Can you name be said when you're given communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Elzee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joysong said:
This conversation is circular.

Let’s move on to more serious topics than the use of one’s personal name. Any who are following this thread and who may possibly be concerned, will have now more than one opinion at least. Hopefully before they march off to Rome or the Bishop’s office, they will consult a higher source than a lay person.
Click to expand...
Your right, but most the conversations are circular here, when it comes to interpretation, as we can deny interpretations all the time, based upon bias and pure stubborness.

As long as someone is willing to deny the meaning of a sentence then we will always run in circles.

So if a sentence says, “walk across the street” and the person wants to run they can deny that their name is mentioned in the sentence so it doesn’t apply to them.

Which is why Protestantism started, by an elevation of self above truth.

I agree with you that this is a very minor point and the grevious sins committed in parishes every day by liturgical abuses far greater than this are of more concern. This is very minor and not too worthy of discussion, what should be discussed is how to be more unified in our worship and not allow abuse to occur, not nitpick every little thing that might bother us.
Seek to unify and clarify.

In Christ
Scylla
 
Joysong said:
…there are two ways of reading that rubric. 😉
Click to expand...
Let’s see…

Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.
–Vatican Council II

and

Nevertheless, the priest must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he
himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the
celebration of Mass.
–General Instruction of the Roman Missal

and

…the priest raises the host slightly
and shows it to each, saying, Corpus Christi (The Body of Christ).
–General Instruction of the Roman Missal

and

The proper and only permissible form for distributing Holy Communion is to offer the consecrated bread by saying, “The Body of Christ” and to offer the consecrated wine by saying, “The Blood of Christ.” No other words or names should be added; and the formula should not be edited in any way. (Cf. GIRM, 161; 284-287).
–USCCB instructions to EMHCs

and then…

there are two ways of reading that rubric.
–Joysong

I’ll say it again. In my opinion, this is about subborn, unyielding defiance. This is about refusal to submit to the Church in even the smallest matter. And those who refuse to submit in the little things, will they then submit in the big things?
 
It’s hilarious, really, how in “Joysong’” self-proclaimed “rubrics come, rubrics go” mentality, it’s a mere “private interpretation” of the GIRM that the minister of communion is supposed to say “The Body of Christ” and nothing else.

So we can smirk, in other words, and imply rubrics are well nigh meaningless since “they come and go”, after all, and we mustn’t dare say something is “wrong” unless we get a notarized letter from Rome saying so (not that such a letter would matter much to “Joysong”, since “rubrics come and go” and therefore don’t mean all that much".

Nonsense. Saying people’s names at Communion isn’t envisaged by the rubrics, and for good reason. It creates a two-tier system: the people who “belong” just a bit more than the average nobodies whose names aren’t known. It is indeed offensively distracting to some such people.

And it’s very simple. Just don’t do it (in other words, follow the rubric).

Also, I might note, there is the liberal arrogance of how the stupid lay people shouldn’t dare question anything. Nonsense.
 
It does clearly look as if it is not permitted, and I can see why. At my former parish, my priest would always say to me “The Body of Christ, Mary.” This did not escape the notice of a friend of mine. She was genuinely hurt that she had attended that parish for years and the priest did not seem to know her, yet he was addressing me by name at communion and I hadn’t even been there a year.

I do agree too that the familiarity from the priest does interfere with the aspect of communion with Christ. I do prefer now receiving communion with the priest at my new parish simply stating “The Body of Christ.” That is really all I want to hear.
 
AlexV said:
It’s hilarious, really, how in “Joysong’” self-proclaimed “rubrics come, rubrics go” mentality, it’s a mere “private interpretation” of the GIRM that the minister of communion is supposed to say “The Body of Christ” and nothing else.

So we can smirk, in other words, and imply rubrics are well night meaningless “they come and go”, after all, and that we mustn’t dare say something is “wrong” unless we get a notarized letter from Rome saying so (not that such a letter would matter much to “Joysong”, since “rubrics come and go” and therefore don’t mean all that much".

Nonsense. Saying people’s names at Communion isn’t envisaged by the rubrics, and for good reason. It creates a two-tier system: the people who “belong” just a bit more than the average nobodies whose names aren’t known. It is indeed offensively distracting to some such people.

And it’s very simple. Just don’t do it (in other words, follow the rubric).

Also, I might note, there is the liberal arrogance of how the stupid lay people shouldn’t dare question anything. Nonsense.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is much more defiance against the rubrics from non-traditional Catholics, it seems. I wonder why that is? Traditional Catholics get accused of being legalistic for following the rubrics, like it’s a bad thing to be obedient.
 
**Folks:

You can agree to disagree…but please stop the personal bickering…no one has a corner on holiness or piety but we could all use some of the human milk of kindness…and it doesn’t break the fast!

Those wishing to discuss other topics, which although they may be timely, of interest, or worthy of discussion, would best be addressed in a more appropriate venue with a clearly labeled thread topic devoted to them are asked to cease disrupting threads here.

Continuing these interjections rather than posting to the correct forum for your preference in practice may well cause a disruption in posting privileges.

Thanks for your help!
**
 
AlexV said:
This practice does indeed create two classes of communicants…the cognoscenti and the “others”. Some are identified as clearly “part of the community”, while others are excluded from that special little label.
.
Click to expand...
People who would feel that they are in a different class, after hearing the EMHC say the other person’s name but not theirs, are either children or psychotic adults.

Jim
 
Besides the fact the practice isn’t envisaged by the liturgy, the fact remains if I go somewhere public and people around me are being called by their first names, and I am treated anonymously, there ARE divisions being created. Some people are audibly affirmed as members of a given community, and others aren’t. We’re not treated equally (as we certainly should be at Communion).

In your arrogance you’ve dared claim people bothered by this shouldn’t receive, and now you make a psychiatric diagnosis that they are psychotic. So much for the happy-love-charity-fellowship we hear about so often.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
People who would feel that they are in a different class, after hearing the EMHC say the other person’s name but not theirs, are either children or psychotic adults.

Jim
Click to expand...
I remember once we had an EMHC who used to say the names of those she knew. It was kind of weird hearing your name mentioned. The first time it happened it took me by surprise. It actually made me feel uncomfortable. It seemed too personal to me.

Now our priest doesn’t allow the EMHC to distribute communion; he has them distribute the Precious Blood only, so that solves the problem of using names.
 
paramedicgirl said:
Now our priest doesn’t allow the EMHC to distribute communion; he has them distribute the Precious Blood only, so that solves the problem of using names.
Click to expand...
Yes but now they’ll have to find a new way to get chummy with the recipients. Maybe wave to the congregation before communion so they won’t be missed?🙂
 
“Say the black, do the red.”

It’s not a difficult concept. If you change the formula (and yes, adding words before or after it, inserting words or removing words, and changing words all constitute changing the formula) you are altering the liturgy, and that has been expressly forbidden (even for priests!) by Vatican II.

The USCCB’s guidelines for EMHCs says the following (emphasis added):
The proper and only permissible form for distributing Holy Communion is to offer the consecrated bread by saying, “The Body of Christ” and to offer the consecrated wine by saying, “The Blood of Christ.” No other words or names should be added; and the formula should not be edited in any way. (Cf. GIRM, 161; 284-287).
Click to expand...
There. The US Bishops even say you are not to edit the “form for distributing Holy Communion”. I ask that you listen to them and obey them. If you choose not to obey them in this matter, why should you necessarily obey them in other matters?
 
japhy said:
“Say the black, do the red.”

It’s not a difficult concept. If you change the formula (and yes, adding words before or after it, inserting words or removing words, and changing words all constitute changing the formula) you are altering the liturgy, and that has been expressly forbidden (even for priests!) by Vatican II.

The USCCB’s guidelines for EMHCs says the following (emphasis added):

There. The US Bishops even say you are not to edit the “form for distributing Holy Communion”. I ask that you listen to them and obey them. If you choose not to obey them in this matter, why should you necessarily obey them in other matters?
Click to expand...
This was pointed out very succinctly in post #62 by VoiciMike.
 
How about dump half of the EMHC, since they are not needed, nor are they “extraordinary”.
 
I just started as an EMHC at my parish, and we received a memo from our Director of Liturgy telling us that we are to state the name of a person if we know it when giving them Holy Communion. I’m not doing this. I am friendly with both of the priests at my parish, and they have never called me by my name. I would think the focus should be on the Eucharist, not on me.
 
MusicMan said:
Oh, please. Can’t we find something of substance to concern ourselves with?

My priest does this, my parents’ priest does this, the pastor of my last church does this, and the pastor of the church I belonged to before that does this.

The rubrics don’t call for it in the West,** but they don’t explicitly forbid it either**. This is such a picayune thing to be upset over.
Click to expand...
I am so sick of people using this foolishness to blow off a liturgical abuse. Find me any - just one - place in the rubrics, the GIRM where anything at all is forbidden. The rubrics (the words written in red) and the GIRM tell us what to do. They do not tell us what we should not do.

Whoever does this is wrong.
 
KatieD said:
I just started as an EMHC at my parish, and we received a memo from our Director of Liturgy telling us that we are to state the name of a person if we know it when giving them Holy Communion. I’m not doing this. I am friendly with both of the priests at my parish, and they have never called me by my name. I would think the focus should be on the Eucharist, not on me.
Click to expand...
I would follow the example of the priest, too. Why is it that Directors of Liturgy have to place their own spin on things?:confused:
 
KatieD said:
I just started as an EMHC at my parish, and we received a memo from our Director of Liturgy telling us that we are to state the name of a person if we know it when giving them Holy Communion. I’m not doing this. I am friendly with both of the priests at my parish, and they have never called me by my name. I would think the focus should be on the Eucharist, not on me.
Click to expand...
Tell your “Director of Liturgy” to study the documents defining what the liturgy is (and what it is not). Point them to the documents quoted here if they give a hissy fit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top