Daily Communion Services at Home?

[piusphilistine]

Just my two-cents: you used a consecrated Host to practice? This is something that not even seminarians do when they are learning how to celebrate Mass.

Then, you decided to continue this Communion service for one at your home because “this daily practice has provided the incentive for (you) to read and reflect on the daily Scripture readings, to pray, and to receive Holy Communion.” And your pastor(s) approved? How did he/they come to that conclusion?

The only thing that sounds “kosher” here is conducting the Communion service in public in a church when no priest/deacon os available for an extended period, say, a week, while the priests/deacon go on an annual retreat or something, or you’re in a “mission” parish, where one priest rotates his daily Mass at several geographically-separated parishes.

“Practice” only in the sense that I wanted to appear comfortable and capable in public. If it would make you feel better I could say “I conducted daily communion services in my quest to feel comfortable and appear capable in conducting them.” I have always completed the entire ritual, beginning to end from the very beginning.

BTW, why would one BEGIN with consecrated hosts if they are (learning to) celebrate the Mass!?!

 

[benedictgal]

“Practice” only in the sense that I wanted to appear comfortable and capable in public. If it would make you feel better I could say “I conducted daily communion services in my quest to feel comfortable and appear capable in conducting them.” I have always completed the entire ritual, beginning to end from the very beginning.

BTW, why would one BEGIN with consecrated hosts if they are (learning to) celebrate the Mass!?!

This is the same question I would ask of you. Why would you “practice” doing a Communion service with a consecrated Host? You practice with an unconsecrated host (these you can purchase at a religious goods store) in order to get the ritual down pat. The Holy Eucharist is not a prop. It is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ.

All you needed to have done was to carefully read the ritual and walk through the steps. To have used a consecrated Host for the sake of practicing is unconscionable.

 

[piusphilistine]

There is nothing laughable here. It is, rather, lamentable, that you cannot differentiate between the two. You have not provided legitimate documentation to support the notion that what you are doing is, in fact, allowable. No one here is contending the fact that you are taking Holy Communion to the sick. That is an allowable practice.

**However, to hold communion services in your home is not allowable. This must be done in a church, as indicated in the GIRM. ** It is most unfortunate that you are blinded by the error you are committing. Walking Home and I have provided you with the documentation. You have not provided any to substantiate your claim.

As Manfred noted in his post, not even transitional deacons who are practicing to celebrate Mass use a Consecrated Species. You cannot use the Holy Eucharist as a practice run for conducting a Communion Service. That is a serious abuse. You also cannot hide behind the approval of your pastors, who, perhaps, at the time, did not realize that what they were allowing was a reprobated practice, since RS wasn’t released until 2004. But, now that you are made aware that this is, in fact, not allowed, and you still persist because of either blind ignorance or pride because it is something that you seem to enjoy, the burden of proof is on your shoulders.

Don’t be angry at us because we answered your questions. After all, it was you who sought the advice. Just because what we are telling you, and what we are pointing out in the documents, doesn’t agree with the answer that you wanted, you can’t discount what is in black and white. You need to seriously pray over this matter and sleep on it. Right now, you are letting your feelings get the better of you and, perhaps you are upset because three of us have told you that you are wrong. The documents themselves do not back your actions.

You asked a question. In good conscience, I have answered it based on the documentation that the Church provides. No one is trying to attack you. However, you need to accept the very strong possibility that what you have been doing is an abuse. In charity, we are trying to help you. Why you cannot see that is a question that you must seriously ponder.

What I have emboldened is flat-out wrong. They are often conducted in hospitals, nursing homes, ships, prisons, jails, ships, office buildings and yes, even homes. Other places too.

I didn’t read any further because it’s clear you make things up – “This must be done in a church, as indicated in the GIRM” is simply untrue.

 

[LilyM]

This is indeed silly. If we accept your laughable interpretation, where does RS differentiate between a communion service in my house by me and giving loved ones communion, also in my house?

You were the one that suggests we should follow an out of context/literal interpretation of “No one may carry the Most Holy Eucharist to his or her home.”

So if that applies to me conducting a communion service at my home without reserving or placing the Blessed Sacrament on exposition, how does it not apply to me when I was taking communion to loved ones in my same home? Using your spaghetti logic we could never take holy communion to anyone staying at our homes, even when approve by our pastors. How utterly rediculous.

Given your misinterpretation of RS, would it be OK to for me to conduct the daily communion service at my next door neighbor’s house with my pastor’s approval because it’s not at my own house?

Your interpretation is clearly wrong, but I just want to see you differentiate between the two, using RS to back-up your justification.

19 postings and only #2 is of value.

The essential difference, and the point of this stipulation of RS, is that you may take Communion to the sick or homebound, prisoners and so on. It’s a laudable function of EMsHC to distribute communion to those who can’t attend Mass that Sunday for whatever reason.

If those sick or homebound happen to be your own relatives living or staying in your own home then so be it. Unless this is the case, for example if all are able bodied and otherwise able to attend Mass, then you’ve no business to take it to your home. That is what RS is saying - otherwise the entire paragraph makes no sense.

My parents are EMHCs, they sometimes distribute to the sick or housebound after themselves attending Sunday Mass. Point being they take it only to the homes where it is needed, never to their own home, since neither of them are sick or housebound, they don’t need it!

They don’t even take Communion alongside those to whom they bring it - it isn’t their place to do so, only to distribute it to those who are otherwise unable to receive.

I’ll tell a story to further illustrate the point. As a child I was once sick and missed Mass on a Sunday. The priest, who was coming over for Sunday lunch anyway, himself brought Communion to me. And ONLY to me - my parents had attended Mass already and had no need to receive from him again.

I can’t speak to the ‘practicing’ with consecrated species. My humble opinion is that it would be much more appropriate, if you feel the need to practice anything, to do so with unconsecrated wafers. You know, so as not to take any sort of chances with the actual Sacred Body and Precious Blood of Our Lord. The idea of calling the reception of Communion ‘practice’ makes me shudder.

 

[Walking_Home]

This is indeed silly. If we accept your laughable interpretation, where does RS differentiate between a communion service in my house by me and giving loved ones communion, also in my house?

You were the one that suggests we should follow an out of context/literal interpretation of “No one may carry the Most Holy Eucharist to his or her home.”

So if that applies to me conducting a communion service at my home without reserving or placing the Blessed Sacrament on exposition, how does it not apply to me when I was taking communion to loved ones in my same home? Using your spaghetti logic we could never take holy communion to anyone staying at our homes, even when approve by our pastors. How utterly rediculous.

Given your misinterpretation of RS, would it be OK to for me to conduct the daily communion service at my next door neighbor’s house with my pastor’s approval because it’s not at my own house?

Your interpretation is clearly wrong, but I just want to see you differentiate between the two, using RS to back-up your justification.

19 postings and only #2 is of value.

---

You are resorting to picking at straws–the discussion was not about bringing communion to the sick, elderly, infirm, etc. You are taking the Host home for your own self–serve communion service.

 

[piusphilistine]

---

You are resorting to picking at straws–the discussion was not about bringing communion to the sick, elderly, infirm, etc. You are taking the Host home for your own self–serve communion service.

It is YOU that is “picking at straws.”

There is nothing from the Church that prohibits or dissuades me from conducting a daily communion service in my own home – provided I have the permission from my pastor and I follow all the rules of conducting a communion service. None at all.

There has been some real bad advice on this thread. Suggesting that only bishops with home chapels may reserve the Blessed Sacrament at home; suggesting that communion services can only be conducted in churches; suggesting that one cannot conduct a communion service at home etc. Bad, bad, bad…

 

[piusphilistine]

The essential difference, and the point of this stipulation of RS, is that you may take Communion to the sick or homebound, prisoners and so on. It’s a laudable function of EMsHC to distribute communion to those who can’t attend Mass that Sunday for whatever reason.

If those sick or homebound happen to be your own relatives living or staying in your own home then so be it. Unless this is the case, for example if all are able bodied and otherwise able to attend Mass, then you’ve no business to take it to your home. That is what RS is saying - otherwise the entire paragraph makes no sense.

My parents are EMHCs, they sometimes distribute to the sick or housebound after themselves attending Sunday Mass. Point being they take it only to the homes where it is needed, never to their own home, since neither of them are sick or housebound, they don’t need it!

They don’t even take Communion alongside those to whom they bring it - it isn’t their place to do so, only to distribute it to those who are otherwise unable to receive.

I’ll tell a story to further illustrate the point. As a child I was once sick and missed Mass on a Sunday. The priest, who was coming over for Sunday lunch anyway, himself brought Communion to me. And ONLY to me - my parents had attended Mass already and had no need to receive from him again.

I can’t speak to the ‘practicing’ with consecrated species. My humble opinion is that it would be much more appropriate, if you feel the need to practice anything, to do so with unconsecrated wafers. You know, so as not to take any sort of chances with the actual Sacred Body and Precious Blood of Our Lord. The idea of calling the reception of Communion ‘practice’ makes me shudder.

I appreciate your comments. But if one is to misinterpret RS to suggest the cannot conduct a communion service at their own homes with permission from their pastor (rediculous) then why does it also not apply to bringing the Blessed Sacrament home for those unable to travel?

How can someone misinterpret RS on one hand, and then flip-flop when there is no change to the language?

 

[LilyM]

I appreciate your comments. But if one is to misinterpret RS to suggest the cannot conduct a communion service at their own homes with permission from their pastor (rediculous) then why does it also not apply to bringing the Blessed Sacrament home for those unable to travel?

How can someone misinterpret RS on one hand, and then flip-flop when there is no change to the language?

Because priests and deacons and lay ministers have ALWAYS, since time immemorial, brought communion to the sick and housebound - and it’s a central part of these roles. Other church documents specify this as one of the roles of the office of EMHC.

What they HAVEN’T ever done, however, until extremely recent decades, is held regular communion services in the absence of a priest. Not inside a church, not outside of it. So the onus is on you, being the innovator, to demonstrate that you have the right to Eucharist-to-go whenever you want, in the absence of another person who is sick or homebound that you’re distributing to.

Heck, why not just tell your priest to set up a drive-through window so people don’t even need to bother going inside the church, they can just grab themselves a Host any time they want …

 

[piusphilistine]

Because priests and deacons and lay ministers have ALWAYS, since time immemorial, brought communion to the sick and housebound - and it’s a central part of these roles. Other church documents specify this as one of the roles of the office of EMHC…

Of course…

What some people chose to do however is to suggest the Blessed Sacrament could never be brought into one’s home in order to conduct a communion service and that is flat-out wrong.

RS dosen’t say that. It says we cannot bring the Blessed Sacrament home to repose or place it on exposition or of course, to descecrate it.

If we are however to belive their general, out-of-context misinterpretation, then it must apply for all sitations as RS provides no additional language to allow one while rejecting another.

 

[piusphilistine]

Because priests and deacons and lay ministers have ALWAYS, since time immemorial, brought communion to the sick and housebound - and it’s a central part of these roles. Other church documents specify this as one of the roles of the office of EMHC.

What they HAVEN’T ever done, however, until extremely recent decades, is held regular communion services in the absence of a priest. Not inside a church, not outside of it. So the onus is on you, being the innovator, to demonstrate that you have the right to Eucharist-to-go whenever you want, in the absence of another person who is sick or homebound that you’re distributing to.

Heck, why not just tell your priest to set up a drive-through window so people don’t even need to bother going inside the church, they can just grab themselves a Host any time they want …

Of course…

What some people chose to do however is to suggest the Blessed Sacrament could never be brought into one’s home in order to conduct a communion service and that is flat-out wrong.

RS dosen’t say that. It says we cannot bring the Blessed Sacrament home to repose or place it on exposition or of course, to descecrate it.

If we are however to believe their general, out-of-context misinterpretation, then it must apply for all situations as RS provides no additional language to allow one while rejecting another. The onus is ON THEM to prove that RS allows one action and not the other – which of course is impossible because it does not.

I sure wish this thread had no been high-jacked. The lack of critical thinking on this thread is apalling – more emotion than anything else.

I’m not sure why you provided the crude sarcasm at the end of your posting, but it certainly was not unexpected.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

To learn the ritual I conducted a daily communion service at my house, with just me in attendance. I stop by my parish on the way home and pick-up a consecrated host which I transport in a proper pyx and burse. Once home after washing my hands and donning an alb, I conduct the communion service strictly per the ritual and in a VERY reverent manner. I do this Monday through Friday – on the weekends I am able to go to Mass.

Originally I intended to do it for perhaps a month to learn the ritual. But after a month I decided to just continue and I have with the approval of my pastors. Yes, I would attend a Mass, a public communion service or even Liturgy of the Hours if one was in any way available to me, but none are. …

I really don’t want to stop, but I’m a bit anxious about doing this five days a week in public. What do you all think?

I think your anxiety is well founded. (Perhaps the Holy Spirit is giving you a little “nudge”?) With all due respect to your pastors, who probably meant well, I don’t think what you are doing is permitted.

First, carrying the Eucharist to your home without a serious reason is not permitted. You may only carry the Eucharist to someone’s home if you are ministering Communion to someone else (e.g., a homebound sick person). From the Code of Canon Law:

“Can. 935 It is not lawful for anyone to keep the blessed Eucharist in personal custody or to carry it around, unless there is an urgent pastoral need and the prescriptions of the diocesan Bishop are observed.”

From the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum:

“[132.] No one may carry the Most Holy Eucharist to his or her home, or to any other place contrary to the norm of law.”

Furthermore, self-communication (giving Communion to oneself) is not permitted for a lay person. We are not to ***take ***Holy Communion; we are to ***receive ***It. (Even a priest only self-communicates at Mass, not outside Mass.) From the General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM):

“160. … The faithful are not permitted to take the consecrated bread or the sacred chalice by themselves …”

From the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum:

“[94.] It is not licit for the faithful “to take . . . by themselves . . . and, still less, to hand . . . from one to another” the sacred host or the sacred chalice …”

A possible exception might be if, for example, you have conducted a Communion service for others, have a consecrated Host left over, and are unable to bring it back to the tabernacle at church. It is my understanding that this would be considered an extension of the Communion you received previously that day, and a necessary part of purifying the pyx in which you carry the Blessed Sacrament.

I understand your desire to receive the Eucharist daily. However, I think it would be better to make a spiritual communion or to ask a priest or deacon to give you Communion when you go to the church, rather than taking It for yourself.

God bless you!

 

[piusphilistine]

I think your anxiety is well founded. (Perhaps the Holy Spirit is giving you a little “nudge”?) With all due respect to your pastors, who probably meant well, I don’t think what you are doing is permitted.

First, carrying the Eucharist to your home without a serious reason is not permitted. You may only carry the Eucharist to someone’s home if you are ministering Communion to someone else (e.g., a homebound sick person). From the Code of Canon Law:

“Can. 935 It is not lawful for anyone to keep the blessed Eucharist in personal custody or to carry it around, unless there is an urgent pastoral need and the prescriptions of the diocesan Bishop are observed.”

From the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum:

“[132.] No one may carry the Most Holy Eucharist to his or her home, or to any other place contrary to the norm of law.”

Furthermore, self-communication (giving Communion to oneself) is not permitted for a lay person. We are not to ***take ***Holy Communion; we are to ***receive ***It. (Even a priest only self-communicates at Mass, not outside Mass.) From the General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM):

“160. … The faithful are not permitted to take the consecrated bread or the sacred chalice by themselves …”

From the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum:

“[94.] It is not licit for the faithful “to take . . . by themselves . . . and, still less, to hand . . . from one to another” the sacred host or the sacred chalice …”

A possible exception might be if, for example, you have conducted a Communion service for others, have a consecrated Host left over, and are unable to bring it back to the tabernacle at church. It is my understanding that this would be considered an extension of the Communion you received previously that day, and a necessary part of purifying the pyx in which you carry the Blessed Sacrament.

I understand your desire to receive the Eucharist daily. However, I think it would be better to make a spiritual communion or to ask a priest or deacon to give you Communion when you go to the church, rather than taking It for yourself.

God bless you!

First, it’s rediculous to suggest a layperson cannot receive communion at a communion service they are conducting…

Second, I don’t repose, expose or desecrate the Blessed Sacrament. I transport it to my house and consume it perhaps 15 minutes later.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

In the Jubilee year of 2000, my pastor at the time asked me to start leading some communion services for some incarcerated folks. I agreed as long as I was allowed to follow the Holy Communion and Worship of the Eucharist Outside Mass. He agreed.

To learn the ritual I conducted a daily communion service at my house, with just me in attendance. I stop by my parish on the way home and pick-up a consecrated host which I transport in a proper pyx and burse. Once home after washing my hands and donning an alb, I conduct the communion service strictly per the ritual and in a VERY reverent manner. I do this Monday through Friday – on the weekends I am able to go to Mass.

Originally I intended to do it for perhaps a month to learn the ritual. But after a month I decided to just continue and I have with the approval of my pastors. Yes, I would attend a Mass, a public communion service or even Liturgy of the Hours if one was in any way available to me, but none are.

This daily practice has provided the incentive for me to read and reflect on the daily Scripture readings, to pray, and to receive Holy Communion.

I have asked each of my pastors (3) since I started if it’s OK to continue. The first two simply said “that’s great – continue.” My current pastor was even more encouraging and asked if I would consider leading it at the parish instead of my house. As it is, he celebrates three daily Masses and just dosen’t have the time to celebrate a fourth.

I really don’t want to stop, but I’m a bit anxious about doing this five days a week in public. What do you all think?

First the “private Communion service” is prohibited.

You could have easily practiced with crackers at home, knowing full well they were just crackers.

Second, yes it would be better to conduct a Communion Service at the church. But again this should only be done when a Mass is not available because no priest is available on a Holy Day of obligation (including Sunday). In my personal opinion Lay lead Communion services should NOT be an everyday occurance in parishes.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

… I don’t repose, expose or desecrate the Blessed Sacrament. I transport it to my house and consume it perhaps 15 minutes later.

Actually, reposing and exposing by an EMHC are permitted, with a pastor’s permission. No one is suggesting that you desecrate.

It’s transporting to your house and consuming (self-communication) that are the problem.

You asked, “What do you all think?” My response was offered in charity; please receive it in charity.

God bless you.

 

[benedictgal]

What I have emboldened is flat-out wrong. They are often conducted in hospitals, nursing homes, ships, prisons, jails, ships, office buildings and yes, even homes. Other places too.

I didn’t read any further because it’s clear you make things up – “This must be done in a church, as indicated in the GIRM” is simply untrue.

This does not apply to homes. The only time it is allowable to do what you advocate in a home is when there is a time of persecution. Obviously, your situation does not qualify as such. Evidently, you have not read the posts in their entirety. Especially, since you yourself admitted to doing this practice initially as a practice run, this is certainly not allowed. What part of the word ilicit do you not understand?

 

[benedictgal]

First, it’s rediculous to suggest a layperson cannot receive communion at a communion service they are conducting…

Second, I don’t repose, expose or desecrate the Blessed Sacrament. I transport it to my house and consume it perhaps 15 minutes later.

However, what you are doing is flat out wrong. You asked us for our advice. It seems that most of the people in this thread concur that you are in grave error. Please do not let your pride get in the way. What you have been doing is a grave abuse.

 

[benedictgal]

One other point that bears noting is the fact that a priest cannot celebrate the Ordinary form of the Mass privately. If that practice is forbidden, then the reprobation also applies to having a private “Communion service” in one’s personal home, as you, yourself described when you were making your dry run at the ritual.

Can’t you see that this is wrong from every level? If a priest, who is the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is not allowed to celebrate the Ordniary form of the Mass in private, what gives you the privilege to celebrate your own Communion service? You are not a priest. The problem here is that you are not connecting the dots, here, piusphilistine.

 

[LilyM]

One other point that bears noting is the fact that a priest cannot celebrate the Ordinary form of the Mass privately. If that practice is forbidden, then the reprobation also applies to having a private “Communion service” in one’s personal home, as you, yourself described when you were making your dry run at the ritual.

Can’t you see that this is wrong from every level? If a priest, who is the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is not allowed to celebrate the Ordniary form of the Mass in private, what gives you the privilege to celebrate your own Communion service? You are not a priest. The problem here is that you are not connecting the dots, here, piusphilistine.

Thanks for bringing this up, actually. Under Canon Law, to celebrate Mass (at least in the OF or Novus Ordo form that most of us attend) the priest MUST have at least one other person present except for grave reason. The prohibition on ‘private masses’ actually is a prohibition on his celebrating Mass without anyone else present.

What makes you think you’re in any way entitled to the privilege of communing on your own when your priest very likely isn’t himself entitled to do so?

 

[Just_1_hr_a_wk]

If you have a genuine question about what you are currently doing - genuine enough to ask others - why not check with your Diocese?

Also -

Do you have a spiritual director? A regular confessor?
If you, do have you spoken to them before coming to a message board?

:knight1: :knight1: :knight1:

 

[Sr_Sally]

I think that it would be MUCH better for you to hold this service at your church. If you have an opportunity to serve your community, you should take it. Since you need to go to the church to get the consecrated host, then it will not take any additional time out of your day.

That is to say better than holding a private service for yourself.

Best of course would be to attend a regularly held daily Mass and give up your private practices.

Perhaps you should consider becoming a permanent deacon. Then this would fall into one of your normal duties.