Extraordinary Minister Holy Communion Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter OurLadyPerpHelp
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
zab said:
Correction: It was actually Fr. Rick Heilman, that Fr. Z quoted.
Click to expand...
Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion should only be used when necessary. Well, according the the rubric a communion service is also presided over by a lay person, or deacon. I take issue with a woman presiding over anything when a man is available and willing. If the men don’t step up to the plate, fewer men will step up to the plate for marriage, fatherhood and the clergy or religious life. It’s not a slam against women. But in a society where men don’t or won’t step up the their role in all things women must step in and should. But when I see men that are available to serve they need to do so and the women really should encourage them. It’s another subject but it does apply to EMHC as well. Our pastor, at the hand of the bishop, is also pushing for not less than half of those serving in any ministry, including EMHC and altar servers, to consist of males. I do NOT say that it should be excluse only to men, however I do believe it is imprudent to not motivate the men out of their pews to serve. Men need to step up to the plate and be men and lead by example.
 
PbloPicasso said:
Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion should only be used when necessary. Well, according the the rubric a communion service is also presided over by a lay person, or deacon. I take issue with a woman presiding over anything when a man is available and willing. If the men don’t step up to the plate, fewer men will step up to the plate for marriage, fatherhood and the clergy or religious life. It’s not a slam against women. But in a society where men don’t or won’t step up the their role in all things women must step in and should. But when I see men that are available to serve they need to do so and the women really should encourage them. It’s another subject but it does apply to EMHC as well. Our pastor, at the hand of the bishop, is also pushing for not less than half of those serving in any ministry, including EMHC and altar servers, to consist of males. I do NOT say that it should be excluse only to men, however I do believe it is imprudent to not motivate the men out of their pews to serve. Men need to step up to the plate and be men and lead by example.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why you are responding to my post with whatever you are taking issue with. My correction in my post that you quoted was directed to my own previous post.
 
The_Old_Medic said:
In my Parish, it would take way more than an hour to distribute Communion if we did not utilize Extraordinary Ministers, (and there would not be distribution under both species),. Even with 11 extraordinary ministers, it takes about 15-20 minutes to get everyone taken care of…
Click to expand...
We have a large parish, and do not use EMHC’s, and we recieve both species.

How do we do it? Simple, we use the communion rail and our pastor offers the Holy Eucharist intincted.

It is substantially more time efficent than communion lines with extra EMHC’s with chalices.

Ask your pastor to give it a try.
 
I have no problem with extraordinary ministers in theory but will have to admit that I always feel uncomfortable when I see the large gaggle of extraordinary ministers standing behind the altar as we get ready for communion. Although I have been asked numerous times over the years I’ve never accepted as quite frankly I don’t feel worthy to distribute our Lord’s body. I don’t know if I sound pretentious when I say that and I don’t mean it as a criticism of those who do this ministry but I just can’t bring myself to do it.
 
Brendan said:
We have a large parish, and do not use EMHC’s, and we recieve both species.

How do we do it? Simple, we use the communion rail and our pastor offers the Holy Eucharist intincted.

It is substantially more time efficent than communion lines with extra EMHC’s with chalices.

Ask your pastor to give it a try.
Click to expand...
It would appear the main need for extraordinary Eucharistic ministers comes about because of receiving under both species-a practice that both liturgically and theologically is not necessary. I spend about a month a year in Mexico and attend a church with a congregation about twice the size of my parish. We use about a half dozen Eucharistic ministers at each mass-this church has one priest distributing communion and it works out fine.
 
zab said:
I don’t understand why you are responding to my post with whatever you are taking issue with. My correction in my post that you quoted was directed to my own previous post.
Click to expand...
was a mistake, mea culpa.
 
Brendan said:
We have a large parish, and do not use EMHC’s, and we recieve both species.

How do we do it? Simple, we use the communion rail and our pastor offers the Holy Eucharist intincted.

It is substantially more time efficent than communion lines with extra EMHC’s with chalices.

Ask your pastor to give it a try.
Click to expand...
Works for me. We just did that last night at a parish using the Anglican Use. Love it. I’d love to deflect this only. But find a parish that would or could do this.
 
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
What does “intincted” mean?
Click to expand...
Where the priest ‘dips’ the species of bread into the species of wine and then offers the Eucharist to the recepient.

So you receive both species at once.

It also has the advantage that the species are offered by the same minister, so it removes the need for additional ministers to offer the second species.
 
estesbob said:
The Host is dipped in the precious blood prior to being distributed. I beleive intinction is prohibited in the US.
Click to expand...
SELF intinction is prohibited, not just in the US, but everwhere. That is where the faithful dip the Eucharist themselves.

Intinction by a priest is allowed.

Cardinal Arinze listed it as being an option available ‘always and everywhere’
Sometimes, however, the high number of communicants may render it inadvisable for everyone to drink from the chalice (cf. Redemptionis Sacramentum, no. 102). intinction with reception on the tongue always and everywhere remains a legitimate option, by virtue of the general liturgical law of the Roman Rite…
Click to expand...
Cardinal Arinze also indicated that intinction was a suggested practice when the use of many chalices would hamper the priests ability to purify the necessary vessels.
What about those instances where there are many chalices and only one Priest to purify them?
Click to expand...
When there are insufficient Priests, Deacons, or instituted acolytes to purify the additional
chalices during Mass, the purification may take place immediately after the Mass has concluded. If such purification by ordinary ministers proves pastorally problematic, consideration should be given to distribution of Holy Communion by intinction or to the distribution of Holy Communion under the form of consecrated bread alone.
Click to expand...
The above quotes came from Cardinal Arinze’s letter to the US Bishops

nccbuscc.org/liturgy/cleansingofvessels.pdf
 
Seriously? Where is this practiced? If I ever saw something like that I think I’d faint. My father used to dunk his toast in his coffee in the morning. Children dunk their cookies in milk. Why would anyone treat the body and blood of Jesus Christ this way?
 
That’s not how Jesus instituted the Sacrament. He gave the Body and Blood separately, he didn’t dunk.
 
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
Seriously? Where is this practiced? If I ever saw something like that I think I’d faint. My father used to dunk his toast in his coffee in the morning. Children dunk their cookies in milk. Why would anyone treat the body and blood of Jesus Christ this way?
Click to expand...
No offense, but where have you been? Have you ever seen a Divine Liturgy? Read how its done? Seriously, have you?

The Anglican parish I mentioned does intinction and is authorized by the bishop. We discussed it in RCIA. The problem is when lay folks think they can do it and end up spilling it. That’s why we tell them “No, we don’t do intinction”. The Divine Liturgy way of doing things works because the priest does it all.
 
No, I haven’t seen a Divine Liturgy. I’ll look for one on the Internet. I’ve never heard of this practice. Is it something new…from Vatican II?
 
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
Seriously? Where is this practiced? If I ever saw something like that I think I’d faint. My father used to dunk his toast in his coffee in the morning. Children dunk their cookies in milk. Why would anyone treat the body and blood of Jesus Christ this way?
Click to expand...
My parish, for one. And every Byzantine Catholic parish. In fact, intinction is generally mandatory in the Byzantine Catholic churches.

More specifically, they place the species of bread into the chalice and the priest offers them both together using a golden spoon.

As to why, for the sign value. We receive the Living Christ, Body and Blood are together, never more to be seperated. Each species is the same substance, the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, so this is simply a sign. By leveraging intinction, we have a sign of this Reality, that Christwe recieve is the Living, Resurrected Christ.

And BTW, the parents each received their First Holy Communion in this way, back in the 30’s and 40’s, so it’s nothing new in the Church.
 
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
No, I haven’t seen a Divine Liturgy. I’ll look for one on the Internet. I’ve never heard of this practice. Is it something new…from Vatican II?
Click to expand...
No, it’s not from Vatican II. A Divine Liturgy is the term for the Holy Mass as celebrated in the Byzantine Rite of the Church.

The liturgy takes it’s present form from St. John Chrystom, from about AD 375 and has a lot in common with the Tridentine Mass, except is usually either in the vernacular or Church Slovanic.

And as I mentioned in my post above, intinction in the Latin Rite was certainly practiced in the pre-Vatican II church.

My parents recieved the Eucharist that way on their First Holy Communion, and on occasions that had a special relationship with the Eucharist, such as the Feast of Corpus Christi and Holy Thursday.
 
OurLadyPerpHelp said:
That’s not how Jesus instituted the Sacrament. He gave the Body and Blood separately, he didn’t dunk.
Click to expand...
Christ instituted this Sacrament as we celebrate it now, with each species consecrated seperately, as His Body and Blood would be seperated ( in His Death). The bishop or priest celebrating the Mass consumes these seperately, as the High Priest consumed the flesh of the sacrifice of the Passover Lamb in the Temple.

Thus priests and bishops will always consume them seperately, as they act in persona Christi as the High Priest.

The Last Supper was celebrated exclusely by bishops ( the Apostles), so we cannot necesarily take their mode of reception as our own.

We see this also in the it is perfectly acceptable (sometimes even desired) that the faithful just recieve the species of bread, even though priests and bishops MUST consume both species.
 
Is the Byzantive rite in communion with Rome or are they in schism?
 
I hope I wasn’t disrespectful in any way and if so then I’m sorry. These past months have been such a discovery, often unexpected and sometimes surprising.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top