EMHC Abuse

[Walking_Home]

And who is more qualified to decide if they are needed or not needed – the priest who has more experience and sees the bigger picture or the EMHCs who have less experience and may not be aware of all factors?

---

Who is more qualified to determine --who can also determine if EMHC’s are needed—The Church or the priest. The Church is aware of the overuse if EMHC’s.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Then the church, through it’s Bishops and priests should address this “overuse” problem. The people should not take it into their own hands.

For example, maybe it might not look like an EMHC is needed but maybe the pastor is aware that the priest saying the mass is not feeling well that day and an EMHC is needed to distribute to a station toward the back of the church so that the ill feeling father who normally does not station does not have to walk all the way over there.

If left to the EMHC to decide, unaware of all the details, they can not possibly make the correct decision. That is why the final decision should be left up to the priest.

 

[quiet52]

from michaeldaniels: it isn’t acceptable for someone other than a Priest to touch The Host.

Our pope says it’s acceptable.

Yes, there are abuses, and both the clergy and laity must do what they can to stop them. However, there is a genuine need in the Church for lay people to be an extension of the priests’ hands in distributing Holy Communion.

btw – have you ever heard about St. Tarcisius?
ewtn.com/library/MARY/TARCISI.htm

vatican.va/edocs/ENG0821/__P7.HTM

I consider it my duty, therefore to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone’s private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. The Apostle Paul had to address fiery words to the community of Corinth because of grave shortcomings in their celebration of the Eucharist resulting in divisions (schismata) and the emergence of factions (haireseis) (cf. 1 Cor 11:17-34). Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church…No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality.

Click here: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum

1. Complaints Regarding Abuses in Liturgical Matters

[183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any favouritism.

[184.] Any Catholic, whether Priest or Deacon or lay member of Christ’s faithful, has the right to lodge a complaint regarding a liturgical abuse to the diocesan Bishop or the competent Ordinary equivalent to him in law, or to the Apostolic See on account of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.[290] It is fitting, however, insofar as possible, that the report or complaint be submitted first to the diocesan Bishop. This is naturally to be done in truth and charity.

 

[Brendan]

And I’m saying that somebody who has spent several years formally studying for the priesthood and has actual experience in performing that role, is better qualified to know if his particular circumstances calls for EMHCs than a backseat driver sitting in the pews.

Note the difference between what they studied for, (the priesthood), and resource assignement.

The get lots of training for the first, but none for the second.

SK,

Do you really think that a priest automatically becomes the expert on all the things he is called to do simply on the grounds that the bishop appointed him to the role. He certainly gains his authority in that manner, there is little question of that. But his expertise is another matter.

I know CPA’s is our parish that are better bookkeepers than my pastor, but he is the authority on the parish ledger.

We have the superintendent of our school district in our parish. If our parish had a school, who would have the most expertise on school administration, even though the pastor is the final word on a parish school.

And yes, there are process analyists and process engineers in the world. I worked in that role. The whole point is to minimize resource allocation within given contraints.

Please explain exactly how a priest, with an M.Div degree, would have more expertice in accounting, school operations, or resource allocation than someone who has a specific degree in those areas and has made it there profession.

 

[Sir_Knight]

The mass, distribution of communion, the sacraments, etc.; are priestly functions and those performing that function SHOULD have more expertise in those matters than those who do not perform that function.

As I said before, the priest may be aware of circumstances which those in the pews are not.

 

[benedictgal]

The mass, distribution of communion, the sacraments, etc.; are priestly functions and those performing that function SHOULD have more expertise in those matters than those who do not perform that function.

As I said before, the priest may be aware of circumstances which those in the pews are not.

But, that still does not take away from the sad fact that many of the abuses that have cropped up over the course of the last 40 years or so have come from those who supposedly know better (the experts you repeatedly extol in your posts).

Sir Knight, you seem to belittle the opinion of the faithful. However, who is to say that perhaps the Lord isn’t speaking through the “little people” in order to remind his priests about what they are supposed to be doing.

The Church lists her documents out in the open for all to see. Unfortunately, the ones who are supposed to “see” and observe, do not. Rather than read what the actual text has to say, they “read into it.” Sadly, quite a few of our priests have been infected with the so-called Spirit of Vatican II.

May I also remind you that it is precisely because of these shadows (and the issue of EMHC and Youth Masses) that the Synod on the Holy Eucharist was convened in 2005.

 

[PaixGioiaAmor]

But, that still does not take away from the sad fact that many of the abuses that have cropped up over the course of the last 40 years or so have come from those who supposedly know better (the experts you repeatedly extol in your posts).

Sir Knight, you seem to belittle the opinion of the faithful. However, who is to say that perhaps the Lord isn’t speaking through the “little people” in order to remind his priests about what they are supposed to be doing.

The Church lists her documents out in the open for all to see. Unfortunately, the ones who are supposed to “see” and observe, do not. Rather than read what the actual text has to say, they “read into it.” Sadly, quite a few of our priests have been infected with the so-called Spirit of Vatican II.

May I also remind you that it is precisely because of these shadows (and the issue of EMHC and Youth Masses) that the Synod on the Holy Eucharist was convened in 2005.

Or maybe they just know how to correctly read and interpret docuements while you only know how to read the plain english. You know, just like you could take a book out of the library on matters of law - doesn’t make you a lawyer.

 

[japhy]

Or maybe they just know how to correctly read and interpret docuements while you only know how to read the plain english. You know, just like you could take a book out of the library on matters of law - doesn’t make you a lawyer.

I dunno, the Church told the US Bishops that the EMsHC could no longer purify the vessels… what, two years ago? And yet it still happens, without the indult to allow it. I’d like to know how to interpret that correctly.

Last year, on Holy Thursday, at a Mass concelebrated by half a dozen priests at my parish, only ONE of them, my pastor, distributed Holy Communion; the other ministers were all extraordinary. (That is reprobate, priests not distributing and letting EMsHC take their place.)

Back in October, at a Mass concelebrated by at least half a dozen priests, the abuse was corrected: only ordinary ministers distributed Holy Communion (since there were plenty).

Hopefully, this year, every priest (and deacon, if any are there) present at Holy Thursday Mass will distribute Holy Communion. If not, I will certainly bring it up to my pastor.

 

[Brother_John]

Please explain exactly how a priest, with an M.Div degree, would have more expertice in accounting, school operations, or resource allocation than someone who has a specific degree in those areas and has made it there profession.

Me thinks there is a tad of difference between use/assignment of Eucharistic Ministers and accounting practices.

 

[Walking_Home]

Or maybe they just know how to correctly read and interpret docuements while you only know how to read the plain english. You know, just like you could take a book out of the library on matters of law - doesn’t make you a lawyer.

---

More likely – it unsettles the progressive crowd --that the Church in Her wisdom-- has published the documents— so that people become aware of Her mind—and no longer fall prey to the “Spirit of Vat II”.

 

[RosalieM]

Only a priest can give the blessing that is given in lieu of communion. When it’s time for our choir to receive communion; it is always given by a priest because a couple members in the choir cannot receive communion but do receive the priest’s blessing.

 

[Joannm]

Only a priest can give the blessing that is given in lieu of communion. When it’s time for our choir to receive communion; it is always given by a priest because a couple members in the choir cannot receive communion but do receive the priest’s blessing.

Where in the rubrics does it state that the priest is to give a blessing to those not receiving communion? How come no one seems to complain about this little abuse.

 

[RosalieM]

Where in the rubrics does it state that the priest is to give a blessing to those not receiving communion? How come no one seems to complain about this little abuse.

 

[RosalieM]

Sorry, I was not clear. I meant the EMHC’s can’t give the sign of the cross blessing to someone who cannot receive communion but who wants the priest’s blessing in persona Christi.
They can get a blessing from a lay person when they sneeze.

 

[Brendan]

Me thinks there is a tad of difference between use/assignment of Eucharistic Ministers and accounting practices.

But there is little difference between assigning workers to do a specific task in work environment and assigning EMHCs to distrubute the Eucharist. That is process analysis and I and many others I know have more formal education in that than the seminary offers, and more work experience than a pastoral assigment offers.

We recognize the accounting limitations of priestly education, why not in process optimization as well?

 

[Brother_John]

Where in the rubrics does it state that the priest is to give a blessing to those not receiving communion? How come no one seems to complain about this little abuse.

What is abusive about receiving a blessing if not receiving Communion?

 

[Brendan]

The mass, distribution of communion, the sacraments, etc.; are priestly functions and those performing that function SHOULD have more expertise in those matters than those who do not perform that function.

The priest is certainly familar and well trained on the theology of the Eucharist. But what course does he take in the Seminiary that prepares him for determining the number of EMHC’s required. I provided a link earlier to the classes taken. Which one covers the Sacramental Theology of how much time to distrubute is too much time?

What formal education is provided to the Seminarians to cover that topic? How exactly is the priest supposed to know, and how exactly is the priest supposed to determine if there are things he can do to accomplish the same task with fewer ministers. You are quite adamant that the priest should automatically know this, by what means does he optain the knowledge?

As I said before, the priest may be aware of circumstances which those in the pews are not.

And they have a teaching role. If parishioner who is a CPA offers advice on the parish ledger, the priest could certainly explain any peculiar circumstances that the CPA might need to take into consideration.

Likewise, if a process expert offers advice, the priest may certainly explain any unusual circumstances.

 

[rayne89]

Where in the rubrics does it state that the priest is to give a blessing to those not receiving communion? How come no one seems to complain about this little abuse.

Because it’s not an abuse. My parish is as reverant as they come. When we were waiting for our convalidation paper work to come back from the archdiocese our pastor mentioned we could still come up for a blessing since we could not recieve communion. We chose not to but we could have. Haven’t you seen priests bless small children and infants when they come up with parents?

 

[Phemie]

What is abusive about receiving a blessing if not receiving Communion?

The Communion procession is for Communion, it’s not blessing time. Everyone gets blessed at the end of Mass. This practice developed because of the idea that everyone had to ‘get something’. If it couldn’t be Communion it should be something else.

OK, I was too lax to go to confession so I can’t receive, no problem, I’ll go get a special blessing instead. I’m in an invalid marriage so I can’t receive Communion, so I’ll just go up for a special blessing. What’s wrong with this picture?

 

[Brother_John]

The Communion procession is for Communion, it’s not blessing time. Everyone gets blessed at the end of Mass. This practice developed because of the idea that everyone had to ‘get something’. If it couldn’t be Communion it should be something else.

OK, I was too lax to go to confession so I can’t receive, no problem, I’ll go get a special blessing instead. I’m in an invalid marriage so I can’t receive Communion, so I’ll just go up for a special blessing. What’s wrong with this picture?

Your uncharitable attitude, for the most part. The statement was, that the blessing was “abuse”. Prove the abuse.

I keep reading all these self-rightous posts, and I can’t help but wonder how many of them would still be posted if Christ was standing over the shoulder (in the flesh) of said poster.