"Eucharistic Minister"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hellisreal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Savio
Ha ha, but I’m still a Protestant heretic. 😃
Heck, I’ve been Catholic all of my life, but in this web-site, I’m often treated as a heretic. Welcome to the club. 😃
I can understand the need in very large parishes, but why do most parishes think it is so necessary? They made do without them before Vatican II, so why are they needed today?
Pre-Vatican II, we had three times the numbers of priest as we do today. We also had twice the number of Masses said in each parish.

The parish I grew up in, had 5 priest. On Sunday, when the French Mass was being said, there was an English Mass in the Chapel at the same time. When I say French and English, I mean the Gospel and homilies were done in the respective languages. The rest of the Mass was in Latin.

Today, our Parish( of 400 families) has one priest, who is pastor of two parishes, and one deacon. So, our Pastor says 5 Masses every week-end. The Mass that the deacon serves, we do not have an EMHC. The other Masses, we have one EMHC and two ministers of the cup.

It would be arrogant for anyone other than the pastor to say that EMHC’s are not need in my parish.

Jim
 
It doesn’t matter if it’s a ‘common figure of speech’ or not.

We have been instructed not to use it in reference to an EMHC, so don’t. Simple.
Really, the Church now controls figure of speech? How about thinking, does the Church also control how people think?

If so, which I don’t believe they do, they’ll fail.

Jim
 
Really, the Church now controls figure of speech?
The Church controlls what Her ministries are called and how the faithful shall refer to them by. And, in that, the Church has issued the appropriate instructions on the matter.

The Vatican has clearly said that the term “Eucharistic Minister” shall only refer to one who may confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist. The USCCB has complied with that directive and, you will note, does not use any other term by “EMHC” to denote the lay role in the distribution of the Eucharist.

If you consider yourself to be somehow above the Vatican or the USCCB in this matter, I feel sorry for you, because you are simply deluding yourself.
How about thinking, does the Church also control how people think?
If so, which I don’t believe they do, they’ll fail.
Red Herring, and you know it.
 
The Church controlls what Her ministries are called and how the faithful shall refer to them by. And, in that, the Church has issued the appropriate instructions on the matter.

The Vatican has clearly said that the term “Eucharistic Minister” shall only refer to one who may confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist. The USCCB has complied with that directive and, you will note, does not use any other term by “EMHC” to denote the lay role in the distribution of the Eucharist.

If you consider yourself to be somehow above the Vatican or the USCCB in this matter, I feel sorry for you, because you are simply deluding yourself.
But this is in the technical use of the term, not the daily talk around the parish. I haven’t heard any Bishop instructing Pastors, to stop using Eucharistic Minister, when talking about EMHCs. Bishops generally don’t go down to this level of pettiness.

Jim
 
But this is in the technical use of the term, not the daily talk around the parish. I haven’t heard any Bishop instructing Pastors, to stop using Eucharistic Minister, when talking about EMHCs. Bishops generally don’t go down to this level of pettiness.

Jim
Cardinal Arinze is a bishop, and he issued the document that said to stop doing that. John Paul II ordered the document to be released ( as well as approving the document’s content) JPII was a Bishop too.

If you consider that to be ‘petty’, that’s your problem, but the directive still stands.

If you think that it only applies to ‘technical terms’ can you please site the source for this, or are we just supposed to take in on your personal authority?
 
private interpretation alert*******
But this is in the technical use of the term, not the daily talk around the parish. I haven’t heard any Bishop instructing Pastors, to stop using Eucharistic Minister, when talking about EMHCs. Bishops generally don’t go down to this level of pettiness.

Jim
***********this is a warning from your Catholic emergency broadcast system

Had this been a real big emergency, you would have been instructed to offer up a Rosary

Now, back to the program…

Take it away, Brendan:D
 
Boy, I bet God’s going to be real happy with how much time we dedicate to ironing out this issue. 😛 Yep, nothing more important we could be using this time for.
 
Cardinal Arinze is a bishop, and he issued the document that said to stop doing that. John Paul II ordered the document to be released ( as well as approving the document’s content) JPII was a Bishop too.

If you consider that to be ‘petty’, that’s your problem, but the directive still stands.

If you think that it only applies to ‘technical terms’ can you please site the source for this, or are we just supposed to take in on your personal authority?
The Vatican is more likely talking about using the term in hierarchical levels of communication, not down at the street level where parishioners, where they’re ordering parishioners to stop saying Eucharistic Minister. They’re talking about the technical use of the term, which is the way the Vatican usually addresses issues.

Jim
 
Boy, I bet God’s going to be real happy with how much time we dedicate to ironing out this issue. 😛 Yep, nothing more important we could be using this time for.
Heck, you are right! Its pertaining to the Eucharist.
Maybe that could be shortened up too, and we can use a figure of speech for it…
Oh, wait. Now we have to wonder if Jesus was using a figure of speech about it too now!:eek:
Did he really mean it was his real body and his real blood? May have just been a figure of speech…🤷
 
The Vatican is more likely talking about using the term in hierarchical levels of communication, not down at the street level where parishioners, where they’re ordering parishioners to stop saying Eucharistic Minister. They’re talking about the technical use of the term, which is the way the Vatican usually addresses issues.

Jim
For people to have right understanding of issues and not reach erroneous understandings, it is important that the words used do not create misunderstanding. Half of the arguments on this forum is because Catholics and non-Catholics use the same words with different meanings, connotations and/or context.

My wife is a EMHC. She uses EHMC and so do the others in our parish to describe what they do. They do so because they understand that they are not Eucharistic Ministers. She cringes when non EMHC’s shorten the term. She knows they do so without rancor but it shows that they do not understand the distinction.

Those who think it is “petty” or “trivial” but understand the distiction imply/infer one thing: They think the distinction between a Priest and lay minister is “trivial.”

Recently, the Church has issued a letter that says that only EM’s may cleanse the sacred vessels. Unless EMHC’s understand they are not EM’s, they will be confused when they read the church documents and listen to their pastor tell them they can’t. They will erroneously think the Pastor is doing something or saying something improper. In fact, they might read into the document that THEY (and not the Priest) is supposed to cleanse the vessels. Confusion caused because somebody thought the distinction trivial or insignificant.

We can not have good Catholics without good catechesis. And it is impossible to have good catechesis without using words and terms correctly always. Confusion is not trivial.
 
For people to have right understanding of issues and not reach erroneous understandings, it is important that the words used do not create misunderstanding. Half of the arguments on this forum is because Catholics and non-Catholics use the same words with different meanings, connotations and/or context.

My wife is a EMHC. She uses EHMC and so do the others in our parish to describe what they do. They do so because they understand that they are not Eucharistic Ministers. She cringes when non EMHC’s shorten the term. She knows they do so without rancor but it shows that they do not understand the distinction.

Those who think it is “petty” or “trivial” but understand the distiction imply/infer one thing: They think the distinction between a Priest and lay minister is “trivial.”

Recently, the Church has issued a letter that says that only EM’s may cleanse the sacred vessels. Unless EMHC’s understand they are not EM’s, they will be confused when they read the church documents and listen to their pastor tell them they can’t. They will erroneously think the Pastor is doing something or saying something improper. In fact, they might read into the document that THEY (and not the Priest) is supposed to cleanse the vessels. Confusion caused because somebody thought the distinction trivial or insignificant.

We can not have good Catholics without good catechesis. And it is impossible to have good catechesis without using words and terms correctly always. Confusion is not trivial.
I agree that using Extraordrinary Minister of Holy Communion is the proper term. Its wonderful when people take the time to use it this way.

The pettiness I’m addressing, is people having a melt-down over it, as the OP of this thread.

BTW, I’ll be sure to correct my pastor, if I ever catch him using the term, “Eucharistic Minister” again. :rolleyes:

Jim
 
I simply want it out of our Bulletin that is also ONLINE which is an advertisement that we dont know much in our parish. Funny, one 7th grader told his mom he knows its wrong! How embarrasing.

If anything more happens, great, but minimally I would like to see the **public **nature of this stop. Of course, its not right under ANY circumstances- but sometimes baby steps is all that one can shoot for at a time.
Dont worry, you dont have to talk to your priest about it. I will if you want.👍
I agree that using Extraordrinary Minister of Holy Communion is the proper term. Its wonderful when people take the time to use it this way.

The pettiness I’m addressing, is people having a melt-down over it, as the OP of this thread.

BTW, I’ll be sure to correct my pastor, if I ever catch him using the term, “Eucharistic Minister” again. :rolleyes:

Jim
 
I agree that using Extraordrinary Minister of Holy Communion is the proper term. Its wonderful when people take the time to use it this way.

The pettiness I’m addressing, is people having a melt-down over it, as the OP of this thread.

BTW, I’ll be sure to correct my pastor, if I ever catch him using the term, “Eucharistic Minister” again. :rolleyes:

Jim
I do think it would be good that you do address your pastor. He is not intending to cause confusion and probably has not given it any thought. But with the new changes regarding vessels that according to my wife is causing confusion these first few weeks they have been implementing it, I’m sure he won’t want any new confusions. And it will be an opportunity for HIM to teach his EMHC’s.

I do agree that the original reaction was a little visceral. Most people who use the term don’t know the difference and find the term EMHC cumbersome so they just shorten it. It took effort for me to shorten the term when I said “Mary called and they are traveling this weekend. She wants you to be Eucharistic Minister for her.” Fortunately for me, I got the “stare” and knew how I messed up. After 15 optical lashings, I’ve finally learned my lesson.

But she does make a good point in her last post: The shorthand phrase should be in writing in the parish bulletin.
 
40.png
Orionthehunter:
. Most people who use the term don’t know the difference and find the term EMHC cumbersome so they just shorten it.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with shortening the the term, the problem that ‘shorting’ EMHC would be rendered as “Extraordinary Minister” NOT “Eucharistic Minister”
 
I don’t think anyone has a problem with shortening the the term, the problem that ‘shorting’ EMHC would be rendered as “Extraordinary Minister” NOT “Eucharistic Minister”
Agreed.
 
For people to have right understanding of issues and not reach erroneous understandings, it is important that the words used do not create misunderstanding. Half of the arguments on this forum is because Catholics and non-Catholics use the same words with different meanings, connotations and/or context.

My wife is a EMHC. She uses EHMC and so do the others in our parish to describe what they do. They do so because they understand that they are not Eucharistic Ministers. She cringes when non EMHC’s shorten the term. She knows they do so without rancor but it shows that they do not understand the distinction.

Those who think it is “petty” or “trivial” but understand the distiction imply/infer one thing: They think the distinction between a Priest and lay minister is “trivial.”

Recently, the Church has issued a letter that says that only EM’s may cleanse the sacred vessels. Unless EMHC’s understand they are not EM’s, they will be confused when they read the church documents and listen to their pastor tell them they can’t. They will erroneously think the Pastor is doing something or saying something improper. In fact, they might read into the document that THEY (and not the Priest) is supposed to cleanse the vessels. Confusion caused because somebody thought the distinction trivial or insignificant.

We can not have good Catholics without good catechesis. And it is impossible to have good catechesis without using words and terms correctly always. Confusion is not trivial.
I’m an EMHC as well, and you raise some great points. It really does hinge on education and catechesis. It’s also important to remember that many EMHCs have no idea of the distinction or its significance themselves. Our parish still does not differentiate very well, but the priest definitely understands the difference and has implemented a number of good changes to ensure that he is celebrating Mass in the appropriate manner.

Just remember that often the EMHC himself simply fails to understand these issues or may not even quite grasp the degree of reverence required for his duties. In these cases, it’s the priest’s job to make the EMHC aware of these things. I guess I’m just trying to say that we need to go easy on the EHMC sometimes and hold the priest accountable, because it is the priest’s direction the EMHC is following.
 
Correction: But she does make a good point in her last post: The shorthand phrase should **not **be in writing in the parish bulletin.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with shortening the the term, the problem that ‘shorting’ EMHC would be rendered as “Extraordinary Minister” NOT “Eucharistic Minister”
I agree. This would be better. Unfortunately, American vernacular is usually such that it is sometimes a shortening not of the title but to a description of what they do. In this case they adMINISTER the delivery of the Eucharist. I’m not defending it but only trying to illuminate that I don’t think the use is by sinister design. And with diligent catechesis, we can get it so it is done properly.
 
Savio-

dont get me going!

You are not a heretic. You are discerning.

Dont make me pull out more papal documents now…

😉 😃

Sorry I neglected in my rant to welcome you to…

Well, to welcome you to reality, I guess.

We can not judge the Church on its members, and if we did- we would be in deep doo doo.

But- we can have faith that in spite of anything a sinful member does-

It will not change the fact that the Church is faithful-
even if its members are not. (I am not implying I am faithful in any imagined way)

I hope I have not hindered you in any way from continuing your discernment-
But- I also feel its best you see this now-

Remember- Jesus chose Judas to be an apostle. He knew Judas would betray him (read John)
(bet you know this but, I just like to add it because I forget this sometimes)

God bless you and

I was not kidding about formation, have you considered teaching RCIA once you convert?

Not a bad idea if you think its for you…

I hope you will pray about it, you know I will.

The Church needs good teachers now. More than ever.
Thanks. I actually have considered teaching RCIA once I convert. I’m going to school to become a high school teacher, so it would be right up my alley. I hope I can convert soon. RCIA is starting at my local Newman Center, and right now I have a conflict with my work schedule, so I need to see what I can figure out. 😦
Heck, you are right! Its pertaining to the Eucharist.
Maybe that could be shortened up too, and we can use a figure of speech for it…
Before my little epiphany, I used to refer to it as “sacred cannibalism.” :banghead: Remind me to confess that one… :ouch:
 
I agree that the terms should be properly understood but aren’t we headed towards it meaning the same.

We have five EMHC on every sunday mass twice.

The shortage of priests now and a lot will be retiring.

Can you see into the future; our parish is training like crazy the children to bring up the water and wine and and even reading the prayers and the Psalms and responses. At their own masses of course and I think that the idea is when they become teenagers and beyond they will want to. Their aren’t any EMHC under about the age of 60 at our church because no one wants to be committed to have to be there.

We don’t have enough adults who want to do this, if we combine our parishes we will have to have more EMHC.

Today at the children’s mass once a week so far they all, 2nd through 8th grade had print outs and they had some sit where the choir sits and we even have them in the adoration room, once a week, two classes sitting in there learning all to know about it. This is wonderful they are very respectfull but aren’t we skipping something like, seminary and confirmation yet?
It is boggeling my brain! The other thing, they are not observing us adults doing this they are reading this off a paper, and you know how kids like to go really fast and get things done they go too fast and drop.
D.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top