Can a lay woman give communion??

  • Thread starter Thread starter eva77
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

eva77

Guest
Was watching a mass celebration and saw a female(not a reverend sister or nun) handing out the eucharist to communicants.and a friend mentioned that it was wrong for a woman to touch the communion,because she’s always unclean once in a month. While i dont believe that’s a good reason (kinda dumb actually),my thoughts are that lay persons shouldnt hand out communion.
What’s the church’s position on this? And opinions please??
 
The Church’s position is that in cases where the priest is ill or there aren’t enough priests or deacons to distribute Communion in a timely matter (and that should be narrowly interpreted), male and female members of the congregation may assist in the distribution.

They are known as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC for short). “Extraordinary” in this case doesn’t mean ‘super duper special’, it means that this is not the ‘ordinary’ way of doing things.

By the way, anybody who is not a deacon, priest or bishop is a ‘lay’ person.
 
I work at a Catholic high school, about 950 students and 80 staff. At our full school masses, it is impractical for the lone priest to distribute communion to so many people. We have about 6 or 8 senior students (aged 16-18), male and female, who go through some training as extraordinary ministers. We just call them “ministers” for short (everyone knows the distinction; we don’t get too pedantic about it). They are invariably well behaved, respectful young people and they do a fine job. Dare I say, a necessary job.
 
firstly,the priest was right there beside her,there were 2 lay women,and 3priests. Secondly the congregation wasn’t that large to require assistance. Thirdly,wouldn’t it be much better if they were women of the cloth like sisters or nuns instead of just lay women?

A friend argued that,communion wasn’t even suppose to be given but rather taken,as only those in a state of grace could partake,so being offered the chalice and then taking the communion meant accepting that you were indeed in a state of grace and would answer the consequences if you lied. But if you were given the communion,any blame of your ‘‘graceless’’ state fell on the priest who gave you the communion. Is there really any basis to this??
 
eva77 said:
A friend argued that,communion wasn’t even suppose to be given but rather taken,as only those in a state of grace could partake,so being offered the chalice and then taking the communion meant accepting that you were indeed in a state of grace and would answer the consequences if you lied. But if you were given the communion,any blame of your ‘‘graceless’’ state fell on the priest who gave you the communion. Is there really any basis to this??
Click to expand...
That sounds more like superstition than theology.
 
eva77 said:
Was watching a mass celebration and saw a female(not a reverend sister or nun) handing out the eucharist to communicants.and a friend mentioned that it was wrong for a woman to touch the communion,because she’s always unclean once in a month. While i dont believe that’s a good reason (kinda dumb actually),my thoughts are that lay persons shouldnt hand out communion.
What’s the church’s position on this? And opinions please??
Click to expand...
Why would you think so? In my Parish, it takes up to 15 Minister’s of Communion to Distribute communion per weekend Mass.
 
eva77 said:
Was watching a mass celebration and saw a female(not a reverend sister or nun) handing out the eucharist to communicants.and a friend mentioned that it was wrong for a woman to touch the communion,because she’s always unclean once in a month. While i dont believe that’s a good reason (kinda dumb actually),my thoughts are that lay persons shouldnt hand out communion.
What’s the church’s position on this? And opinions please??
Click to expand...
I see them all the time, I think it’s great and have no problem with it. I feel that if the laity are in service to a particular church and especially if they belong to an order for the laity, like the Secular Franciscan Order, than that’s fine with me.
 
eva77 said:
firstly,the priest was right there beside her,there were 2 lay women,and 3priests. Secondly the congregation wasn’t that large to require assistance. Thirdly,wouldn’t it be much better if they were women of the cloth like sisters or nuns instead of just lay women?

A friend argued that,communion wasn’t even suppose to be given but rather taken,as only those in a state of grace could partake,so being offered the chalice and then taking the communion meant accepting that you were indeed in a state of grace and would answer the consequences if you lied. But if you were given the communion,any blame of your ‘‘graceless’’ state fell on the priest who gave you the communion. Is there really any basis to this??
Click to expand...
Sounds like your friend needs a little catechesis. BTW sisters and nuns are lay women.
 
eva77 said:
wouldn’t it be much better if they were women of the cloth like sisters or nuns instead of just lay women?
Click to expand...
As Phemie alluded to, sisters and nuns are lay women… 😉
A friend argued that,communion wasn’t even suppose to be given but rather taken,as only those in a state of grace could partake,so being offered the chalice and then taking the communion meant accepting that you were indeed in a state of grace and would answer the consequences if you lied. But if you were given the communion,any blame of your ‘‘graceless’’ state fell on the priest who gave you the communion. Is there really any basis to this??
Click to expand...
Yikes! No!

In fact, the Church speaks to reception of communion rather than taking it! And, regardless of whether you perceive of it as being ‘received’ or ‘taken’, the responsibility for worthy reception of the Eucharist lies with the person approaching, not with the priest/minister distributing!
 
oh wow…did’nt know that sisters and nuns were laity too,guess i missed that part of cathecism. Thanks.

Right you are too,just as i told my friend whether the priest is giving or you are taking,you definitely walked all the way to receive/take,and you also opened your mouth and gladly chewed,so you are sooo to blame if you did that unjustly.
 
eva77 said:
a friend mentioned that it was wrong for a woman to touch the communion,because she’s always unclean once in a month.
Click to expand...
I know that this is the position of a kind-of-Russian Orthodoxish sect called Old Believers (not the ones w/o priests, but the “priested” Old Believers).
Is your friend Catholic?
 
eva77 said:
firstly,the priest was right there beside her,there were 2 lay women,and 3priests. Secondly the congregation wasn’t that large to require assistance.
Click to expand...
The celebrant of the Mass is the chief liturgist, and HE decides when and whether he need extraordinary ministers. You may have an opinion, but it is just that-- an opinion. The priest has done nothing wrong in having extraoridinary ministers, as they are most definitely allowed.
eva77 said:
Thirdly,wouldn’t it be much better if they were women of the cloth like sisters or nuns instead of just lay women?
Click to expand...
No. You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that a religious sister is somehow “better” than any other lay person when it comes to being an extraordinary minister. They are the same. One is either ordained (priest or deacon and an ordinary minister-- or one is lay (everyone else) and an extraordinary minister.
eva77 said:
A friend argued that,communion wasn’t even suppose to be given but rather taken,as only those in a state of grace could partake,so being offered the chalice and then taking the communion meant accepting that you were indeed in a state of grace and would answer the consequences if you lied. But if you were given the communion,any blame of your ‘‘graceless’’ state fell on the priest who gave you the communion. Is there really any basis to this??
Click to expand...
I do no understand your concepts of “given” and “taken”. The EHMC gives, and the communicant receives.

But at any rate, no the “blame” for receiving communion while not in a state of grace falls on you, not the priest.

There is no basis for your friend’s assertion, if I am understanding the sentence correctly.
 
eva77 said:
Was watching a mass celebration and saw a female(not a reverend sister or nun) handing out the eucharist to communicants.and a friend mentioned that it was wrong for a woman to touch the communion,because she’s always unclean once in a month. While i dont believe that’s a good reason (kinda dumb actually),my thoughts are that lay persons shouldnt hand out communion.
What’s the church’s position on this? And opinions please??
Click to expand...
The Church’s postion is that a woman’s menstrual cycle is not a consideration. It has nothing to do with it.

-Tim-
 
eva77 said:
a friend mentioned that it was wrong for a woman to touch the communion,because she’s always unclean once in a month.
Click to expand...
😃 i needed a good laugh today…
2 questions can a woman take communion when its her “time” seeing she’s unclean? and
does your friend eat pork (another old testament thingy…)?

Sorry, please dont ban me moderator-just slap my hand…
 
dee_burk said:
😃 i needed a good laugh today…
2 questions can a woman take communion when its her “time” seeing she’s unclean? and
does your friend eat pork (another old testament thingy…)?

Sorry, please dont ban me moderator-just slap my hand…
Click to expand...
Where’s her sign that says “unclean, unclean!” I thought all women wore them around that time of the month…don’t tell me I’m the only one!:D::blushing:
 
Phemie said:
They are not ordained so they are part of the laity.
Click to expand...
Oh, I had such an argument with a sister over that. She maintained that yes, they were lay in one sense, but CONSECRATED laity, so not ‘just’ laity.
 
While they are permitted to hand out communion, I guess the bishop could require that all lay ministers of any stripe be male. I know this has been done with altar servers. Perhaps the person was referring to a local policy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top