Extraordinary Minister Holy Communion Question

[benedictgal]

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.

FAB, I am not in error here, as I am quoting what the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments told me. The mingling of the Body and Blood of Christ is a priestly action. Furthermore, the documents specifically use the word “sacredos” when naming who the one to perform the intinction is.

The local ordinary has authority, but, he cannot override and supercede the Holy See. That is the point that you seem to not want to accept. I would invite you to contact the CDWDS yourself. However, if you discout its authority, maybe even hearing it directly from them would be to no avail. FAB, while you say that you do not discout the authority of the Holy Father, your posts throughout this thrread have inferred a discounting of the authority of the CDWDS.

The bishop, on his own, cannot invent liturgical norms or policies. He is given limited authority in the GIRM. He can decided the ordering of churches, matters of concelebration and if Holy Communion will be distributed under one or both species. However, he does not have the latitude to override the Church regarding who the minister of intinction is. The bishop’s authority is not as far-reaching as you would lead us to believe.

 

[zab]

benedictgal;7576356**:

FAB, I am not in error here, as I am quoting what the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments told me. The mingling of the Body and Blood of Christ is a priestly action.

Furthermore, the documents specifically use the word “sacredos” when naming who the one to perform the intinction is.

The local ordinary has authority, but, he cannot override and supercede the Holy See. That is the point that you seem to not want to accept. I would invite you to contact the CDWDS yourself. However, if you discout its authority, maybe even hearing it directly from them would be to no avail. FAB, while you say that you do not discout the authority of the Holy Father, your posts throughout this thrread have inferred a discounting of the authority of the CDWDS.

The bishop, on his own, cannot invent liturgical norms or policies. He is given limited authority in the GIRM. He can decided the ordering of churches, matters of concelebration and if Holy Communion will be distributed under one or both species. However, he does not have the latitude to override the Church regarding who the minister of intinction is. The bishop’s authority is not as far-reaching as you would lead us to believe.
benedictgal,
Some of what you have written comes across as insulting. There are people in authority who have had the same understanding as FAB. Cardinal Arinze has said that only priests and deacons may give Communion by intinction. FrDavid96, a regular contributor to this forum, has also stated that he doesn’t see any reason that a deacon cannot distribute by intinction. In a post from August, 2009, he said: *I’m not entirely convinced (personally speaking) that it was the intention of Redemptionis Sacramentum to limit intinction only to priests. *
Apparently the bishops have interpreted RS that way and we should defer to that interpretation.

 

[benedictgal]

The CDWDS gave me the citations from the norms. In fact, I have had several conversations with them about this. Cardinal Arinze’s comments regarding the deacon were given off the cuff. The key word here, that FAB seems to be ignoring, is “Sacredors”. A deacon is not a “sacerdo”. Every citation having to do with intinction in Latin carries the word “sacerdos”. Even the US norms specifically state “priest”.

What folks seem to be forgetting is that the CDWDS is the supreme rule-making authority here. It is sad that there are folks who do not seem to want to accept that.

This is not about being insulting. Ironically enough, those who have responded to my posts regarding this issue have been the ones who have been condescending and insulting. But, the CDWDS has given its opinion on the matter and they have given citations. After all, they are the ones to whom the bishops’ conferences must go to in order to get recognitios. It is for the CDWDS to determine who administers in what manner. They have decided that intinction is solely for those who are ordained to the priesthood to do.

 

[zab]

The CDWDS gave me the citations from the norms. In fact, I have had several conversations with them about this. Cardinal Arinze’s comments regarding the deacon were given off the cuff. The key word here, that FAB seems to be ignoring, is “Sacredors”. A deacon is not a “sacerdo”. Every citation having to do with intinction in Latin carries the word “sacerdos”. Even the US norms specifically state “priest”.

What folks seem to be forgetting is that the CDWDS is the supreme rule-making authority here. It is sad that there are folks who do not seem to want to accept that.

This is not about being insulting. Ironically enough, those who have responded to my posts regarding this issue have been the ones who have been condescending and insulting. But, the CDWDS has given its opinion on the matter and they have given citations. After all, they are the ones to whom the bishops’ conferences must go to in order to get recognitios. It is for the CDWDS to determine who administers in what manner. They have decided that intinction is solely for those who are ordained to the priesthood to do.

It is good that you want to share that information. But comeing across as a tyrant shoving this information down our throats is not going to get your point across especially when your good information is injected with comments like , “what you seem to be refusing to accept”, “what you seem to be ignoring”, etc. Perhaps you have a better understanding because of your conversations with the CDWDS which the average person on this board has not had.