Communion services

[ora_pro_nobis]

When did it become the Latin Catholic practice that one can’t go a day without communion?



More modernism!

Hardly modernism. St Pius X promoted daily communication in 1905 (Sacra Tridentina) though of course this was in the context of the Holy Mass.

 

[Phemie]

Did you take a moment to actually read the ritual you are citing?

Seriously, did you?

No where does it say another layperson distributes Holy Communion to the individual conducting the communion service.

In fact, the ritual calls for the person doing the Communion Rite (that could be the leader of prayer or a different EMHC since the ritual strongly suggests that different people do the different parts) to consume the Host after showing it to the assembly and saying “Behold the Lamb of God…”

 

[JustCath]

In fact, the ritual calls for the person doing the Communion Rite (that could be the leader of prayer or a different EMHC since the ritual strongly suggests that different people do the different parts) to consume the Host after showing it to the assembly and saying “Behold the Lamb of God…”

Please cite us to the specific provision you are talking about.

 

[JustCath]

Did you take a moment to actually read the ritual you are citing?

Seriously, did you?

No where does it say another layperson distributes Holy Communion to the individual conducting the communion service.

You’re right. But it does say “. . .the extraordinary minister, is never allowed to self-communicate. . .”

I provided the complete section above. I broke it down to the words most relevant to what I quoted from you here. Now that I and several others have provided authority demonstrating that we are not simply pulling this idea from our nethers, would you please provide some specific authority for your position.

 

[JustCath]

Nor does the ritual call for someone else to give communion to the layperson conducting the communion service…

Your quote here was directly in response to the following: ?!?!

“50. The communicant, including the extraordinary minister, is never allowed to self-communicate, even by means of intinction. Communion under either form, bread or wine, must always be given by an ordinary or extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.”

Did you read over these words?

“. . .the extraordinary minister, is never allowed to self-communicate. . .”

Nor does the ritual call for someone else to give communion to the layperson conducting the communion service…

Are you kidding me? You called my idea in this thread silly yesterday. I have thus far refrained from retorting in kind. But this is silly.

 

[JustCath]

“Idiom” or not, let me very direct. I am not your “friend” particularly given some of your comments directed towards my friend.

Wow. Hmmmm… I’m at a loss for words. You say this to others in this thread after all of the defensiveness and lashing out that you have doled out. I suppose you had preemptively decided that you and I aren’t “friends” either when you kicked of by calling my idea silly.

 

[JustCath]

My regrets but the onus is on you to show that what his pastor recommended and allows (with the bishop’s approval) is somehow wrong.

1. The communicant, including the extraordinary minister, is never allowed to self-communicate, even by means of intinction. Communion under either form, bread or wine, must always be given by an ordinary or extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.

 

[GwenL]

In fact, the ritual calls for the person doing the Communion Rite (that could be the leader of prayer or a different EMHC since the ritual strongly suggests that different people do the different parts) to consume the Host after showing it to the assembly and saying “Behold the Lamb of God…”

Do you have a citation for this, please?

 

[Phemie]

Do you have a citation for this, please?

From the Ritual itself, after the Invitation to Communion when the leader shows the Host and says “Behold the Lamb of God…”

“COMMUNION
33. If the minister receives communion, he says quietly:
**May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life.
**He reverently consumes the body of Christ.”

 

[Usige]

You are merely trying to manufacture a reason for my friend’s pastor not to allow what I have described. Again, sorry but no sale.

Actually the Bishop is the one that must approve this, not his pastor. The allowance to use communion services are domain of the Bishop. Since this is essentially a private service the Bishop should certainly be the one approving such a unusual event given that it is not a one time thing.

I don’t think anyone is trying to attack your friend. The situation you mention just goes against everything most of us have been taught about the Eucharist, laity self communing, and private services. Communion services are meant to tie the community together under extraordinary circumstances, but here is someone that is celebrating outside of the community on a near daily basis. That is not the purpose of the communion service. I don’t think anyone thinks its nefarious. Just think of it this way. When taking the Eucharist to the sick we are not allowed to take a pyx with 7 consecrated hosts and leave it on the person’s night stand and say “I’ll be back next week with a refill.” Heck we are not allow to let them take the host from the pyx. If we can’t leave the host with someone that is sick so they can self administer then it would seem that a health person should not allowed to do so either.

If you really don’t trust anyone on this forum, ask if it is okay for a member of the laity to have a nightly private communion service on the Ask an Apologist forum. Who knows, maybe one of the Reverend Fathers will surprise us all and say this is perfectly fine.

 

[dshix]

MrTheosis,
You are one of the most aggressively defensive and close minded people I have spoken to on this forum. You have put up innumerable straw men and ad hominem attacks, as well as a few red herrings, and have had an angry tone throughout all of your posts.

I have now realized that it is impossible to argue with a brick wall, so I am not going to continue addressing your posts (especially since I and other have already answered your objections, and all you have done is rephrase the same thing you already said in a different way.)

You have blinded yourself to the distinct wording of Church documents, which others on this thread have provided.

I have not judged your friend. Actually, you have judged me and jumped to conclusions on that, because I actually said that I was not judging him, yet you insisted I was. Do you see how closed your mind is? You think you are all knowing.

Furthermore, you have said that I think I am an “arbiter” or interpreter of Church documents. Where, may I ask, did you get this idea, my friend?

I will no longer respond to your statements concerning Church discipline unless they are correct, since there is no use arguing with you anyway.

Theosis, you must understand that making a personal attack against me or anyone else on this thread (as I know you will do as soon as you read this post) will get you nowhere. If you wish to prove your claims right, you must provide official Church documents explicitly stating that a person may self-communicate whenever he wishes, with no one else present, without the permission of the bishop. If you can pull that up, I will make a full apology for my ignorance and this conversation will end, with you the victor.

If you cannot produce solid, identifiable, clear proof of your claims, this conversation will go on until you admit that there is no Church foundation for your claims.

 

[JustCath]

From the Ritual itself, after the Invitation to Communion when the leader shows the Host and says “Behold the Lamb of God…”

“COMMUNION
33. If the minister receives communion, he says quietly:
May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life.
He reverently consumes the body of Christ.”

Phemie,

Would you please provide the link to where this is. I assumed it was one of the links already posted in this thread. But as best I can tell, it’s not.

Thanks

 

[MrTheosis]

In fact, the ritual calls for the person doing the Communion Rite (that could be the leader of prayer or a different EMHC since the ritual strongly suggests that different people do the different parts) to consume the Host after showing it to the assembly and saying “Behold the Lamb of God…”

I’m sitting here with the official ritual and I see no evidence that “the ritual strongly suggests that different people do the different parts.” Even the readings can be done by the person conducting the communion service.

What I do read is:

"33. If the minister receives communion he says quietly:

May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life.

He reverently consume the body of Christ.

1. Then he takes the vessel or pyx and goes to the communicants…"

There is no mention of another person giving this person Holy Communion nor have I ever witnessed such a practice.

 

[MrTheosis]

Actually the Bishop is the one that must approve this, not his pastor. The allowance to use communion services are domain of the Bishop. Since this is essentially a private service the Bishop should certainly be the one approving such a unusual event given that it is not a one time thing.

I don’t think anyone is trying to attack your friend. The situation you mention just goes against everything most of us have been taught about the Eucharist, laity self communing, and private services. Communion services are meant to tie the community together under extraordinary circumstances, but here is someone that is celebrating outside of the community on a near daily basis. That is not the purpose of the communion service. I don’t think anyone thinks its nefarious. Just think of it this way. When taking the Eucharist to the sick we are not allowed to take a pyx with 7 consecrated hosts and leave it on the person’s night stand and say “I’ll be back next week with a refill.” Heck we are not allow to let them take the host from the pyx. If we can’t leave the host with someone that is sick so they can self administer then it would seem that a health person should not allowed to do so either.

If you really don’t trust anyone on this forum, ask if it is okay for a member of the laity to have a nightly private communion service on the Ask an Apologist forum. Who knows, maybe one of the Reverend Fathers will surprise us all and say this is perfectly fine.

Actually his pastor suggested and approved it with permission from the local ordinary.

The “self communication” is a red herring. Within the context of conducting a communion service, I have never seen the person conducting the CS to pause while someone else gave them communion. The fact is, the rite (page 27, paragraph 33) makes no such comment/instruction.

All the hyperbole aside, no one here has been able to provide a reason for him not to conduct the solo services:

1. He has the requisite permissions.
2. He is an extremely trustworthy and well known person within the parish.
3. There is no chance of public misinterpretation as he conducts the services when one one else is around.
4. A history of almost 6 years without incident.

The reason I posted this to begin with was in response to some of the terribly arrogant comments concerning communion services. In this case my friend’s pastor recognized he would be nourished by what I have described and the bishop approved it. It has become a great and extended grace in his life.

Thankfully the fabricated charges of “self communication”, placing the Blessed Sacrament in “grave danger”, etc. are not going to change that.

 

[Brendan_64]

Some of the reasons I’ve heard is that there are more lay people involved. That’s true, since ur Ritual strongly suggests having a different person lead the Communion Rite and that’s generally what we we do. So we have the leader of prayer, 3 readers and at least one EMHC leading the Communion Rite.

A greater involvement of lay people at our Masses and other services, is not a good thing. Involving more lay-people just to create a sense of ‘inclusion’ is an abuse of the Liturgy.

A big problem with Liturgies of the Word with Communion held on a regular basis is that it can raise the status of lay-people and result in blurring of the lines between laity and clergy. In my opinion, if there is to be a Liturgy of the Word with Communion (out of a dire necessity) then a Deacon should lead it.

As to people preferring such services to Mass because of increased involvement of the laiity . Why? If they like services with lots of involvement of the laity then there are many services in the Churches of our Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ that have huge laity involvement.

The Liturgy is not there to facilitate a sense of cosy ‘inclusiveness’ amongst the laity. We serve the Liturgy, the Liturgy does not serve us.

 

[Phemie]

“COMMUNION
33. If the minister receives communion, he says quietly:
May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life.
He reverently consumes the body of Christ.”

Phemie,

Would you please provide the link to where this is. I assumed it was one of the links already posted in this thread. But as best I can tell, it’s not.

Thanks

This thread, post #4
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=2338107&highlight=Sunday+Celebration+in+the+absence+of+a+priest+communion#post2338107

The same in the following, look for the pdf on order of service
catholicnh.org/parish/scap/

 

[MrTheosis]

A greater involvement of lay people at our Masses and other services, is not a good thing. Involving more lay-people just to create a sense of ‘inclusion’ is an abuse of the Liturgy.

A big problem with Liturgies of the Word with Communion held on a regular basis is that it can raise the status of lay-people and result in blurring of the lines between laity and clergy. In my opinion, if there is to be a Liturgy of the Word with Communion (out of a dire necessity) then a Deacon should lead it.

As to people preferring such services to Mass because of increased involvement of the laiity . Why? If they like services with lots of involvement of the laity then there are many services in the Churches of our Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ that have huge laity involvement.

The Liturgy is not there to facilitate a sense of cosy ‘inclusiveness’ amongst the laity. We serve the Liturgy, the Liturgy does not serve us.

That’s not an issue if those chosen to conduct CSs are chosen and trained with the utmost care. My experience has been that those most willing to conduct CSs are the absolute last people who should be doing so. Go figure.

I conduct a monthly CS at a skilled nursing facility. I had to be approached by my pastor and asked to consider it. I prayed on the matter for six months and then agreed to a “test run.” My CS’s are very formal and by the book.

FWIW, the liturgy most certainly “serves us.” It would be more accurate to say it nourishes us or even better, that God nourishes us through the liturgy.

 

[Phemie]

I’m sitting here with the official ritual and I see no evidence that “the ritual strongly suggests that different people do the different parts.” Even the readings can be done by the person conducting the communion service.

What I do read is:

"33. If the minister receives communion he says quietly:

May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life.

He reverently consume the body of Christ.

1. Then he takes the vessel or pyx and goes to the communicants…"

There is no mention of another person giving this person Holy Communion nor have I ever witnessed such a practice.

I agree that the Rite says that the person doing the Communion Rite consumes the Host after the Invitation to Communion.

The Canadian Ritual book calls for more than one person to do a Sunday Celebration of the Word with Communion.

Redemptionis Sacramentum also says:

[165.] It is necessary to avoid any sort of confusion between this type of gathering and the celebration of the Eucharist.[271] The diocesan Bishops, therefore, should prudently discern whether Holy Communion ought to be distributed in these gatherings. The matter would appropriately be determined in view of a more ample co-ordination in the Bishops’ Conference, to be put into effect after the recognitio of the acts by the Apostolic See through the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.** It will be preferable, moreover, when both a Priest and a Deacon are absent, that the various parts be distributed among several faithful rather than having a single lay member of the faithful direct the whole celebration alone.** Nor is it ever appropriate to refer to any member of the lay faithful as “presiding” over the celebration.strongly suggests more than one person involved.

In my parish there are four people trained to lead the whole service if necessary: 2 men, 2 women. Two of us are EMHCs, two aren’t (I don’t want to be one & I don’t think the other guy does either). There are two more EMCHs who are trained to simply do the Communion Rite – we don’t have many EMHCs who want to do this and even fewer who want to lead the whole celebration.

Usually we have one person leading Opening Rites and the Liturgy of the Word, an EMHC doing the Communion Rite and three readers.

 

[Brendan_64]

That’s not an issue if those chosen to conduct CSs are chosen and trained with the utmost care.

But that does in effect put members of the laity in leadership position above other members of the laity. Redemptionis Sacramentum states that when such a service takes place no one member of the laity should be seen to be in a leadership position as a result.

“It will be preferable, moreover, when both a Priest and a Deacon are absent, that the various parts be distributed among several faithful rather than having a single lay member of the faithful direct the whole celebration alone. Nor is it ever appropriate to refer to any member of the lay faithful as “presiding” over the celebration.”

Training up members of the laity to deliver Liturgies of the Word with Communion does just that. It sets one member of the laity as directing the celebration.

This is a very short step from ending up having ‘lay ministers’ in the way our Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ do in their Churches.

Unlike in Protestant Churches, in the Catholic Church the roles of the laity and the clergy are very, very distinct. As a Church we really need to be very careful not to blur the boundaries between laity and clergy. Liturgies of the Word with Communion, delivered by a lay person, do indeed contribute to the blurring of the boundaries between laity and clergy.

 

[GwenL]

From the Ritual itself, after the Invitation to Communion when the leader shows the Host and says “Behold the Lamb of God…”

Sorry, can you be more specific. What document, authorized by whom?