Extra ordinary minister of the eucharist and mortal sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter grapes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

grapes

Guest
Morning folks:
I’m an extra ordinary minister of the eucharist at our parish. I’ve commited a mortal sin (and we don’t have confession on Sunday), can I still give the host to our parishners?
God Bless
Grapes
 
Get someone else to do it. You **must **not.

I’ll add you can always ask the priest for confession on any day of the week and he should give you the time. A request for a quick confession may be in order.
 
To the OP: I know of know canonical reason why you cannot distribute Holy Communion to your brethren, though I can certainly understand your discomfort to do so.

I am willing to be corrected.
Get someone else to do it. You **must **not.
[user]Shin[/user]: Can you correct me?

tee
 
To the OP: I know of know canonical reason why you cannot distribute Holy Communion to your brethren, though I can certainly understand your discomfort to do so.

I am willing to be corrected.

[user]Shin[/user]: Can you correct me?

tee
If I have to look something up:

Can. 916 Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.

I shouldn’t have to look it up. I’m certain there’s plenty more than this but it should be self-evident. I recall reading the saints speaking of those who have handled the Eucharist while in a state of mortal sin. . The bloodcurling nature of their statements makes me near to breaking out in a cold sweat and want to run and hide under the earth. I cannot do justice to it, nor do I wish to recall it at all.

This is an -extraordinary- occupation, the only thing he has to be afraid of in human terms is some fool gossip, ‘oh why hasn’t he assisted today’, in divine terms the soul should tremble and quake at the thought.

A person in mortal sin stinks to high heaven, and has the most wretched spiritual appearance one can imagine. The soul is dead and it has a stench like a rotten corpse.

What one should be doing in a case like this is making a perfect act of contrition and going to Confession as soon as possible.

Hopefully it is only grave and not mortal. Regardless – contrition, confession, and amendment. And someone who has a problem with grave sins should not even regularly be in an extraordinary position like this which calls for someone of a higher spiritual caliber and holiness. 🙂
 
When I was still an EMHC I remember a few times asking Father to hear my confession just before Mass so that I would be in a state of grace while giving out Communion.
 
There is no teaching regarding whether or not people in states of mortal sin may distribute the Eucharist, but it is evident that a state of mortal sin does not lend itself well at all to function within this ministry. With that in mind, I would advise that any extraordinary minister of Holy Communion who is in a state of mortal sin not serve in that liturgical role unless it be absolutely necessary for him or her to.

One reason for this is that extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion often receive Communion, themselves, on the altar. It would not look appropriate and could potentially spread scandal for the congregation to see an individual, unbeknown to them due to his or her state of mortal sin, refuse to receive Holy Communion, him- or herself, while subsequently proceeding to distribute Communion. Additionally, if the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion is to be distributing the Blood of Christ, it would be impossible for him or her to consume the remainder of the Precious Blood in the chalice if it were necessary to do so.

I also have to point out that the Code of Canon Law has been mis-interpreted above. The restriction regarding when one “may not celebrate Mass” is intended for the priest, or celebrant.
 
I also have to point out that the Code of Canon Law has been mis-interpreted above. The restriction regarding when one “may not celebrate Mass” is intended for the priest, or celebrant.
Pardon me, but if everyone in between, priest and faithful can’t do it – Where does this extraordinary position get this special permission to do so? Both the letter and spirit of the law cover this.

It is not to be done. This is a grave matter. The canon above is all inclusive in language. You can take it to court if you like – but just what are you fighting for hmm?
 
Pardon me, but if everyone in between, priest and faithful can’t do it – Where does this extraordinary position get this special permission to do so? Both the letter and spirit of the law cover this.

It is not to be done. This is a grave matter. The canon above is all inclusive in language. You can take it to court if you like – but just what are you fighting for hmm?
You are the one who emphasized the phrase *may not celebrate Mass *(perhaps you’d meant to highlight some other part of the canon?). That phrase, naturally, applies only to those who celebrate the Mass – Priests and bishops. Those who celebrate the Mass are obliged to receive Communion. But nothing obliges a non-celebrating minister (ordinary or extra-) to do so.

Back in the day, before the advent of extraordinary ministers, it was a frequent occurence for another priest on staff to pop out of the sacristy vested in alb and stole, assist in the distribution of Holy Communion, and then leave again. No one gave a second thought that he did not partake of the sacrament himself. (At least in my experience)

tee
 
Pardon me, but if everyone in between, priest and faithful can’t do it – Where does this extraordinary position get this special permission to do so? Both the letter and spirit of the law cover this.

It is not to be done. This is a grave matter. The canon above is all inclusive in language. You can take it to court if you like – but just what are you fighting for hmm?
You are correct when you says it applies to everybody. The canon refers to the celebrating of the Mass because it implies that the priest will communicate, and it also refers to the laity that cannot receive.

You are wrong when you are extrapolating from receiving communion to distributing communion. Canon 916 does not address that topic.
 
Morning folks:
I’m an extra ordinary minister of the eucharist at our parish. I’ve commited a mortal sin (and we don’t have confession on Sunday), can I still give the host to our parishners?
God Bless
Grapes
… With that in mind, I would advise that any extraordinary minister of Holy Communion who is in a state of mortal sin not serve in that liturgical role unless it be absolutely necessary for him or her to.

One reason for this is that extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion often receive Communion, themselves, on the altar. It would not look appropriate and could potentially spread scandal …
I think that you should follow the suggestion given to you. If that is in the case of serving during Mass, in my opinion, you should refrain. However, if it is the case of serving as an EMHC to the home-bound and the sick you should, in my opinion, you should still do so. This is why each one of us has a conscience, we do what is right and not what it feels good. If the ministry at the moment is truly necessary then you do it, otherwise you step to the side.
 
Although there is no official canon law that says an EMHC is not supposed to assist at Mass in the state of mortal sin, the nature of the position would proclude it.

An EMHC is supposed to receive communion from the priest before distributing it. By canon law anyone receiving communion (not just EMHCs) must be in a state of grace.

If you are in a state of sin you should either try to go to confession before Mass or try to get someone else to assist.

That being said, if you are in a state of sin and distribute communion that does not affect the validity of the Eucharist or anything else like that. It only affects the fact you shouldn’t have received communion in the state of sin.
 
If “celebrating the Eucharist” applies to everyone, not just an ordained priest or Bishop then it would follow logically that one in mortal sin should not be present at Mass. That is not the case, therefore the phrase must only apply to Priests and Bishops who forbidden to perform the Eucharistic Celebration when in mortal sin.

As far as being a lay extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, it would be awkward to do so at a celebration of the Mass, but not so if one is taking the Eucharist to the sick and shut-ins. And yes it would feel strange to be doing even that when in the state of mortal sin, but it is not forbidden.
 
Wow! I grapple with this as I’m often in a state of mortal sin. I hate this about myself but sex is very important part of my life. I am not married but adore and love my mate. Due to finicial reasons, marriage is out!

What am I to do? Not serve the folks at the local nursing home? I feel God does forgive me. I always confess except one time in am emergency. I did not partake of the Holy meal but gave it out.

I fear telling my priest outright that maybe I should step down as I love my service to the old. The priest does hear my confessions and has not yet told me to step down.

As I am a sober alcoholic and prone to excess, sex is not different for me. I wish I was chaste but am not an may not ever be.

Shim, Sad to hear you remarks as this is why many choose to leave the flock. Jesus is all good and all forgiving. Even at the point of death we can ask Him to allow us a chance at heaven. Why scare the dickens out of folks with the “Stench of death stuff” Really? You smell the sinners? lol

God bless us all

Glen
 
How to Make a Proper vs. How to Make an Improper Confession…

Sorrow and a purpose of amendment necessarily go together. “A sorrow of the soul and a detestation of sin,” says the Council of Trent, “along with the purpose of sinning no more.” The soul **cannot **have a true sorrow for sin without a sincere purpose *never *more to offend God. Now, in order to be a true purpose, it must have three conditions: it must be firm, universal, and efficacious.

i. It must be firm, so that the penitent resolutely purposes to suffer every evil rather than offend God.

Some say: “Father, I do not wish ever more to offend God; but the occasions of sin and my own weakness will make me relapse: I wish, but shall scarcely be able, to persevere.” My son, you have not a true purpose, and therefore you say:* I wish, I wish.* Know that hell is full of such wishes. It is a mere empty wish, **not **a true resolute will or purpose; a true purpose is a firm and resolute will to suffer every evil rather than to relapse into sin. It is true that there are occasions of sin; that we are weak, particularly if we have contracted a habit of any sin; and that the devil is strong: but God is stronger than the devil, and with his aid we can conquer all the temptations of hell. I can do all things, says St. Paul, in Him who strengtheneth me. It is true that we ought to tremble at our weakness, and distrust our own strength; but we ought to have confidence in God that by his grace we shall overcome all the assaults of our tempters. Praising, I will call upon the Lord, said David, and I shall be saved from my enemies. I will invoke the Lord, and he will save me from my enemies. He who recommends himself to God in temptations shall never fall.

'“But, Father, I have recommended myself to God, and the temptation continues.”

Do you, then, also continue to ask help from God as long as the temptation lasts, and you will never fall. God is faithful; he will not permit us to be tempted above our strength. God, says the Apostle, is faithful, who will not suffer yon to be tempted above that which you are able.

He has promised to give aid to all who pray for it. For every one that asketh receiveth. And this promise is made to all to sinners, as well as to the just: " For every one that asketh receiveth." So there is no excuse for those who consent to sin; for if they recommend themselves to God, he will stretch out his hand, and support them, and they will not fall. He, then, who falls into sin falls through his own fault, either because he will not ask aid from God, or because he will not avail himself of the aid which the Lord offers to him.

The purpose must be universal; that is, it must be a purpose of avoiding ever - mortal sin. Saul was commanded by God to put to death all the Amalecites, and all their cattle, and to burn all their goods. What did he do? He slew a great multitude of men and of cattle, and burnt a large quantity of their goods; but he saved the life of the king, and preserved what was most valuable of the property; and on account of this con tempt of God’s commandment he merited his malediction. Many penitents imitate Saul; they purpose to avoid some sins, but they cannot give up some dangerous familiarity, or some goods that they have a scruple about retaining, or some cherished feelings of anger and ill-will against a neighbor, or some hankering after revenge.

Such persons wish to divide their heart, giving one half to God, and the other to the devil. The devil is content with his portion, but God is not satisfied with a part of their heart.

Every one knows the history of Solomon how two women came to him, each claiming to be the mother of the child who was still left alive. He ordered the infant to be divided, and one half to be given to each of them. Divide the living child in two.

The woman who was not the mother of the child remained silent and was satisfied with the order of the king; but the true mother said: I beseech thee, my lord, give her the child alive, and do not kill it. " No, my lord, if my child must die, I prefer that she should have it entire." Solomon concluded that she was the true mother of the child, and gave it to her. Thus, the devil because he is our enemy, and not our father, is content to have a part of our heart; but God, who is our true Father, is not satisfied unless he has the whole of it. No man, says Jesus Christ, can serve two masters.

God does not accept for his servants those who wish to serve two masters; he wishes to be our only Lord, and he justly refuses to be the companion of the devil in the possession of our hearts. Our purpose, then, must be universal: it must be a purpose of avoiding all mortal sins.

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori

‘Meditate on the horrors of Hell which will last for eternity because of one easily-committed mortal sin. Try hard to be among the few who are chosen. Think of the eternal flames of Hell, and how few there are that are saved.’

‘I was watching souls going down into the abyss as thick and fast as snowflakes falling in the winter mist.’

St. Benedict Joseph Labre, Mendicant

Love God, fear Hell, and **stop **sinning. It’s that important. It’s about your forever. Like standing in front of an oncoming train for kicks. The train can hit you. You should be scared. You should be sweating like someone standing in traffic and saying the cars won’t hit me because I’m not responsible. The sin is **not **worth it. Father can hand out Communion without your help.

‘They violated me among my people, for a handful of barley and a piece of bread.’

Ezech. xiii. 19

I’ll note there is no marriage and no marital relations in the afterlife, or after the resurrection, forever. So one way or another you don’t get it anymore forever, so give up what you’re going to have to one way or another.
 
There is no teaching regarding whether or not people in states of mortal sin may distribute the Eucharist, but it is evident that a state of mortal sin does not lend itself well at all to function within this ministry.
Maybe I shouldn’t have started this but doesn’t one who touches something topically receive it? It does get absorbed into the human body that way, though not through the normal digestive process.
 
Maybe I shouldn’t have started this but doesn’t one who touches anything topically receive it? It does get absorbed into the human body that way, though not through the normal digestive process.
While I agree that someone with mortal sin should not act as an EMHC, I do not believe that the Church has made any official pronouncement on this issue.

I also do not believe that the Church has any official pronouncement on “topical” reception.
 
This thread has been deeply troubling to me; not only has it always bothered me that lay people are handling the consecrated Host and I have questioned the need for a small army of EMHCs at every Mass, now I’m l learning they can even be in a state of Mortal Sin while distributing communion! How did we get from the laity never, never handling the consecrated Host, not receiving communion while in a state of grave sin and fasting three hours prior to this nonsense?
 
‘Besides, the priest on the altar offers to God in sacrifice the immaculate Lamb; that is, the very Son of God. On this account, says St. Jerome, the priest should be so chaste as not only to abstain from every impure action, but also to avoid every indecent glance. St. John Chrysostom likewise has written that a priest should have purity which would make him fit to stand in the midst of the angels in heaven. And in another place he has said that by their purity the hands of a priest, which must touch the flesh of Jesus Christ, should be more resplendent than the rays of the sun. **On the other hand, St. Augustine asks where can a man be found so wicked as to presume to touch the most holy sacrament of the altar with unclean hands? **" But," says St. Bernard, " the priest that dares to ascend the altar, to handle the body of Jesus Christ, after being contaminated with sins of impurity, is guilty of a far more enormous crime." “Ah! priest of God,” exclaims St. Augustine, " the hands that you moisten with the blood of the Redeemer do not moisten with the sacrilegious blood of sin." Ah! do not allow the hands which are bathed in the blood of the Redeemer, shed one day for the love of you, to be polluted with the sacrilegious blood of sin.’

‘The priests of the Old Law the Lord commanded to be clean, merely because it was their duty to carry the sacred vessels: *Be ye clean, you that carry the vessels of the Lord. *“How much more clean,” says Peter de Blois, “should they be who carry Christ in their hands and in their body?”’

The hand, says St. John Chrysostom,* that touches the sacred flesh of Jesus Christ, and the tongue that is purpled with his divine blood, should be purer than the rays of the sun.* In another place he says that a priest ascending the altar should be possessed of purity and sanctity which would merit for him a place in the midst of the angels. How great, then, must be the horror of the angels when they behold a priest, who is the enemy of God, stretching forth his sacrilegious hands to touch and eat the immaculate Lamb! “Who,” exclaims St. Augustine, “shall be so wicked and daring as to touch the most holy sacrament with polluted hands!” Still more wicked is the priest that celebrates Mass with a soul defiled by mortal sin.

God turns away his eyes that he may not behold such horrible impiety.

. . . It is one thing, says St. Peter Damian, to violate the laws of a sovereign, and another to strike him with your own hands. . . It is one thing to transgress edicts which the king has promulgated, and another to wound him with our own hands.

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Bishop & Doctor of the Church
 
This thread has been deeply troubling to me; not only has it always bothered me that lay people are handling the consecrated Host and I have questioned the need for a small army of EMHCs at every Mass, now I’m l learning they can even be in a state of Mortal Sin while distributing communion! How did we get from the laity never, never handling the consecrated Host, not receiving communion while in a state of grave sin and fasting three hours prior to this nonsense?
Even the priest can commit mortal sin. Imagine those priests who have been preying on children for years, at the same time they say many Masses throughout that time.

Our sins cannot diminish Jesus. If we’re in a state of grace, what we receive in the Eucharist is still the same Jesus regardless of the sins of the minister of Holy Communion. While their sins may make them unworthy, it is their sin and unworthiness, it does not affect us and what we .
 
Even the priest can commit mortal sin. Imagine those priests who have been preying on children for years, at the same time they say many Masses throughout that time.

Our sins cannot diminish Jesus. If we’re in a state of grace, what we receive in the Eucharist is still the same Jesus regardless of the sins of the minister of Holy Communion. While their sins may make them unworthy, it is their sin and unworthiness, it does not affect us and what we .
If the communion recipients were aware the pedophile priest and to a lesser degree perhaps, the EMHC offering them communion was in such a state of sin I expect the recipients would be outraged. The only way this sort of thing, an abomination in my mind, can work is through secrecy. In the case of the priests I have serious questions about the validity of the consecration itself; at least the EMHC question does not impact the consecration. To me the EMHC in a state of grave sin is in some perhaps unexplainable way soiling that Eucharist that I’m about to receive. Christ was mortified once by His choice, we don’t need these EMHCs doing it over and over again through their fault.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top