Do you avoid female Extraordinary Ministers Of the Holy Eucharist?

[jlw]

otm:

Horse patooties! We have one priest(in his 70’s), and at the 10:30 Mass we have three other EMHCs distributing the Host, and 6 administering the Cup.

Oh, and we have girl altar servers.

And we have one priest (or is it two?) ordained within the last few years, one seminarian, two (or is it now 3?) women who have joined the convent, one just recently ordained deacon, and one in studies.

Girl altar servers have nothing to do with vocations or the lack of them.

EMHCs (even women EMHCs , heaven forbid!!!) have nothing to do with vocations, or the shortage thereof.

Prayer has a lot to do with it; we have 24 hour adoration, and have had for a number of years. THAT has something to do with it.

Now if all parishes can be just like yours, all would be ok!!

 

[katherine2]

ThornGenX:

I don’t get it, how would you tell if they are? and just in general huh?

Okay, I can’t make historical illusions if you guys don’t know your history. For many centuries the objections to women on or near the sancturary had to do with the assertion that we are “unclean” while menstrating. You cna find all sorts of commentaries on this by churchmen of the past.

 

[beverly30]

My parish only uses priests and deacons, so I don’t have to worry about such issues. We also have a communion rail, so I can receive our Lord on my knees.

Does anyone know the reason behind taking communion rails down? I have been to a Lutheran church that used them, and it didnt’ seem to take that much longer. I don’t participate in it at this church, but the thought of kneeling, being able to stay there for a minute and say a prayer to Jesus thanking him before going back to the pew seems better than standing, and walking back to the pew at the same time the host is still in your mouth. Are there any Catholic churches that it is not permited in, or is it simply the parishes choice? I would love it if our church did this, but of course would feel out of place suggeting such an important thing like that. It seems like it would also decrease the need for so many emhc’s, which in my opinion would be good. Nothing against the people, but it really does seem more right to me to receive Jesus from a priest. It’s such an important Gift. I think if people still wanted to help at the church there are plenty of other volunteer options for them. Something inside me just doesn’t think it right to give such a privilage to almost anyone.

 

[usqueadmortem]

Male or female, it doesn’t matter to me. If hands are unconsecrated I prefer not to recieve from them.

Usque.

 

[Lisa_N]

Wow what an interesting thread! I think so many have made good points. I would never line jump but early on I realized if I sat in a certain spot I would receive from the priest. When I attend mass more than once a week though, I feel guilty like I should defer and go to one of the EM’s instead of “hogging” the priest so to speak.

I think among the best points are those that question the need for EM’s in unextraordinary circumstances. A huge mass, one or two priests, might be reason for a veritable army of EMs but someone mentioned that it seems the “need” for EMs is really their need to be involved at some level, for the church to be more inclusive (I have learned to HATE that word along with diversity BLECH!).

We have several smaller and a large mass. We probably don’t need EM’s at the smaller masses particularly as we had one permanent deacon and a brother who was a deacon who will be ordained next month. But we’d have a lot of lay folk and I admit MOSTLY women basically taking over the job. Serving when you are truly needed is one thing. Self serving activities are another. It does speed up the process but is that really the point? Having time to reflect both before and after receiving, while others are in the line is a very special time for me. We don’t need to rush everyone through like it was dinner at the Chuckwagon Cafeteria.

I also think a good point was made about EM’s reducing the perception that giving Communion is a special sacred calling that requires more than just a willingness to stand there and pass it out. Communion was a lot more meaningful to me because it took some commitment on my part (RCIA) to be able to receive. When I was in a Prot church and anyone could wander up and take communion, mostly from lay people, it was utterly meaningless. It may indeed reduce the interest in vocations.

That being said, I wouldn’t avoid women EMs but I would prefer to receive from the priest.

Lisa N

 

[Pariah_Pirana]

cnelms:

I am a Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion and I consider it the greatest privlege of my life to assist the priest and deacons in this ministry. Oftentimes I tremble or weep while holding the ciborium or chalice in my hands during the mass. We have a parish of 2200 families. One mass on Saturday, and 4 packed masses on Sunday. We have three priests (Pastor, Associate Pastor and our Beloved Retired Priest in Residence), one permanent deacon and we usually are granted a transitional deacon (seminarian in formation for ordination) during the seminary session year. The church building itself seats about 1000 people. We have 4 to 6 ciborium and 8 chalices at every mass. The ordained (priests and/or deacon) arrange themselves at the foot of the sanctuary on the main aisle, then flanking out from them are 3 chalice ministers, one or two more ciborium ministers and one more chalice minister on the end. With all these ministers it still takes roughly 10-12 minutes to complete the distribution of the most precious Body and Blood of the savior. Without our EMHC’s, communion would take at least 30 to 45 minutes. Mass times are 0730, 0900, 1030 and Noon. 30 minutes transition between each. On Palm Sunday, Easter Sunday and Christmas Day, we further separate the mass times to allow 60 minutes of transition.

We have to have our EMHC’s.

That I doubt. We have about the same number of EMsHC, priests, parishioners and Masses as you do. Odd how ONE PRIEST used to distribute communion (and it didn’t take that long) and how now it takes an ARMY at my parish!

When it was one priest it was under one species or through intinction, so a small number of EMsHC might be acceptable.

Then again, there is nothing that mandates that Holy Communion be offered under both species…

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Let’s see what Pope John Paul II, God rest his soul, said about THE MYSTERY AND WORSHIP OF THE EUCHARIST.

"How eloquent therefore, even if not of ancient custom, is the rite of the anointing of the hands in our Latin ordination, as though precisely for these hands a special grace and power of the Holy Spirit is necessary!

**"To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained, one which indicates an active participation in the ministry of the Eucharist."
**
Hmmm…what could the Holy Father have been trying to tell us, I wonder?

 

[stevejosem]

I don’t believe that a woman should ever be ordained a deacon or a priest for the reasons the Church gives, but I don’t have a problem with a woman being an Extraordinary Minister. If it’s acceptable to the Church under the conditions the Church gives, it’s acceptable to me.

As a matter of fact, my wife was an EM for a long time at her church in Chicago. She is very devout, and she prays almost every chance she gets. I am not proud of myself to say this, but she is a lot more devoted in prayer to God than I am. But, I am very happy that I have a wife that is so devoted, and I hope to be more devoted in prayer myself.

It would be personal pride to go against what the Church teaches, and it would be a lack of faith to deny the promise that Jesus made that the Holy Spirit would guide St. Peter and his successors in the teachings of the faith until Jesus returns to us.

 

[mommy]

I honestly never considered the sex of the EMHC. But I don’t go to them anyway. I go to the priest or the deacon. I don’t have anything against them, our church is rather large, and always full, although we only have two at each mass, so we’re not overdoing it in my opinion.

To me, there’s just something a bit more sacred about having ‘less hands in the pot’ so to speak. The priest consecrates it, then he places it on my tongue. There’s no middle man.

I just prefer it that way, but I have nothing against the concept of EMHC in general, for anyone else who wishes to use them.
I know they are great use for the homebound when our priest can’t make it everywhere.

 

[MariaG]

I uncomfortably realize I have fallen into the habit of chosing the priest’s line because I prefer to receive from a priest.

Yet as I read all these comments, I truly feel like weeping. We, and I include myself in this, should not be focussing on who is holding Jesus, but Jesus Himself. Truly, I am now crying because it feels as if we are trying to rip Jesus apart by arguing about who we should receive from. We should be focusing on Christ and my own body, mind, heart and soul into which we are receiving Him.

Lord, I pray that I will be so focused on you that I do not notice who I receive you from. Lord, help me to offer my whole self to you in worship and not worry about those things that don’t matter at the time. Amen.

If there is a problem in our parishes (abuse of that which is allowed), we should direct our efforts at change, but not during Mass. Mass is for worship, not statements of any kind.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[catholicanarchy]

Kyenta:

Boy, I thought I was the ONLY one who line jumped! It doesn’t matter if the EM is a male or female - their hands are not consecrated thus I almost always go with the Priest to receive communion on my tongue.

I say almost always because sometimes the Mass is packed and I’ll be on the wrong side. I feel you receive more graces through the Priest.

You don’t “receive more graces through the priest.”:

You just don’t.

 

[catholicanarchy]

cheese_sdc:

I think that is the saddest thing I have ever heard.

walks away, shaking head

I agree. Not only is it sad, it is hateful. I can’t believe how self-righteous some Catholics can be, who think they have the right to “line-jump” and be picky about who is handing them such a beautiful gift as the Eucharist.

Granted, it is a shame when Eucharistic Ministers do not treat their ministry with the reverence it is due. And in those cases, correction is neccessary. But to “line-jump” based on sexist and hyper-clerical bias is sinful.

And I seriously can’t believe we’re not hearing from more femal EME’s who simply can’t believe what they’re reading.

 

[GoLatin]

I am taking instructions to join the Church from a Traditionalist Priest in full communion with Rome. I plan to always kneel, only receive from a Priest, and only take Jesus under the appearance of bread. The Precious Blood can spill from the Chalice! I also prefer the Tridentine Mass.

I attended a Funeral Mass for a Priest in a neighboring Diocese. The Mass was said Novus Ordo, in English, but there is a very interesting point that I would like to bring up. The church was packed to the gills, but when it came time to distribute Holy Communion, the ONLY people that gave Jesus to the congregation were the two main celebrants(The Bishop received from one of these two Priests, I think, and the other Priests present came up and communicated themselves.). Jesus was only distributed to the laypeople under the form of bread.

 

[GoLatin]

This is a clarification of the above post. At the Funeral Mass, the Bishop was present but was not concelebrating. I guess that this is the reason why he did not communicate himself.

 

[rcn]

GoLatin:

I am taking instructions to join the Church from a Traditionalist Priest in full communion with Rome. I plan to always kneel, only receive from a Priest, and only take Jesus under the appearance of bread. The Precious Blood can spill from the Chalice! I also prefer the Tridentine Mass.

If you’re still preparing to join the Church, you might as well learn now that there is no such thing as a “Traditionalist Priest in full communion with Rome”. There are only “priests.” If you are being taught that the things you’ve mentioned are “better”, you’re being taught incorrectly.

 

[bones_IV]

otm:

You are trying to split hairs with a dull razor. Anglicans believe in the True Presence. Their theology is wrong (and they do not have a sacramental priesthood due to changes in the ordination ceremony), but if they use the term Anglo-Catholic, while I agree with you that does not make them in union with Rome, they can decide by what name they go, and it is not up to you to change that name.

Baloney!

As far as you not recognizing them as Catholic, you ought to tone down your sweeping statements, as there is permission from Rome for those Anglicans who have reunited to continue with a good portion of their format. If you walked into one of their churches during Mass, you would probably not be able to distinguish which one was in union with Rome and which was not.

www.advent.org/cathen/01498a.htm

Look at the part where it says they have communion service.

I would also challenge your staatement that many of them know they do not have the True Presence. Where do you get this evidence?
Assuming that they have rejected the Catholic Church teaching.

And if we want to go one further, they are united with the Catholic Church, although incompletely. They are united through the sacrament of baptism, which they are fully capable of administering and which the Catholic Church acknowledges as valid baptism.

By the way, it is not the fact that they are not in communion with Rome that denies them the True Presence; it is the loss of the sacramental priesthood.

More than that.

1. Rejection of Purgatory and ommission of prayers for the dead. (Catholics have prayers for the dead every mass.) And you say I wouldn’t know the difference between what mass was in communion with Rome and which one wasn’t. That’s laughable.
2. Rejection of Church Infallibility.
3. Sola Scriptura
4. Rejection of the invocation of the blessed virgin mary and the saints.
5. The non-necessity of a auricular confession.
6. Triple Eucharistic tenet namely the Eucharist is simply a sacrament or commuion and not the holy sacrifice of the mass. The denial of the Transubstantian and worship of the host. Deny the sacrificial priesthood.
7. Justification by faith alone.

The Orthodox are not in union with Rome, but they do have a sacramental priesthood, and they do have the True Presence.

 

[ridesawhitehors]

**

catholicanarchy:

I agree. Not only is it sad, it is hateful. I can’t believe how self-righteous some Catholics can be, who think they have the right to “line-jump” and be picky about who is handing them such a beautiful gift as the Eucharist.

Granted, it is a shame when Eucharistic Ministers do not treat their ministry with the reverence it is due. And in those cases, correction is neccessary. But to “line-jump” based on sexist and hyper-clerical bias is sinful.

And I seriously can’t believe we’re not hearing from more femal EME’s who simply can’t believe what they’re reading.

**

That is a mouthful, catholicanarchy, to say that it is hateful.
You can’t imagine the experiences that all of us have in our respective parishes. In fact, I will tell you this, And I give my word that what I am going to tell you is the truth. I was once physically assaulted by a female EM, while I was kneeling to recieve the Eucharist. She was angry that I kneeled to recieve, and she actually drew blood by gouging me with one of her manicured nails. She was arrogant, abusive, and mean. Yes, I don’t hold it against her gender, and I believe that Christ in the Holy Eucharist was abused more then me in this act. But I am VERY VERY shy of recieving from an EM, especially females. I think it is a role best suited to men.
She was a special case to be sure, so I believe I come by my predjudice honestly.
I did write to the priest, the archbishop, and to the Cardinal in charge of such things… I can’t recall who that was. But, boy did I get letters! It was very traumatic for me, but drew me closer to the Eucharist.

 

[catholicanarchy]

AndrewMcNabb:

I only take the Eucharist from Priests,Deacons or Bishops. I don’t think its right for laymen to touch the body of our Lord.

So you can touch the Body of Christ with the inside of your mouth, and with the inside of your digestive system (and who knows what has passed through there), but a layperson can’t touch the host w/ his or her hands in order to give it to you?

 

[Steve_Green]

Golly ,

How in the world did anyone live before the Novus Ordo Mass?

You mean the seminaries were full ?

There were not discussions or controversies over Eucharistic Ministers?

80 percent of the Catholics attended Mass ?

You mean to tell me that the Mass of that old guy Pius V converted the Americas ?

 

[catholicanarchy]

**

That is a mouthful, catholicanarchy, to say that it is hateful.
You can’t imagine the experiences that all of us have in our respective parishes. In fact, I will tell you this, And I give my word that what I am going to tell you is the truth.** I was once physically assaulted by a female EM, while I was kneeling to recieve the Eucharist. She was angry that I kneeled to recieve, and she actually drew blood by gouging me with one of her manicured nails. She was arrogant, abusive, and mean. Yes, I don’t hold it against her gender, and I believe that Christ in the Holy Eucharist was abused more then me in this act. But I am VERY VERY shy of recieving from an EM, especially females. I think it is a role best suited to men.
She was a special case to be sure, so I believe I come by my predjudice honestly.
I did write to the priest, the archbishop, and to the Cardinal in charge of such things… I can’t recall who that was. But, boy did I get letters! It was very traumatic for me, but drew me closer to the Eucharist.

You have got to be kidding me.

First of all, I know priests who do similar things. A priest who used to be at my parish wasn’t happy with the assigned lector one Sunday. He tried to grab the Lectionary from the woman, saying “You aren’t going to read at MY Mass.” When she didn’t hand over the Lectionary, he walked by her and intentionally slammed into her with his shoulder. (“His” Mass, he said. Aside from the fact that this immature 30-year-old priest threw such a temper-tantrum, the complete arrogance of this guy is incredible.)

Yeah, things happen and individuals do stupid things at Mass. But for you to then say that your experience contributes to your position that EMEs should be males is absolutely ridiculous; nonsensical.

Sounds to me like you are taking your (unfortunate) experience and using it as a way to justify a previously-held negative view of women, and an unnaturally elevated view of the priesthood. (And yes, I am aware that you are a woman.)