Eucharistic Minister Sanitizing Hell Out Of Hands Before Distributing Communion

April 14, 2015 by  
Filed under Mass


Local Eucharistic Minister Courtney Smith has been sanitizing the living hell out her hands for the past two minutes in preparation of distributing Holy Communion, parishioners are reporting.

According to parishioners at the 9:30 morning Mass at St. Kieran Catholic Church, 57-year-old Smith was seen pumping the crap out of the sanitizing dispenser like there was “no tomorrow.”

“She’s actually still up there, sanitizing away,” parishioner Joseph Koscheka told EOTT as he watched Smith proudly look at the congregation as she pumped the day lights out of the poor dispenser. “Now look at her…the woman’s actually sanitizing all the way up to her elbows. Wait a minute…she seriously just slapped some on her face like an old man slapping on aftershave.”

A few minutes later, Koscheka reported that, although Smith had finally begun to distribute communion, that she had taken out a bottle of hand sanitizer from her pocket and was now using it after every parishioner approached her for communion.

At press time, Koscheka has decided to just go up and receive communion from one of the other 50 or so Eucharistic Ministers of Holy Communion.

  • receive communion from one of the other 50 or so Eucharistic Ministers of Holy Communion.

    50, lol!

    • This allows more time for the real focus of the Mass, the Sign of Peace.

      • fredx2

        At my church (a welcoming church) we get to leave after the Sign of Peace. After all, what’s the point of staying after you have received the ultimate high?

        Who needs some wacky little cracker? Give me a good disease ridden handshake or kiss with a person I have never seen before, and I am on cloud nine.

    • antigon

      Only 50? Where are the rest of the people of God?

      • pupsncats

        Down at the other Protestant churches.

  • Andy, Bad Person

    Lord, wash away my iniquities; cleanse me from my sins.

    Also staphylococcus. Cleanse me from that, too.

    • Jo Flemings


    • Our Lord is so Holy He kills all the germs that could be transferred at Mass; but these Vatican II criminals must find another germicide since their Christocide has left them with nothing but unbelief and imbecility.

      • harveydude

        Your understanding of the Eucharist needs some work. Transubstantiation does NOT change the physical properties of the accidents. So it is still possible for germs to be transmitted via the host or chalice.

        • My dear sir, you are arguing against a choir. And be careful about big phrases like: physical properties of the accidents … don’t injure your brain. Because I used “so Holy He kills all ” … you immediately thought I was some fluffy pietist who talks rubbish without ever studying, rigorously, St. Thomas.

          • harveydude

            Did you even understand what I wrote? Let’s try this again…
            You claimed that the sacred Host automatically “kills all the germs” because It is the body/blood/soul/divinity of Our Lord.
            That is flat-out not true.

            While it is indeed the body/blood/soul/divinity, that does not mean that it loses the physical properties of bread (hence the word “accidents,” as opposed to “substance”). For instance, if someone suffers from celiac disease (cannot eat bread), then they will be affected by the Host. Same with germs: if there are germs somehow present, germs can be transferred unwittingly.

          • PGMGN

            A ‘diatribe.’ Way to go, harveydude, if the objective is to continue the pretense that all is well with VII documents and there is no root cause to the bumper crop of foul fruit. Kind of like pretending that there is no Holy Father responsible for correcting issues.

          • You want to discuss theology on EOTT, funny. Sorry I am not game for you. And what diatribe? Once again, stay off big phrases (notice how I am not engaging you? – that will make you feel better about yourself that you have won your own argument). And if you don’t understand a comment in the context of EOTT, stay away.

          • harveydude

            Yes, I realize that EOTT is satire, but was your comment in that same context? Let’s see: “Our Lord is so Holy He kills all the germs that could be transferred at Mass; but these Vatican II criminals must find another germicide since their Christocide has left them with nothing but unbelief and imbecility.”
            Was THAT meant to be satirical?

            No. Anyone who reads that instantly knows two things: 1) You don’t know that the Host which is Our Lord is still capable of transmitting germs, and 2) that you despise Vatican II. Both of these spell trouble.

            All I did was point out that the Eucharistic species are indeed capable of transmitting germs, and you should either rebut that intelligently, or admit that you misspoke (well, miswrote).

            So I await your simple answer, rather than a glib side-step:

            If there are germs somehow present, those germs can be transferred unwittingly via the Host.
            Agree or disagree?

          • PGMGN

            “…that you despise Vatican II. Your schismatic leader Lefebvre might agree with the second point, but definitely not the first point.”

            The above demonstrates a blind loyalty you have to an ideal of not questioning or even reading for understanding the documents presented to you for belief. Sorry, HarveyDude, but the CMTV brand of lockstep acceptance in the face of rotten fruits is no proof of loyalty, but rather a blindfold firmly in place. Hence the biblical quote, the blind leading the blind.

            Educate yourself. That is not the same as indoctrination.

          • harveydude

            I’ll stick with the barque of Peter. You do what you wish. We’ll all see how this plays out in the end, won’t we?

          • PGMGN

            …then you may want to stick with the barque of Peter and not promulgate the handy-tag of schism and schism leader (fear mongering tools to prevent actual learning about issues) that has never been the official ruling of ANY pope. (Even Popes and councils have limits. IOW: A Church council cannot declare that God is dead and require all Catholics to believe as much.)

            Again, your limited concept of taking sides is so open to manipulation. That’s why CM, in their former dog-and-pony show of last summer, is so dangerous. Read the documents of VII and then make an unbiased assessment of what the documents say – not what you’re ‘told’ they say, friend. Same goes for calumniating others as schismatics.

            Catholics are given intellect and will for good reason. So yes, indeed, let’s see how things play out as you term it. But while you hunker down pretending that all is okay in your “I follow the Pope” mode, remember that yours is not to judge that which others are called to do – and for good reason. You do not have the understanding or even the willingness to educate yourself on issues. That is why calling others names as you did here is completely out of line as it does nothing whatever to promote the Truth.

            Good luck with that moving forward.

          • harveydude

            Cripes, man, let leofec network fight his own battles.
            And you’ve already admitted you have multiple axes to grind, one of them being some sort of distaste for Vatican II.
            I defend the Church. You can whine about its decisions, but a council is a council. And it’s plain-old fact that the SSPX is not in full communion.

            Since you’re so happy to engage in this debate, perhaps I’ll turn the ORIGINAL question over to you: If someone snarkily claims that the Host cannot transmit germs, would you agree or disagree?

          • PGMGN

            Cripes, harvey dude, practice what you preach. You could have let Natasha from CM fight her own battles, too. You could let VII stand on its own like anything that asserts itself as binding must – oh, I forgot – VII docs aren’t binding. Good ole “pastoral” – the only way to pass along all of the blatant novelty speak and compromise that helpful individuals will pass off as Church teaching while supposedly preaching against it. (A council is a council, and we have had baddies in the past, friend. Again, pick up some history outside the syllabus of your chosen handlers. You can’t defend the fort with limp noodles. And you can’t pretend to support the Pope while attempting to speak on his behalf without any authority while calling others who support Church teaching as it has been handed down as being on the outside.)

            You can whine all you’d like and name call and cut corners so you don’t have to deal with the distaste of reading for yourself. The plain old fact is that Vatican II has real clarity issues. If you’re okee okee with saying that doesn’t matter then I suppose you should reach out and support ISIS in their efforts to fulfill God’s inscrutable decrees. Nostra Aetate says it all. Kinda like the new ‘official’ position of the Church to leave off converting a chosen few.

            As to your question regarding a ‘snark’, you are truly off the deep end if you think that’s the issue of the day. But rock on with the shining knight imitation of what makes you feel justified, complete with capital letters as you trounce anyone who calls for the king to read the documents. Not offer an interpretation. You’d be a real hoot at the reading of a contentious will. But hey, that involves $$$. And we all know that one must be clear about that.

            Good luck, fella.

          • harveydude

            Gee, how did I know I wouldn’t get an answer to a simple “agree/disagree” question?

            Care to answer it PGMGN?
            Otherwise we’ll all have to assume that you agree with leofec and think that the Sacred Host cannot transmit germs. You do realize that that’s ALL that this was about from the start…

          • PGMGN

            All this was about at the start is you overreacting to any inference that Vatican II, or your gal pal at CM, isn’t all they’re cracked up to be.

            That said, the Blessed Sacrament was given on the tongue for quite a long time without mass epidemic breakouts. The manufactured fear of transmitting germs is just another vehicle by which to corral people into positions they might otherwise be hesitant to take. Hence the humor of stating that someone is sanitizing the Hell out of one’s hands. (Kids used to actually eat portions of their ‘mud’ pies back in the day and I’m not talking ice cream ;^)

            As for further assumption on your part – and I cannot help but notice you’re speaking on behalf of some ambiguous ‘we’ (… are you a nurse? Queen Elizabeth? Or someone adopting the old form of papal discourse?) – I suggest you again, do some reading and try to understand the concept of humor while on EOTT.

          • Applying my medical expertise – something churchmen know nothing about – it is precisely because of the thriving time in enclosures that germs have I warn people against going to confession in private areas.

            This humour is in the court reverse mode…

            Then that Leofec person would come and say … Sacrament of Penance destroys germs, in fact it annihilates them.

            And harvey would say … that is not theological…let’s fight!

          • harveydude

            Point taken 🙂

          • Okay sir, that was a fair ending – may God bless you and me.

          • PGMGN

            ….another accurate diagnoses, Herr Doctor. But one I think the patient will reject as touting the disease affords more traction in certain circles ;^)

          • harveydude

            Again, a non-answer. Why can’t you just admit that it’s possible for germs to be transmitted?
            I 100% agree that receiving on the tongue is better in that regard. And that it’s highly unlikely to transmit germs. And that the sanitizer bit is overplayed, etc.
            And of course EOTT is humor. (I guess I should have understood Leofec’s comment about “Vatican II criminals” as sarcasm, and surely that he really embraces Vatican II, huh?)

            The “we” that you were troubled by is not a royal “we.” Did you not know that we are in a public forum? The “we” is referring to the peanut gallery of readers who might be watching this little back-and-forth. Anyone reading the exchange can now plainly see that you refuse to answer a simple agree/disagree question. (BTW, I’d be happy to answer your straightforward questions. Not sure why it’s so difficult for you.)

            In a prior comment you railed about me “judging” yet you have done quite a bit yourself. (Let’s see… “gal pal,” thinking that I don’t grasp “the concept of humor,” my “not having the understanding” to educate myself on the issues.” Perhaps you too should think about the invectives coming from your own keyboard too.

          • PGMGN

            God bless you, Harvey. Dude. The only one troubled here is you, friend. But then you put your foot into it of your own free will. Peace out ;^)

          • harveydude

            The “only one troubled”?
            Somehow I thought you were troubled by Vatican II, along with Leofec. ‘Nuff for now…

          • PGMGN

            Truth isn’t troubling, harvey, unless one is hiding from it. One is mandated to reject error and novelty. Pretty simple.

            The trouble comes when those suffering from cognitive dissonance attempt to spread their disorder to others by way of false obedience. That’s rather what you stuck your foot in here and why you’re dismissing the actual words in VII in lieu of the this-is-what-I-meant rationalizations.

            Good luck with that.

          • Guy McClung

            Not only is the sanitizer a new sacramental, but it is part of the new pseudo-priest-females-too order of “Ex.Minister.” It is no accident that they have used the name “minister.” Just more of “if a female can do it, then a female can be ordained” – Jesus’s job at the last Supper was M.C., not the Head Of The Mystical Body – and heck, anybody with hands and a tongue can do that human, nondivine, job. No testicles needed. “In persona Christi” includes “in persona Christa.” Look, Ma, I can raise my hands in the priestly orans posture; I can say “This is my Body;” I can make the Sign of the Cross with the words “I absolve you . . .”

          • Guy McClung

            EOTT is humor; it is also often truth

          • Here is a deal, since you have employed the words “sincerely” … “spirit of truth” etc, I will make further effort to answer you. My initial comment aside, since I am not sure you will ever understand it.

            As for correct doctrine, to which I subscribe:

            Transubstantiation is just that, the changing of the substance, no more no less. The (material/physical) smell, taste, decayability, sight etc still are those of the former substance. Let my betters correct me.

            Yes, in case you were wondering Vatican II is detestable in itself, and as such has nothing to do with the barque of St. Peter. Maybe you would do well to understand the incongruous nature of the two realities. Each excludes the other, as proven by the recent people who have sat on the chair of St. Peter.

            Also, take to heart this saying: liberalism is a mental disorder. Pope Francis (JPII etc) and Pope Peter have nothing in common. One is in Heaven and the other, may God deliver His Church from him!

          • harveydude

            You should notice that my first comment to you did not mention anything about Vatican II. It purely corrected you about the Host (or chalice) being capable of transmitting germs.
            I thank you for agreeing that transubstantiation changes only the substance, not the physical properties (and thus in some remote way might still transmit germs as plain bread might).
            We’re on the same page in the only area that I meant to embark upon. I’m sorry for stirring the pot with accusations of schism.

            That said, your distaste for Vatican is an issue that is troublesome, because it’s not the view of the Church that has the teaching authority handed down from Peter. But I’m OK with leaving that for another time, since we’ve found common ground on the issue that caused me to first jump in.

  • Jude

    I just hope she remembered to wear a really short skirt and some flip flops. Wouldn’t want to be caught out of uniform.

    • NickD

      I thought it was Daisy Dukes and a spaghetti-strap tank-top…I’ll have to tell my pastor to let the “Eucharistic Ministers” know!

    • Eric_Beocarl

      For a 57 year old? No, no, no…it’s black yoga pants and a poofy blouse.

  • avoiding these people is not that difficult, I always strategically make sure I approach the priest and not one of the 50 helpers…

    • SeaDogBoy

      Is that “helpers” or did you mean “leapers”?

    • antigon

      Watch your back, Mz. Luyben. The priesthood of the faithful (POTH-TM) has knit thy name!.

    • pupsncats

      A better thing for you would be to avoid going to a Novus Ordo church and attend a Catholic church where there is no question what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is and certainly no laity acting as though they are priests.

  • & seriously, perhaps hand sanitizer ought to be distributed before the hand shaking event. On sunday the woman in front of me industriously gnawed on her nails through the entire sermon then put out her paw for me to shake. Cringeworthy. (and she looked so surprised when I gave her the “nod” of peace instead of my hand.)

    • Guest

      Just don’t touch a mucous membrane with your shaking hand until you are able to disinfect your hand which has been touched by the unwashed. That way you won’t offend your neighbor, as was taught by Jesus, and you won’t catch whatever it is you’re afraid of catching.

      • Netmilsmom

        Here’s an even better idea. Say “Peace be with you, Konichiwa” and bow. If it’s good enough for the Japanese, it’s good enough for me.

        • “Namaste” with the prayer hands and a bow
          works as well.

          • john

            No way, Luyben. My son’s been pickin’ his nose since the psalm. You’re getting the good stuff or I’ll tell everybody you’re a hate-filled trad.

          • antigon

            How about Kemosabe?

  • Jim

    “She had taken out a bottle of hand sanitizer from her pocket and was now using it after every parishioner approached her for communion.” Now this must have been something to see. What, did she have the ciborium on a harmonica holder?

    • Jo Flemings

      Obviously you have never had to sweep a floor with a baby on your hip- not the hands free version- or you would know how this kind of thing is done. Balancing it on her head, duh.

    • Jude

      Obviously she needs a holster. I’m sure the parish can provide her with one with a great big wooden cross on it to show that she is official.

  • PJParks

    I wonder if we could put holly sanitizer in the Fonts?

    • Jo Flemings

      In the ‘welcoming church’ in my town, they stock hand sanitizer dispensers right up on the altar rail at intervals of about ten feet apart. Totally user-friendly. And we make an effort to strike just the right tone between communicating to people with our body language that they are either socially acceptable and just too-icky-to-touch during the exchange of the sign of peace-by judicious glances at those same HS positions as hands are whipped out and flying around, and through a series of gestures taught during the parish yoga classes- offered in conjunction with CCD.

  • fredx2

    Why don’t they invent a host dispenser, like those dixie cup dispensers? No need to have a human in there, except because the human wants to feel important. I remember the good old days, when we actually got the host from a priest. Of course, in those days we actually believed in the real presence. Imagine that!

  • fredx2

    At my church (a welcoming church) the Eucharistic Ministers put on hazmat suits, and then enter a disinfectant shower before handing out the eucharist. Afterwards, they undergo a radiation bath guaranteed to kill all known organisms. Some have complained that they are starting to glow in the dark after a while, but our priest insists that is just a sign of the Holy Spirit’s favor.

    • Beth Van


  • Marie Van Gompel Alsbergas

    Smith was taking the hint from Simon Peter: Simon Peter said to Him, “Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head!” (John 13:9)

    • Jim

      I understand Ms. Smith has been spoken to before about her energetic pumping of hand-sanitizer. I allude to an incident in which she neglected to stand in front of a clogged dispenser while dispensing, unintentionally sanitizing an entire pew of fourth-degree Knights of Columbus.

  • Joe Mendez

    I don’t generally criticize fake media outlets-but this is sloppy journalism. The Eucharistic Minister is the priest. #ExtraordinaryMinister4Lyfe

    • T. Audrey Glamour

      Satire could be thought of as using sloppy journalism to make a point.

      • antigon

        Stop being gentle Mz Glamour, or I’ll report you to Bishop Williamson!

    • Taylor B.

      Actually they’re both considered Eucharistic ministers. The difference is drawn between being an “Ordinary” minister (the priest) versus an “Extraordinary” minister (laity). Just since we’ve decided to cover details here.

      • Joe Mendez

        Thanks, Canon Law 134 defines an Ordinary as the local bishop or other authority over a Diocese and Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum backs me up in reserving Eucharistic minister for Priests. If I’m wrong, feel free to call me out.

        • Anna

          So, “Ordinary Time” is sort of owned by the local bishop? Does that mean “Time Lord” is an acceptable address instead of “Your Excellency”?

          • Jo Flemings

            (cue the Darth Vader prelude….)

          • MrSpock

            If it is, I believe that makes their informal title “The Doctor”. And means they must have a sonic screwdriver hidden somewhere in that crosier.

        • Andy, Bad Person

          That would be the “local Ordinary” who is the bishop. An Ordinary minister of Holy Communion is simply one who is Ordained (hence, ordinary): a bishop, priest, or deacon.

        • Jude

          No, you’re right. The EMHCs are NOT Eucharistic Ministers. It drives me crazy when they refer to themselves as such.

  • LatinMassType

    Let us be charitable. As much as I abhor the use of the non-ordained to distribute the Eucharist, I think this person may have been showing belief in the Real Presence. If she is of good will — well, who am I to judge?

    However, I will be at the Mass across town in the church with the altar rail…

    • Joe Cole

      I wonder if there are clown masses at churches with Altar rails.

      Like with extra-ordinary eucharistic minister clowns on a unicycle riding along the top edge of the rail coin-flipping hosts to people

      Wouldn’t that be so entertaining?

  • Fr. Joseph Krupp

    It’s amazing that, no matter how funny or insightful the post in the Catholic world, there will always be those who jump at the opportunity to comment on how their parish is doing it wrong.

    • Hotrod1962

      You know what they say, Father…..the catholic church has a grave shortage of men who want to become priests….but there is absolutely no shortage in men who want to be pope.

  • Dcn Chris

    Finding HazMat vestments for all the liturgical colors of the calender is not easy, let me tell you. It’s ROSE, I tell you. ROSE !

    • Jo Flemings

      Y’all are hilarious!

    • pupsncats

      No, too close to Red which signifies sacrifice. Make it White-the color of purity because you know, everyone is saved anyway.

  • Jo Flemings

    Oh mi gosh I needed this so badly… just the headline has me absolutely ROTFL!

  • Fr. William Lugger

    We have EOMOHC as well…..who use sanitizer sparingly before Communion…but what about all the whose hands touch the top of the pews…and what about all who put the Sacrament on tongues during mass…150-300 mouths per weekend….Save me Jesus…oops he already did!!!

    • LatinMassType

      Are you suggesting people are receiving communion on the tongue…?!!!!

      • Fr. William Lugger

        Why yes people always have a choice as to how they receive the sacrament

        • antigon

          The Frisbee toss method is especially popular at our welcoming church.

          • Fr. William Lugger

            Frisbee toss? what kind of statement is that…for the Sacrament?..I hope you’re not Catholic!!

          • antigon

            What? You mean folks *don’t * have a choice as to how they receive the sacrament, or Sacrament?
            Sorry to offend an honest piety tho Padre. My grotesquerie was grotesque, even if but a parody no worse than what too many clerics (who call themselves Catholic) both have & still do allow & promote, doubtless to honor their clerical hero Bugnini.

          • Beth Van

            Oh dear me….

          • harveydude

            Just so you know, this is a sarcastic website so the comments tend to be sarcastic. 🙂

        • pupsncats

          How many Novus Ordo parishes have you been to Father? If you tried to receive the wafer on your tongue from a “Eucharistic minister” in some of them, they haven’t got a clue as to why you are opening your mouth. Then you get a lecture from the priest that “in my parish, everyone receives in the hand.”

  • jamey brown

    Some of the Active Retirees try to French kiss me during the Sign of Peace. Isn’t this a little too much, especially the men?

    • pupsncats

      Tut tut. Don’t be so judgmental.

      • jamey brown

        You’re right. I have to really “get with it” with the New Catholic Church.

  • ithakavi

    Churches should dispense with the Holy Water and fill the fonts with Hand Sanitizer. Thus the highlight of the Mass (the Sign of Peace) will be safe for everyone. It’s time the Church caught up with the times and practiced Safe Handshaking.

    • Safe Handshaking all the way! … and each parishioner must come with a walking stick, so that we clang sticks instead of embracing one another … the farther the distance in the church, the more likely we are to enter Heaven whole.

  • pupsncats

    Since the function of the priest has been changed to simply a “presider” over the community of “the people of God”, and the communion wafer is part of the “meal in remembrance of the Last Supper”, and an “Eucharistic minister” is acting in persona Christi rather than the priest, why not just put a big bowl of wafers on the “table” with some baby wipes and let people grab their own wafer?

  • Pilate never really left a manual on how to wash off common sense.
    Something like this would have helped madame Smith:

    Step 1 – Insert hands in bowl of lukewarm water
    Step 2 – wash hands vigorously while mumbling “what is Truth”
    Step 3 – hold head high as an accomplished idiot

  • Hotrod1962

    When I was eucharistic minister, I would have the dry cleaners open up just for me, so I could get my hands martinized.

  • Staten Pilgrim
  • Staten Pilgrim
  • Laura

    OMG, I almost lost it reading this! LOL! I call it the Holy Hand Sanitizer.

  • pat

    when they install the vending machines in the lobby for communion, this won’t be an issue.