Eucharistic Minister/reader at same mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lizzie22785
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lizzie22785

Guest
Please can anybody tell me if it’s permitted for a person to be Eucharistic Minister and a reader at the same mass?

Thanks.
 
It is an acceptable practice, though in theory it shouldn’t happen. Of course, theoretically you should never see someone serving as lector, usher, EMHC or altar server two weeks in a row because we should all want to do it and should be practically fighting over whose turn it is.
 
I have had to serve in both capacities once in awhile at daily mass because I was lecturing and the person assigned to EM didn’t show and no one else got up to help. We have a lunchtime mass that is very crowded and an EM is necessary so that the Mass doesn’t go too long. But as a rule you are only supposed to serve in one ministry at any given Mass.
 
Ideally, a layperson should not participate in two distinct ministries at the same Mass.

So, ideally, one should not be scheduled as ‘EMHC’ and ‘lector’ at a single Mass. However, if you are scheduled to participate in one ministry, and the situation arises that there are insufficient minister(s) to participate in another ministry, you might be called upon to fill in for a second ministry. It would seem to be inappropriate – if others are unavailable – to say “I’m sorry: I did X so I cannot do Y.”

YMMV. 😉
 
Lizzie22785 said:
Please can anybody tell me if it’s permitted for a person to be Eucharistic Minister and a reader at the same mass?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Lay persons cannot be that, i.e. those who are not ordained are not Eucharistic Ministers.They can be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC) which is not a Eucharistic Minister.
 
thistle said:
Lay persons cannot be that, i.e. those who are not ordained are not Eucharistic Ministers.They can be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC) which is not a Eucharistic Minister.
Click to expand...
Thistle, you’re simply arguing semantics in this case. While I agree with the point you’re making, the reality is in practice the definition of Eucharistic Minister has been expanded to include Extraordinary Ministers as well as Ordinary Ministers (priests, deacons).
 
CatholicHockey7 said:
Thistle, you’re simply arguing semantics in this case. While I agree with the point you’re making, the reality is in practice the definition of Eucharistic Minister has been expanded to include Extraordinary Ministers as well as Ordinary Ministers (priests, deacons).
Click to expand...
The reality is that the Church has reprobated misuse of the term “Eucharistic Minister” because it refers to priests and bishops only.

Instruction Redemptionis sacramentum
[154.] As has already been recalled, “the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest”.[254] Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone. Moreover, also by reason of their sacred Ordination, the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon,[255] to whom it belongs therefore to administer Holy Communion to the lay members of Christ’s faithful during the celebration of Mass. In this way their ministerial office in the Church is fully and accurately brought to light, and the sign value of the Sacrament is made complete.
Click to expand...
[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.
Click to expand...
 
Elizium23 said:
The reality is that the Church has reprobated misuse of the term “Eucharistic Minister” because it refers to priests and bishops only.

Instruction Redemptionis sacramentum
Click to expand...
I’m just talking about what’s become practice. Whether or not that’s the way it’s supposed to be is another issue.

Personally, I always try to use “extraordinary minister” rather than “eucharistic minister,” but I also know I forget frequently. I also feel like focusing too much energy on the correct terminology dangerously borders on the sin of scrupulosity. Especially when we have much bigger issues in the Church today, like how almost half of Catholics don’t know or don’t accept Church teaching on the Eucharist being the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ.
 
CatholicHockey7 said:
I’m just talking about what’s become practice. Whether or not that’s the way it’s supposed to be is another issue.

Personally, I always try to use “extraordinary minister” rather than “eucharistic minister,” but I also know I forget frequently. I also feel like focusing too much energy on the correct terminology dangerously borders on the sin of scrupulosity. Especially when we have much bigger issues in the Church today, like how almost half of Catholics don’t know or don’t accept Church teaching on the Eucharist being the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ.
Click to expand...
What about how Catholics who distribute Holy Communion come to think they’re just as good as priests?
 
Elizium23 said:
What about how Catholics who distribute Holy Communion come to think they’re just as good as priests?
Click to expand...
I haven’t met any of those yet. And even if I did, I’d personally still be more concerned with people who don’t accept that Christ is present in the Eucharist. Not saying I wouldn’t do anything about the other, just that it wouldn’t be my primary concern.
 
CatholicHockey7 said:
I haven’t met any of those yet. And even if I did, I’d personally still be more concerned with people who don’t accept that Christ is present in the Eucharist. Not saying I wouldn’t do anything about the other, just that it wouldn’t be my primary concern.
Click to expand...
Good strawman. Because we could never be concerned about both at the same time.
 
CatholicHockey7 said:
…I’d personally still be more concerned with people who don’t accept that Christ is present in the Eucharist.
Click to expand...
So, if that’s the case, perhaps you’ll concede we may have too many ministers of communion as it is. And that this whole thread is a waste of time to read?
 
ProVobis said:
So, if that’s the case, perhaps you’ll concede we may have too many ministers of communion as it is. And that this whole thread is a waste of time to read?
Click to expand...
Frankly I don’t think we have enough. Not because we need more EMHC’s, but because we don’t have enough priests and deacons!
 
Catholic1954 said:
It is not permitted in my diocese; you should check with yours.
Click to expand...
Sometimes at Mass I would be a Eucharistic server AND an Altar server when the young folks didn’t show up. Not ever having been one, I told the priest to give me the “high sign” when he wanted me to take a particular action. After a few times I got the hang of it.
 
CatholicHockey7 said:
I haven’t met any of those yet. And even if I did, I’d personally still be more concerned with people who don’t accept that Christ is present in the Eucharist. Not saying I wouldn’t do anything about the other, just that it wouldn’t be my primary concern.
Click to expand...
Not only do I have a friend who constantly insists he is a Eucharistic Minister (he is an EMHC) he also thinks he can administer the last rights and give absolution to a dying person if a priest cannot be found in time.

EMHC’s who think they are Eucharistic Ministers and those who talk about EMHC’s as Eucharistic Ministers should ALWAYS be told in no uncertain terms they are wrong.
 
thistle said:
Not only do I have a friend who constantly insists he is a Eucharistic Minister (he is an EMHC) he also thinks he can administer the last rights and give absolution to a dying person if a priest cannot be found in time.

EMHC’s who think they are Eucharistic Ministers and those who talk about EMHC’s as Eucharistic Ministers should ALWAYS be told in no uncertain terms they are wrong.
Click to expand...
If there is in fact a danger of serious confusion, as there seems to be with your friend, then absolutely. And I think it’s always a good idea to use proper language. I think the problem is when we INSIST on the proper terms when people actually do understand the difference. There’s very little danger in people who understand they aren’t priests using the term “Eucharistic Minister” incorrectly. But if we continually insist on proper language in that situation, that’s where we come dangerously close to scrupulosity.

Should we use correct language? Yes. Should we insist on it? Only when there’s a real danger. Otherwise you just sound like a pretentious *****. (Not saying you sound that way right now, just that we can sound that way when we insist on things that are small matters when there are very big issues not being addressed).
 
CatholicHockey7 said:
If there is in fact a danger of serious confusion, as there seems to be with your friend, then absolutely. And I think it’s always a good idea to use proper language. I think the problem is when we INSIST on the proper terms when people actually do understand the difference. There’s very little danger in people who understand they aren’t priests using the term “Eucharistic Minister” incorrectly. But if we continually insist on proper language in that situation, that’s where we come dangerously close to scrupulosity.

Should we use correct language? Yes. Should we insist on it? Only when there’s a real danger. Otherwise you just sound like a pretentious *****. (Not saying you sound that way right now, just that we can sound that way when we insist on things that are small matters when there are very big issues not being addressed).
Click to expand...
Sorry but I disagree with you. It is not a small matter for an EMHC to say they are a Eucharistic Minister. Those who are ignorant about the expression are at least not culpable. Those who know better are and should be told straight to their face to stop being (to use your expression) a "pretentious *****.
 
Please don’t take threads off topic into tangent issues, people. It’s not fair the OP. If you wish to discuss another issue start another thread.
 
I think that it’s recommended that lay people only serve in one capacity during the liturgy. I have been a reader and a sacristan or a server and a sacristan at the same Mass, but I try to do one or the other. I don’t like taking on both ministries at once. Sometimes, things happen and someone has to take on more than one role, but it’s advised that lay people should only serve in one ministry at the same Mass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top