Can EMs really give out communion?

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Yes it is frustating that apparently some churches don’t go over it… the schedule has said EMs ever since my dad recieved orders here (it is a military church). Just recently my finance and I have been going to mass off-base, and realized how different it is. I will bring the material you gave me and talk to the priest about changing the documents that are handed out at church. It isn’t any fun to be misinformed about something so important!

I agree with you that EMHCs are there to assist with the wine or in special circumstances. At the church we go to now, there are two EMHCs that help with the Blood of Christ, but the church on base has some for the Host as well, which i dont feel is necessary in a small church.

See? this is the problem—It is not about what the congregation FEELS is right, but up to the judgement of the Pastor. Certainly you may disagree, but it is your obligation to respect and obey him. There is a section of the document quoted which many overlook.

1. Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.290 It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

I have never heard of a Bishop going against a pastor in these matters which are left to his judgement. Some also may wish to review the Catechism and canon law about respecting and obeying their pastor. If a perceived abuse is reported, it should be left to those in authority.

Lux

 

[hamburglar]

I believe what you said “First I hope you realize that both species are indeed the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ no matter if you receive them from a cleric or a layperson.” to be true… but I also prefer to take it from the priest. As i said before, you are supposed to minimize the handling of the Body of Christ.

I don’t feel that I am protesting? Nor do I want to draw attention to myself. The parish on-base is very liberal, and I do not like how they handle things with the EMHC… I guess that sounds like a protest, but that is not intentional… I just prefer to take it from the priest.

I will not receive from an EMHC. I will only receive from a Priest, on the tongue. The Priest’s hands are sacred, and they are consecrated for the purpose of confecting the Eucharist. I also only receive the Host, since It contains both the Body and the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I still don’t see a reason why the Precious Blood is distributed to the Faithful.

I think that an EMHC is good for special cases (such as what was mentioned before about hospitals). I think that using them every sunday is in a way, an abuse if they are not needed.

I agree, EMHC’s are WAY overused. There is no need for an army of people to flock up to the Altar for sake of “Active Participation.” It’s quite ridiculous. Does Communion really need to be a race?

 

[Merkel]

I believe what you said “First I hope you realize that both species are indeed the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ no matter if you receive them from a cleric or a layperson.” to be true… but I also prefer to take it from the priest. As i said before, you are supposed to minimize the handling of the Body of Christ.

I don’t feel that I am protesting? Nor do I want to draw attention to myself. The parish on-base is very liberal, and I do not like how they handle things with the EMHC… I guess that sounds like a protest, but that is not intentional… I just prefer to take it from the priest.

I think that an EMHC is good for special cases (such as what was mentioned before about hospitals). I think that using them every sunday is in a way, an abuse if they are not needed.

And what was the “?” to?

I had a typo in there, i meant fiance, not finance

The consecrated hosts will be handled the same amount whether it is by an ordained man or a layperson.

 

[Merkel]

I will not receive from an EMHC. I will only receive from a Priest, on the tongue. The Priest’s hands are sacred, and they are consecrated for the purpose of confecting the Eucharist. I also only receive the Host, since It contains both the Body and the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I still don’t see a reason why the Precious Blood is distributed to the Faithful.

What do the status of a priests’ hands have to do with regard to receiving communion? What are we to infer from that comment? That lay hands profane the Blessed Sacrament or somehow lessen it? How could that possibly be? The same goes for a priest’s hands. Are they somehow adding or preserving something to the Blessed Sacrament? How could that possibly be?

Offering communion under both species has far superior sign value:

GIRM 85. It is most desirable that the faithful, just as the priest himself is bound to do, receive the Lord’s Body from hosts consecrated at the same Mass and that, in the instances when it is permitted, they partake of the chalice so that even by means of the signs Communion will stand out more clearly as a participation in the sacrifice actually being celebrated.

 

[benedictgal]

What do the status of a priests’ hands have to do with regard to receiving communion? What are we to infer from that comment? That lay hands profane the Blessed Sacrament or somehow lessen it? How could that possibly be? The same goes for a priest’s hands. Are they somehow adding or preserving something to the Blessed Sacrament? How could that possibly be?

Offering communion under both species has far superior sign value:

GIRM 85. It is most desirable that the faithful, just as the priest himself is bound to do, receive the Lord’s Body from hosts consecrated at the same Mass and that, in the instances when it is permitted, they partake of the chalice so that even by means of the signs Communion will stand out more clearly as a participation in the sacrifice actually being celebrated.

However, there are certain parameters to this. Redemptionis Sacramentum notes the following:

[101.] In order for Holy Communion under both kinds to be administered to the lay members of Christ’s faithful, due consideration should be given to the circumstances, as judged first of all by the diocesan Bishop. It is to be completely excluded where even a small danger exists of the sacred species being profaned.187 With a view to wider co-ordination, the Bishops’ Conferences should issue norms, once their decisions have received the recognitio of the Apostolic See through the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, especially as regards “the manner of distributing Holy Communion to the faithful under both kinds, and the faculty for its extension”.188

[102.] The chalice should not be ministered to lay members of Christ’s faithful where there is such a large number of communicants189 that it is difficult to gauge the amount of wine for the Eucharist and there is a danger that “more than a reasonable quantity of the Blood of Christ remain to be consumed at the end of the celebration”.190 The same is true wherever access to the chalice would be difficult to arrange, or where such a large amount of wine would be required that its certain provenance and quality could only be known with difficulty, or wherever there is not an adequate number of sacred ministers or extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion with proper formation, or where a notable part of the people continues to prefer not to approach the chalice for various reasons, so that the sign of unity would in some sense be negated.

Furthemrore, the communicant receiving the Sacred Host still receives the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. While both Sacred Species would constitute a fuller sign, it is not always feasible.

Regarding the overuse of EMHCs, Ecclesiae de Mysterio notes the following:

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”. ***

Rome recognized this as being a problem as late as 12 years ago. It also addressed the issue over four years ago with Redemptionis Sacramentum when it noted that:

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.

If things were going well, Rome would not have had to take great measures to issue these documents.

 

[TLara]

The Priest and Deacon are properly called Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

Only a Bishop or Priest are Eucharistic Ministers. A deacon is a ordinary minister of Holy Communion because he is part of the clergy, it is proper for him to assist the priest in distributing the body and blood to the faithful.

 

[forever_always]

Merkel bolded the word “wine”. I’m sure you know this: after the consecration, it’s not wine. Perhaps it was just a slip of the fingers.

Yes I do know this, sorry… another typo =]

 

[forever_always]

I will not receive from an EMHC. I will only receive from a Priest, on the tongue. The Priest’s hands are sacred, and they are consecrated for the purpose of confecting the Eucharist. I also only receive the Host, since It contains both the Body and the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I still don’t see a reason why the Precious Blood is distributed to the Faithful.

I agree, EMHC’s are WAY overused. There is no need for an army of people to flock up to the Altar for sake of “Active Participation.” It’s quite ridiculous. Does Communion really need to be a race?

Yes, this is exactly how I feel…
And I understand the purpose of EMHCs, and am thankful for their service to the church, but I feel that today they are overused.

 

[forever_always]

What do the status of a priests’ hands have to do with regard to receiving communion? What are we to infer from that comment? That lay hands profane the Blessed Sacrament or somehow lessen it? How could that possibly be? The same goes for a priest’s hands. Are they somehow adding or preserving something to the Blessed Sacrament? How could that possibly be?

Offering communion under both species has far superior sign value:

GIRM 85. It is most desirable that the faithful, just as the priest himself is bound to do, receive the Lord’s Body from hosts consecrated at the same Mass and that, in the instances when it is permitted, they partake of the chalice so that even by means of the signs Communion will stand out more clearly as a participation in the sacrifice actually being celebrated.

Have you read from the Dominicae coenae? (written by Pope John Paul II). It may answer some of your questions. Let me quote from it “… one must not forget the primary office of priests, who have been consecrated by their ordination to represent Christ the Priest: for this reason their hands, like their words and their will, have become the direct instruments of Christ. Through this fact, that is, as ministers of the Holy Eucharist, they have a primary responsibility for the sacred species, because it is a total responsibility: they offer the bread and wine, they consecrate it, and then distribute the sacred species to the participants in the assembly who wish to receive them. Deacons can only bring to the altar the offerings of the faithful and, once they have been consecrated by the priest, distribute them, How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary! To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist.”

The Pope then adds that “it is obvious that the Church can grant this faculty to those who are neither priests nor deacons, as is the case with acolytes in the exercise of their ministry, especially if they are destined for future ordination, or with other lay people who are chosen for this to meet a just need,” the purpose of Dominicae coenae as a whole is to stress the ineffable mystery of the Eucharist, the sublime and unique dignity of the priesthood, and the urgency of ordained men remaining faithful to the special tasks of their state, above all regarding the worthy veneration and handling of the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar.

 

[Merkel]

Have you read from the Dominicae coenae? (written by Pope John Paul II). It may answer some of your questions. Let me quote from it “… one must not forget the primary office of priests, who have been consecrated by their ordination to represent Christ the Priest: for this reason their hands, like their words and their will, have become the direct instruments of Christ. Through this fact, that is, as ministers of the Holy Eucharist, they have a primary responsibility for the sacred species, because it is a total responsibility: they offer the bread and wine, they consecrate it, and then distribute the sacred species to the participants in the assembly who wish to receive them. Deacons can only bring to the altar the offerings of the faithful and, once they have been consecrated by the priest, distribute them, How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary! To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist.”

The Pope then adds that “it is obvious that the Church can grant this faculty to those who are neither priests nor deacons, as is the case with acolytes in the exercise of their ministry, especially if they are destined for future ordination, or with other lay people who are chosen for this to meet a just need,” the purpose of Dominicae coenae as a whole is to stress the ineffable mystery of the Eucharist, the sublime and unique dignity of the priesthood, and the urgency of ordained men remaining faithful to the special tasks of their state, above all regarding the worthy veneration and handling of the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar.

The use of EMsHC is approved by the Church (even the Byzantine churches) under specific conditions to distribute communion.

Some people proudly proclaim that they only receive from priests/deacons. They seem to think they know better than the Church. That’s a problem, in a great many ways.

I have seen post after post where people proclaim “I feel EMsHC are overused.” Not once have I read “I am concerned about the use of EMsHC but I place my trust in my pastor and bishop to do the right thing.”

 

[syromalabarcath]

I will not receive from an EMHC. I will only receive from a Priest, on the tongue. The Priest’s hands are sacred, and they are consecrated for the purpose of confecting the Eucharist. I also only receive the Host, since It contains both the Body and the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I still don’t see a reason why the Precious Blood is distributed to the Faithful.

I agree, EMHC’s are WAY overused. There is no need for an army of people to flock up to the Altar for sake of “Active Participation.” It’s quite ridiculous. Does Communion really need to be a race?

interesting approach to thinking (how the Eucharist containts both the Body and Blood), but what about at the Last Supper when Jesus takes the wine and blesses it saying “This is my Blood.”

PS - i didnt realise Communion was a race…

 

[japhy]

interesting approach to thinking (how the Eucharist containts both the Body and Blood), but what about at the Last Supper when Jesus takes the wine and blesses it saying “This is my Blood.”

The same thing is said at Mass. But because his Body cannot be separated from his Blood, nor can they be separated from his Soul, which cannot be separated from his Divinity… each fragment of the consecrated host and each drop of the consecrated wine contains fully, whole, and entire, the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. This teaching of the Catholic Church is called “concomitance”.

 

[forever_always]

interesting approach to thinking (how the Eucharist containts both the Body and Blood), but what about at the Last Supper when Jesus takes the wine and blesses it saying “This is my Blood.”

PS - i didnt realise Communion was a race…

I think by “race” (correct me if I am wrong please!) it was meant that Holy Communion is hurried. What is wrong with waiting longer to recieve Christ? What is wrong with kneeling to recieve Him, or genuflecting? I do not feel that Communion should be rushed. When there are numerous lines it seems that people are in a hurry to get it done with. Nothing wrong with a little patience =]

 

[OLHope]

Is it wrong to recieve a blessing from them?

And yes, that is the correct term… it has been called both in that parish. They have had no training, they just volunteer to hand out communion. (I know this because I am the leader/schedular for the lectors at that parish, and am involved with all trainings).

i guess i just come from a very traditional catholic family, and recieving communion from someone other than the priest doesn’t feel right? i was just wondering if it was or wasn’t.

I was an EM for a long time with my home parish, logically it isn’t a bad thing to get a blessing from anyone, I mean wouldn’t it be a perfect utopia to always have people around who cared so much for your interest?

However, I WAS NEVER commissioned to apply this, people needing a blessing usually stay and wait in the priests line. I mean, many people bring rosaries to mass and a beat up mini vans to church to pull the priest and only the priest to bless them. They are the only people commissioned for that.

An EM blurting out I can bless you was inappropriate, especially at traditional mass where non verbals around communion are quite understood, so if you are in line for the priest then they should have backed off. I would come to assist a priest after my line and many times people would not budge from the line, and I accepted that, I just began wrapping up. It is still preferred by some to have only a priest give them their communion, and priests can only bless you or your holy articles.

-Hope

 

[hamburglar]

The use of EMsHC is approved by the Church (even the Byzantine churches) under specific conditions to distribute communion.

Some people proudly proclaim that they only receive from priests/deacons. They seem to think they know better than the Church. That’s a problem, in a great many ways.

I have seen post after post where people proclaim “I feel EMsHC are overused.” Not once have I read “I am concerned about the use of EMsHC but I place my trust in my pastor and bishop to do the right thing.”

I never said I know better than the Church. I agree with the Church that a Priest’s hands are sacred, and that is why I will only receive from a priest.

The Church and Her Bishops have said on numerous occasions that EMHC’s are overused. They should only be used in extreme conditions.

I think by “race” (correct me if I am wrong please!) it was meant that Holy Communion is hurried. What is wrong with waiting longer to recieve Christ? What is wrong with kneeling to recieve Him, or genuflecting? I do not feel that Communion should be rushed. When there are numerous lines it seems that people are in a hurry to get it done with. Nothing wrong with a little patience =]

That is correct. Communion often seems very rushed. Often people march up in the parade/procession, grab Our Lord, chew Him like a potato chip, then rush outside to be first in line for the Daytona 500 about to take place in the parking lot.

 

[benedictgal]

I was an EM for a long time with my home parish, logically it isn’t a bad thing to get a blessing from anyone, I mean wouldn’t it be a perfect utopia to always have people around who cared so much for your interest?

However, I WAS NEVER commissioned to apply this, people needing a blessing usually stay and wait in the priests line. I mean, many people bring rosaries to mass and a beat up mini vans to church to pull the priest and only the priest to bless them. They are the only people commissioned for that.

An EM blurting out I can bless you was inappropriate, especially at traditional mass where non verbals around communion are quite understood, so if you are in line for the priest then they should have backed off. I would come to assist a priest after my line and many times people would not budge from the line, and I accepted that, I just began wrapping up. It is still preferred by some to have only a priest give them their communion, and priests can only bless you or your holy articles.

-Hope

However, for the time being, the Holy See has put a stop to blessings in lieu of receiving Holy Communion. This stop applies just as much to priests and deacons as it does to EMHCs (who are never supposed to bless anything–as you rightly observed, the only thing we can do is to assist in the distribution of Holy Communion).

Earlier in this thread, I quoted from the letter that the Holy See wrote regarding stopping this practice. Since it is now in the official publication of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, it is bona fide policy until such time as the Holy See concludes its study.

 

[Newbie2]

I have said this in other threads, ad nauseum but, it bears repeating. We are only there to assist in the distribution of Holy Communion, not to impart blessings or say and do something other than what we are commissioned. The Holy See has effectively spoken on the matter and we need to obey Rome. That is the bottom line.

Yet many bishops encourage the practice. The priests obey the bishops and so on down the line. If the bishops don’t particularly care, why should we, I ask rhetorically.

However, for the time being, the Holy See has put a stop to blessings in lieu of receiving Holy Communion. This stop applies just as much to priests and deacons as it does to EMHCs (who are never supposed to bless anything–as you rightly observed, the only thing we can do is to assist in the distribution of Holy Communion).

Earlier in this thread, I quoted from the letter that the Holy See wrote regarding stopping this practice. Since it is now in the official publication of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, it is bona fide policy until such time as the Holy See concludes its study.

Put a stop to it? Hardly. I’m guessing there are very few parishes that have fallen into line merely because it is “official”.

 

[benedictgal]

Yet many bishops encourage the practice. The priests obey the bishops and so on down the line. If the bishops don’t particularly care, why should we, I ask rhetorically.

Put a stop to it? Hardly. I’m guessing there are very few parishes that have fallen into line merely because it is “official”.

Newbie, the bishops’ authority only goes so far. If the Holy See has already indicated in a bona fide letter that this practice is not to be done, then it should not happen.

Just as the priests and the faithful are bound to obey their bishops, the bishops, in turn, are bound to obey the Holy See.

 

[Newbie2]

I’ll agree that yes, it **should **not happen.

But this is the real world and it does. Not saying that it should, but it does happen and will always happen, methinks.

Kinda like hand-holding.

 

[OLHope]

I think by “race” (correct me if I am wrong please!) it was meant that Holy Communion is hurried. What is wrong with waiting longer to receive Christ? What is wrong with kneeling to receive Him, or genuflecting? I do not feel that Communion should be rushed. When there are numerous lines it seems that people are in a hurry to get it done with. Nothing wrong with a little patience =]

Miss, you can genuflect, but you have to step aside if you receive it in your hand or genuflect quickly before receiving on your tongue, the EM and Priest need to ensure it is consumed in the unity of the church community, less chance for someone to walk off and denigrate the host. If you are like me, I have it placed in my mouth, I do not chew, I let it stay softening and that takes time, but I return to my pew, I recite the Anima Christi, internally of course, and then swallow the host still without chewing. I do not know why I do this(I have an issue masticating the host, so I want to say that it draws from my second grade preparation, we are all told to be gentle with the host when we had the fake wafer and that was the most docile way I could think of handling it), it is to be a more serene person when you consume the host, you have your quiet time, the church gives a calm atmosphere, I say my prayers, and I feel more faithful and content. I know everyone has their own personal time after communion, but everyone has their own way of using the solace afterward. I try to make the most of mine and it happens to involve the host.

-Hope