A
Ad_Deum
Guest
I think Eastern Orthodoxy does that if they know the people’s names.
Pax
Laudater Jesus Christo
Instaurare omnia in Christo
Pax
Laudater Jesus Christo
Instaurare omnia in Christo
- Status
Q
quiet52
Guest
The word “extraordinary” as used by the Catholic Church means “outside the ordained.”
“Extra” is from the latin word meaning “outside of.” “Ordinary” refers to the ordained person.
Q
quiet52
Guest
I’d like to offer my perspective as an EMHC here. With no intention of being defiant toward any rubric – and actually without thinking – I addressed a friend of mine by name once before saying “the Body of Christ.” Then his wife, and elder son … they all smiled, seeming to appreciate it. Then the younger son came to receive, and I struggled to remember his name, not wanting to offend him in case he found out later I’d greeted his older brother by name. I did remember, and said “whew, thank God!” afterwards.
But after mass, when I put some thought to this, rubrics aside, I felt ashamed. It is such an awesome privilege to be entrusted to distribute Jesus to my fellow parishioners. It’s Jesus! He is all-deserving of MY attention, as I give Him to someone else. First, I allowed myself to become distracted by being sociable, and by focusing on something that took away from my the astonishment that this is JESUS (especially when I struggled to remember a name). My friends are still my friends, whether I state their names or not, but, second, I think I distracted THEM. “Oh, (so-and-so) was nice…she said my name…I smiled back at her.” I was a source of distraction for THEM from the wonder of receiving Jesus, body, blood, soul and divinity. The Eucharist, Jesus, is the center of our Catholic Christian community. He is worthy of our total gratitude, humility, praise, and attention. Not friendliness or social graces.
I’m far from bring perfect as a person, or as an EMHC, but I try to be prayerful and joyful as I serve in this ministry, with each person, as I proclaim “the Body of Christ!”
But after mass, when I put some thought to this, rubrics aside, I felt ashamed. It is such an awesome privilege to be entrusted to distribute Jesus to my fellow parishioners. It’s Jesus! He is all-deserving of MY attention, as I give Him to someone else. First, I allowed myself to become distracted by being sociable, and by focusing on something that took away from my the astonishment that this is JESUS (especially when I struggled to remember a name). My friends are still my friends, whether I state their names or not, but, second, I think I distracted THEM. “Oh, (so-and-so) was nice…she said my name…I smiled back at her.” I was a source of distraction for THEM from the wonder of receiving Jesus, body, blood, soul and divinity. The Eucharist, Jesus, is the center of our Catholic Christian community. He is worthy of our total gratitude, humility, praise, and attention. Not friendliness or social graces.
I’m far from bring perfect as a person, or as an EMHC, but I try to be prayerful and joyful as I serve in this ministry, with each person, as I proclaim “the Body of Christ!”
J
Joysong
Guest
I have sent several emails to persons in authority to obtain clear interpretation whether or not it is appropriate to mention the communicant’s name. Whenver it is received, if the thread is still active, I will send the replies. If I am wrong, then thanks be to God. If I am right, that it is not an alteration of the essential formula, perhaps this will stop the crucifying of our priests and those who assist as EMHC’s.
There is absolutely nothing on the www whatsoever that makes a clear statement, so I still maintain that since so many priests do this, they cannot all be disobedient renegades.
As for the private interpretation that has been offered by certain laity in this thread who claim to be in the know, I challenge your ‘knowing’ similar to the misinterpretation of ‘subsist’ that was finally clarified by the Church. Threads were initiated to challenge the use of the word as being incorrect, yet it was the challengers themselves who were proved wrong.
I cannot be assured therefore, that the laity who are simply reading a document are totally correct in their interpretations, but I am open to learning what the Church holds as to the meaning.
Finally, before I leave this contentious thread, I urge those who are not able to engage in amicable discussion, but feel a need to ‘smirk’ and scoff at others who voice their opinions, consider well Who it is that reads your heart.
There is absolutely nothing on the www whatsoever that makes a clear statement, so I still maintain that since so many priests do this, they cannot all be disobedient renegades.
As for the private interpretation that has been offered by certain laity in this thread who claim to be in the know, I challenge your ‘knowing’ similar to the misinterpretation of ‘subsist’ that was finally clarified by the Church. Threads were initiated to challenge the use of the word as being incorrect, yet it was the challengers themselves who were proved wrong.
I cannot be assured therefore, that the laity who are simply reading a document are totally correct in their interpretations, but I am open to learning what the Church holds as to the meaning.
Finally, before I leave this contentious thread, I urge those who are not able to engage in amicable discussion, but feel a need to ‘smirk’ and scoff at others who voice their opinions, consider well Who it is that reads your heart.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
A
AlexV
Guest
I wonder who these “people in authority are”.
We’re not idiots, “Joysong”.
We can read. Some of us in several languages.
The rubrics give a formula for Communion.
The rubrics also say nothing may be added to the formulas of the liturgy, except in those cases where the rubrics specify one may use “similar words”. Communion is not one of those times.
We’re not “crucifying” anybody. We’re asking for our PATRIMONY, the Sacred Liturgy. Which isn’t the personal plaything of anyone, priest or layman.
We’re not idiots, “Joysong”.
We can read. Some of us in several languages.
The rubrics give a formula for Communion.
The rubrics also say nothing may be added to the formulas of the liturgy, except in those cases where the rubrics specify one may use “similar words”. Communion is not one of those times.
We’re not “crucifying” anybody. We’re asking for our PATRIMONY, the Sacred Liturgy. Which isn’t the personal plaything of anyone, priest or layman.
P
paramedicgirl
Guest
I have never hear a priest use a person’s name when giving the Eucharist. In churches where this is happening, is it only the EMHC who are doing it? Or is the priest leading them into it?
Me, I just find it distracting. We had just one EMHC who did that, but not the others, so it kinda seemed like it was her own initiative. Our priests have never named people during Holy Communion. If it came from the priest, I would feel differently about it.
Me, I just find it distracting. We had just one EMHC who did that, but not the others, so it kinda seemed like it was her own initiative. Our priests have never named people during Holy Communion. If it came from the priest, I would feel differently about it.
J
Joysong
Guest
Then, I invite you to feel differently. From this same thread, giving enough evidence that it widespread:Our priests have never named people during Holy Communion. If it came from the priest, I would feel differently about it.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2569035&postcount=5
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2569112&postcount=10
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2569135&postcount=11 (Deacon)
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2569382&postcount=18 (Abbot)
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2573126&postcount=86
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2573654&postcount=94
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=2573753&postcount=96
This may also be one of those situations the church needs to clarify in the same manner as “subsist” which traditionists maintained was wrong, simply by privately reading the document.
That many priests are doing this says to me they know something we don’t know about the document and/or permission from the Bishop, and/or an interpretation that is similar to mine. If they, too, are wrong, then maybe the liturgy police can have the Bishop correct them.
A
AlexV
Guest
How difficult is it, “Joysong”, for you to read?
The rubrics offer the formula “Corpus Christi”, English “The Body of Christ”. That’s all they offer. They ALSO say NOBODY can add to the liturgy.
Period, end of story. Not private interpretation. Reality. Like the reality of the disobedience of those who turn the liturgy into a private plaything.
The Church also doesn’t have “secret rubrics” that some privileged few are aware of, while the rest of the dopes have to accept the word of the Gnostics that whatever the Gnostics do is above reproach.
The rubrics offer the formula “Corpus Christi”, English “The Body of Christ”. That’s all they offer. They ALSO say NOBODY can add to the liturgy.
Period, end of story. Not private interpretation. Reality. Like the reality of the disobedience of those who turn the liturgy into a private plaything.
The Church also doesn’t have “secret rubrics” that some privileged few are aware of, while the rest of the dopes have to accept the word of the Gnostics that whatever the Gnostics do is above reproach.
J
japhy
Guest
Allow me to reiterate post #73. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops wrote up guidelines for Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, found online here. This “Liturgy Guide” is found on this page. It is in force since 2002.
It states the following: 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). I think that the will of the Bishops in this matter is very clear: “no other words or names should be added”. I believe this covers names of Christ as well as the name of the person receiving Communion; in other words, it prohibits saying “The Body of the Lamb of God” and “James, the Body of Christ”. Both are names, and the prohibition is on the addition of any other name whatsoever.
V
VociMike
Guest
But apparently we need a further clarification of this clarification of the GIRM. And so on, and so on, and so on, and…
T
THurifer2
Guest
But of course 'cause “rubrics come and rubrics go” or so that is the recent saying I have heard says.
P
paradoxy
Guest
If this is a practice even in the most rural of Serbian Orthodox parishes, I can’t imagine it being a new, feel-good, chummy thing… And it makes sense. Whenever you approach a Holy Mystery, you are a person encountering a Person. When you’re baptized, married, when you confess (at least in the Orthodox absolution prayer), your name is mentioned. Why not when you receive the Eucharist?
V
VociMike
Guest
But it is definitely a new thing in the Roman rite, whatever the motives of the persons introducing it. And in the Roman rite it is not allowed.
Now if the Church were to declare tomorrow that it is now allowed, I would be fine with that (with the rather obvious pastoral proviso that if one is to use names, then one must use everybody’s names - as the Eastern Church now does it, I believe).
The question of names vs. no names is morally and theologically neutral. But the matter of ignoring or disobeying the express commands of the Church is not.
P
paradoxy
Guest
OK. Fair enough. It just is so common to encounter “old” and “outdated” Catholic practices being mentioned here that are actually current Orthodox ones that I guess I made a rule of it: whatever we do and you don’t, you used to do but don’t any more. Or something to that effect.
S
sphilomena
Guest
You hit the nail on the head. (japhy has a good quotation). This is similar IMO, to the priest omitting the word “men” in the Creed. It is not allowed: “no person, even a priest, etc.” (I always say the word “men” nice and loud
. I think women should be insulted that someone thinks we are not intelligent enough to know that we are part of “mankind”.)
J
Joan_M
Guest
We are NOT giving Holy Communion to people either to be friendly or to be compassionate. Friendliness has its place. Compassion has its place. We need to be obedient to the Church at all times. That includes not doing things because they “feel nice” or we think that is what Jesus would do. Jesus willingly accepted horrendous suffering in obedience to His Father. We can forego our nicer feelings to be obedient to His Church.The rubrics doesn’t say we should be friendly or compassionate. Should we avoid this?
Jim
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
Fine, you can belong to your cold ridged parish. I’ll belong to my friendly compassionate parish. I’m glad my spiritual life in Christ, isn’t as gloomy as yours.
Jim
C
Catholig
Guest
I just want to add that this is wrong.
Just because the GIRM doesn’t explicitly forbid it doesn’t mean that it is acceptable - no more that saying “How are you? Body of Christ” or “This is most certainly the body of Christ” any other weird adlibs would be allowed. We are meant to follow what the GIRM says - not practice everything it doesn’t condemn.
Catholig
Just because the GIRM doesn’t explicitly forbid it doesn’t mean that it is acceptable - no more that saying “How are you? Body of Christ” or “This is most certainly the body of Christ” any other weird adlibs would be allowed. We are meant to follow what the GIRM says - not practice everything it doesn’t condemn.
Catholig
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
We’re meant to follow the GIRM in the spirit of charity.
This sounds more and more like a Fundamentalist Website, where every word is taken literally and the meaning behind the words are lost.
Jim
- Status