Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers handling the Ciborium

[benedictgal]

Yes, **EEM **was short for Extraordinary Eucharistic Minister. The term preferred by Rome to be used for “distributors of the Eucharist.” Part of the reason I wrote it like this was because I was tired, and another, to be truthful, because I don’t like the term.
But being faithful to Rome I use it.
I just wish Churches didn’t use EEM’s so indiscriminately. If we did use them in “extra” ordinary circumstances, like in isolated territories etc. then it wouldn’t be such a burden.

No it is not the preferred term. In Redemptionis Sacramentum, the term is Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion. The priest and bishop are the ordinary ministers of the Eucharist because only they can confect the Holy Sacrament. Deacons, by virture of their ordination, are the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion. The laity who have been deputized for this function are therefore to be referred to as Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion.

 

[CMP2]

Thanks to all for the information and clarity.

I think the issue would be resolved if every Parish would let the Priest do his job. I know that the Priests are overworked etc. but I would also think that the Blessed Sacrament should be a priority to the community of believers as well as the Priest. Period. If the Priest is the one removing and distributing Holy Communion then when he replaces Jesus into the Tabernacle he will know how many Consecrated Hosts are present.
Thus the issue would be solved. No reason for anyone to be counting anything.
Sometimes “ministries” become distracted with their own agendas at the expense of doing what is right. Control issues abound in every Parish.
As Father said it is very distracting to have a layperson even opening the Tabernacle never mind looking into it and removing a Holy Vessel to shake, look, count etc. For me when the Tabernacle opens it is Adoration. When I am walking to my pew and it is opened I am driven to my knees in awe. Am I alone? Am I a religious nut, or a legalistic person? Maybe. But the reality is…if a person believes that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist then what is our response to be?
God bless you all, c.

 

[zab]

Thanks to all for the information and clarity.

I think the issue would be resolved if every Parish would let the Priest do his job. I know that the Priests are overworked etc. but I would also think that the Blessed Sacrament should be a priority to the community of believers as well as the Priest. Period. If the Priest is the one removing and distributing Holy Communion then when he replaces Jesus into the Tabernacle he will know how many Consecrated Hosts are present.
Thus the issue would be solved. No reason for anyone to be counting anything.
Sometimes “ministries” become distracted with their own agendas at the expense of doing what is right. Control issues abound in every Parish.
As Father said it is very distracting to have a layperson even opening the Tabernacle never mind looking into it and removing a Holy Vessel to shake, look, count etc. For me when the Tabernacle opens it is Adoration. When I am walking to my pew and it is opened I am driven to my knees in awe. Am I alone? Am I a religious nut, or a legalistic person? Maybe. But the reality is…if a person believes that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist then what is our response to be?
God bless you all, c.

You sound like you have good intentions but you come across as being a little too judgemental. I don’t know what you mean by “if every parish would let the priest do his job.” Are you saying that we should not have sacristans? I don’t know of any sacristans in our parish “who have their own agendas at the expense of doing things right,” or who have control issues. There are always better ways of doing some things and that is something that we always look for. If you think it would be better if the priest would estimate the remaining Hosts in the tabernacle after Communion - and wrote it down so the sacristan would have an estimate of how many hosts are in the tabernacle, then that is an issue to be brought up to the pastor. It is not a reason to criticize those who are just doing the service that they have been asked to do.

 

[JReducation]

As I read the direction this thread is taking, I wonder if we’re UNINTENTIONALLY creating a confrontational situation where none is necessary.

It is true that the Blessed Sacrament must be protected from any form of abuse. But the fact that in some places a non-ordained person is commissioned to check the content of the ciborium is hardly an abuse. It is more of a distraction if one is trying to pray.

Additionally, we must be careful to avoid statements that suggest that clerics are not doing their job. That kind of language can be perceived as condemnatory. It does not really lead to any good place.

These are just my two cents. I’m not really interested in discussing the merits of my two cents, because I’m just sharing a thought, not asking a question.

Fraternally,

JR

 

[zab]

Thank you, JR, your 2 cents is worth a lot.

 

[CMP2]

Dear Zab:

Sorry if I sounded “judgmental”. I was just voicing concerns.
Yes Sacristans do have a role.
Until we decide who is better qualified to be doing such work it is going to always be an issue. I think we need more solid guidelines. Things have developed into too many “gray” areas.
I am not suggesting that Priests are not doing their job. I would never suggest this.
I guess I am just frustrated at the direction things have gone but I have nothing but faith that this will all be remedied one day.

On a good note…I am excited. I will be attending my first High Latin Mass on Sunday. It is on the Mainland and not that accessible, but the Frat. of St. Peter have a Personal Parish over there. One may soon be established on the Island. I think this will give me great peace as the mores are firm and there is a great reverence paid the Blessed Sacrament. No “gray” areas with this rite.
Forgive my defense of the Eucharist. I am a bit touchy I know. Please don’t take this as some sort of criticism personally. I appreciate your feedback.
I have been humbled and I apologize for anything I have said that is not charitable.

 

[zab]

Dear CMP2,

I accept your appology. And I apologize as well for being so sensitive to your comments.

 

[Aramis]

Living in a state where circuit priests are a fact of life, and where the priest might arrive 5 minutes late due to driving times not accounting for wildlife and rockfall, and where the same priest might not be seen again for months…

It is both a function of the paucity of vocations AND of the inability to afford to support a full time priest…

in such places, it is important that the sacristan be able to make things ready for the priest as best he’s able. Making certain enough hosts are present to meet this week’s and next week’s communion needs is part of the community having the Eucharist at all.

 

[CMP2]

Dear Aramis:

Thank you for showing that in Extraordinary circumstances is the reason for Extraordinary MHC. The reason that this ministry was started in the first place.

God bless you in your work. c.

 

[PJM]

Not specifically forbidden, but improper especially if it’s done while there are people in the church preparing for Mass. There’s no good reason for it, and every reason not to do it.

Remember that no one is an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion unless he is an instituted Acolyte, or has been approinted specifically by the bishop for a period of time. A priest may (only if strictly necessary) appoint EMHCs for a particular ocasion. If a priest appoints a EMHC to help with the distribution at Mass, that person is no longer an EMHC once the distribution of Communion is ended. They must be appointed each time. The same goes for those deputed to take Communion to the sick. This is the pastor’s responsibility. He may appoint qualified laypersons, but again only if there is a genuine need. They must be appointed in one way or another each time (even if that appointment is done silently).

Reply:
Thank you Father! God bless you.

Two serious questions for you.

I am well aware of what an “Acolyte is, and is permitted to do, having read the GRIM, Canon Law and other documents; but as a life long Catholic, active and in the past twenty years, very active, I have never seen, or even actually heard the term of Acolyte” spoken. Why is this?

I would very much like to be able to access a list of Papal granted Indults to our American Bishops, but have been unable to do so. Can you provide any guidence.

My pastor has requested my assistance several times, most recently last week, on wether or not there is a MANDATE for Altar
relics. Both GRIM and the Code say “yes.” The Bishops document, “Built of Living Stones,” say’s No. So I’ve been searching for an Indult on the issue.

I am keenly aware of Invironment and Art in Catholic Worship
and it’s prodigy: Built of Living Stones.

Dispite this latter document being presented to the USCCB for a vote, I can find no evidence that it has been sent to Rome to necessary approval?

Can you clarify for us?

Thanks and God’s special blessings on your ministry!

PJM m.c.

 

[FrDavid96]

Reply:
Thank you Father! God bless you.

Two serious questions for you.

I am well aware of what an “Acolyte is, and is permitted to do, having read the GRIM, Canon Law and other documents; but as a life long Catholic, active and in the past twenty years, very active, I have never seen, or even actually heard the term of Acolyte” spoken. Why is this?

The practical answer is that for the most part in the US, only those preparing for the diaconate or priesthood are installed into this ministry. That’s why we usually don’t hear about it (sad but true).

I would very much like to be able to access a list of Papal granted Indults to our American Bishops, but have been unable to do so. Can you provide any guidence.

Honestly, I wouldn’t even know where to begin to look. A possible starting point would be the Canon Law Society (www.clsa.org)

My pastor has requested my assistance several times, most recently last week, on wether or not there is a MANDATE for Altar
relics. Both GRIM and the Code say “yes.” The Bishops document, “Built of Living Stones,” say’s No. So I’ve been searching for an Indult on the issue.

Canon 1237 says that the practice of placing relics under the altar “is to be preserved” but does not specifically mandate this.

The GIRM is likewise a bit vague 302 “The practice of placing relics of Saints, even those not Martyrs, under the altar to be dedicated is fittingly retained. Care should be taken, however, to ensure the authenticity of such relics.”

“Fittingly retained” is not quite the same thing as saying that it “must” be done either.

Note that in both c. 1237 and the GIRM the reference is specifically to “under” the altar, and not “within” the altar, nor within an altar stone. I believe that’s a key distinction.

I don’t know what the Pontifical says, and I don’t have access to one. I would suggest looking to see what that says.

I would say though, that if the local bishop has consecrated an altar, then we should all accept that the bishop did what he felt was required, and we must defer to his judgment.

If you are building a new church, since the pastor seems to feel strongly about it, I would personally encourage him to place relics under the altar if the bishop is amenable to that.

“Built of Living Stones” is merely a guideline, and it is not liturgical law. However #60 is simply repeating what is already found in the canon and GIRM. It’s not my place to judge the document (far far from it), but I can say that what it says is the same thing. In fact, in “Built of Living Stones” the word “beneath” is in italics. That leads me to believe that the USCCB is placing emphasis on the distinction between “beneath” and “within.”

I am keenly aware of Invironment and Art in Catholic Worship
and it’s prodigy: Built of Living Stones.

Dispite this latter document being presented to the USCCB for a vote, I can find no evidence that it has been sent to Rome to necessary approval?

Since those documents are only guidelines and not liturgical laws they don’t require the recognition of the Holy See.

There’s my 2 cents. Do with it as you will.

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by CMP2
Yes, EEM was short for Extraordinary Eucharistic Minister. The term preferred by Rome to be used for “distributors of the Eucharist.” Part of the reason I wrote it like this was because I was tired, and another, to be truthful, because I don’t like the term.
But being faithful to Rome I use it.

I just wish Churches didn’t use EEM’s so indiscriminately. If we did use them in “extra” ordinary circumstances, like in isolated territories etc. then it wouldn’t be such a burden.

Reply:It would also be what Rome has authorized:blush:

My dear friends in Christ,

Are we being truthful? (“There can’t be your truth and my truth, but only the truth…” Pope Benedict XVI) when we use the term “Extrodinary Ministers of the Eucharist?”

Every day, in every church, at every Mass, is hardly “Extrodinary.”

I was in a church recently that had a sign on the door of a room in the rear of the church that said “Ordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.”

They were not obedient but they are truthful

God bless, PJM m.c.

 

[PJM]

FrDavid96
New Member Join Date: October 13, 2008
Posts: 364

Re: Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers handling the Ciborium

Dear Father Davis,

God bless you my friend.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I’ll say a couple of Hail mary’s for you before I go to bed tonight! Thanks

PJM m.c.

 

[FrDavid96]

I was in a church recently that had a sign on the door of a room in the rear of the church that said “Ordinary Ministers of the Eucharist.”

They were not obedient but they are truthful

God bless, PJM m.c.

Let’s hope that refered to the sacristy used by the priests and deacons. Let’s just hope.

 

[CMP2]

Thank you Fr. David for the replies to PJM. A lot of good info here. We have a relic in our altar but nobody knows who it is. I wonder if there is really anyone there? By the sound of it this is not required. I always thought that every consecrated altar had a relic. There you go. Learn something everyday.