M
Merkel
Guest
Absolutely!
- Status
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Actually, both “sides” of this issue are correct. Laypersons cannot “confer blessings” during Mass (nor a blessing properly speaking even outside of Mass). And if the approved ritual is followed, this does not happen (or appear to happen). That should set at-ease the concerns of those who oppose lay “blessings” during Mass. To put it another way, if there’s no lay blessing, there’s no reason for concern.
Because the Holy See approved the St Blaise day ritual, it can be done during Mass. That’s realy the only relevant point. Regardless of how one constructs the argument to arive at the conclusion, ultimately the Holy See’s approval settles the matter.
T
thereseozi
Guest
Daily Mass at my Church includes up to 300 people. (It is a large parish.) I am so blessed to be able to attend daily Mass at this parish. Even the Pastoral Musician is at Mass every day to play beautiful music on the organ and/or piano.What amazes me is that St. Blase’s feast day usually falls on a weekday. Why would there be so many folks at a weekday Mass that would necessitate a prest having an EMHC help out? If he can distribute Holy Communion to 40 or less communicants, why can’t he bless the same amount of throats? The blessing is not that long.
S
surritter
Guest
Yes – the Book of Blessings allows EMHCs to help out with the St. Blase blessing of throats!
:tiphat:
:tiphat:
F
FrDavid96
Guest
Actually, it doesn’t–nor does any other liturgical document of the Church. EMHCs may be apointed to assist the priest in the distribution of the Eucharist, nothing more. Unless they are engaged in actually distributing the Eucharist by virtue of a deputation from that priest at that specific moment, they are not even EMHCs. In other words, after the homily, or after Mass is ended, there are no EMHCs; that temporary office doesn’t exist at that moment.
S
surritter
Guest
Oops – that’s what I get from looking at second-hand sources. The actual book doesn’t allow that? I’m guessing ashes are still OK because there’s no blessing involved.
:doh2:
:doh2:
C
Corki
Guest
The ashes are blessed but there isn’t a blessing involved in the distribution of them. Anyone can be enlisted to help with distributing ashes.
With that being said, there are many, many people in my parish who go to extreme lengths to only receive the ashes from our priest.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
It’s not a matter of whether or not a layperson may assist the priest when he blesses throats, or assist with the distribution of ashes. The real point is that a person who might be appointed to act as an EMHC when it comes time for the distribution of Communion (or who did do so if the Mass is over), is not somehow automatically qualified to assist with these other rituals. The misunderstanding is that an EMHC has any other role beyond assisting at Communion. Being a potential EMHC does not mean that a person has any office or is in any other way distinct from any other layperson (although of course, one must be qualified to serve as EMHC in the first place, which itself is a distinction).
A layperson might be appointed as an EMHC when it comes time to distribute Communion.
A layperson might be appointed to assist the priest with throats or ashes.
Both statements are true, but one function has nothing to do with the other function.
L
Lux_et_Tenebrae
Guest
Hi,
I have never seen any lay person who is not an EMHC assist in these services. Perhaps this is the reason for the confusion.
Definitely in hospitals & other care facilities the EMHC are used for these services. The patients may prefer a priest, but most are very grateful for the EMHC, since a priest would not be able to visit all of them.
Lux
I have never seen any lay person who is not an EMHC assist in these services. Perhaps this is the reason for the confusion.
Definitely in hospitals & other care facilities the EMHC are used for these services. The patients may prefer a priest, but most are very grateful for the EMHC, since a priest would not be able to visit all of them.
Lux
N
ncjohn
Guest
FrDavid is exactly correct here that being an EMHC does not “entitle” one to assist the priest in any other capacity, or even to act as an EMHC for that matter unless a genuine need is there.
It is true that, as a practical matter, it is almost always the EMHC’s who do provide that assistance because they are already involved and available and don’t require other scheduling. But it is not their status as an EMHC that qualifies them to do this as it is a completely separate function. Any lay person could be designated, again as long as there is a genuine need, as long as they follow the ritual as designed and don’t try to add blessings they are not allowed to give.
Contrary to what was stated, that it occurred “during” Mass is not the bone of contention. The only bone of contention would be if the lay minister is going beyond their specified role in the ritual. Hopefully nobody was spurred to a confrontation with their priest over this because of the misunderstandings about what is actually permitted.
Peace,
It is true that, as a practical matter, it is almost always the EMHC’s who do provide that assistance because they are already involved and available and don’t require other scheduling. But it is not their status as an EMHC that qualifies them to do this as it is a completely separate function. Any lay person could be designated, again as long as there is a genuine need, as long as they follow the ritual as designed and don’t try to add blessings they are not allowed to give.
Contrary to what was stated, that it occurred “during” Mass is not the bone of contention. The only bone of contention would be if the lay minister is going beyond their specified role in the ritual. Hopefully nobody was spurred to a confrontation with their priest over this because of the misunderstandings about what is actually permitted.
Peace,
R
RosalieM
Guest
Since my return to the Church I have come across countless bones of contention.
Speaking for myself, unless I have no choice, I will go to the priest for communion and for ashes and throat blessings.
Speaking for myself, unless I have no choice, I will go to the priest for communion and for ashes and throat blessings.
M
Merkel
Guest
That’s your choice of course. Just don’t suggest what you choose is in any way better than receiving from a layperson.Since my return to the Church I have come across countless bones of contention.
R
RosalieM
Guest
Yes, it’s my choice and why are you being confrontational in telling me “just don’t suggest it’s better”? I won’t. I’ll simply say I believe it carries more weight receiving from the hands of a priest. Oops, my bad – I just did imply it’s better. Well, whaddaya know. So sue me. It’s your prerogative to disagree. So I’m unsubscribing to this thread. I appreciate the (name removed by moderator)ut, except for the confrontational one above.
God bless you all.
God bless you all.
B
Brendan
Guest
Recieving the Eucharist from a priest IS better, the Church itself knows that, and that is why the use of EMHC’s is restricted to times of need.
The priest, during Mass, is configured as in persona Christi. So when one recieved from the hands of a priest, one is recieving Christ from Christ Himself.
As far as the blessing of the throats, that too is better from a priest. In addition to the invocation and prayers of St. Blaise, The priest may impart the blessing with the Authority and Merits of the Church Herself. The layperson can ‘only’ invoke St. Blaise. While that is powerful in, and of itself, the recieptient can do they same themselves and both lack the additional efficatiousness of the priestly blessing
The ashes, however, DO have the priestly blessing, and the lay person can distribute those in the same way as the priest outside of the context of the Mass.
Within the Mass, the priestly nature again takes effect, and one is recieving ashes and the admonition to sin no more from Christ Himself.
S
surritter
Guest
You say that receiving ashes from a layperson is the same as receiving from a priest, but receiving the consecrated host from a layperson is in some way not as good as receiving from a priest. Why the difference?
Obviously, the Eucharist is worlds apart from blessed ashes, but theologically speaking doesn’t the host contain all the power needed, no matter whose hands deliver it to me?
So I would actually say the opposite: the host is a self-contained packet of power, but imposing ashes requires the person to invoke something and perform an action.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Because the priest has given his hands to Christ - thus, in a sense, they are Christ’s hands - thus, when we receive from the priest, we are, in a very real sense, receiving from Christ’s own hands, just as the disciples did at the Last Supper.
N
Newbie2
Guest
Where on earth does it say that the Priest is acting in persona Christi when distributing communion???To say receiving from a priest is somehow “better” implies that receiving from a Deacon or lay person is somehow “not as good”. Baloney. This is a very disturbing way of looking at the Sacrament, that the benefit of whom one receives it from depends on whom is distributing it. That line of reasoning would seems to suggest that receiving from a Bishop, Archbishop, Monsenior or even the Pope would be “better” than receiving it from a priest.
Baloney. What about a Deacon? They’re clergy too.Because the priest has given his hands to Christ - thus, in a sense, they are Christ’s hands - thus, when we receive from the priest, we are, in a very real sense, receiving from Christ’s own hands, just as the disciples did at the Last Supper.
Faulty thinking here, guys. I understand why one might feel more special receiving the sacrament from a priest, but the sacrament is no “better” just because of whom distributes it.
Show me a reference where it says that the sacrament received from a priest is “better”.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Yes, and their hands are also consecrated to Christ, as well.
A lay person’s hands are not, though.
B
Brendan
Guest
Note that I said that recieving ashes from a priest and a layperson are theologically the same OUTSIDE OF A MASS.
Here is my actual words, with the appropriate section underlined.
Within a Mass, the priest is in the person of Christ, and therefore recieving ANYTHING from him is not the same as recieving the same thing from a layperson.
B
Brendan
Guest
Is recieving from the hands of Christ the same thing as recieving it from me or you?Show me a reference where it says that the sacrament received from a priest is “better”.
- Status