Another Weird Place to Find Consecrated Hosts!

[Spiller]

The Tridentine Latin Mass generally is longer than Novus Ordo Mass (1 hour 15 minutes compared to around 45-50 minutes). I attended one of the largest Latin Mass communities, and a great number people there received communion. 10-15 extra minutes is not going to ruin everyone’s Sunday.

When the Tridentine Mass was celebrated in my home parish in decades past, people were in and out in a bit less than an hour. That included nearly 15 minutes for communion. While the church may actually have been a bit fuller back then, I would guess only 1/4 to 1/3 actually went up for communion on any given Sunday. The exception was Christmas and Easter where we had 4 priests distributing communion.

We don’t have 4 priests anymore. We also distribute communion under both kinds. The responsible and non-abusive use of EmsHC is warranted.

 

[Madaglan]

When the Tridentine Mass was celebrated in my home parish in decades past, people were in and out in a bit less than an hour. That included nearly 15 minutes for communion. While the church may actually have been a bit fuller back then, I would guess only 1/4 to 1/3 actually went up for communion on any given Sunday. The exception was Christmas and Easter where we had 4 priests distributing communion.

We don’t have 4 priests anymore. We also distribute communion under both kinds. The responsible and non-abusive use of EmsHC is warranted.

Regular Mass attendance is significantly lower than back in the day. So, you’re in most cases dealing with a much smaller congregation, especially when “Vigil” Masses that fulfill one’s Sunday obligation, and several Sunday Masses now distribute the parishioners.

Also, considering that something like 99%+ Catholics today regularly receive but never or very rarely go to confession, the solution is not EMCH, but a greater focus on preparation in receiving communion, which includes prior sacramental confession. This should, in effect, make for the priest a manageable number of weekly Sunday communicants.

It is unfortunate the Latin Rite does not have more priests. However, a priest shortage does not justify the transference of sacerdotal functions to those to whom it does not belong.

 

[Spiller]

Regular Mass attendance is significantly lower than back in the day. So, you’re in most cases dealing with a much smaller congregation, especially when “Vigil” Masses that fulfill one’s Sunday obligation, and several Sunday Masses now distribute the parishioners.

As I explained earlier, our attendance/Mass is likely a bit less then it was in say 1965

Also, considering that something like 99%+ Catholics today regularly receive but never or very rarely go to confession, the solution is not EMCH, but a greater focus on preparation in receiving communion, which includes prior sacramental confession. This should, in effect, make for the priest a manageable number of weekly Sunday communicants.

No. Your logic makes no sense at all. While it would most certainly be a blessing if all Catholics had a higher regard for the sacrament of reconciliation, it would have little impact on communion. Around these parts in the olden days, people simply did not go to communion on Sunday if they did not go to confession on Saturday – it made no difference if they had the stain of mortal sin(s) on their souls or not. While it’s praiseworthy to go to confession to absolve even venial sins, it’s not a requirement nor is it in any way a reason to forgo communion. Forgoing communion when one was free of mortal sin because they had not been to confession the night before was not a healthy practice.

In the end hopefully more people would hopefully go to confession more often, but the same amount (and possibly more) would receive communion.

It is unfortunate the Latin Rite does not have more priests. However, a priest shortage does not justify the transference of sacerdotal functions to those to whom it does not belong.

Again, you are simply wrong.

*GIRM 162. The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, e.g., duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been deputed for this purpose. In case of necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion. *

Your personal opinions/tastes do not trump what the Church actually directs/allows.

NB: It’s unfortunate that ALL traditions of the Church don’t have more priests. This shortage is in no way limited to the Latin church.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

No, such a “machine” tabernacle does not exist, but there are some ugly tabernacles out there.

EMHC was a bad idea. There are very, very few cases that actually might require someone other than the clergy to distribute holy communion. And when I say few cases, I mean situations in which there may be one priest for 15,000 people, as is the case in places in South America. This is not the case in the United States. Unfortunately, a fast-food mentality has afflicted the reception of communion in many churches. I’ve seen 6-8 EMHC for services including fewer than 1000 persons. Is there a need for speeding up communion? Is there anything more important than the Eucharist that one has to attend to after Mass? It just eludes me. I find it slightly ronic that in the “extraordinary” rite there are no “extraordinary” ministers of holy communion.

Would the sick and homebound be able to receive without EMHC? The problem here seems to be the tabernacle, rather than EMHC. EMHC are legitimate ministers. I cannot find the documentation, but I don’t believe this free access to the tabernacle is allowed. This is what needs to be addressed.

Lux

 

[Madaglan]

As I explained earlier, our attendance/Mass is likely a bit less then it was in say 1965

No. Your logic makes no sense at all. While it would most certainly be a blessing if all Catholics had a higher regard for the sacrament of reconciliation, it would have little impact on communion. Around these parts in the olden days, people simply did not go to communion on Sunday if they did not go to confession on Saturday – it made no difference if they had the stain of mortal sin(s) on their souls or not. While it’s praiseworthy to go to confession to absolve even venial sins, it’s not a requirement nor is it in any way a reason to forgo communion. Forgoing communion when one was free of mortal sin because they had not been to confession the night before was not a healthy practice.

How does one know with confidence that one is free of mortal sin?

Being free of mortal sin is not an invitation to receiving the Eucharist, but is only a condition that must be met before receiving.

Again, you are simply wrong.

GIRM 162. The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, e.g., duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been deputed for this purpose. In case of
necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion.

Your personal opinions/tastes do not trump what the Church actually directs/allows.

What does “very large number” mean? 100’s? 1000’s? 10’000’s?

The Latin Church has innovated much, and destroyed much, these past fifty years. I do not follow the whims of modernists dazzled by the world.

 

[Spiller]

How does one know with confidence that one is free of mortal sin?

It’s called a conscience…

If we had no way to know if we were in a state of mortal sin, we would also lack the ability to make a valid confession. After all, we would have no idea what to confess.

Being free of mortal sin is not an invitation to receiving the Eucharist, but is only a condition that must be met before receiving.

So?

And not going to communion on Sunday because one did not go to confession on Saturday despite the absence of mortal sin on one’s soul is not a healthy situation.

What does “very large number” mean? 100’s? 1000’s? 10’000’s?

Common sense needs to be and is applied throughout the Church. My gut feel is distribution of communion lasting longer than 15-20 is too long. Others would say a bit shorter or a bit longer. But your opinion that EMsHC should never be used is simply false. In fact, your personal opinion contravenes what the Catholic Church directs.

Keep in mind that Orthodox state church parishes/missions are typically TINY with very few people in attendance.

The Latin Church has innovated much, and destroyed much, these past fifty years. I do not follow the whims of modernists dazzled by the world.

At least it’s not in a state of schism. Your ecclesiastical group is.

 

[EasterJoy]

No, such a “machine” tabernacle does not exist, but there are some ugly tabernacles out there.

EMHC was a bad idea. There are very, very few cases that actually might require someone other than the clergy to distribute holy communion. And when I say few cases, I mean situations in which there may be one priest for 15,000 people, as is the case in places in South America. This is not the case in the United States. Unfortunately, a fast-food mentality has afflicted the reception of communion in many churches. I’ve seen 6-8 EMHC for services including fewer than 1000 persons. Is there a need for speeding up communion? Is there anything more important than the Eucharist that one has to attend to after Mass? It just eludes me. I find it slightly ronic that in the “extraordinary” rite there are no “extraordinary” ministers of holy communion.

Well, as soon as it is decided to make the Precious Blood available to the laity, you have added a need for more ministers right there. I don’t think it is liberal to see value in that.

We have parishes in Oregon with one priest for 1,000 registered families. We have priests doing three and even four Masses every weekend, which is exhausting all by itself, even with EMHC. A lot of these priests are either over 60 or not long out of the seminary and yet taking on the role of pastor alone. This alone is reason to have some help for them.

We even have retired priests who, with the help of pastoral administrators, cover several parishes that would otherwise have no priest at all. Between their other pastoral duties and their human limitations, they are not able to handle all the ministries to the sick and homebound. We could switch to the EF exclusively tomorrow, and we would still need EMHC for that.

I know there are laity who cannot find it in themselves to empathize with that. I’m glad the bishops don’t see it that way.

 

[Pug]

I have seen an EMHC hand Communion to a woman who walked up in the Communion line with her hand extended in the same form as someone being handed a pencil or donut.

I know Catholics who cannot turn both their palms upright in a natural manner, at least, not when they are right in front of their body. Usually it is such people who make a pinching motion with their thumb or some similar maneuver to secure the host so that it doesn’t fall when placed upon their semi-upturned hands. It isn’t always that they are not Catholic. Of course, sometimes it is.

 

[Madaglan]

It’s called a conscience…

Ah, Martin Luther had that, too…

If we had no way to know if we were in a state of mortal sin, we would also lack the ability to make a valid confession. After all, we would have no idea what to confess.

Uh, you’d confess your sins.

So?

And not going to communion on Sunday because one did not go to confession on Saturday despite the absence of mortal sin on one’s soul is not a healthy situation.

If you are aware that you are in a state of grace.

Common sense needs to be and is applied throughout the Church. My gut feel is distribution of communion lasting longer than 15-20 is too long. Others would say a bit shorter or a bit longer. But your opinion that EMsHC should never be used is simply false. In fact, your personal opinion contravenes what the Catholic Church directs.

What if the sense is not common?

Keep in mind that Orthodox state church parishes/missions are typically TINY with very few people in attendance.

It’s really not particular to the Orthodox countries. Traditionally Catholic countries in Western Europe have, in certain places (e.g. the Netherlands), very low Mass attendance rates.

At least it’s not in a state of schism. Your ecclesiastical group is.

Ecclesiastical group?

Your Church recognizes the Eastern Churches, both Catholic and Orthodox, as true Churches.

 

[Madaglan]

Well, as soon as it is decided to make the Precious Blood available to the laity, you have added a need for more ministers right there. I don’t think it is liberal to see value in that.

We have parishes in Oregon with one priest for 1,000 registered families. We have priests doing three and even four Masses every weekend, which is exhausting all by itself, even with EMHC. A lot of these priests are either over 60 or not long out of the seminary and yet taking on the role of pastor alone. This alone is reason to have some help for them.

We even have retired priests who, with the help of pastoral administrators, cover several parishes that would otherwise have no priest at all. Between their other pastoral duties and their human limitations, they are not able to handle all the ministries to the sick and homebound. We could switch to the EF exclusively tomorrow, and we would still need EMHC for that.

I know there are laity who cannot find it in themselves to empathize with that. I’m glad the bishops don’t see it that way.

Well, first off, the Precious Blood is not available at all parishes. In fact, the vast majority of parishes I’ve attended did not regularly offer the Precious Blood.

But in the cases in which the Precious Blood is offered, the priest can give communion via intinction.

Please understand that I’m not completely negating the pastoral aspect. There are EXTREME cases when the priest literally cannot do everything himself.

But what I’ve seen is “extraordinary” ministers of holy communion becoming ordinary aspects of parish life, even in small parishes where it is not warranted. EMHC is not meant as a chance for laity to add to the liturgy, but is an allowance for extreme situations in which there are no other options. The problem is that, in so many places, the exception has become the rule.

 

[Madaglan]

I know Catholics who cannot turn both their palms upright in a natural manner, at least, not when they are right in front of their body. Usually it is such people who make a pinching motion with their thumb or some similar maneuver to secure the host so that it doesn’t fall when placed upon their semi-upturned hands. It isn’t always that they are not Catholic. Of course, sometimes it is.

In such cases, wouldn’t it make more sense to receive on the tongue?

 

[Pug]

In such cases, wouldn’t it make more sense to receive on the tongue?

Perhaps it would. I don’t know their every circumstance, though. Some people have difficulty opening their jaw the appropriate amount for reception on the tongue. I’m one of them. But, I still receive on the tongue, even though I have to pop the jaw to get it open the appropriate amount. Go figure. I may have to give it up someday, at least in the main communion line. But for now, I’m free to do as I wish. (Well, “free” is a relative term. I’m not free to eat carrots, big hamburgers, etc.)

I guess I tend to think of how people are sometimes limited, and that they tend to make accommodations bit by bit and then don’t think about it after that.

 

[Spiller]

Ah, Martin Luther had that, too…

Too bad those orthodox clerics didn’t who stole Catholic parishes in the former USSR.

Uh, you’d confess your sins.

“Uh” you wouldn’t know what a sin was without a conscience.

If you are aware that you are in a state of grace.

What?

What if the sense is not common?

I could see where that would be an issue in your case.

It’s really not particular to the Orthodox countries. Traditionally Catholic countries in Western Europe have, in certain places (e.g. the Netherlands), very low Mass attendance rates.

Depends on what part of the Netherlands.

Ecclesiastical group? Your Church recognizes the Eastern Churches, both Catholic and Orthodox, as true Churches.

For which one of the orthodox state churches? The ones that fight amongst themselves and have shut-off communion to one another?

Look back at your posts to this thread. They added absolutely zero value. Your only reason for posting here was to take shots at the Catholic Church.

Knock it off. Your type have already been removed from the Eastern Catholic forum.

 

[Madaglan]

Too bad those orthodox clerics didn’t who stole Catholic parishes in the former USSR.

Many Eastern Catholic churches were dissolved by the Soviets and forced into the Orthodox Church. Many of these churches have since been returned to the Eastern Catholic Churches.

I could remind you of the crimes of Catholic clerics against the Orthodox, but you can find them on your own.

“Uh” you wouldn’t know what a sin was without a conscience.

You’d know it is a sin, but conscious does not tell you for sure if it is a venial or mortal sin.

I could see where that would be an issue in your case.

Could you please expound on what this means.

Depends on what part of the Netherlands.

In all the Catholic dioceses of the Netherlands.

For which one of the orthodox state churches? The ones that fight amongst themselves and have shut-off communion to one another?

Look back at your posts to this thread. They added absolutely zero value. Your only reason for posting here was to take shots at the Catholic Church.

People get angry when confronted by things they don’t like to hear.

How have I taken shots at the Catholic Church? Much of what I write is shared by millions of traditional-minded Latin Rite Catholics.

Knock it off. Your type have already been removed from the Eastern Catholic forum.

“Your type”?

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.