Extraordinary Minister Holy Communion Question

[Faith1960]

It does happen. No one is saying that one should not or cannot receive Communion kneeling. But I know what Annabelle is saying. I nearly tripped over one man’s foot on one occassion when he made a sudden move to genuflect while in line to receive Communion. And our church is not that small.

 

[zab]

Here’s an idea…perhaps we shouldn’t follow too closely in the Communion line. It makes me think of Curly bumping into Larry or some dominoe effect on a freeway. Giving our fellow Catholics sufficient space in front of us just in case they decide to bend their knee at the sight of the Lord sounds like a charitable thing to do.

:blackeye:

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

:blackeye:

I’m sorry Zab, I don’t understand what this little yellow character means. Could you clarify please?

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

zab;7570273:

I’ve never seen anyone at my church kneel while receiving, and if they did, I’d expect someone would trip. As it is, with some going to partake of the Precious Blood and some not, along with all the EMHC’s and lines, there have been a couple times I nearly walked into someone.

This is an interesting observation. If we can’t allow people to kneel to receive the Lord because the person behind us might trip due to inattention, then by that logic we need to do away with most EMHCs because of the confusion they generate. I’ve seen this at a couple churches. You receive the Lord and then have to look around to make sure you’re not cutting anyone off or bump into them. Maybe we need to signal our intentions just like in a car. It seems to me immidately after receiving the Lord we should focus our attention on Him, not stick handling through traffic.

 

[zab]

I’m sorry Zab, I don’t understand what this little yellow character means. Could you clarify please?

I wrote that I nearly tripped when someone made a sudden move to genuflect while in line and your post came across as being unsympathetic to the point of blameing the person who nearly trips for following too closely and not showing charity to the person in front of them. Ouch!

 

[zab]

Faith1960;7570324:

This is an interesting observation. If we can’t allow people to kneel to receive the Lord because the person behind us might trip due to inattention, then by that logic we need to do away with most EMHCs because of the confusion they generate. I’ve seen this at a couple churches. You receive the Lord and then have to look around to make sure you’re not cutting anyone off or bump into them. Maybe we need to signal our intentions just like in a car. It seems to me immidately after receiving the Lord we should focus our attention on Him, not stick handling through traffic.

That is not my quote in your quote box. It looks like the quoting system is off. That is not Faith’s quote in my post either.

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

Dear Zab, when something unexpected occurs our reaction time is sometimes not as sharp as it could be. Now that you know the person in front of you might genuflect before the Lord I’m sure you will be more alert and give more space so as to not trip and hurt yourself.

Maybe the person in front of you just got back from Rome and received Holy Communion from the Pope himself!

 

[zab]

Dear Zab, when something unexpected occurs our reaction time is sometimes not as sharp as it could be. Now that you know the person in front of you might genuflect before the Lord I’m sure you will be more alert and give more space so as to not trip and hurt yourself.

Maybe the person in front of you just got back from Rome and received Holy Communion from the Pope himself!

I am aware and have been aware that people, some of my good friends, genuflect and kneel to receive Communion. And I am not on the heels of the person in front of me. Accidents still happen. Your uncharitable tone is offensive.

 

[OurLadyPerpHelp]

It does happen. No one is saying that one should not or cannot receive Communion kneeling. But I know what Annabelle is saying. I nearly tripped over one man’s foot on one occassion when he made a sudden move to genuflect while in line to receive Communion. And our church is not that small.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

zab;7570273:

Ok, I’m confused. If you are aware the person in front of you might genuflect before the Lord and you keep sufficient space between you then how did you trip over him?

Now I need one of those characters that ZAB used…you are missing the entire point. I’m tired of explaining…:yawn:

 

[PbloPicasso]

Did somebody trip?

 

[zab]

Ok, I’m confused. If you are aware the person in front of you might genuflect before the Lord and you keep sufficient space between you then how did you trip over him?

I’m sorry you view my tone as uncharitable as I can assure you it is not my intention. In fact it is quite the opposite. I’m trying to find a charitable resolution to your dliema. I’m equally confused as to how you could be offended by someone trying to help you. Can we put this behind us and stay friends?

My dear Lady, As I reflect upon your sweet gesture asking if we could stay friends, I wonder how I can expect to be treated any better than my Saviour, who was falsely accused, insulted, betrayed with a kiss, beaten, and had his heart pierced with a lance. During the turmoil of the past few days, not all seen to the observing eye, I have to say that I have never recognized you as a friend. And yet, there is always hope.

 

[revert_jen]

My dear Lady, As I reflect upon your sweet gesture asking if we could stay friends, I wonder how I can expect to be treated any better than my Saviour, who was falsely accused, insulted, betrayed with a kiss, beaten, and had his heart pierced with a lance. During the turmoil of the past few days, not all seen to the observing eye, I have to say that I have never recognized you as a friend. And yet, there is always hope.

Wow. That is quite possibly the coldest post I have ever seen.

 

[revert_jen]

That is purely your observation and personal opinion, based on your dislike for the practice. The recommendation in the rubrics, using only three stations at a well attended mass, calls for the use of eight EMHC’s - the Bishops’ stated directive.

Actually, no. The Bishops’ directive does not “call for the use of eight EMHCs.”

First, there is this quote from the document you have cited:
Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America:

In practice, the need to avoid obscuring the role of the priest and the deacon as the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion by an excessive use of extraordinary minister might in some circumstances constitute a reason either for limiting the distribution of Holy Communion under both species or for using intinction instead of distributing the Precious Blood from the chalice.

So, the Bishops acknowledge that there might be a problem with excessive use, and that that problem might be made worse by reception using the chalice, and incidentally that intinction would be a possible solution to that problem.

Then there is the part you quoted.
ibid:

a suitable number of ministers of Holy Communion are provided at each Mass. For Communion from the chalice, it is desirable that there be generally two ministers of the Precious Blood for each minister of the Body of Christ, lest the liturgical celebration be unduly prolonged.

Emphasis mine.

In the first place, you have to acknowledge that even these days, there are still lots of churches that have more than one priest. There are also deacons. The document only says “ministers of Holy Communion” meaning both Ordinary and Extraordinary.

Also, nowhere in the document does it say anything about having 3 stations. If there are three priests in a parish, they could distribute Communion under both species at a smallish Mass without any EMHCs at all, while still being in accordance with all of the advice given in the document.

Thirdly, the document does not appear anywhere to indicate that distribution under both species is expected to take place at every Mass. There is a difference between something being allowed, or even encouraged, and it being mandatory.

Fourth, “it is desirable that there generally be two” is not by any means a mandate that there must be two.

I will say it again, much good may it do me, but I am not saying that there should never be any EMHCs. I am not even necessarily saying that 8 EMHCs in a Mass at a particular parish would be wrong, although it might fall under the conditions in #24 quoted above. I am not trying to declare that something the Church allows is illicit, and I am not trying to get rid of EMHCs, except by praying for vocations.

All I am saying is that the bishops have not “directed” that every or even any Mass have 8 EMHCs in it. Your interpretation of the document is that it implies that the use of 8 EMHCs would be acceptable. Whether your interpretation is correct or not (and it may well be correct), that is still entirely different from whether the document actually directs the use of 8 EMHCs. It simply does not do that.

–Jen

 

[Phemie]

Actually, no. The Bishops’ directive does not “call for the use of eight EMHCs.”

Fourth, “it is desirable that there generally be two” is not by any means a mandate that there must be two.

Two chalices per ciborium might be needed in parishes where a large percentage of the faithful receive under both species. The priest is the best one to determine that.

I know that in my parish there were 2 EMHCs for the chalices each Saturday. In reality, only about 25% of those in attendance received the Precious Blood. Now we’ve cut it back to one EMHC and Communion takes no longer than it did before.

 

[zab]

Wow. That is quite possibly the coldest post I have ever seen.

I suppose one could read it that way if they wanted. That seems to be a big problem on these threads when one cannot hear the actual tone of voice with which something is written. In this case, the tone is of deep sadness and hurt but holding out hope. Try reading it in that tone.

 

[Brendan]

Two chalices per ciborium might be needed in parishes where a large percentage of the faithful receive under both species. The priest is the best one to determine that. .

But again, where would the preist recieve an exception from Redemptionis Sacramentum’s instruction to only use EMHC’s in instances of true necessity?

Who has the authority to grant such an exception?

 

[FAB]

With all due respect, your interpretation is incorrect as it runs contrary to what the CDWDS said. It also runs contrary to the documents. The deacon can administer either species, but, not both via intinction. This mode is only for the celebrant and concelebrants. As for the bishop, it does fall to him as to whether or not he mandates communion under both kinds, but he does not have the authority to allow change who can do what. The Holy See has supreme authority, something which you tend to, with l due respect, selectively discount.

Evidently, you seem to not give any validity to the CDWDS. They act in and with the authority of the Holy Father.

The facity of a deacon is to distribute communion in all forms including intinction as an ordinary minister. You are in error. The pope has supreme authority, I don’t discount this, you want the discount the authority of the Local ordinary.

 

[Faith1960]

Help;7570384]
That is not my quote in your quote box. It looks like the quoting system is off. That is not Faith’s quote in my post either.

You’re right…I didn’t write that. lol.

 

[Faith1960]

Faith1960;7570324:

This is an interesting observation. If we can’t allow people to kneel to receive the Lord because the person behind us might trip due to inattention, then by that logic we need to do away with most EMHCs because of the confusion they generate. I’ve seen this at a couple churches. You receive the Lord and then have to look around to make sure you’re not cutting anyone off or bump into them. Maybe we need to signal our intentions just like in a car. It seems to me immidately after receiving the Lord we should focus our attention on Him, not stick handling through traffic.

Well, I’ve thought that we have too many EMHC’s at our church.