Do you avoid female Extraordinary Ministers Of the Holy Eucharist?

[otm]

JakeW:

Hmm. I don’t think you understood the comment. I think jlw was trying to say that emc’s are there not really because of NEED, but much more because of newness, change, inclusiveness and “involvement”. Thusly it waters down the importance of the CATHOLIC priest and the altar sanctuary during the CATHOLIC Mass. By implication, the use of emc’s make the CATHOLIC CONSECRATED priest less necessary, and in a way, it protestantizes the faith.

I get realy tired of the “protestantizing” comment, particularly by people who have, seemingly, both a narrow view of what the Catholic Church is, and a narrow experience of it.

We have a 70+ year old Jesuit as our pastor, for a church of about 1000 families and a new school. He is responsible for four Masses on the weekend, and EMHC are most certainly necessary.
I understand that there are parishes that have more than one priest, and that would reduce the number of EMHCs by one if they would make themselves available, although not necessarily reduce them by any more than that. I also understand that some parishes use too many for the number of people present. But I have yet to hear any conversation, statement or comment that would lead me to believe that “someone” or a bunch of “someones” are conspiring to “protestantise” the Church. Most of it is a combination of sloppiness, laziness, and/or poor liturgical understanding.

Some people have a highly iconic view of the Church, and anything that doesn’t fit within that icon view is “heretical” or “abusive” or “protestantizing”. Much of the kevetching simply has to do with the fact that it doesn’t fit their image. Some of it, too, approaches a hyper-religiosity which is mistaken for piety. I would suggest that those who isle jump may be of the latter persuasion.

 

[otm]

jlw:

I see your point, and agree. However, you are missing mine.

Protestants, essentially, believe that the apostolic succession, the direct line back to Peter is unnecessary, no?? And therefore, it would follow that a CATHOLIC priest is unnecessary, right??

No, that does not necessarily follow. For example, the Orthodox reject the primacy of the Pope, but most certainly believe in priests. So alos the high Lutheran church, and also the Anglican; they both have a priesthood. We can argue the issue of a sacramental priesthood, but both believe that the priest confects the Eucharist. So your logic does not follow.

jlw:

When the emc’s are doing what the priest is doing, it lessens his importance, no??

No, not if it is not an essential act of the priesthood. And Rome has clearly seen fit to give the permission, so I would trust that Rome has a pretty clear idea of what is, and is not, intrinsic to the priesthood.

jlw:

When lay people are doing the job of a CONSECRATED CATHOLIC priest, and milling about the sanctuary in streetclothes, why have the roman collar or traditional robes, why the alter chistos??

Obviously it is not the job of the priest - at least, not intrinsic to the priesthood; or perhaps better put, the job (if you will) is not limited to the ordained. See above.

If you want them robed, so be it; to me that would go further towards what you see as an identity issue; I would prefer they not be robed.

And they don’t “mill around” any more than the altar servers. They go up and stand still, until they have received and benn handed the Cup or Bowl.

 

[otm]

jlw:

That is such a rediculous comparison.

bones_IV you are being reactionary here. I’m not calling for some SPPX coup or something stupid like that. :whacky:

I am JUST being vigilant. I think that you may take me for a “master of suspicion”. On the contrary, you’re assuming too much.

I am not leaving the Church over EMC’s.

I am willing to say out loud that most emcs are UNNECESSARY, and that makes me heretical???

The Church allows emc’s…in EXTRAordinary circumstances. I understand and embrace THAT. But some of the observations in bluerose’s post #6 ring true. I understand teelynn when she must deal with a real priest shortage in her diocese. And when OhioBob says, even in his defense of emc’s:

…my question is WHY?? Why do we WANT the priest to minister the Eucharist?? And why do many, like Panis Angelicas, who also defends the use of emc’s say:

What IS “overuse”??? What is too much?? WHY would you decide that it’s too much??? What logic would you use to reach such a conclusion??

Looking for some thoughtful answers here. I would expect much from the very smart people contributing here.

There is certainly the appearance that those who feel that EMHCs are over utilized are also those who don’t like the use of EMHCs somwhere from “slightly dislike” to “seriously disdain”.

When there are other priests available, they should be distributing Communion beofre EMHCs; the same goes for deacons. But as to how many are necessary, or the reverse, what constitutes unnecessary use, is pretty much left to the discretion of the priest. On occasion there are priests who do not use much discretion. But at the heart of most of this discussion is the fact that many of those discussing it simply don’t like EMHCs and are not going to be happy campers until EMHCs are done away with. While that may certainly occur in the future, I wouldn’t counsel holding your breath; blue is a much better color for a shirt than skin.

 

[bones_IV]

So alos the high Lutheran church, and also the Anglican; they both have a priesthood.

No they don’t. They lost their priesthood, by rejecting the authority of the Pope and their priesthood is invalid due to the fact that they don’t believe in the holy sacrifice of the mass. Leo XIII declared the anglican priesthood invalid.

We can argue the issue of a sacramental priesthood, but both believe that the priest confects the Eucharist.

The anglicans don’t believe in the real presence.

 

[Penitent]

otm:

I would suggest that those who isle jump may be of the latter persuasion.

Seems there’s judgmentalism on both sides of the aisles, based on your “suggestion.” All I can say is I read here on this board an EMHC had a certain amount of disgust for giving Holy Communion to those who received on the tongue–so far, I haven’t heard or read this same “disgust” from a Priest, whom I assume knows it is perfectly acceptable and not “disgusting.” And I can guarantee you my discomfort now about EMHCs is not “hyper-religious.” And just as backup, I spoke a few days ago to an EMHC in my parish and asked her how she felt about giving communion on the tongue and she said it makes her uncomfortable and she found it difficult…I’m also going to assume the Priest (hopefully) doesn’t feel the same way.

Penitent

 

[Affirmed]

This is to you people who jump lines to avoid the EMHC’s.

It would seem like the most logical thing to do if you are upset about the EMHC’s (there is no such thing as an "Extraordianry Minister of the Eucharist) is to talk to the pastor. Trying to avoid their presence by jumping lines to recieve from a priest or deacon doesn’t do anything but let people around you know just how much smarter than Rome you think you are. After all, the Vatican has approved them. But if you really think you know better, go right ahead and show Jesus just how much you love Him by slighting your brothers and sisters. I don’t like having them either. But the way to deal with them is by going to the person in charge. And if that doesn’t work, go higher. And so on and so forth. Don’t start with the EMHC’s that think they are doing the Church a service.

 

[Exporter]

I have never gone to a line in which a female E.M. was giving the Eucharist. In fact in my Church I have never seen a woman giving out the Eucharist. They do sometimes give the Blood of Christ - I took it from a woman once - and felt bad about for several days.

If you were to ask me why I would avoid women as E. M. I will tell you. First I will just say that I am prejudiced. If I am prejudiced then I dont have to justify why I do what I do , do I? I dont like to see men wear sandals. I am prejudidiced. I dont have to give a reason for that, do I?

 

[otm]

bones_IV:

So alos the high Lutheran church, and also the Anglican; they both have a priesthood.

No they don’t. They lost their priesthood, by rejecting the authority of the Pope and their priesthood is invalid due to the fact that they don’t believe in the holy sacrifice of the mass. Leo XIII declared the anglican priesthood invalid.

We can argue the issue of a sacramental priesthood, but both believe that the priest confects the Eucharist.

The anglicans don’t believe in the real presence.

You missed the point. The arguement was that EMHCs were “protestantizing the priesthood”; Protestants don’t accept the authority of the Pope, and therefore Catholic priests are unnecessary. The point I was making was that not accepting the authority of the Pope does not necessarily lead to a belief that priests are not necessary. Both the Anglican/Episcopalian and the high Lutheran believe that priests are necessary; they also believe that their priests can confect the Eucharist. I said nothing about whether or not the sacramental orders were valid, or whether the Eucharist was confected.

My only comment was that the logic did not flow; both believe that priests are necessary (they believe they have them). Validity was not part of the specifiec conversation.

 

[otm]

Penitent:

Seems there’s judgmentalism on both sides of the aisles, based on your “suggestion.” All I can say is I read here on this board an EMHC had a certain amount of disgust for giving Holy Communion to those who received on the tongue–so far, I haven’t heard or read this same “disgust” from a Priest, whom I assume knows it is perfectly acceptable and not “disgusting.” And I can guarantee you my discomfort now about EMHCs is not “hyper-religious.” And just as backup, I spoke a few days ago to an EMHC in my parish and asked her how she felt about giving communion on the tongue and she said it makes her uncomfortable and she found it difficult…I’m also going to assume the Priest (hopefully) doesn’t feel the same way.

Penitent

Some people would feel that touching one’s finger against the tongue of another individual was disgusting; others would not. Without being part of the conversation someone had with the EMHC who expressed disgust, I have no idea why they felt disgusted, but would suspect that might be part of the issue. I have never spoken with a priest about the matter. However, as an altar server pre Vatican2, I saw our parish priest put the host on the tongue, and pull a line of spit as he withdrew his finger, numerous times. We altar servers used to joke about how long a line could be drawn (6th graders have rather crude senses of humor).

As to the discussion you had with an EMHC, that may be part of it, or it may be other issues; did you ask why they felt that way?

And I will stand by my statement that there appears to be a streak of hyper-religiosity running through this thread. Receiving more grace because you received from a priest? That’s an interesting bit of theology; I would like to see it’s source. And until I see one, I have no place elese to chalk it up to but hyper-religiosity.

Next we will be hearing that people go to Mass when a certain priest says it because he is more holy than the other priest, who is known to say “hell” inappropriately and is rumored to drink a bit too much, and so they know they receive more grace by attending the other Mass.

It is about the same thing.

 

[otm]

Exporter:

I have never gone to a line in which a female E.M. was giving the Eucharist. In fact in my Church I have never seen a woman giving out the Eucharist. They do sometimes give the Blood of Christ - I took it from a woman once - and felt bad about for several days.

If you were to ask me why I would avoid women as E. M. I will tell you. First I will just say that I am prejudiced. If I am prejudiced then I dont have to justify why I do what I do , do I? I dont like to see men wear sandals. I am prejudidiced. I dont have to give a reason for that, do I?

Well, at least you are honest.

But seriously, if Rome has approved (and avoiding the red herring of “too many”), perhaps a deeper questioning of why you feel this way, and how it interrelates to the fact that Rome has approved of it, might be fruitful. At the very bottom, I suspect, is how you think or perceive the Sacraments and God.

They are a great mystery (it is not for no reason the Eatern Churches refer the the Mass as the Holy Mysteries), and worthy of questioning in a positive way. Some fear to question at all, as if that were to introduce heresy; but it is only in questioning that we can grow into an adult faith, on that is tru to what Christ taught, and the Church has taugh ever since.

Too many Cathiolics stopped learing about their faith somewhere between the end of grade school and the end of high school. And it often shows.

 

[A.Pelliccio]

I avoid EMOHE all the time period. The very least if I can not recieve the holy sacrement from a priest I try to get it from the deacon.

 

[KCT]

ames61:

What do you do when the EMHC is under 5’ tall and you’re 5’8"?

Or 5’ 10" in my case! We have a number of EM’s who are short, old and shaky. From them, I receive in my hand. It’s safer! I don’t avoid female EM’s. Sometimes the priest is the only male on the altar.
—KCT

 

[EsclavoDeCristo]

I tend to see out the priest or the man yes. However, that is just personal preference. Jesus is still just as real with whatever minister is handing out the Host. If the extra-ordinary minister is being used correctly (there is true necesity for her) then I am fine with it. Unfortunately, the majority of EM are unneeded and just used to make a political statement. :bigyikes:

God is good, praise Him! :bowdown:

 

[A_O]

bones_IV:

The anglicans don’t believe in the real presence.

Don’t make such sweeping and incorrect statements.
While Anglican, I believed in Transubstantiation and had plans to buy a monstrance for my old parish. I was supportive of Corpus Christi processions, adoration, and benediction. All of which are tolerated in Anglicanism. (Usually found in the Anglo-Catholic Churches)

Anglicans, even of the lower branch, generally acknowledge the True Presence (as it is an official belief).
The Book of Common Prayer refers to the even Mass (as it is called) as a sacrifice.

 

[adstrinity]

No. No I do not.

How much should I?

 

[bones_IV]

Both the Anglican/Episcopalian and the high Lutheran believe that priests are necessary; they also believe that their priests can confect the Eucharist.

The priests in the Lutheran, Episcopalian/Anglican ecclesial communities are not priests. They are just ministers and I refrain from even calling them priests. They believe that their priests are legitimate but its not the truth.

 

[bones_IV]

A&O:

Don’t make such sweeping and incorrect statements.

We catholics have the real presence, you don’t. The real presence is in the church and only in the Catholic church. Let me ask you this. If you believe in the real presence then why do you have women as ministers? If you believe in the real presence, then why don’t you accept the authority of the Pope? While you say you believe in the real presence it’s not the same as the Holy Roman Church. That’s why I say that the Eucharist you have is not the real presence. The Anglican Church lost its apostolic authority when they broke up with Rome.

 

[KBarn]

A previous poster mentioned height differentials…

I prefer to receive Jesus on my tongue. I am 6’4’’ so it is difficult for me to find a layperson who is skilled enough to place the host on my tongue. And what is worse, women tend to be shorter than men.

It is a problem that affects the way I receive our Lord because I want to receive Him as solemnly as I am able. Being able to receive on the tongue contributes to my ability to solemnly approach the Eucharist.

 

[ThornGenX]

I do not avoid female EMs at all. Also, though I am not a EM myself, I rarely wear pantyhose, so if I ever do become a EM, there would be no pantyhose at the alter of mine.

 

[Micki]

jlw:

Yes, I do. Sorry.

If we are at a visiting parish where this might happen, we sit in the back so we can “line jump” (if necessary) so I can recieve Jesus from the consecrated hand of the Alter Christos, the priest.

I second that!!

Micki