Can EMs really give out communion?

[benedictgal]

Even if that is what the Pastor instructs them to do?
*

Sir Knight, with all due respect, I do not think you understand. The pastor cannot overrule what the Holy See has ordered. It is not within their authority to do so. I am not under any obligation to obey the celebrant if what he is asking me to do is contrary to what Rome has already declared.

While there may be some who do not wish to accept the decision that Rome has issued, it is not a matter of choice. Rome has told us that for the present, this is not to be done and we must obey. Remember that the celebrant must obey Rome. He cannot do as he pleases, especially if Rome has said no.

 

[Merkel]

So much of this conversation has to do with naivete and in some cases downright ignorance.

Yes, the Church documents say something. Oddly enough our personal interpretations of them are not always accurate. I certainly have seen misinterpretations on these forums. And big arguments about them too.

But let’s say for a given item we are CERTAIN what the Church is directing. We dig into our pastor only to find out he was directed to by his father, our bishop. That responsibility then rests with our bishop, not with us no matter how some love to spin RS.

A classic is the pouring of the Precious Blood in the Archdiocese of LA. Cardinal Mahony gave his “permission” via the Tidings, their newspaper. Immediately the naive person screams I know what the GIRM and RS says and this is wrong! Quite right. If your pastor does not stop the practice then write to Cardinal Mahony! If they don’t them write to the Holy See!

Yeah, good luck with that – nothing will happen. Some people lack the savvy to realize that. They also don’t realize that the consequences for that bad decision rests with the good cardinal and not with them. They also don’t realize they have a solemn duty to be obedient. Instead it’s immediately back to RS where they’ll give you chapter and verse on how the HAVE to take action by golly!

At least it’s amusing.

 

[benedictgal]

So much of this conversation has to do with naivete and in some cases downright ignorance.

Yes, the Church documents say something. Oddly enough our personal interpretations of them are not always accurate. I certainly have seen misinterpretations on these forums. And big arguments about them too.

But let’s say for a given item we are CERTAIN what the Church is directing. We dig into our pastor only to find out he was directed to by his father, our bishop. That responsibility then rests with our bishop, not with us no matter how some love to spin RS.

A classic is the pouring of the Precious Blood in the Archdiocese of LA. Cardinal Mahony gave his “permission” via the Tidings, their newspaper. Immediately the naive person screams I know what the GIRM and RS says and this is wrong! Quite right. If your pastor does not stop the practice then write to Cardinal Mahony! If they don’t them write to the Holy See!

Yeah, good luck with that – nothing will happen. Some people lack the savvy to realize that. They also don’t realize that the consequences for that bad decision rests with the good cardinal and not with them. They also don’t realize they have a solemn duty to be obedient. Instead it’s immediately back to RS where they’ll give you chapter and verse on how the HAVE to take action by golly!

At least it’s amusing.

Merkel, the documents are very clear as to what can and cannot be done. The Holy See has already issued its directive and we must obey. With all due respect, what part of that do you not understand? No blessings means no blessings. You can try to find ways to justify your opinion, but, Rome has spoken rather clearly about the issue. We are to refrain from imparting a blessing in lieu of distributing Holy Communion. The directive from the CDWDS is very clear on that.

 

[Merkel]

Merkel, the documents are very clear as to what can and cannot be done. The Holy See has already issued its directive and we must obey. With all due respect, what part of that do you not understand? No blessings means no blessings. You can try to find ways to justify your opinion, but, Rome has spoken rather clearly about the issue. We are to refrain from imparting a blessing in lieu of distributing Holy Communion. The directive from the CDWDS is very clear on that.

That’s not true. They are not always “very clear.” In fact, in some cases the Church purposely don’t nail things down specifically to leave them to the discretion of the local ordinary – except they do not explicitly say that and some don’t have any idea that happens.

It’s also not clear to most how the Church operates, nor where authority or responsibility rests.

I did read a few of your comments and those of others about receiving a blessing during communion. Your personal opinion was wrong based on the comments of the then Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. That was proven without a shadow of a doubt to anyone willing to read the thread. Since that subject matter is not germane to this thread I’ll stop here.

 

[benedictgal]

[edited]

Actually, the letter from the CDWDS, which is in Notitiae, the official publication of the same congregation, affirms what I had posted. The prefect emeritus was speaking off the cuff; however, the document from the CDWDS is official. It is not anyone’s personal opinion. It is what the CDWDS has declared while the matter is under study. That is a huge difference.

Actually, the matter is germaine to the thread because the OP asks what an EMHC can do. Conversely, if we are to discuss what an EMHC can do, we also need to make very clear what they cannot do. And, the CDWDS has stated that:

1. The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.

***2. Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf. Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; Canon 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).

1. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands — which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here — by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged. ***

1. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, “forbids any pastor, for whatever reason to pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry”. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.

1. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).

This document also has a protocol number: Protocol No. 930/08/L
which is official. It is not a YouTube telecasst. This is a physical, bona fide, genuine document. In fact, it affirms what a cleric from the CDWDS told me when I called the Congrergation on a matter with which they are assisting my father. After we discussed my father’s situation, which is still under review, the cleric asked if we had further questions. I asked him about blessings imparted in lieu of receiving Holy Communion and he gave me the same answer that the CDWDS gave to our two CAF friends who wrote the inquiry. In a word, the answer was “no”, and for the same reasons quoted above.

[edited]