Eucharistic ministers

[palmas85]

*
Actually, when it comes to matters of faith, as a Catholic, you do have to agree with him.

• But if using them allows for more individuals to receive the Body of Christ, isn’t that a good thing? As a matter of fact, isn’t that a better course of action than not taking the option and seriously limiting the number & frequency of ill & homebound Catholics who would receive Christ in holy Communion?

Definitely not.

• I don’t see why the priest couldn’t take care of this himself. Or, at most, the priest and the deacon.
• 3200+ families translates into a lot of individual members. Taking into account that many people from NY and NJ retire in PA, we may indeed have a higher percentage of elderly than normal. Additionally, we are located in a rural community and our parish covers a rather large geographic area. I live ten miles from the church and I have homebound people that I minister to that live even further. Assuming 10-15 miles in each direction from the church and our parish covers about 500 square miles.

Now, let’s do the math and address your assertion that the priests of the parish are “more likely not willing to make the side trips.” Including myself, there are 34 EMHC in our parish who minister to the homebound. I, personally, have 6 people that I bring communion to regularily. I’m one of the new’er EMHC, so my list is mostlikely smaller than EMHCs that have been doing this longer. But let’s assume that all of us have 6 people on our list. That translates into 204 people. For a parish that have 3200+ families covering about 500 square miles, it isn’t unusual to have 200-300 sick and homebound parish members.

Getting back to the six people on my list. Two of them receive communion once a week – making it 8-10 visits a month for the two of them. Let’s count that as 9 as an average. One person receives communion from me only once a month on first Fridays so it brings the number up to 10. And the other three receive communion from me every other week making it 6-9 visits a month for them. Let’s count that as 8. Those 8 plus the previous 10 add up to 18 visits that I made a month on average.

Averaged out weekly, that comes out to about 4.5 visits per week. Let’s be conservate and say 4 just to keep the math simple. Each visit takes about 30-45 minutes. 5-10 minutes to distribute communion plus 5-10 minutes of small talk for some of them while 10-20 minutes of small talk for others … since they are home bound, we are often the one of the few humans that they interact with and they just want to talk. Factor in round trip travel time, and each visit is about 45-60 minutes. Four visits a week at 45-60 minutes a visit translates into about 3.5 hours a week.

Assuming the other EMHCs in my parish devote the same amount of time, that translates into 119 hours a week. Since we’ve been rounding down the entire time, let’s just round this number up to 120 hours a week to keep the math simplier.

On average, 120 hours a week is spend within my parish distributing communion to the homebound. If there were no EMHCs in my parish devoted to bringing communion to the homebound, our two priests would have to spend 60 hours every week delivering communion leaving them almost no time to do anything else.

Something would have to suffer somewhere. Either the people could not receive as often as they would like or all of them could not receive or other parish functions would have to suffer.

After looking at the raw data, if you do not see the positive benefit of having EMHCs bringing communion to homebound, then I no longer know what to say.

• Link.

Actually, I don’t have to agree with him, and I don’t even have to like what he says. I have to obey him and accept what he says in those circumstances. Thats all, Obey. I learned in the military it is possible to obey and not agree.

The link you provided said exactly what I thought it would. They MAY be used, with the laity as a last choice I might add, in certain rare circumstances. It said nothing about throwing open the doors and inviting the whole congregation in to take on the duty.

That being said, you have illustrated a good example of when they MAY be necessary. I applaud that because it is the very first example I’ve seen that seems valid. That is of course assuming your figures aren’t inflated, :ehh: . As an aside I asked one of the Extraordinary ministers at my parish approximately how many house call they make. Thirty to fifty or so a week. Thats for the whole group. Not each one.

But I do appreciate your example and see the value for that purpose…

Now if you could only give me one for the crushing numbers at the altar

 

[InnocentIII]

Michael038:

You should hit the search topic tab because this topic has come up over and over and over again! These Extraordinary ministers are approved by the Pope to assist the Priest when there is a large volume of people at Mass. If you have a problem then you should make a point to go in the line where the Priest is.

I agree. This topic has been done to death. However, I take the point that ECM’s are often used even when extraordinary circulstances are not in evidence. I attended mass in a large country town every Sunday for a year where the congregation was about 40 people but there were still 2 ECM’s plus the priest giving out communion … and before someone asks no it was not the chalice. All three handed out the host only.

 

[davy39]

palmas85:

I know it’s the norm and knowexactly what you guys do… And if you want me to be scathingly honest I’ll tell you. You do one thing, you speed up the mass. Expediency, haste get it over with, there are kids soccer games, the NFL and shopping to get to. You make communion go faster. and that sure as heck isn’t necessary.

I’ve posted here many times that the only real reason I’ve ever seen for Extraordinary Minister is to give the laity something to do in the Mass. Thats all.

Hey everybody, in your haste to condemn all EMHCs, you forgot something. Another function of ours is to take the Holy Eucharist to the sick and the homebound after Mass. With only one priest, this helps him out a great deal. I enjoy visiting the sick of the parish, and I believe that it does as much for me in my life as it does for them. Now everybody pile on, and tell me why this is wrong, too.

 

[Brendan]

davy39:

Hey everybody, in your haste to condemn all EMHCs, you forgot something. Another function of ours is to take the Holy Eucharist to the sick and the homebound after Mass. With only one priest, this helps him out a great deal. I enjoy visiting the sick of the parish, and I believe that it does as much for me in my life as it does for them. Now everybody pile on, and tell me why this is wrong, too.

Perhaps because that is one of the charisms of the Deacon.

If you read my post above, just about every prayer for vocations to the Diaconate is a prayer that that aspect of your ministry would end.

That certainly doesn’t mean that you can’t or shouldn’t visit the sick and elderly, but the distribution of Holy Communion to them properly belongs to the Deacon.

With having only one priest at your parish, you certainly serve a needed role, but if your parish had several deacons…

 

[InnocentIII]

arieh0310:

I don’t agree. My parish is similar in size and we employ no EMHC’s. There are two priests distributing communion and it usually lasts only about 5-6 minutes. Although we typically only offer communion under one species and use a communion rail, which I think helps speed things along.

I agree. At our parish we still only have it under one species and we kneel or stand along the sanctuary step. As the priest goes along the line it fills up again from the front. I have found this a much more efficient way to distribute communion. I could never understand the argument for bus queues being quicker. Except that the priest doesn’t move, it is in general slower as you have to wait for the people in front to move on. Each person may only take a few seconds to step out of the way but multiply that by 200 people receiving communion. Using a rail or the sanctuary step it becomes one smooth continuous process. As for communion under both species I can take it or leave it. It is not essential and tends to create the sense that the body and blood are separate so if I had to choose I would prefer under one species only … but it’s not a die in the ditch kind of issue.

 

[InnocentIII]

otm:

Which may be one of the reasons to use EMHCs; this issue is not speeding things along, but doing it slowly and reverently. I have a hard time saying that a priest dsitributing the Eucharist at a clip of one to one and a half seconds per communicant is doing it slowly and reverently.

I don’t think it is done any more reverently in the bus queues. What is more the justification given for the queues was that it made for a more efficient (ie speedier) distribution. I agree it should be done reverently but not necessarily slowly. The reverence lies in our approach and the priests demeanour not in his velocity.

However, I am sure others would disagree. however, it is more awkward to receive from the Cup at a Communion rail.

How so … the Anglicans have been doing it successfully for several centuries now.

that is because when two or three or 4 are distributing the Host at the same time, they can all do it slower and with more reverence, thus the time elapsed for all to receive Communion is about the same, but the process for each individual is slower and allows for more reverence.

Hmm … you must know different EMHC’s to me. The ones I know are pretty quick, unless you want to receive on the tongue in which case they are certainly slow

 

[InnocentIII]

palmas85:

I know it’s the norm and knowexactly what you guys do… And if you want me to be scathingly honest I’ll tell you. You do one thing, you speed up the mass. Expediency, haste get it over with, there are kids soccer games, the NFL and shopping to get to. You make communion go faster. and that sure as heck isn’t necessary.

I’ve posted here many times that the only real reason I’ve ever seen for Extraordinary Minister is to give the laity something to do in the Mass. Thats all.

I will however apologise to those EMHC’s (that’s you Breton) who take it seriously. I have been an EMHC myself at the very large college where I taught so I appreciate how you feel. Nonetheless it is true the in many parishes EMHC’s are as palmas says just a way fo giving the laity something to do (see my earlier post) and in some cases that I know of personally the person doing it had visions of themselves as a sort of substitute priest (one even tried to bless a child in the line … and I mean bless not just a kind word and a hand on the head). As with much that flowed from VII something was introduced that assumed a level of maturity that few possessed … and thus opened the door to rampant abuse.

 

[InnocentIII]

I agree also with several other posters about the change in attitude towards receiving communion which is I think the real abuse and the real issue of which EMHC are just the symptoms.
Prior to the late 60’s receiving communion was generally the exception rather than the rule. Few Catholics would receive communion without going to confession first (hence the non-stop confessionals in some churches during mass - a pre VII abuse to show its not all on one side) and so no-one thought any ill of someone who didn’t go up to communion. Since the late 60’s it has become the norm to go up to receive communion whether one has been to confession or not. There is therefore a lot of subtle pressure on people to go up … people will aks questions about why you didn’t … what have you been up to etc. This was part of the protestantising of the faith but even the protestants usually hold their communion services separate so that only those wishing to go to communion need stay. What is needed is a return to the concept that communion is a great privilege, not to be undertaken lightly, not to be received without confessing first. Perhaps then we will have less need for EMHCs.

 

[oldfogey]

We have a fairly large parish with about 600 people at each Mass and usually 8 laity distributing under both species. It takes the priest as about half as long to give the EMHC’s Communion and for them to get set up etc, as it takes for the whole congregation to receive. The whole process doesn’t really save any time, and the way you have to negotiate around all these people standing in front of the altar really detracts from the actual experience of receiving. After I receive, I have to be more concerned with bumping into someone than with the fact that I have just received Communion.

With the altar rail, you could actually pause and consume the host, and not be immediately jostled and distracted. It was more efficient, and more reverent.

 

[davy39]

Brendan:

Perhaps because that is one of the charisms of the Deacon.

If you read my post above, just about every prayer for vocations to the Diaconate is a prayer that that aspect of your ministry would end.

That certainly doesn’t mean that you can’t or shouldn’t visit the sick and elderly, but the distribution of Holy Communion to them properly belongs to the Deacon.

With having only one priest at your parish, you certainly serve a needed role, but if your parish had several deacons…

Yes, but we don’t have the luxury of having several deacons. We have one between the two parishes, so most of the time, it’s either us, or they don’t have Holy Communion brought to them. There have been priests on our area that have admitted that they don’t like to visit the sick and homebound. Why, I have no idea. I thought it was one of their primary duties. Correct me if I’m wrong. Also, sometimes our deacon will be at Mass, but will not assist the priest, or distribute Communion. There again, I have no idea why.

 

[MrS]

Dr. Bombay:

Next thing ya know, they’ll be telling us it’s a mortal sin to not hold hands during the Pater Noster.

From some of the looks I have gotten… maybe it is?:bigyikes:

 

[Sir_Knight]

palmas85:

That is of course assuming your figures aren’t inflated, :ehh: .

If anything, I tried to be conservative in my estimates but I do admit that I made a lot of assumptions. I assumed that other EMHC that ministered to the homebound had a similar number of people to visit, that their folks had about the same number of visits per month as my folks on average and that they spent about the same amount of time per visit as I did. Lacking actual data, I think that this was a fair assumption to make because any that might have been under would have been off-set by those who were over with them averaging out in the middle.

palmas85:

As an aside I asked one of the Extraordinary ministers at my parish approximately how many house call they make. Thirty to fifty or so a week. Thats for the whole group. Not each one.

I, personally, average about 18 visits a month which breaks down to about 4.5 visits a week. Assuming the other EMHC that ministered to the homebound have the same number of visits, that comes out to about 153 visits a week for a parish that has 3200+ FAMILIES.

palmas85:

Now if you could only give me one for the crushing numbers at the altar

I can’t. Which is why I do not distribute communion during Mass. I believe that our two priests and one deacon should be able to handle things. At most, maybe one extra EMHC might be needed per mass.

 

[palmas85]

Sir Knight:

If anything, I tried to be conservative in my estimates but I do admit that I made a lot of assumptions. I assumed that other EMHC that ministered to the homebound had a similar number of people to visit, that their folks had about the same number of visits per month as my folks on average and that they spent about the same amount of time per visit as I did. Lacking actual data, I think that this was a fair assumption to make because any that might have been under would have been off-set by those who were over with them averaging out in the middle.

I, personally, average about 18 visits a month which breaks down to about 4.5 visits a week. Assuming the other EMHC that ministered to the homebound have the same number of visits, that comes out to about 153 visits a week for a parish that has 3200+ FAMILIES.

I can’t. Which is why I do not distribute communion during Mass. I believe that our two priests and one deacon should be able to handle things. At most, maybe one extra EMHC might be needed per mass.

Well, as I said, distributing to the sick and homebound may very well be a valid reason for Extraordinary Ministers, and for those circumstances, I have adjusted my opinion.

Nothing anyone has said though has even remotely justified the use of Extraordinary Ministers in the Mass, and so I remain hopeful that in that context they will soon be a barely remembered practice of the church such as the agape, simony and flagellants. I’m not comparing them to these other groups just hoping they are soon gone for good.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

Sir Knight:

If we have the opportunity to do good for others and do not, why wouldn’t Jesus say the following to us on judgement day … … Matthew 25.

I have no quarrel with you, Sir Knight. (Actually, I do. I just wanted to say that. )

To equate a voluntary church ministry involving laity assuming what at one time was an exclusively priestly function with the moral imperative of serving the least of our brothers is faulty theology, with all due respect.

If we were going to be cast into the lake of fire for refusing to become EMHCs, don’t you think the Church would’ve apprised us of this fact?

 

[Veritas41]

palmas85:

W
Sometimes I feel like I’m in a Twilight Zone episode. People worried about spending an additonal 20 minutes in Mass?
Doesn’t sound like a big hardship to me

I agree. I read in a Catholic magazine that in African countries, Mass is often about 2 hours long. We have a Nigerian priest in our diocese, and when he says Mass, it takes about 1 1/2 hours (I guess he’s accommodating Americans). It’s too bad Americans look at Mass as something to hurry up and get over with.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

palmas85:

Well, as I said, distributing to the sick and homebound may very well be a valid reason for Extraordinary Ministers, and for those circumstances, I have adjusted my opinion.

Nothing anyone has said though has even remotely justified the use of Extraordinary Ministers in the Mass, and so I remain hopeful that in that context they will soon be a barely remembered practice of the church such as the agape, simony and flagellants. I’m not comparing them to these other groups just hoping they are soon gone for good.

Oh, they’ll be gone alright. As soon as we have shepherds who are able to look back at the past 40 years with a dispassionate eye, without the baggage of having lived through that time and having been fed all the propoganda about “renewal” and “the new springtime,” the true renewal and springtime will then be able to begin.

Until then, sadly, we are stuck with leaders who continue to mistake the fire of hell ravaging Holy Mother Church for a warm spring sun. Which means novelties like EMHCs will continue for the time being.

 

[otm]

gladius_Verbi:

The Pope has no right to legalize something that is sinful, such as communicatio in sacris. It is against the natural law, and there has not ever been, nor will there ever be, a Pope who can alter that.

The Church, a fortiori an individual Pope, cannot touch anything that pertains to the substance of the Sacraments. There have been four crystal clear statements about this fact, although this did not stop the modern Innovators from touching just about all of them. I would be happy to cite them here for you, should you not take my word for it.

As a layman, I am simply going by what 2000 years of authoritative Catholic teaching says, and if the recent teaching contradicts it, too bad for the recent teaching.

Perhaps you should then start citing.

Given the fact that the Holy spirit protects the Church from errors in faith and morals, and the Church has exercised its authority in saying that under specific limited circumstances one who is not in full communion with the Church may receive the Eucharist, you would care to explain how the Pope has ruled that this may occur? Or is this a hidden issue of sede vacantism?

 

[otm]

gladius_Verbi:

When you care to actually try and prove that this sinful action, which has always been held as such by Catholics, is somehow perfectly acceptable now, I shall happily respond at greater length.

Since it is you who are suggesting theat the action by the Pope is sinful, then I would suggest that the burden of proof is upon you.

 

[otm]

InnocentIII:

I don’t think it is done any more reverently in the bus queues. What is more the justification given for the queues was that it made for a more efficient (ie speedier) distribution. I agree it should be done reverently but not necessarily slowly. The reverence lies in our approach and the priests demeanour not in his velocity.

I thing your terminology of bus quueues says much; we are not in bus queues, we are in procession. It is no more a bus queue if you approach in line and stand in front of the inidividual distributing Communion (priest, deacon or emhc) than it is a bus queue if you approach in line and kneel at an altar rail. And we disagree about velocity; I feel strongly that the priest moving “efficiently” (as one post put it) is missing spomething; efficiency is not the point. Reception is the point, and I don’t like the speed I have seen all too often.

It is much more difficult and awkward to be kneeling with a rail that is higher up on one’s chest than a table would be, were one sitting at one, and to take a cup without knocking one’s elbows into the rail. anything that risk’s stopping the progression of the elbows abruptly as an altar rail can also risks the Precious Blood being spilled.

InnocentIII:

Hmm … you must know different EMHC’s to me. The ones I know are pretty quick, unless you want to receive on the tongue in which case they are certainly slow

Yes, I know a goodly number of them, and none of them are in a rush in dsitributing the Eucharist or the Cup.

 

[Servus_Pio_XII]

Stop the presses! News flash from Pio XII - his Excellency Archbishop Jose Gomez allows his flock to desecrate the Body of Christ with their unordained hands!

Your piety is oh so inspiring.

Arrogant and smart. A combination unbeatable. Tell me, how would the LORD react, do you think? We are passing out His Precious Body and Blood like potato crisps! We try to make it more convenient, more expedient!

Look at the changes in the Mass! Not only do we have a breviated Mass, with far less time consumed by all those offeratory prayers, we also have to make it shorter by having 12 laymen pass out hosts because it might take too long.

My hands aren’t worthy, but it is of course up to everyone who wishes to discern about his own. I can speak but for myself.