interpreted as discouraging or effectively prohibiting traditional modes of reception. In September last year, Archbishop Colombo stated publicly that “in Argentina, Communion is received standing”, referring to norms approved by the Argentine bishops which designate standing as the ordinary posture for the reception of Holy Communion. The norms also provide for a bow before receiving the sacrament. The controversy intensified after an incident at the Basilica of San Francisco in Mendoza in September 2025, when worshippers attempting to receive Communion kneeling were publicly rebuked. Reports from Argentine Catholic media said Fr Alberto Zini, a Franciscan friar serving at the basilica, shouted “Get up!” at communicants who knelt before him. At least one worshipper was allegedly refused Communion while kneeling and was instructed to receive in the hand instead. A Catholic teacher who witnessed the incident later wrote to Archbishop Colombo to complain about the treatment of the faithful at the Mass. In his response, the archbishop reportedly defended the existing norms in the archdiocese, citing liturgical provisions contained in the Argentine edition of the Roman Missal and decisions of the bishops’ conference concerning the posture for Communion. The dispute quickly became a focal point for wider tensions within the Argentine Church over liturgical practice and the place of traditional forms of devotion. Bishop Barba also came under criticism after issuing a clarification before Corpus Christi in June 2025 encouraging the faithful in San Luis to receive Communion in the hand. The diocese had long been associated with more traditional Eucharistic practice under the late Bishop Juan Rodolfo Laise, who became known internationally for defending the right of Catholics to receive Communion on the tongue. The dispute deepened further in October when Bishop Barba reportedly wrote to candidates preparing to become extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, instructing them to receive the Eucharist only in the hand in order to act as “pedagogues” of the practice and to “preach by example”. The Holy See has repeatedly affirmed over several decades that Catholics retain the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue where the practice is permitted by the Church. The Congregation for Divine Worship stated in the 2004 instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum that “each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue”. If the reports from Argentina are accurate, the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments has effectively rebuked Archbishop Colombo and Bishop Barba after both dioceses adopted practices which discouraged, restricted or practically penalised Catholics who wished to receive Communion kneeling or on the tongue. Many bishops and clergy across the Western Church have acted as though Communion in the hand and standing were mandatory, despite repeated Vatican instructions stating the opposite. In practice, Catholics attached to older forms of Eucharistic reverence have often been treated as troublesome, divisive or psychologically suspect. The language changes from diocese to diocese, from “pastoral unity” to “liturgical norms” and “ecclesial maturity”, but the underlying message is usually the same: conform to the preferred style of the local hierarchy. Archbishop Colombo’s subsequent defence of the diocesan norms only deepened the controversy. His argument rested on the claim that Argentine liturgical norms establish standing as the manner in which Communion is received. Yet this is precisely where many bishops misunderstand the distinction between what is normative and what is compulsory. Rome settled this question years ago. Redemptionis Sacramentum , issued in 2004 under Pope St John Paul II, explicitly states: “It is not licit to deny Holy Communion to any of Christ’s faithful solely on the grounds, for example, that the person wishes to receive the Eucharist kneeling or standing.” The same instruction further declares that every member of the faithful “always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue”. The Holy See recognised that local liturgical bureaucracies had begun treating permissions as prohibitions and preferences as law. What is happening is part of a much older post-conciliar pattern in which traditional devotional practices are tolerated officially while being marginalised culturally. San Luis illustrates this particularly well. Under the late Bishop Laise, the diocese became known for defending Communion on the tongue and maintaining a visibly traditional Eucharistic culture long after much of the Church had abandoned it. Bishop Barba’s subsequent insistence that extraordinary ministers receive only in the hand in order to act as “pedagogues” of the practice was therefore interpreted by many as a deliberate attempt to reshape the liturgical identity of the diocese. Since Vatican II, bishops’ conferences have accumulated enormous practical influence, often behaving as though they possess a kind of national magisterium. Yet they remain subordinate to universal law. They cannot abolish rights guaranteed by Rome, nor can they transform local customs into binding obligations where the Holy See has explicitly preserved legitimate freedom. The irony is difficult to miss. Much of the rhetoric surrounding modern ecclesial governance emphasises decentralisation and synodality. Yet Argentina demonstrates the inevitable problem with excessive decentralisation in liturgical matters: local ideological preferences quickly begin presenting themselves as universal Catholicism. One bishop discourages kneeling, another marginalises Latin and another treats ad orientem worship as pastorally unacceptable. Before long, practices which the Church still permits exist only on paper. Image credit: By ProtoplasmaKid – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=43442907