Eucharistic Ministers Approaching Tabernacle

[regression]

The way the current GIRM is written, it’s presuming that the tabernacle isn’t even being used during Mass. There’s very little reference to it, and nothing direct about who may or may not place the consecrated Hosts in the tabernacle. However (this is important) the only role of an EMHC is to assist the priest/deacon in distributing Holy Communion, anything beyond this is not permitted. Since the priest (or maybe a deacon) is available to place the Hosts in the tabernacle, there’s no reason at all why a former EMHC should be doing this. I say former EMHC because once the distribution of Communion is over, so too is the role of EMHC.

Thanks. Now I wonder why the priest at my parish will just stand while a lay person puts the hosts back in the tabernacle… I guess next time I see him I can ask.

 

[tinalewis]

I say former EMHC because once the distribution of Communion is over, so too is the role of EMHC.

Oh my. That’s not how I see it at all. I feel as if I’m an EMOHC every minute of every day, even in my sleep. Even though I’m not actually administering Holy Communion every day, I am always ready to. And I should treat everyone I come in contact with at work, at church, while shopping, driving my car, etc. as if I were about to offer them the Body or Blood of Christ. Isn’t this how it should be or am I way off base here?

 

[FrDavid96]

Oh my. That’s not how I see it at all. I feel as if I’m an EMOHC every minute of every day, even in my sleep. Even though I’m not actually administering Holy Communion every day, I am always ready to. And I should treat everyone I come in contact with at work, at church, while shopping, driving my car, etc. as if I were about to offer them the Body or Blood of Christ. Isn’t this how it should be or am I way off base here?

Actually, yes, you’re “way off base” but only with regard to “being” an EMHC. Please don’t take that as a personal comment–I do NOT at all mean it in that way. A priest may only make a temporary appointment of an EMHC when there’s a genuine need, and this function is very strictly limited to that particular moment. That’s what the word “extraordinary” means. In other words, not “ordinary” or not “all the time” but strictly according to the need, and dependant upon the specific appointment by a priest for that moment.

But having said that, YES, you should “treat everyone [you] come in contact with…as if [you] were about to offer the Body of Christ.” We all should. Bullseye on that part!!!

 

[agapewolf]

The way the current GIRM is written, it’s presuming that the tabernacle isn’t even being used during Mass. There’s very little reference to it, and nothing direct about who may or may not place the consecrated Hosts in the tabernacle. However (this is important) the only role of an EMHC is to assist the priest/deacon in distributing Holy Communion, anything beyond this is not permitted. Since the priest (or maybe a deacon) is available to place the Hosts in the tabernacle, there’s no reason at all why a former EMHC should be doing this. I say former EMHC because once the distribution of Communion is over, so too is the role of EMHC.

Uh, yes there is. One parish I play music at has a very elderly priest that does all he can to minister communion, but cannot climb the 4 stairs up to where tabernacle is. He has an EMHC do it as he watches near the altar.

 

[FrDavid96]

Uh, yes there is. One parish I play music at has a very elderly priest that does all he can to minister communion, but cannot climb the 4 stairs up to where tabernacle is. He has an EMHC do it as he watches near the altar.

Uh…that’s what’s meant by “necessity.” If you read my post you would have seen that I wrote “…since the priest (or deacon) is available…” if he can’t climb the stairs, then common sense says he’s not “available.”

 

[Seatuck]

Seatuck,
See my post #8. Does that explain it? I tried to outline the reasons. This often comes down to more a matter of “exactly what is happening?” rather than a general statement one way or the other of saying that EMHCs are or are not permitted to open the tabernacle.

You know I love and respect you Father, but I was looking for church documentation. If I’m going to sit down with committees I need more than your very good but in your own words explanation.I’ve been given the vague- our Bishop allows it as is his right explanation.

 

[Malkin71]

Uh…that’s what’s meant by “necessity.” If you read my post you would have seen that I wrote “…since the priest (or deacon) is available…” if he can’t climb the stairs, then common sense says he’s not “available.”

In my Parish the EMHC walk up to the Tabernacle and get the Ciborium and take it to the Altar and stand there next to the Altar during the Agnus Dei while everyone else is kneeling.

During Holy Communion when Fr. runs out, he just goes back to purify the Chalice while the other EHMC finish up distributing Holy Communion and return to the Tabernacle and transfer the remaining Holy Communion into one Ciborium by themselves. I cringe every time I see this. I understand unless it is a extraordinary reason. But, the EHMC roles are blured.

Any help.

 

[Catholic_Wife]

But the second half of your question “why are we not allowed to put the consecrated hosts back into the tabernacle after coming back from a nursing home?” has a different answer. If the priest (or any priest or deacon) is available to do this, then there is no longer any necessity for him to appoint a layperson to do so. Since the necessity is no longer there, then neither is the legitimacy of the appointment (it was perfectly legitimate but when a cleric is present, the temporary function ceases). If the priest is not available, well then the necessity is still there and that temporary appointment still stands. So that second half of your question really has 2 answers depending upon the circumstances.

Does this “necessity” also apply to a EMHC returning the ciborium to the tabernacle during Mass when the tabernacle is located in the chapel instead of the sanctuary?

 

[benedictgal]

In my Parish the EMHC walk up to the Tabernacle and get the Ciborium and take it to the Altar and stand there next to the Altar during the Agnus Dei while everyone else is kneeling.

During Holy Communion when Fr. runs out, he just goes back to purify the Chalice while the other EHMC finish up distributing Holy Communion and return to the Tabernacle and transfer the remaining Holy Communion into one Ciborium by themselves. I cringe every time I see this. I understand unless it is a extraordinary reason. But, the EHMC roles are blured.

Any help.

The EMHCs are not supposed to approach the altar during the Agnus Dei. They are supposed to come forward after the celebrant consumes the Body and Blood of Christ.

This is what the GIRM says:

1. The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, e.g., duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been deputed for this purpose.97 In case of necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion.98

These ministers should not approach the altar before the priest has received Communion, and they are always to receive from the hands of the priest celebrant the vessel containing either species of the Most Holy Eucharist for distribution to the faithful.

1. When the distribution of Communion is finished, the priest himself immediately and completely consumes at the altar any consecrated wine that happens to remain; as for any consecrated hosts that are left, he either consumes them at the altar or carries them to the place designated for the reservation of the Eucharist.

Of course, if there is a deacon assisting him, then, the deacon will be the one to do this. In either case, it is not for the EMHC to do.

Here is an additional observation that Ecclesia de Mysterio makes regarding EMHCs:

To avoid creating confusion, certain practices are to be avoided and eliminated where such have emerged in particular Churches:

extraordinary ministers receiving Holy Communion apart from the other faithful as though concelebrants;
association with the renewal of promises made by priests at the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, as well as other categories of faithful who renew religious vows or receive a mandate as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion;
the habitual use of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion at Mass thus arbitrarily extending the concept of “a great number of the faithful”.

Thus, the only duty that an EMHC is limited to doing is to assist in the distribution of Hol Communion, and, only when there is a geunine need.

 

[FrDavid96]

Does this “necessity” also apply to a EMHC returning the ciborium to the tabernacle during Mass when the tabernacle is located in the chapel instead of the sanctuary?

Good question. It realy is a good question. Liturgical principles say that the priest should not leave the Sanctuary during Mass (except for when it’s obviously necessary). In principle the priest should never leave the church itself during Mass. So based on that principle, someone other than the priest should take the Hosts to the chapel. If there is a deacon available (or another priest) then he should be the one to do this, and not an EMHC.

Also keep in mind that the way the current liturgical laws are written, there is a presumption that the Eucharist will not be placed in the tabernacle for the purpose of distributing at the next Mass (the purpose is for Viaticum and Adoration, but not distribution at a later Mass). The norms have “evolved” over the past few decades, and we can see a defiinate movement away from distributing the reserved Hosts at Mass. That doesn’t make this practice “wrong.” But the best practice is that everyone receives Hosts which were consecrated at that particular Mass. This ideal isn’t always possible, but the ideal exists nonetheless.

What that means is that the Church doesn’t really address the issue directly of EMHCs taking a ciborium of consecrated Hosts to a chapel distinct from the place where Mass is being celebrated–the presumption is that this is not happening in the first place. I’m speaking of current norms. I believe there were past norms or suggestions which might have called for this.

The fact remains thought that the only function of EMHCs is to assist the ministers of Communion in actually distributing Communion. Any function beyond that is not legitimate.

So the long and short of it is that there’s no specific liturgical norm which answers your question, and as for my own opinion on the matter, I realy don’t have one, one way or the other. In my opinion and practice, I would not put myself into a position where I would have to find an answer.

 

[FrDavid96]

In my Parish the EMHC walk up to the Tabernacle and get the Ciborium and take it to the Altar and stand there next to the Altar during the Agnus Dei while everyone else is kneeling.

During Holy Communion when Fr. runs out, he just goes back to purify the Chalice while the other EHMC finish up distributing Holy Communion and return to the Tabernacle and transfer the remaining Holy Communion into one Ciborium by themselves. I cringe every time I see this. I understand unless it is a extraordinary reason. But, the EHMC roles are blured.

Any help.

Malkin,
Here’s what the Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America has to say:
38. If extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are required by pastoral need, they should not approach the altar before the priest has received Communion. After the priest has concluded his own Communion, he distributes Communion to the extraordinary ministers, assisted by the deacon, and then hands the sacred vessels to them for distribution of Holy Communion to the people.
usccb.org/liturgy/current/norms.shtml

That’s pretty clear. There isn’t any room for interpretation in that. The EMHCs should not be near the altar during the Agnus Dei.

As far as the priest finishing the distribution and returning to the altar while the EMHCs continue to distribute, I think this comes down to a matter of asking just what’s happening at that particular moment. Here’s what I mean, if there are only “a few” people left to receive, then I don’t see a problem with it, but if there is a large number yet to receive, then the priest (or deacon) really should be the one to continue and the EMHCs should stop distributing.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

Also keep in mind that the way the current liturgical laws are written, there is a presumption that the Eucharist will not be placed in the tabernacle for the purpose of distributing at the next Mass (the purpose is for Viaticum and Adoration, but not distribution at a later Mass). The norms have “evolved” over the past few decades, and we can see a defiinate movement away from distributing the reserved Hosts at Mass. That doesn’t make this practice “wrong.” But the best practice is that everyone receives Hosts which were consecrated at that particular Mass. This ideal isn’t always possible, but the ideal exists nonetheless.

This is a lovely theory, but I don’t see how it can be applied practically. I don’t think it is even possible (in a church of even moderate size) to predict with absolute accuracy how many hosts will be needed at a given Mass. Even if the sacristan were to do an exact head count three minutes before Mass (which is highly impractical), the number will be inaccurate due to latecomers who arrive after the head count, people who do not receive, etc.

 

[FrDavid96]

This is a lovely theory, but I don’t see how it can be applied practically. I don’t think it is even possible (in a church of even moderate size) to predict with absolute accuracy how many hosts will be needed at a given Mass. Even if the sacristan were to do an exact head count three minutes before Mass (which is highly impractical), the number will be inaccurate due to latecomers who arrive after the head count, people who do not receive, etc.

Of course I agree with that. I said it’s the ideal, and it’s not always possible. My point is that the liturgical norms do not directly address the question of whether or not EMHCs should be removing the consecrated Hosts from the tabernacle, and to explain the reason why there’s an absence of clear norms.

 

[benedictgal]

Of course I agree with that. I said it’s the ideal, and it’s not always possible. My point is that the liturgical norms do not directly address the question of whether or not EMHCs should be removing the consecrated Hosts from the tabernacle, and to explain the reason why there’s an absence of clear norms.

Actually, it might. Recall that EMHCs should not approach the altar until after the celebrant has communicated. What happens a lot in the parishes down here is that the celebrant and/or deacon will go to the tabernacle during the sign of peace to retrieve the ciborrium. Then, the Agnus Dei begins. At this point, EMHCs are not even supposed to aproach the altar, so, if the retrieveal happens at this time, the EMHCs would have no business being up there.

By the time the EMHCs do approach the altar, everything is already in place.

 

[Joannm]

No matter how we try we have foreign visiting priests who will not go to the tabernacle which forces the EMHC to go. This only happens at daily Mass. Mind you the tabernacle is maybe 5 steps (footsteps) from the altar. These priests just stand at the altar and wait. They also do not bring the ciborium back but make the EMHC do it. One of them doesn’t hand the ciborium to the EMHC to distribute communion, but just leaves it on the altar for him or her to pick up. We have told them to do otherwise but we have never got them to comply. One even makes up parts of the prayers (but won’t do it when the pastor is concelebrating). So, it is not always the EMHC who is in the wrong but the priests…and if the priest does other that what is required, what is the EMHC to do? Our pastor is non-confrontational but we are doing a major evaluation of our liturgies and starting a liturgy committee and looking to have a written guideline to give our visiting priests (seems they don’t read the GIRM). We have quite a lot of foreign visiting priests during the year so this seems like the best idea.

 

[PhilotheaZ]

No matter how we try we have foreign visiting priests who will not go to the tabernacle which forces the EMHC to go. This only happens at daily Mass. Mind you the tabernacle is maybe 5 steps (footsteps) from the altar. These priests just stand at the altar and wait. They also do not bring the ciborium back but make the EMHC do it. One of them doesn’t hand the ciborium to the EMHC to distribute communion, but just leaves it on the altar for him or her to pick up. We have told them to do otherwise but we have never got them to comply.

Maybe the EMHC (after a polite reminder to the priest in the sacristy prior to Mass about the correct procedure) needs to stand in place and out-wait the priest, or gesture to him for him to do it, or discreetly hand him the key to the tabernacle! (I’m not sure this is an appropriate solution; it’s just a bit of “liturgy police” in me venting!)

And I would not pick up the ciborium from the altar. I would wait for him to hand it to me, and if he does not, return to my seat. Priests should not put EMHCs in the position of having to disobey Church rules in violation of their conscience.

 

[paperwight]

And I would not pick up the ciborium from the altar. I would wait for him to hand it to me, and if he does not, return to my seat. Priests should not put EMHCs in the position of having to disobey Church rules in violation of their conscience.

Oh, please! And have a whole queue of people standing waiting not knowing what to do and getting hot and bothered?
How petty would that look? And unfair to those parishioners who get upset by these things?

Sorry, EMHC often have to fill-in doing things to cover-up a priest’s mistake, for the sake of the smooth running of Holy Communion. The important thing is the congregation, not a too-tender conscience, or the wish to make a point and call attention to ourselves.

if you did leave the sanctuary to go back to your place, the priest meanwhile obviously having started to give Holy Communion, what could the priest do? Call out to you to come back? With a ciborium meanwhile unattended on the altar?

 

[PhilotheaZ]

Oh, please! And have a whole queue of people standing waiting not knowing what to do and getting hot and bothered?
How petty would that look? And unfair to those parishioners who get upset by these things?

Sorry, EMHC often have to fill-in doing things to cover-up a priest’s mistake, for the sake of the smooth running of Holy Communion. The important thing is the congregation, not a too-tender conscience, or the wish to make a point and call attention to ourselves.

if you did leave the sanctuary to go back to your place, the priest meanwhile obviously having started to give Holy Communion, what could the priest do? Call out to you to come back? With a ciborium meanwhile unattended on the altar?

As I wrote,

I’m not sure this is an appropriate solution; it’s just a bit of “liturgy police” in me venting!

I would not really do this. In fact, it is to avoid taking part in such things that I made the decision not to serve as an EMHC at Masses at our parish; my “too-tender conscience” prefers not to be put in such a postion to make choices between local practice and Church teachings. When I took the training to become an EMHC at our parish, I told our pastor that I was doing it to be able to bring Holy Communion to the sick in our nursing homes.

By the way, it’s not a priest’s “mistake” that is being covered up. It is usually disobedience. A “mistake” is something that happens once or twice because of ignorance or forgetting; once a priest has been instructed on the correct procedures and chooses to ignore them, it looks more like defiance.

 

[benedictgal]

Oh, please! And have a whole queue of people standing waiting not knowing what to do and getting hot and bothered?
How petty would that look? And unfair to those parishioners who get upset by these things?

Sorry, EMHC often have to fill-in doing things to cover-up a priest’s mistake, for the sake of the smooth running of Holy Communion. The important thing is the congregation, not a too-tender conscience, or the wish to make a point and call attention to ourselves.

if you did leave the sanctuary to go back to your place, the priest meanwhile obviously having started to give Holy Communion, what could the priest do? Call out to you to come back? With a ciborium meanwhile unattended on the altar?

With all due respect, this is a poor way of looking at the importance of norms. I do not think that we should be calling adherence to the norms petty. Integrity to the norms of the liturgy is of the utmost importance.

[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.

It seems, as I read your comments, that you are proposing to just ignore the norms for the sake of the congregation. This is not the approach to take. When we ignore the norms, as Cardinal Arinze, the Prefect Emeritus for the CDWDS, notes, things start to go awry:

1. Harm Done by Non-Observance of Liturgical Norms

Looking at things from a different perspective, we can appreciate negatively the importance of the observance of liturgical norms if we list some of the damages which can be introduced by ignoring these norms.

Liturgical abuses can confuse the congregation and occasion uncertainty, perplexity, scandal, opposition and factionalism. In more severe cases, they can obscure the Catholic faith and prevent the people from sharing fully in the celebration of the mysteries of Christ. To ignore liturgical norms can also reinforce a false understanding of freedom. In ecumenical efforts it introduces problems and sometimes a wrong presentation of the Catholic faith.17

To ignore liturgical norms can in a subtle way introduce secularization and gradual banalization into the liturgy. In this short-sighted vision, a church building may no longer be seen as a sacred place. Do the people then come to church for Mass as to a “meeting” like in a stadium or congress hall? Do they talk in church as if it were not appreciated as a sacred place separated from secular daily events? Does this tendency regard the norms on the use of liturgical vestments as triumphalism? Does it lead to a type of secular leveling down which prefers to say cup instead of chalice, plate instead of paten, dress instead of vestment, and president instead of priest celebrant?

To ignore liturgical norms can gradually introduce such erosions.

Furthermore, the faithful are not the focus of the Mass. God is. While the faithful make up an important component, they are not the most important part of the Holy Sacrifice. God is.

 

[msugeotech]

This is an interesting thread to me. I’m not an EMHC, but I do watch what goes on. Our parish is a “church in the round”, so the altar is directly in the middle of the church, with the pews in a circle around it. The tabernacle is located in a room in the back of the church, not completely closed off, but is not visible from the congregation either. An EMHC goes to the tabernacle and gets the hosts and brings them to the altar to the priest. Along with another EMHC (2 at the altar at this point) help the priest get the chalices and bowls (sorry if I’m using bad terminology) and lays them out. Then they leave the altar until the priest has taken communion himself. Then all the EMHC’s approach, take communion, then step down to give to us. After, while the priest is purifying all the chalices, and consuming the remains, an EMHC returns the hosts to the tabernacle.

I believe we have 14 EMHC’s at every mass.

I’m guessing this is violating norms all over the place?