Can any Catholic in Graces of the Church distribute the Eurcharist at mass?

[benedictgal]

You mean the approval of course must come from the priest

Both the request to serve and the approval come from the priest. An EMHC cannot simply ask someone from the pews to come up and serve during Mass. The documents do not allow that.

 

[MusicMan]

… Can any one practicing Catholic distribute the Eucharist if asked by a layperson who is a Eucharistic Monister?

Eucharistic Monister? I see you’re attempting to describe the out of control amount of lay people distributing Communion – the Eucharistic Monster!

Oh, and, again, there is no such person, lay or ordained, called an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. It is not a title bestowed upon someone. It’s merely what happens when a lay person assists with the distribution of Holy Communion. It is an action, not a person or title. The documents are quite clear on this.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Only if asked by priest, not an EMHC.

No. An Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion cannot ask someone from the pews to distribute. Please see the reference that I posted from Redemptionis Sacramentum, which is has the force of universal law since the document comes directly from the Holy See.

It’s not a question as to whether or not the OP can serve; it’s who is doing the asking that can be problematic. An EMHC cannot recruit someone from out of the pews to help out during Mass; that request must come from the priest.

Both the request to serve and the approval come from the priest. An EMHC cannot simply ask someone from the pews to come up and serve during Mass. The documents do not allow that.

I’m an EMHC. I normally do not serve at Mass but instead bring our Lord to the ill, elderly & home-bound.

Our church normally has a fixed number of EMHC’s scheduled for each Mass. Prior to Mass, they sign-in in the sacristy (same for ushers, lecturers, etc.). If they are short in any particular areas, the ushers that are present go out into the pews to recruit for the missing positions.

Given that I am already an EMHC, I’ve been asked on occasion, when they are short, to help with the distribution of Communion.

For my own clarification, I would like to know if this is improper? The priest is expecting X-number of EHMC’s (the number that were scheduled) for the mass. The ushers are assisting to meet his expectations. Given the fact that I am already a regular EMHC, is it improper for me to be asked when I am not scheduled and is it improper for me to accept?

 

[Phemie]

I’m an EMHC. I normally do not serve at Mass but instead bring our Lord to the ill, elderly & home-bound.

Our church normally has a fixed number of EMHC’s scheduled for each Mass. Prior to Mass, they sign-in in the sacristy (same for ushers, lecturers, etc.). If they are short in any particular areas, the ushers that are present go out into the pews to recruit for the missing positions.

Given that I am already an EMHC, I’ve been asked on occasion, when they are short, to help with the distribution of Communion.

For my own clarification, I would like to know if this is improper? The priest is expecting X-number of EHMC’s (the number that were scheduled) for the mass. The ushers are assisting to meet his expectations. Given the fact that I am already a regular EMHC, is it improper for me to be asked when I am not scheduled and is it improper for me to accept?

No, it’s not improper. You have been commissioned to fulfill the role of EMHC and you’re simply being asked to act as such. There’s no difference between being asked by the usher and being scheduled by the secretary.

But a priest may tap someone on the shoulder Sunday morning and say “There are no EMHCs present this morning so would you please help me distribute Communion?” An usher or EMHC is not allowed to do the same thing even if another person is required at that particular Mass.

 

[quiet52]

I have asked people in the pews to help serve Holy Communion when we’re short of commissioned EMHCs, whether they’re scheduled to serve at that particular Mass or not. But I ask the celebrant first. So, he asks, through me (“Father would like to know if…”). I’ve only asked people the priest knows.

What is frustrating is when EMHCs arrive in the church just before, or when, Mass begins. By then, it’s too late to “cancel out” the requests made to others who weren’t originally scheduled to serve.

 

[benedictgal]

I have asked people in the pews to help serve Holy Communion when we’re short of commissioned EMHCs, whether they’re scheduled to serve at that particular Mass or not. But I ask the celebrant first. So, he asks, through me (“Father would like to know if…”). I’ve only asked people the priest knows.

What is frustrating is when EMHCs arrive in the church just before, or when, Mass begins. By then, it’s too late to “cancel out” the requests made to others who weren’t originally scheduled to serve.

However, are the people you are asking already serving as EMHCs or are they simply in the pews? That is a big difference. If they are already serving as EMHCs, then, you are taking the correct action. If they have not ever been EMHCs, then, that deputation is solely reserved to the priest.

 

[benedictgal]

Eucharistic Monister? I see you’re attempting to describe the out of control amount of lay people distributing Communion – the Eucharistic Monster!

Oh, and, again, there is no such person, lay or ordained, called an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. It is not a title bestowed upon someone. It’s merely what happens when a lay person assists with the distribution of Holy Communion. It is an action, not a person or title. The documents are quite clear on this.

Actually, there is a title. If you were to look at Ecclesia de Mysterio, the authoritative document issued by the Congregation for Clergy (in collaboration with the Congregations for the Doctrine of the Faith and Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments), you will find this section:

The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion
The non-ordained faithful already collaborate with the sacred ministers in diverse pastoral situations since “This wonderful gift of the Eucharist, which is the greatest gift of all, demands that such an important mystery should be increasingly better known and its saving power more fully shared”.(95)

Such liturgical service is a response to the objective needs of the faithful especially those of the sick and to those liturgical assemblies in which there are particularly large numbers of the faithful who wish to receive Holy Communion.

1. The canonical discipline concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion must be correctly applied so as to avoid generating confusion. The same discipline establishes that the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is the Bishop, the Priest and the the Deacon.(96) Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are those instituted as acolytes and the faithful so deputed in accordance with Canon 230, 3.(97)

A non-ordained member of the faithful, in cases of true necessity, may be deputed by the diocesan bishop, using the appropriate form of blessing for these situations, to act as an extraordinary minister to distribute Holy Communion outside of liturgical celebrations ad actum vel ad tempus (acting or temporarily appointed) or for a more stable period. In exceptional cases or in unforeseen circumstances, the priest presiding at the liturgy may authorize such ad actum.(98)

1. Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion.(99) They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion. (100)

This function is supplementary and extraordinary (101) and must be exercised in accordance with the norm of law. It is thus useful for the diocesan bishop to issue particular norms concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion which, in complete harmony with the universal law of the Church, should regulate the exercise of this function in his diocese. Such norms should provide, amongst other things, for matters such as the instruction in eucharistic doctrine of those chosen to be extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, the meaning of the service they provide, the rubrics to be observed, the reverence to be shown for such an august Sacrament and instruction concerning the discipline on admission to Holy Communion.

To avoid creating confusion, certain practices are to be avoided and eliminated where such have emerged in particular Churches:

extraordinary ministers receiving Holy Communion apart from the other faithful as though concelebrants;
association with the renewal of promises made by priests at the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, as well as other categories of faithful who renew religious vows or receive a mandate as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion;
the habitual use of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion at Mass thus arbitrarily extending the concept of “a great number of the faithful”.

Even here, there is already language that specifically states that the priest is the one who is to ask the person in the pew (so to speak) if he can assist him in distributing Holy Communion.

Ecclesia de Mysterio, which remains in force, serves as the precursor to Redemptionis Sacramentum.

 

[MusicMan]

You’re right. There are titles:

Person who serves as an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion: LAYPERSON
Person who serves as an ordinary minister of Holy Communion: Deacon, Priest, or Bishop.

Glad we got that cleared up.

 

[Godfollower]

You’re right. There are titles:

Person who serves as an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion: LAYPERSON
Person who serves as an ordinary minister of Holy Communion: Deacon, Priest, or Bishop.

Glad we got that cleared up.

Hmm. Let’s see what the Church has to say about it.

[156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.

[157.] If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed. Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it. The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons.

[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.[259] This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.

[Redemptionis Sacramentum](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...0423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter VII) ¶¶ 156-58.

So, apparently, there is such a person (by definition a layman) as an “extraordinary minister of Holy Communion,” who fulfills the function of “extraordinary minister of Holy Communion,” and that person can be “appointed to this ministry” or not, according to the rules of the Church.

If a layman is appointed to be an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, then that person fulfills the function of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.

Please don’t expect the people in the Church to send out emails saying “We are in need of two more laymen to fulfill the function of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion for the 10:30 Mass this Sunday” when they could just as easily – and correctly – say “We are in need of two more extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion for the 10:30 Mass this Sunday.”

The term applies to the function and to the persons appointed to fulfill that function. Both usages are clearly correct, as those are the usages the Church employs.

 

[Godfollower]

Meanwhile, back at the thread . . . .

Any Catholic in good standing can be appointed. But the appointment has to come from the bishop for “term” appointments and from the presiding priest for a one-time appointment.

[155.] If, moreover, reasons of real necessity prompt it, another lay member of Christ’s faithful may also be delegated by the diocesan Bishop, in accordance with the norm of law,[256] for one occasion or for a specified time, and an appropriate formula of blessing may be used for the occasion. This act of appointment, however, does not necessarily take a liturgical form, nor, if it does take a liturgical form, should it resemble sacred Ordination in any way. Finally, in special cases of an unforeseen nature, permission can be given for a single occasion by the Priest who presides at the celebration of the Eucharist.
. . . .
[159.] It is never allowed for the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion to delegate anyone else to administer the Eucharist, as for example a parent or spouse or child of the sick person who is the communicant.

[Redemptionis Sacramentum](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...0423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter VII) ¶ 159.

 

[MusicMan]

Sorry, but 156 and 157 pretty clearly refer to the function and duties, not to a title for people.

And an email going out to recruit more people to serve as emHC would simply read, “We need two more people to serve as emHC (or to distribute Holy Communion.”

I will forever maintain that the Church gives title to the function, not the people, and that by bestowing such a grand title on laypeople, they make them really important. If we’d drop the subterfuge and not bestow a title where none exists, these problems would go away.

 

[zab]

Sorry, **but 156 and 157 pretty clearly refer to the function and duties, not to a title for people. **

And an email going out to recruit more people to serve as emHC would simply read, “We need two more people to serve as emHC (or to distribute Holy Communion.”

I will forever maintain that the Church gives title to the function, not the people, and that by bestowing such a grand title on laypeople, they make them really important. If we’d drop the subterfuge and not bestow a title where none exists, these problems would go away.

[156.]This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened
That is how I read it- “This function…is that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.”

 

[benedictgal]

Hmm. Let’s see what the Church has to say about it.

[Redemptionis Sacramentum](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...0423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter VII) ¶¶ 156-58.

So, apparently, there is such a person (by definition a layman) as an “extraordinary minister of Holy Communion,” who fulfills the function of “extraordinary minister of Holy Communion,” and that person can be “appointed to this ministry” or not, according to the rules of the Church.

If a layman is appointed to be an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, then that person fulfills the function of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.

Please don’t expect the people in the Church to send out emails saying “We are in need of two more laymen to fulfill the function of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion for the 10:30 Mass this Sunday” when they could just as easily – and correctly – say “We are in need of two more extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion for the 10:30 Mass this Sunday.”

The term applies to the function and to the persons appointed to fulfill that function. Both usages are clearly correct, as those are the usages the Church employs.

Furthermore, we also should read Redemptionis Sacramentum in light of Ecclesia de Mysterio, which says “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion” in some of the sections that I posted in one of my previous responses.

 

[MusicMan]

And I maintain that Ecclesia de Mysterio refers to the function, the duties and responsibilities of said function, and does not designate the title emHC upon the non-ordained faithful who are allowed to serve as an emHC.

Non-ordained faithful is the title used in Ecclesia de Mysterio, while extraordinary minister of Holy Communion is the function of the ministry that they can be selected to participate in.

I further maintain, and I feel like I’m beating a dead horse here (quick, I need lasix!), that if we stopped bestowing the title of emHC upon laypeople, we would see far less abuse in the hordes of them climbing the altar rails to distribute.

It is a privilege to serve as an emHC. It is not something you become.

 

[benedictgal]

And I maintain that Ecclesia de Mysterio refers to the function, the duties and responsibilities of said function, and does not designate the title emHC upon the non-ordained faithful who are allowed to serve as an emHC.

Non-ordained faithful is the title used in Ecclesia de Mysterio, while extraordinary minister of Holy Communion is the function of the ministry that they can be selected to participate in.

I further maintain, and I feel like I’m beating a dead horse here (quick, I need lasix!), that if we stopped bestowing the title of emHC upon laypeople, we would see far less abuse in the hordes of them climbing the altar rails to distribute.

It is a privilege to serve as an emHC. It is not something you become.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion; however, if you read the entire section that I posted you will find that Ecclesia de Mysterio points out to extraordinariy ministers of Holy Communion. It does not say persons functioning as an extraordinary minister. It uses the term in the plural and in the singular.

Thus, the term describes both the person and the function he is performing. So, it is both a title and a function. Even the documented references support that dual notion.

 

[MusicMan]

As are you, however, I maintain that mine is the right one, and that yours is not only erroneous, but it supports, however well intentioned, the root of the problem.

I would recommend that the original document in Latin be reviewed. It is entirely possible that liberties were taken with the translation for brevity’s sake.

 

[benedictgal]

As are you, however, I maintain that mine is the right one, and that yours is not only erroneous, but it supports, however well intentioned, the root of the problem.

I would recommend that the original document in Latin be reviewed. It is entirely possible that liberties were taken with the translation for brevity’s sake.

I maintain that mine is the correct interpretation, given that the documents all support that dual notion. I do not know if you are familiar with the Spanish language, but, here is that translation of RS:

[157.] Si habitualmente hay número suficiente de ministros sagrados, también para la distribución de la sagrada Comunión, no se pueden designar ministros extraordinarios de la sagrada Comunión. En tales circunstancias, los que han sido designados para este ministerio, no lo ejerzan. Repruébese la costumbre de aquellos sacerdotes que, a pesar de estar presentes en la celebración, se abstienen de distribuir la comunión, encomendando esta tarea a laicos.[258]

[158.] **El ministro extraordinario de la sagrada Comunión **podrá administrar la Comunión solamente en ausencia del sacerdote o diácono, cuando el sacerdote está impedido por enfermedad, edad avanzada, o por otra verdadera causa, o cuando es tan grande el número de los fieles que se acercan a la Comunión, que la celebración de la Misa se prolongaría demasiado.[259] Pero esto debe entenderse de forma que una breve prolongación sería una causa absolutamente insuficiente, según la cultura y las costumbres propias del lugar.

The Latin also refers to the word “minister”:

[157.] Si de more adsit copia ministrorum sacrorum quae etiam ad distributionem sacrae Communionis sufficit, nequeunt ministri extraordinarii sacrae Communionis deputari. Talibus in adiunctis, ii qui ad eiusmodi ministerium deputati sint, ne idem exerceant. Reprobandus est usus illorum Sacerdotum, qui, licet celebrationi ipsi intersint, a Communione tamen distribuenda se abstinent, laicis id munus committentes.[258]

[158.] **Extraordinarius enim sacrae Communionis minister **poterit Communionem ministrare solummodo cum Sacerdos vel Diaconus desunt, cum Sacerdos debilitate vel provecta aetate vel alia vera causa impeditur vel cum fidelium ad Communionem accedentium numerus tantus est, ut ipsa Missae celebratio nimis protrahatur.[259] Quod tamen ita intendatur, ut causa omnino insufficiens erit prolongatio brevis, secundum rerum et culturae loci adiuncta.

They are not discussing the function, they are naming the person.

 

[EasterJoy]

Music Man, whether you are right or wrong with regards to translations, there is a practical problem with what you’re proposing.

The Church has a serious duty to avoid putting anyone known to be problematic in a position of trust. For reasons legal and ethical, everyone who might be called upon to serve in public liturgy must have a background check, whenever that is possible. I think you would agree that there also is a serious duty to make certain that the person is aware of the gravity, has the practical knowledge of the function they are being asked to fulfill, because this knowledge–not to mention an explicit belief in the True Presence!–cannot be automatically assumed to exist in any given member of the faithful.

Since we have the duty to choose and prepare these people carefully, we are naturally going to have a name for people who have been thus prepared for this particular function.* I would argue that once you’ve given the person the preparation, it doesn’t matter what words you attach to describe that.* They’re going to have the awareness that they are prepared to fulfill the function, and they are going to be subject to the attending temptations, such as they are, including perhaps a desire to be necessary when they are not. This is human nature.

I’m not saying you aren’t raising a real possible problem. I just don’t think that quibbling about titles is going to provide a way around it. A horse trained to run knows it is trained to run. It is a firm hand, and not its particular name, that will keep it reined in. In light of that, we may as well choose the names based on how well they describe.

 

[MusicMan]

It never ceases to amaze me that we sit here and quibble over numbers of lay people distributing Communion at Mass, quibble over titles, quibble over qualifications, quibble over the priest’s behavior, and so many other pieces of minutiae.

What about visiting the sick? The infirm? The dying? What about ministering to the poor and the needy?

When we come on here and do this, we’re not Catholics or Christians or followers of Christ. We’re a joke. A big, embarrassing, shameful joke, quoting documents all day long and letting the things Christ called us to do to build up the Kingdom languish.

I hope that Mother Mary is wiping dry the Baby Jesus’s tears from when he sees threads and discussions like this.

 

[zab]

It never ceases to amaze me that we sit here and quibble over numbers of lay people distributing Communion at Mass, quibble over titles, quibble over qualifications, quibble over the priest’s behavior, and so many other pieces of minutiae.

What about visiting the sick? The infirm? The dying? What about ministering to the poor and the needy?

When we come on here and do this, we’re not Catholics or Christians or followers of Christ. We’re a joke. A big, embarrassing, shameful joke, quoting documents all day long and letting the things Christ called us to do to build up the Kingdom languish.

I hope that Mother Mary is wiping dry the Baby Jesus’s tears from when he sees threads and discussions like this.

You do have a point.