Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Sep 22, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).
A recent study found that traditional liturgical experiences, including receiving the Eucharist by tongue, indicate a stronger belief among Catholics in the Real Presence.
Last year, Natalie A. Lindemann published a journal article on Catholics’ belief in the real presence of Jesus Christ’s body and blood in the Eucharist. Lindemann, a professor in the department of psychology at William Paterson University, recently published a follow-up peer-reviewed article that uses a larger sample size and examines additional information.
Belief in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist is central to the Catholic faith, but only about 57% of U.S. Catholics believe with certainty the Eucharist is Jesus’ body, according to Lindemann’s report.
The new study, published in the Catholic Social Science Review, found receiving the Eucharist on the tongue, attending a parish that rings consecration bells, and attending a parish that offers the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) have an effect on one’s belief in the Real Presence.
The research is from a survey of 860 U.S. Catholic English-speaking adults. The group closely reflects the ratio of men to women in the U.S. adult Catholic population. The ethnicity demographic was biased toward the overrepresentation of some ethnic groups, so a corrective weight was applied.
Participants’ Eucharistic beliefs varied with 31% reporting they are certain of the Real Presence, 23.6% being certain that the Eucharist is a symbol without Jesus being present, 10.5% said Jesus is probably present, 19.2% were not sure, and 15.8% said the Eucharist is probably a symbol.
How ‘bodily and related social liturgical practices’ predict beliefs
The survey asked participants to answer questions on a scale of 1 to 5. One represented the belief that “bread and wine are symbols of Jesus; I am certain that Jesus is not really present.” Five indicated that person is “certain that Jesus is really present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist.” Belief in the Real Presence on the five-point rating scale was found to have an average mean (M) of 3.10.
Participants who have received the Eucharist on the tongue at some point (M=3.27) believe more in the Real Presence than those who have never received the Eucharist by tongue (M=2.79). People who often receive on the tongue, and often see others receive on the tongue, also reported a stronger belief in the Real Presence.
Those who always receive on the tongue (M=3.69) showed a moderately higher belief in the Real Presence than those who always receive in the hand (M=3). The report noted that since most participants consistently receive the Eucharist via one method, treating the reception method as a scale variable is questionable.
Catholics who said people should receive the Eucharist on the tongue had a significantly stronger belief in the Real Presence (M=4.32) than those who said one should receive in the hand (M=2.62). Those who reported they value personal choice regarding how one receives fell in between (M=3.37).
The report noted that 33 participants mentioned that the COVID-19 pandemic continues to have an effect by prompting more reception in the hand.
Factoring in the Traditional Latin Mass
“The TLM liturgy prescribes Eucharistic-reverent behavior … therefore, [Lindemann] expected that Catholics who attend the TLM would on average have stronger Real Presence beliefs.” The study found this to be true as participants whose parishes offer a TLM (M=3.63), whether or not the participant has ever attended it, showed a slightly stronger belief in the Real Presence than those whose parishes do not offer one (M=3.04).
The effect of the Latin Mass was slightly higher among those who both attend a parish that celebrates TLM and have attended it before (M=3.83), compared with Catholics with no exposure to a Latin Mass (M=3.07).
There was also a trend toward stronger Real Presence belief among people who have a positive perception of TLM (M=3.74) than those with a negative perception (M=2.44). Those with neutral feelings toward TLM were found to have a mean of 3.60.
“Since consecration bells signal the importance of the consecration,” Lindemann said she “predicted that participants whose parishes more often ring consecration bells would report a stronger belief in the Real Presence.” This prediction was found to be true. Specifically, there was a substantially higher belief among Catholics who have always heard consecration bells at Mass (M=3.43) than those who have never heard them before (M=2.53).
Other factors that tended to result in a higher belief in the presence of Jesus in the Eucharist included more frequent Mass attendance and politically conservative viewpoints.
The participants were also asked about the location of the tabernacle at the altar, but the study found there was no relationship between where it is placed and Eucharistic belief. Sex, age, and ethnicity were also found to have no effect.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
From personal ‘lived’ experience when first considering a spiritual life it was the Trappist Abbey Our Lady of the Genesee [now sadly Genesee Abbey speaks for itself] the monks offered Mass in the simplest of settings in their temporary dwelling while the Abbey was being constructed – in accord with the ancient rite. It was the most spiritual, beautiful liturgical experience.
It was then that my sense of Christ’s presence deepened. Although by the time many years later ordained when the Novus Ordo was the rule, I previously had the great privilege of attending Mass at Precious Blood Monastery in Brooklyn offered by Msgr Joseph B Frey, Director of the Confraternity of the Precious Blood that included, with the printing of religious inspired books the Adorers of the Precious Blood.
In 1910, the Precious Blood Monastery in Brooklyn NY became the home of the Sisters Adorers of the Precious Blood which was founded by Mother Catherine Aurelia of the Precious Blood [Aurelia Caouette] in 1861 in Quebec, Canada. Back to Msgr Frey, who loved the TLM and wrote a book called My Mass.
When the changes came Msgr Frey conveyed the same joyous love of the Mass. His movements and tone conveyed holiness, awareness of Christ’s presence. Although that all began with the TLM.
Every Catholic worthy of the name should envy you the beautiful spiritual heritage you have known. I will search for Msgr. Frey’s book. Thank you for commenting, Father Morello.l
Asante Sana Sarah.
We had a Precious Blood order priest serving our Southern parish years ago. He got recalled back to wherever the order’s home base was. Ohio maybe?
Father related back then that the only way he got a new pair of shoes was when another priest had died-assuming the shoes fit. Perhaps they had a supply of deceased priest’s shoes on hand. Who knows?
I presume, then, that those Catholics who do not believe in the Real Presence think that what they’re receiving is merely a piece of bread. They really are fools then, since the bread is very lousy bread indeed. I could point them to any number of bakeries that make far superior bread. And, if that’s the case, just stay home and don’t bother to go to church at all. Better yet, get yourself to Dunkin Donuts on Sunday morning for some superb pastries.
I agree totally with this! Absolutely more enjoyable to go purchase a dozen donuts for the family from Dunkin’, then go home with the treats and relax with the Sunday paper in an easy chair. Why go to church to eat a wafer that has no taste and no meaning!
Krispy Kreme, please Deacon Edward…
🙂
My apologies to the KK faction for showing partiality to DD
Disbelief in the Real Presence is symptomtic of the doubts spread by Modernists concerning 2 other questions:
1) Was Jesus just a man good man like any other religious leader, or is He the Christ?
2) Was the resurrection a collective symbolic cŕeation or did Jesus historically rise from the dead?
The correlation between disbelief in the divinity of Christ and His historical resurrection and disbelief in the Real Presence would probably be a perfect match.
Otherwise put, this is not just about Latin Mass and receiving on the tongue.
This is about a crisis in dogmatic preaching and basic catechism about the second person of the Blessed Trinity.
We might conclude, those in contact with priests formed traditionally have more likelihood of developing Real-Deal Catholic Faith.
Those in contact with Vatican II liberals / who listened to Pope Francis’ relativist ramblings have less likelihood of developing the Real-Deal Catholic Faith. They remain nominally Catholic with the potential to develop the Catholic Faith if brought into contact with it.
Conclusion: without the Traditional wing of the Catholic Church, all that remains of Catholicism is a heritage show at different stages of being emptied of the faith.
Mr. Cracked Nut, I generally agree with your sentiment: it seems obvious to me that if you don’t accept Jesus as God, it’s going to be very difficult to accept that same Man can become present in the Eucharist some 2000 years after his death. To that end, I think you’re spot on about Catechesis. I’m not so sure, however, that a view of Church that divides participants into either the “modernists” or the “traditionalists” is a helpful distinction. Tradition itself only carries weight in so far as the Magisterium asserts its Goodness. By necessity, an Ecumenical Counsel is always traditional. So to attempt to divide the Church into “Vatican II Liberals” in opposition to, I suppose (and forgive the license I’m about to take if it’s not what you mean), “Pre-conciliar Traditionalists” seems to be an unhelpful dichotomy. Perhaps a more useful distinction are orthodox Catholics as opposed to unorthodox Catholics.
Dear James,
Thank you for the correction, brother in Christ. Your suggestion of Orthodox/heterodox is a gôod one, but perhaps the term “Post-Conciliarists” and not “Vatican II liberals” would have been better? Since the implementation of the Spirit of the Council bears little ressemblence to the council texts.
The problem being the preconceived ambiguities that were planted therein by the political-scheming enemies of Holy Mother Church.
PpBXVI claimed that the real council had yet to be discovered. Where there is hope, there is a way?
But the devastated vineyard is in a State of Decay, as attested to herein.
What characterises those persecuting the SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM TLM is a spirit that stands in opposition that great light in the darkness that was ppBXVI, and therefore the True Council of Vatican II of which he spoke and upon which he acted by signing SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM on 07.07.2007.
Anyone who has seen 07.07.07 on a tabernacle knows it stands for God’s holy name. The path to discovering the True Council is the restoration of SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM rather than Post-Conciliarism?
Howdy Mr. Cracked Nut,
I think the biggest problem with people understanding the landscape of Catholicism in the United States post-Vatican II is an over-simplistic characterization of the movements of various groups before and after the Council. No question that the implementation of the Council was mostly spearheaded in the US by those who claimed the “Spirit of the Council” (who were mostly of a group later called Concilium). This group believed the changes of Vatican II to be a “rupture” with the past – and it’s this group that, mostly, millennials and zoomers are pushing against by seeking a return to a more Scholastic (pre-conciliar) model of Catholicism.
The problem is that neither the Concilium or Scholastic vision of Vatican II really capture what the Council teaches. There is a authentic path to adopt the Council – and it’s the path of Communio theology which stands in continuity with the pre-Conciliar church while still embracing the teaching of the Council. The teachings of Communio are Traditional for this very reason, including embracing the Ordinary Form of the mass (Pope Benedict was of this ilk, btw, despite also bristling at the liturgical abuses implemented mostly by Concilium folks).
All that to say, there is a more nuanced way of looking at the Church’s growth and development that I find very hopeful for where we’re headed in the next pontificate. I could say much more on this topic; but suffice it to say, there is a way to approach the Sacramental Life of the Church with reverence that is consistent with the Council, and I think we’re just coming to the moment where the Church is ready to try it.
Peace,
James
Dear James,
If I may:
“I think we’re just coming to the moment where the Church is ready to try it [reverence].”
Why for 60 years was it possible to try out anything except Sacred Tradition?
What ppBXVI did with SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM 2007-2021 was to try the tried and tested! And normal Catholicism was working so well the meanies shut it down.
Traditionis Custodes was implemented with “an over simplistic characterisation” that too many Catholic faithful were being attracted to tradition and consequently questioning the validity of the last 60 years of Post-Conciliarism. Perish the thought.
We can only pray that the wisdom of ppBXVI will provide an impetus for the Church to exit the Post-Conciliar impasse of tearing-down Catholicism.
A restoration of SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM would be the logical first step towards rediscovering the Catholic Church of the Council: the Catholic Religion as taught and lived ad33-1962. Without it, what use is there in the council texts which issued from and adressed the Catholic Religion and not a Post-Conciliar heritage show busy building the freemasonic brotherhood of man?
But what is cause here, and what is effect? Does belief in the real presence lead one to prefer these liturgical practices, or does participation in these liturgical practices lead one to believe in the real presence? This is a distinction of some importance.
Faith, good works…good works, faith.
Perhaps a little bit of both, one fuels the other.
Going back to the tradition of capitalizing Body and Blood and Real Prescence and His and Him will go a long way to realizing the True Prescence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist too.
Our intellect can allow us to ponder variable descriptions of the Eucharist, and how it should be presented and maintained. But in simplicity, it is the body of Christ, and the absolute essence of the Catholic Mass, and of our faith. At my last duty station in the Navy, I finally became Catholic. My first communion was sort of a miracle in a sense. My Navy duty watches were draining: two eve watches (4PM-12AM), 8 hours later, two day watches (8AM-4PM), 8 hours later, two midnight watches (12AM-8AM). My last midnight watch ended on a Sunday (I was baptized between my two eve watches), and now I was eligible to receive the Eucharist at Mass. However, the last midnight watch was the most frantic, and hectic watch I ever served. We detected 13 Soviet submarines, 18 miles offshore; up and down the East coast (each submarine had 19 nuclear armed missiles). In the Mediterranean, three Soviet ships deliberately bumped into our ships. And China suddenly had 3 army divisions situated at their closest land point to Taiwan. And my duty station was handling and forwarding a ton of messages concerning these specific issues. When the shift was over, I just wanted to get a ton of sleep. But I also wanted to attend Mass. At Mass, I was quite dreary and drained. When it came time for Communion, I dragged myself up to receive the Eucharist. After I received the Eucharist, I took 3 steps, and then suddenly every cell in my body exploded with energy. So after Mass, I drove the 3 hour drive to my parent’s house. I entered the foyer, closed the door, and then suddenly, every ounce of energy left me. I was confused, and wondered what happened. Then I remembered that this all started when I received the Eucharist. At that point, Jesus spoke directly to me: “IT IS my body, always treat it with reverence and respect”. It wasn’t something in my mind, but what I physically heard with my ears. The Eucharist is simply a miracle every time we receive it. That is really the only concern we should have about it.
This certainly is interesting research; but I wonder if it goes far enough to really identify what’s going on. Most people whom I know who attend the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite attend because they’re seeking it out – not necessarily because they’ve been going to it their whole lives. Even in the case of this paper, they’ve indicated that the average age of those attending the EF is around 49 years old, which is older than the typical sample. Given Vatican II having occurred some 60 years ago, I’d assume its far more likely for anyone born after the Counsel to have sought out the EF rather than being raised attending it.
For the record, I certainly think that utilizing all the sacramentals, gestures, praying in Latin during the sacred liturgy, and fostering easy access to Adoration asserts our collective belief in what we’re saying we’re doing (receiving Jesus in the Word and Eucharist) at our parishes and, broadly speaking, reminds congregants/parishioners of the Truth of what we practice at Mass. At the same time, I’m not convinced that correlation necessarily equals causation in all of the tested-for practices. If you really want to know what’s happening in mainstream America, I’d want to see what the data say after you remove those who attend a parish that exclusively offers the EF of the Latin Rite.
The beauty of the whole thing is the validity of the sacrament is that it is not dependent on either the moral status or the beliefs of the celebrant. If he was validly ordained and uses the correct lectionary, the sacrament is valid. At the same time it is not necessary to believe in order to receive grace from reception of the sacrament. Myself being unable to get my head around the whole idea of transubstantiation, I take great comfort in a saying sometimes attributed to Queen Elizabeth I of England – “ His were the words that spake it ( the consecration) His were the hands that brake it ( the bread ) what His word does make it, I accept take it”. In this way I don’t need to know exactly what happened, but I can will to accept it in the fullest measure that Christ means it to be. Even a doubting Thomas can receive in good faith! Praise God!
This survey should not come as a surprise. The new mass teaches a Protestant understanding of the Eucharist, so after 50 years the we have the majority of Catholics with a confused understanding of our faith.
If I may: in your article you have made the following statement: “Five indicated that person is “certain that Jesus is really present in the bread and wine of the Eucharist.”
I have a problem with the phrase “in the bread and wine of the Eucharist”. Using the word “in” implies that the substance of bread still exists! My understanding of ‘transubstantiation’ is that the bread, despite appearances, ceases to exist and the substance of bread is completely changed into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus the Christ.
From my very limited understanding, it is the Anglican/Episcopalian belief of “Consubstantiation” that the Body of Christ co-exists in the ‘consecrated bread”. I could be totally wrong.
As an aside: the phrase “Jesus is present in the Blessed Sacrament” is also somewhat misleading… Jesus is the Blessed Sacrament and the Blessed Sacrament is Jesus, totally and completely!
Our English language is very deficient to explain and present the mysteries of our Faith.