EME

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kathy_McManus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kathy_McManus

Guest
Our pastors have said that EMEs are encouraged to ‘bless’ the little children who approach with their parents to receive the Eucharist. I feel honored to do this as a Mom and Grandmother of 22 with a deep passion for little ones. However, a relative has said that this is forbidden by the Church! She indicated that it is a distraction from the spirit of reverence I should have. Also, if I touch the head of a child then touch the sacred species I am dishonoring the Eucharist.! Who is correct?
 
Our pastors have said that EMEs are encouraged to ‘bless’ the little children who approach with their parents to receive the Eucharist. I feel honored to do this as a Mom and Grandmother of 22 with a deep passion for little ones. However, a relative has said that this is forbidden by the Church! She indicated that it is a distraction from the spirit of reverence I should have. Also, if I touch the head of a child then touch the sacred species I am dishonoring the Eucharist.! Who is correct?
First of all, there is no such term as an EME. The term that the Church uses in her official documents is Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.

Your relative is correct. With all due respect, your pastors have overstepped their bounds and are allowing something that the Church states should not be happening, especially when it comes to the laity. This directive was issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (ie: the Holy See) in November 2008:
  1. The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.
**2. Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf. Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; Canon 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18). **
**3. Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands — which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here — by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged. **
  1. The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio n. 84, “forbids any pastor, for whatever reason to pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry”. To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.
5. In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).
This is an official document of the Holy See, as it bears a protocol number: 930/08/L. These five observations came as a result of a letter written by two of our forum members. When I spoke to the CDWDS two weeks ago on a related matter, I inquired as to the maintenance of these five observations and they are still in effect.

With regard to touching anyone with the Sacred Host, that is a huge no-no. The Sacred Host should be either Exposed (as in for Benediction) or consumed at Holy Communion. It is not a mere sacramental; it is the Sacrament and should not be abused in that manner.

Unfortunately, this bad practice of imparting a blessing in lieu of Holy Communion, sprang from the mistaken notion that everyone is entitled to receive something at Mass. What we tend to forget is that the Communion line is specifically to receive Someone (our Lord), not something, a blessing. Everyone, including children, will receive the blessing at its proper time, the end of the Mass. Furthermore, only the priest can impart a blessing within the context of the Mass, but, again, this blessing should come at the proper time.
 
That question was asked to the Vatican, and here is the response
This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Disciple of the Sacraments acknowledges receipt of your kind letter of 13 August, 2008 and would like to thank you for your interest and suggestions. This matter is presently under the attentive study of the Congregation.
For the present, therefore, this Dicastery wishes to limit itself to the following observations:
The liturgical blessing of the Holy Mass is properly given to each and to all at the conclusion of the Mass, just a few moments subsequent to the distribution of Holy Communion.
Lay people, within the context of Holy Mass, are unable to confer blessings. These blessings, rather, are the competence of the priest (cf. Ecclesia de Mysterio, Notitiae 34 (15 Aug. 1997), art. 6, § 2; can. 1169, § 2; and Roman Ritual De Benedictionibus (1985), n. 18).
Furthermore, the laying on of a hand or hands – which has its own sacramental significance, inappropriate here – by those distributing Holy Communion, in substitution for its reception, is to be explicitly discouraged.
The Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, n. 84, “forbids any pastor, for whatever reason to pretext even of a pastoral nature, to perform ceremonies of any kind for divorced people who remarry.” To be feared is that any form of blessing in substitution for communion would give the impression that the divorced and remarried have been returned, in some sense, to the status of Catholics in good standing.
In a similar way, for others who are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in accord with the norm of law, the Church’s discipline has already made clear that they should not approach Holy Communion nor receive a blessing. This would include non-Catholics and those envisaged in can. 915 (i.e., those under the penalty of excommunication or interdict, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin).
Please continue to pray for the Church’s ministers that they ever become more worthy of the mystery they celebrate.
With every good wish and kind regard, I am,
Sincerely Yours in Christ,
(Fr. Anthony Ward, S.M.)
Under-Secretary
rpinet.com/wforum/index.php?t=getfile&id=1&rid=0&S=2d9e6e1269e9dd58c35101ca00af44b2

Also, I presume that you mean Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion. The Minister of the Eucharist is the one who confects the Sacrament of the Eucharist. In other words, the priest.

The Communication of the Sacrament, brining it to the Community, is a different ministry, and it’s title is Minister of Holy Communion.

The only EME - Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist that can exist in the church would be a laicized priest. They can confect the Sacrament, but can only do it in Extraoridinary circumstances.
 
The truth is we do not know for certain how this practice got started. But there are sufficient documents coming from the Vatican that discourage the practice of giving blessings in the Communion line, no matter if the one giving the blessing is a priest or an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.
 
Its just a matter of not thinking things through (as so many liturgical problems are). Everyone in the congregation receives a blessing from the priest only a few minutes after communion. Giving “blessings” in the Communion line seems to negate this fact. Also, I put “blessings” in quotations marks because a lay person cannot give “blessings” in the manner we are discussing. After all, why would an EMHC be more suitable to give blessings than any other lay person in the congregation?

I hope everyone had (is having) a very blessed and merry Christmas!
 
First of all, there is no such term as an EME. The term that the Church uses in her official documents is Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.
We have EMEs at our parish. Perhaps it’s incorrect use, but we use it nontheless. 🤷

BTW, the priest and Bishop are OK with it’s use. Again, 🤷 .

So if we’re being technical, yes, there is such a term, but it’s use is incorrect and/or unrecognized by the Church. 🙂
 
We have EMEs at our parish. Perhaps it’s incorrect use, but we use it nontheless. 🤷

BTW, the priest and Bishop are OK with it’s use. Again, 🤷 .

So if we’re being technical, yes, there is such a term, but it’s use is incorrect and/or unrecognized by the Church. 🙂
It’s actually forbidden by the Church:
Redeptionis Sacramentum:
[156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.
 
Our pastors have said that EMEs are encouraged to ‘bless’ the little children who approach with their parents to receive the Eucharist. I feel honored to do this as a Mom and Grandmother of 22 with a deep passion for little ones. However, a relative has said that this is forbidden by the Church! She indicated that it is a distraction from the spirit of reverence I should have. Also, if I touch the head of a child then touch the sacred species I am dishonoring the Eucharist.! Who is correct?
There are 2 problems with this:
  1. Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion cannot bless anyone. They’re not priests or deacons.
  2. Blessings in the Communion line aren’t appropriate, because the time for the distribution of Communion is just that: the distribution of Communion. It’s not a time for blessings, or anything else.
Unfortunately, over the past few years, some people have spent too much time trying to think of ways to add their own personal little “improvements” which in reality impoverish the Mass. The only role for Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion is to assist the priest in distributing Communion.
 
mwscott;6094675Mike:
ven in the church, zeal can lead people to issue harsh judgments and impute the worst motives to one another. These attitudes and practices do irreparable damage to the communion of the church." ]!
Your signature is a needed reminder.
 
Your signature is a needed reminder.
Indeed, especially on a forum where things can sometimes seem harsh and sterile. Although I’m not always the best at it I try to make sure I don’t come off as judging or mean. It seems to happen most when talking about liturgical matters.

Anyways, I’m off to Mass (I’m going to the EF today!).
 
We have EMEs at our parish. Perhaps it’s incorrect use, but we use it nontheless. 🤷

BTW, the priest and Bishop are OK with it’s use. Again, 🤷 .

So if we’re being technical, yes, there is such a term, but it’s use is incorrect and/or unrecognized by the Church. 🙂
If you are from the same diocese are I am ( Detroit), then you are incorrect. Neither Cardinal Maida nor Archbishop Vigneron have used the term “Minister of the Eucharist” to apply to anyone other than the priest ever since Redemptionis Sacramentum came out.

In fact, the correct use of terms was hammered into to us at the seminary ( I was in the Diaconate program for 3 years, up until kids #4 and #5 came along 😉 )

And if you are from the Diocese of Lansing, well then Bishop Boyea was one of the ones doing the hammering on this at the seminary, back when he was an auxilliary bishop in Detroit 🙂
 
If you are from the same diocese are I am ( Detroit), then you are incorrect. Neither Cardinal Maida nor Archbishop Vigneron have used the term “Minister of the Eucharist” to apply to anyone other than the priest ever since Redemptionis Sacramentum came out.
In fact, the correct use of terms was hammered into to us at the seminary ( I was in the Diaconate program for 3 years, up until kids #4 and #5 came along 😉 )

And if you are from the Diocese of Lansing, well then Bishop Boyea was one of the ones doing the hammering on this at the seminary, back when he was an auxilliary bishop in Detroit 🙂
Yes, Brendan, we are in the Detroit Archdiocese. Um…I didn’t say “Archbishop”, but let me clarify: Of the bishops (auxillary) that have been to our parish, according to our priest, none have ever objected to our use of the term (our sign-in board clearly says EME and they all have to have seen it).

I’ve taken classes at the Seminary for 8 years now and have never heardthe issue brought up. Our recently minted Deacon, with whom I am friends, never mentioned anything about it as well. 🤷

Was there any instructor or class in particular where the use of the term was hammered home?
 
Yes, Brendan, we are in the Detroit Archdiocese. Um…I didn’t say “Archbishop”, but let me clarify: Of the bishops (auxillary) that have been to our parish, according to our priest, none have ever objected to our use of the term (our sign-in board clearly says EME and they all have to have seen it).
I’ve taken classes at the Seminary for 8 years now and have never heardthe issue brought up. Our recently minted Deacon, with whom I am friends, never mentioned anything about it as well. 🤷
 
The truth is we do not know for certain how this practice got started. But there are sufficient documents coming from the Vatican that discourage the practice of giving blessings in the Communion line, no matter if the one giving the blessing is a priest or an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion.
True, no one knows where this practice started, but my belief is that two parents sagely decided that if they left their children alone in the pew during Holy Communion, they might return to find the church on fire.
 
True, no one knows where this practice started, but my belief is that two parents sagely decided that if they left their children alone in the pew during Holy Communion, they might return to find the church on fire.
Parents have been taking their children with them to Communion for centuries but only in recent years has this ‘everyone come up for a blessing if you can’t receive Communion’ trend developed in certain areas. It’s not a practice in any of the parishes where I’ve worshipped in the last couple of years.
 
True, no one knows where this practice started, but my belief is that two parents sagely decided that if they left their children alone in the pew during Holy Communion, they might return to find the church on fire.
:rotfl:
All kidding aside, I have no problem with people posting documents that show that blessings should not be given in the Communion line. What I object to is the persistent judgement of the motives of others. We do not have any real knowlege of how or why this practice started. Some of the remarks come across as insulting.
 
Yes, Brendan, we are in the Detroit Archdiocese. Um…I didn’t say “Archbishop”, but let me clarify: Of the bishops (auxillary) that have been to our parish, according to our priest, none have ever objected to our use of the term (our sign-in board clearly says EME and they all have to have seen it).

I’ve taken classes at the Seminary for 8 years now and have never heardthe issue brought up. Our recently minted Deacon, with whom I am friends, never mentioned anything about it as well. 🤷

Was there any instructor or class in particular where the use of the term was hammered home?
Yep, Msgr Kasza, the Cardinal’s Secretary (at the time). He taught my first Sacramentology class, and the subject was discussed heavily when we were covering Sacramental Ministers. In fact, it was even on the midterm.

Bishop Boyea was the episcopal moderator for our vicariate and met with each person studying for Holy Orders in his region. He covered what was expected when each man was instutted as an Acolyte, including stressing the actual title of the role they would assume during Holy Communion.
 
In our parish, we used to use the term “Eucharistic Minister” years ago and all of the letters and instructions for the (EMHC) used that term also. Even after it was knowm that the proper term was Extaordinary Minister of Holy Communion, we were still calling them EM’s (for extraordinary minister) mostly because it was a habit and it was shorter. However, I have noticed in recent years that the correct term is now being used in both spoken and written instruction as well as on the sign-in sheet. Whether this came about by correction from the authorities (pastor or bishop) or whether it came about because of the knowledge of the lay instructors I do not know.
 
Even before I was Catholic, I would greet the priest or deacon after Mass and ask for a blessing for some particular reason. I still do this. It is of great benefit, and I cringe a little bit to think that people could conflate something that grace-laden with something a layperson could confer. In the same line, my maternal blessing of my own children is a serious thing, and I don’t want them getting it confused with an EMHC signing them with the cross just because they are in line with me.

One reason I have declined to minister the Body of Christ at Mass is that kids in my parish expect a blessing and I won’t do it. It was very awkward and I asked permission to never have to repeat the experience. No such problem if I bear the chalice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top