N
NorthTexan88
Guest
I was just wondering what was the history of EMHC? We’re they around in the ancient church or was this a recent development?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
J
Joannm
Guest
In the ancient Church people would bring the Eucharist home for the sick. In fact they would keep it in their homes. When I was a kid we learned of St. Tarsisius (sp) , a boy who was carrying the Eucharist for the sick when he was attacked and killed by other boys. I don’t recall ever reading of lay people distributing communion at Mass however.
A
Aelred_Minor
Guest
Laypeople also sometimes distributed communion during times of persecution when priests or deacons were not available, but as far as I know this was also outside of any liturgical context.In the ancient Church people would bring the Eucharist home for the sick. In fact they would keep it in their homes. When I was a kid we learned of St. Tarsisius (sp) , a boy who was carrying the Eucharist for the sick when he was attacked and killed by other boys. I don’t recall ever reading of lay people distributing communion at Mass however.
My knowledge of this subject is rather hazy, but as far as I know the current practice of EMHCs began in the 1960s. At first lay men were to perform this function in preference to lay women, but this distinction disappeared in later liturgical documents. Though I believe formally installed acolytes, which are only men, are still preferred to ordinary laypeople of any sort for this function. However, in most dioceses these acolytes are practically not to be found outside the seminaries, so it doesn’t affect ordinary parish life. Still though, EMHCs are only to be used when the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion present are not practically sufficient for the distribution of communion.
J
John_Lilburne
Guest
The 1909 Catholic Encyclopedia has:
"The minister of administration
The dogmatic interest which attaches to the minister of administration or distribution is not so great, for the reason that the Eucharist being a permanent sacrament, any communicant having the proper dispositions could receive it validly, whether he did so from the hand of a priest, or layman, or woman. Hence, the question is concerned, not with the validity, but with the liceity of administration. In this matter the Church alone has the right to decide, and her regulations regarding the Communion rite may vary according to the circumstances of the times. In general it is of Divine right, that the laity should as a rule receive only from the consecrated hand of the priest (cf. Trent, Sess. XIII, cap. viii). The practice of the laity giving themselves Holy Communion was formerly, and is today, allowed only in case of necessity. In ancient Christian times it was customary for the faithful to take the Blessed Sacrament to their homes and Communicate privately, a practice (Tertullian, Ad uxor., II, v), to which, even as late as the fourth century, St. Basil makes reference (Epistle 93). Up to the ninth century, it was usual for the priest to place the Sacred Host in the right hand of the recipient, who kissed it and then transferred it to his own mouth; women, from the fourth century onward, were required in this ceremony to have a cloth wrapped about their right hand. The Precious Blood was in early times received directly from the Chalice, but in Rome the practice, after the eighth century, was to receive it through a small tube (fistula); at present this is observed only in the pope’s Mass. The latter method of drinking the Chalice spread to other localities, in particular to the Cistercian monasteries, where the practice was partially continued into the eighteenth century.
Whereas the priest is both by Divine and ecclesiastical right the ordinary dispenser (minister ordinarius) of the sacrament, the deacon is by virtue of his order the extraordinary minister (minister extraordinarius), yet he may not administer the sacrament except ex delegatione, i.e. with the permission of the bishop or priest. As has already been mentioned above, the deacons were accustomed in the Early Church to take the Blessed Sacrament to those who were absent from Divine service, as well as to present the Chalice to the laity during the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries (cf. Cyprian, Treatise 3, nos. 17 and 25), and this practice was observed until Communion under both kinds was discontinued. In St. Thomas’ time (III:82:3), the deacons were allowed to administer only the Chalice to the laity, and in case of necessity the Sacred Host also, at the bidding of the bishop or priest. After the Communion of the laity under the species of wine had been abolished, the deacon’s powers were more and more restricted. According to a decision of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (25 Feb., 1777), still in force, the deacon is to administer Holy Communion only in case of necessity and with the approval of his bishop or his pastor. (Cf. Funk, “Der Kommunionritus” in his “Kirchengeschichtl. Abhandlungen und Untersuchungen”, Paderborn, 1897, I, pp. 293 sqq.; see also “Theol. praktische Quartalschrift”, Linz, 1906, LIX, 95 sqq.)"
Pohle, J. (1909). The Blessed Eucharist as a Sacrament. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 25, 2012 from New Advent: newadvent.org/cathen/05584a.htm .
From the same encyclopedia, on viaticum:
"Minister
Formerly Viaticum was administered not only by bishops and priests, but also by deacons and clerics of inferior orders and even by lay people. During the persecutions lay people carried consecrated particles to their homes and administered Holy Communion to themselves, and it is natural to conclude that they received it as Viaticum in the same manner. Dionysius of Alexandria (“Ep. ad Fabium Antioch.” in Eusebius, Church History VI.44) relates that Serapion, an old man in danger of death, received Viaticum from his nephew, a mere boy, who had received the consecrated particle from a priest. From a Decree of the Council of Reims (Regino, “De eccl. disc.”, I, cxx) it appears that sometimes even females carried the Viaticum to the dying, which practice the Council strictly forbade. Apparently for a while it was difficult to eliminate this abuse, for Hincmar, Archbishop of Reims, required the diocesan visitors to inquire whether the priests gave Communion to the sick with their own hands or by others’, “per se et non per quemlibet”, and whether they gave the consecrated particle to any lay person, “cuiquam laico”, to carry it home for the sake of giving it to the dying (Martène, “De antiq. eccl. rit.”, I, I, v, 2). After the tenth century no mention is made of lay persons carrying Viaticum to the dying, but deacons regularly administered it, and from two manuscript codices in the monastery of Casalis Benedicti it is evident that subdeacons carried it to the house of the sick person, but that the priest administered it (Martène, ibid.). At present only parish priests or their assistants carry and administer it to the dying. In case of necessity a deacon my be delegated, and if the necessity be urgent this delegation need not be waited for (Lehmkuhl, II, 135)."
Schulte, A.J. (1912). Viaticum. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 25, 2012 from New Advent: newadvent.org/cathen/15397c.htm
"The minister of administration
The dogmatic interest which attaches to the minister of administration or distribution is not so great, for the reason that the Eucharist being a permanent sacrament, any communicant having the proper dispositions could receive it validly, whether he did so from the hand of a priest, or layman, or woman. Hence, the question is concerned, not with the validity, but with the liceity of administration. In this matter the Church alone has the right to decide, and her regulations regarding the Communion rite may vary according to the circumstances of the times. In general it is of Divine right, that the laity should as a rule receive only from the consecrated hand of the priest (cf. Trent, Sess. XIII, cap. viii). The practice of the laity giving themselves Holy Communion was formerly, and is today, allowed only in case of necessity. In ancient Christian times it was customary for the faithful to take the Blessed Sacrament to their homes and Communicate privately, a practice (Tertullian, Ad uxor., II, v), to which, even as late as the fourth century, St. Basil makes reference (Epistle 93). Up to the ninth century, it was usual for the priest to place the Sacred Host in the right hand of the recipient, who kissed it and then transferred it to his own mouth; women, from the fourth century onward, were required in this ceremony to have a cloth wrapped about their right hand. The Precious Blood was in early times received directly from the Chalice, but in Rome the practice, after the eighth century, was to receive it through a small tube (fistula); at present this is observed only in the pope’s Mass. The latter method of drinking the Chalice spread to other localities, in particular to the Cistercian monasteries, where the practice was partially continued into the eighteenth century.
Whereas the priest is both by Divine and ecclesiastical right the ordinary dispenser (minister ordinarius) of the sacrament, the deacon is by virtue of his order the extraordinary minister (minister extraordinarius), yet he may not administer the sacrament except ex delegatione, i.e. with the permission of the bishop or priest. As has already been mentioned above, the deacons were accustomed in the Early Church to take the Blessed Sacrament to those who were absent from Divine service, as well as to present the Chalice to the laity during the celebration of the Sacred Mysteries (cf. Cyprian, Treatise 3, nos. 17 and 25), and this practice was observed until Communion under both kinds was discontinued. In St. Thomas’ time (III:82:3), the deacons were allowed to administer only the Chalice to the laity, and in case of necessity the Sacred Host also, at the bidding of the bishop or priest. After the Communion of the laity under the species of wine had been abolished, the deacon’s powers were more and more restricted. According to a decision of the Sacred Congregation of Rites (25 Feb., 1777), still in force, the deacon is to administer Holy Communion only in case of necessity and with the approval of his bishop or his pastor. (Cf. Funk, “Der Kommunionritus” in his “Kirchengeschichtl. Abhandlungen und Untersuchungen”, Paderborn, 1897, I, pp. 293 sqq.; see also “Theol. praktische Quartalschrift”, Linz, 1906, LIX, 95 sqq.)"
Pohle, J. (1909). The Blessed Eucharist as a Sacrament. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 25, 2012 from New Advent: newadvent.org/cathen/05584a.htm .
From the same encyclopedia, on viaticum:
"Minister
Formerly Viaticum was administered not only by bishops and priests, but also by deacons and clerics of inferior orders and even by lay people. During the persecutions lay people carried consecrated particles to their homes and administered Holy Communion to themselves, and it is natural to conclude that they received it as Viaticum in the same manner. Dionysius of Alexandria (“Ep. ad Fabium Antioch.” in Eusebius, Church History VI.44) relates that Serapion, an old man in danger of death, received Viaticum from his nephew, a mere boy, who had received the consecrated particle from a priest. From a Decree of the Council of Reims (Regino, “De eccl. disc.”, I, cxx) it appears that sometimes even females carried the Viaticum to the dying, which practice the Council strictly forbade. Apparently for a while it was difficult to eliminate this abuse, for Hincmar, Archbishop of Reims, required the diocesan visitors to inquire whether the priests gave Communion to the sick with their own hands or by others’, “per se et non per quemlibet”, and whether they gave the consecrated particle to any lay person, “cuiquam laico”, to carry it home for the sake of giving it to the dying (Martène, “De antiq. eccl. rit.”, I, I, v, 2). After the tenth century no mention is made of lay persons carrying Viaticum to the dying, but deacons regularly administered it, and from two manuscript codices in the monastery of Casalis Benedicti it is evident that subdeacons carried it to the house of the sick person, but that the priest administered it (Martène, ibid.). At present only parish priests or their assistants carry and administer it to the dying. In case of necessity a deacon my be delegated, and if the necessity be urgent this delegation need not be waited for (Lehmkuhl, II, 135)."
Schulte, A.J. (1912). Viaticum. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved April 25, 2012 from New Advent: newadvent.org/cathen/15397c.htm
- Status
- Not open for further replies.