EMHC Abuse

[rayne89]

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?

Wow, that was charitable. Well since you call it an abuse the burden of proof is on you -so where is it?

I’m tempted to say more, but I won’t. God Bless.

Maybe you’d like to take it up with my pastor, his email is on our church’s website. saintcyrils.org/index.htm

 

[SenorSalsa]

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?

I dont know about you, but i know a lot of things I haven’t studied in class. For instance, talking, walking, eating. I never took a class in any of those, yet i know how to do them. Perhaps the Priest, I dunno, learned it in his year as a transitional deacon, or as an associate pastor, etc.

 

[Sir_Knight]

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.

Because this is contrary to the message of the gospel which commands us to obey our religious leaders – not requiring our religious leaders to listen to us as you are suggesting. See Acts 5:13; Acts 15:6,24; Acts 16:4; Rom. 15:16; 1 Cor. 5:3-5; 16:22; 1 Tim. 1:20; Gal 1:8; Matt 18:17; 2 Cor. 2:17; 2 Cor. 3:6; 2 Cor. 5:20; 2 Cor. 10:6; 2 Cor. 10:8; 1 Thess. 5:12-13; 2 Thess. 3:14; 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 2:15; Heb. 12:9; Heb. 13:7,17; 1 Peter 2:18; 1 Peter 5:5; Jude 8; 2 Peter 2:10; 3 John 9.

 

[Walking_Home]

Because this is contrary to the message of the gospel which commands us to obey our religious leaders – not requiring our religious leaders to listen to us as you are suggesting. See Acts 5:13; Acts 15:6,24; Acts 16:4; Rom. 15:16; 1 Cor. 5:3-5; 16:22; 1 Tim. 1:20; Gal 1:8; Matt 18:17; 2 Cor. 2:17; 2 Cor. 3:6; 2 Cor. 5:20; 2 Cor. 10:6; 2 Cor. 10:8; 1 Thess. 5:12-13; 2 Thess. 3:14; 1 Tim. 5:17; Titus 2:15; Heb. 12:9; Heb. 13:7,17; 1 Peter 2:18; 1 Peter 5:5; Jude 8; 2 Peter 2:10; 3 John 9.

---

I suggest you let the Church interpret scripture. She has stated that an EMHC is to determine if his/her services are needed. This limits the authority a priest has to the use of EMHC’s.

Now decide Sir Knight — is Rome to be obeyed or not.

 

[Brendan]

I dont know about you, but i know a lot of things I haven’t studied in class. For instance, talking, walking, eating. I never took a class in any of those, yet i know how to do them. Perhaps the Priest, I dunno, learned it in his year as a transitional deacon, or as an associate pastor, etc.

I’m taking those same courses myself, and I know most of the seminarians, as well as most of the men ordained in the last few years.

Talk to your pastor, ask HIM when he learned human resource management

 

[Brendan]

Because this is contrary to the message of the gospel which commands us to obey our religious leaders – .

No here said that the priest does not have final authority, or that we should not obey them.

All I am personally am saying is that the priest does not get magical knowlege to go along with that authority. They are NOT, contrary to your assertion, actually given training in the subject area we are talking about. So when priests make bone headed decisions, we obey them (as long as they do not directly contradict a higher authority) . But that doesn’t mean we have no right to bring petitions to him for redress.

 

[Sir_Knight]

No here said that the priest does not have final authority, or that we should not obey them.

All I am personally am saying is that the priest does not get magical knowlege to go along with that authority. They are NOT, contrary to your assertion, actually given training in the subject area we are talking about. So when priests make bone headed decisions, we obey them (as long as they do not directly contradict a higher authority) . But that doesn’t mean we have no right to bring petitions to him for redress.

So you are sayings that the shepard is accountable to the folk that he shepards?

If the priest has final authority, as you say, then that authority should be obeyed.

 

[Phemie]

So you are sayings that the shepard is accountable to the folk that he shepards?

If the priest has final authority, as you say, then that authority should be obeyed.

That’s not what Redemptionis Sacramentum says:

[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.

 

[Sir_Knight]

---

I suggest you let the Church interpret scripture. She has stated that an EMHC is to determine if his/her services are needed. This limits the authority a priest has to the use of EMHC’s.

And where does Rome tell us that the Church’s leaders are to be disobeyed?

She has stated that an EMHC is to determine if his/her services are needed. This limits the authority a priest has to the use of EMHC’s.

Now decide Sir Knight — is Rome to be obeyed or not.

So you are saying that if a pastor thinks that he needs X number of EMHCs and schedules that number but if the EMHCs think that in THEIR opinion, they are not needed, they shouldn’t come up?

They should make that determination instead of their pastor? So the experience of a priest who has actual experience and training in priestly matters should come secondary to those that have no actual experience in these matters?

 

[Walking_Home]

And where does Rome tell us that the Church’s leaders are to be disobeyed?

So you are saying that if a pastor thinks that he needs X number of EMHCs and schedules that number but if the EMHCs think that in THEIR opinion, they are not needed, they shouldn’t come up?

They should make that determination instead of their pastor? So the experience of a priest who has actual experience and training in priestly matters should come secondary to those that have no actual experience in these matters?

---

I provided the appropriate section from RS-2004 --that covers your questions.

A priest is to be obeyed in all which falls within the mind of the Church. Once a priest crosses the line --obedience to him makes the people participants in his disobedience to the Church.

 

[Sir_Knight]

---

I provided the appropriate section from RS-2004 --that covers your questions.

See CCC 1269 which states: Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us. 76 From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to “obey and submit” to the Church’s leaders, 77

Does one SERVE and OBEY and SUBMIT themselves to their church leaders by disagreeing and questioning their decisions?

A priest is to be obeyed in all which falls within the mind of the Church. Once a priest crosses the line --obedience to him makes the people participants in his disobedience to the Church.

Once a priest crosses the line IN YOUR OPINION. The church gives a priest latitude in determining the use of EMHCs. Just because your unprofessional opinion disagrees with the priest’s professional opinion, doesn’t mean that the priest crossed the line. In most cases, it is the person in the pew who has come to the incorrect conclusion based on lack of knowledge and actual experience.

 

[Walking_Home]

See CCC 1269 which states: Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us. 76 From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to “obey and submit” to the Church’s leaders, 77

Once a priest crosses the line IN YOUR OPINION.

---

Yes --we and the priest and even bishops are subject to higher authority – that authority is the Church (Rome).

And yes — the Church as per RS-2004 – has given the EMHC’s the authority to determine if their services are needed. This is not my opinion — it is the Church speaking.

 

[LilyM]

---

I provided the appropriate section from RS-2004 --that covers your questions.

A priest is to be obeyed in all which falls within the mind of the Church. Once a priest crosses the line --obedience to him makes the people participants in his disobedience to the Church.

What you quoted answers very few questions - particularly not the very necessary question of precisely HOW an EMHC is to determine that too many EMsHC have been rostered. Does RS give some sort of mathematical formula or something?

Absent some such sort of clear definition of when exactly there are in fact too many, an EMHC can not say with any sort of authority that the priest is in fact acting outside the mind of the Church, because there IS no clear expression of what, in the mind of the Church, constitutes too many EMsHC.

And in the end the EMHC is not privy to all the circumstances surrounding the rostering - maybe the priest is ill and NEEDS EMsHC to do the distribution but the EMsHC don’t know it, for example, or has a lot of other very necessary obligations to attend to and needs to have communion completed as expeditiously as possible.

 

[Sir_Knight]

LilyM, exactly my point. Thank you.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I don’t know what the “official” status is of RS-2004 but the CCC is the official guideline for Catholic norms according to the introduction by the Pope and as I quoted from CCC 1269, we are to SERVE and OBEY and SUBMIT ourselves to our church leaders and not second guess their EXPERIENCED decision when we, ourselves, do not have that level of experience or complete knowledge of all the circumstances regarding how many EMHCs are needed and for what reasons.

 

[Walking_Home]

What you quoted answers very few questions - particularly not the very necessary question of precisely HOW an EMHC is to determine that too many EMsHC have been rostered. Does RS give some sort of mathematical formula or something?

Absent some such sort of clear definition of when exactly there are in fact too many, an EMHC can not say with any sort of authority that the priest is in fact acting outside the mind of the Church, because there IS no clear expression of what, in the mind of the Church, constitutes too many EMsHC.

And in the end the EMHC is not privy to all the circumstances surrounding the rostering - maybe the priest is ill and NEEDS EMsHC to do the distribution but the EMsHC don’t know it, for example.

---

That would be part of the training the EMHC’s should be receiving.
If it is not being done—the ball is being dropped. The Church already takes into account the use of EMHC’s when there is a valid need ( illness) . Even with that in mind – She does say the EMHCs are to determine if there is a need for their services. An EMHC with experience – should become knowledgeable enough to determine whether there truly exists is a need.

RS-2004
[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.[259] This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.

 

[Sir_Knight]

And in the end the EMHC is not privy to all the circumstances surrounding the rostering - maybe the priest is ill and NEEDS EMsHC to do the distribution but the EMsHC don’t know it, for example, or has a lot of other very necessary obligations to attend to and needs to have communion completed as expeditiously as possible.

Exactly! Maybe somebody is on their death bed and the priest needs to wrap up mass as quickly as possible to get there in time to administer the last rites.

 

[LilyM]

---

Yes --we and the priest and even bishops are subject to higher authority – that authority is the Church (Rome).

And yes — the Church as per RS-2004 – has given the EMHC’s the authority to determine if their services are needed. This is not my opinion — it is the Church speaking.

Point me to where in RS it says that the EMHC is to be guided by his or her opinion alone in determining whether or not there are a sufficient number of EMsHC present.

I can see, for example, a situation where a Bishop may have set specific guidelines in regard to numbers, which you can adhere to if the priest is disobeying them, but nowhere that the EMHC’s gut is to be the only guide.

 

[Walking_Home]

I don’t know what the “official” status is of RS-2004 but the CCC is the official guideline for Catholic norms according to the introduction by the Pope and as I quoted from CCC 1269, we are to SERVE and OBEY and SUBMIT ourselves to our church leaders and not second guess their EXPERIENCED decision when we, ourselves, do not have that level of experience or complete knowledge of all the circumstances regarding how many EMHCs are needed and for what reasons.

---

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html

CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP
AND THE DISCIPLINE OF THE SACRAMENT
INSTRUCTION

Redemptionis Sacramentum

On certain matters to be observed or to be avoided
regarding the Most Holy Eucharist
In order that especially in the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy the Church might duly safeguard so great a mystery in our own time as well, the **Supreme Pontiff has mandated **that this Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments,[8] in collaboration with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, should prepare this Instruction treating of certain matters pertaining to the discipline of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Those things found in this Instruction are therefore to be read in the continuity with the above-mentioned Encyclical Letter, Ecclesia de Eucharistia.

 

[LilyM]

---

That would be part of the training the EMHC’s should be receiving.
If it is not being done—the ball is being dropped. The Church already takes into account the use of EMHC’s when there is a valid need ( illness) . Even with that in mind – She does say the EMHCs are to determine if there is a need for their services. An EMHC with experience – should become knowledgeable enough to determine whether there truly exists is a need.

RS-2004
[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.[259] This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.

So I’m supposed to grill my priest as to whether or not he’s feeling well, and what his workload is like, how many sick people he has to visit or other masses he has to say or how many confessions he has to hear or other obligations he has to attend to?

And after that can still turn around and say ‘sorry, Padre, you haven’t convinced me that your reasons for needing me are genuine and I respectfully decline’?

For heaven’s sake, if I HAD to interrogate my priest in such a completely unChristian fashion I’d certainly quiz him on much more important and relevant issues such as whether he beleived in the Real Presence - THAT matters to the validity of the sacrament at least!