Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

It worked prior to Vatican II, and there were much larger crowds back then than there are now.

And there were far more priests then.
(and yes, the EMHC’s as well as all the parishioners do spend time praying for vocations trying to get people and cars in and out more quickly-- & EMHC’s serving at Mass, the hospital, nursing home and homebound)

Lux

 

[Phemie]

And there were far more priests then.
Lux

But not in rural parishes which might see several hundred people at each of the two Sunday morning Masses (the 8 a.m. Low Mass & the 10 a.m. High Mass) with only one priest available. Several priests in residence was not a reality for most of the parishes in my diocese except those in the city or larger towns.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

But there were 2 hours between scheduled Masses. We are fortunate if we can get 1:15 between Masses. Certainly I cannot speak for every parish in every diocese, but I do know that the parishes in my area with 8 Masses each weekend do need the help of EMHC for Mass, and ever more for the sick & homebound.

Lux

 

[jeanannemarie]

Our Saturday evening Mass may have 20 people or less. Sunday attendance could be 20 to 50 depending on the time of year. Interestingly, if there are EMC in attendance, they are ALWAYS used, but just for the blood of Christ.

 

[zab]

Our Saturday evening Mass may have 20 people or less. Sunday attendance could be 20 to 50 depending on the time of year. Interestingly, if there are EMC in attendance, they are ALWAYS used, but just for the blood of Christ.

Are you being sarcastic? I would think the celebrant would need a little help with the distribution of the Precious Blood if there was not deacon present.

 

[jeanannemarie]

The only dumb question is the one not asked; somebody please tell me how to get that superfluous stuff off my signature. My pride is hurt, so now I have to practice humility!

 

[jeanannemarie]

Are you being sarcastic? I would think the celebrant would need a little help with the distribution of the Precious Blood if there was not deacon present.

No, I am not being sarcastic. I am just sharing what happens in my little parish. It never ocurred to me about using a deacon, as we have never had one.

 

[zab]

The only dumb question is the one not asked; somebody please tell me how to get that superfluous stuff off my signature. My pride is hurt, so now I have to practice humility!

At the top of this page, click on profile. Then on the left hand column at the top, click on edit signature.

 

[zab]

No, I am not being sarcastic. I am just sharing what happens in my little parish. It never ocurred to me about using a deacon, as we have never had one.

I see nothing wrong with using an EMHC to assist in the distribution of the Precious Blood when there are just a few people. I guess they could all form one line at the base of the sanctuary and the priest could give everyone the Hosts, and then go back to get the chalice and give everyone the Precious Blood, But that is not the norm now for giving Communion.

 

[jeanannemarie]

Thank you, zab.

 

[PJM]

Here’s an idea - what if you had, say, a railing of some kind at the front where people would kneel to receive on the tongue, and the priest, with one or two of the altar servers assisting him, would just move back and forth along the railing giving Holy Communion, and as each person received on the tongue, they would move back to their pew while others took their place, and the priest would just keep on moving back and forth, back and forth, until there was no one left at the railing? There would be no waiting for people to step forward, since all of the people’s movement would occur while the priest was distributing Holy Communion elsewhere along the line - this seems like it could be fairly efficient, don’t you think?

It worked prior to Vatican II, and there were much larger crowds back then than there are now.

:clapping: :tiphat: :dancing: :extrahappy: :yup:

Yup!

Yea!

YES!

And if we did, if we did, we’d again have larger crowds

God bless you, wonderful post!

 

[Phemie]

We normally schedule 3 EMHCs for Sunday Mass, 2 to offer the Precious Blood and one to distribute the Hosts with Fr.

The last 2 Sundays we haven’t offered the Precious Blood because of a nasty virus that is working its way through the community. Instead of telling 2 of the scheduled EMHCs not to present themselves, Fr. told 1 not to present him/herself and had 2 distribute the Hosts while he sat down.

I knew that was going to happen because when I broached the topic of overuse of EMCHs with him a few weeks ago he told me that they will be used at all times to validate their ministry in the eyes of the congregation. He told me that everything I learned from the documents is wrong and that that is not his vision of how a community should function. He proceeded to tell me that at one of the parishes he was formerly responsible for they had a funeral with the bishop celebrating the funeral Mass. When it came time for the funeral rites he had the lay leader of prayer do those, again in the name of ‘validating their ministry’ to the community.

I thought when he came we were going to have a more orthodox pastor than the one who was leaving but it looks as though they are cut from the same cloth.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Hi,

I don’t see any difference in time taken if the people move, or the priest moves, and the priest must take the time to walk back to the beginning of the rail, or wait for the people to get up and down, if he reverses direction.

Again, I agree that some parishes may sometimes have more EMHC than needed, but it is very hard to judge how many people will receive, and if there are usual Communion stations, it would be confusing to eliminate some of them sometimes.

If no EMHC are needed, it means Mass is not very full—I’d rather have EMHC and more people attending Mass.

Lux

 

[PJM]

No, I am not being sarcastic. I am just sharing what happens in my little parish. It never ocurred to me about using a deacon, as we have never had one.

Dear friend in Christ,

Are you aware that “the cup” is not essential?

That the ENTIRE Christ, “Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity” is in the Holy Eucharist alone Indeed, in even the smalled segment of the sacred Host, one finds the “complete Jesus.”

So why “the cup?”

Theology claims that it is a “more full” reception of Jesus. Speaking theologically, not practically.

The real reason I feel, is something else:blush:

Our Catholic Catechism…

"1390 Since Christ is sacramentally present under each of the species, communion under the species of bread alone makes it possible to receive all the fruit of Eucharistic grace. For pastoral reasons this manner of receiving communion has been legitimately established as the most common form in the Latin rite. But “the sign of communion is more complete when given under both kinds, since in that form the sign of the Eucharistic meal appears more clearly.” This is the usual form of receiving communion in the Eastern rites."

"1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different.” “And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory.”

"1366 The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit:

[Christ], our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper “on the night when he was betrayed,” [he wanted] to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit"

The Mass is first and FOREMOST a sacrifice, that is but celebrated in the form of a meal. “sacrifice” is the essential element .

 

[benedictgal]

We normally schedule 3 EMHCs for Sunday Mass, 2 to offer the Precious Blood and one to distribute the Hosts with Fr.

The last 2 Sundays we haven’t offered the Precious Blood because of a nasty virus that is working its way through the community. Instead of telling 2 of the scheduled EMHCs not to present themselves, Fr. told 1 not to present him/herself and had 2 distribute the Hosts while he sat down.

I knew that was going to happen because when I broached the topic of overuse of EMCHs with him a few weeks ago he told me that they will be used at all times to validate their ministry in the eyes of the congregation. He told me that everything I learned from the documents is wrong and that that is not his vision of how a community should function. He proceeded to tell me that at one of the parishes he was formerly responsible for they had a funeral with the bishop celebrating the funeral Mass. When it came time for the funeral rites he had the lay leader of prayer do those, again in the name of ‘validating their ministry’ to the community.

I thought when he came we were going to have a more orthodox pastor than the one who was leaving but it looks as though they are cut from the same cloth.

Phemie, I know that you know this, but, it does bear reminding that according to Redemptionis Sacramentum:

156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.

[157.] If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed. Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it. The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons.258

Unfortunately, this is also happening at one of the parishes down here. It is frustrating.

 

[Phemie]

Phemie, I know that you know this, but, it does bear reminding that according to Redemptionis Sacramentum:

Unfortunately, this is also happening at one of the parishes down here. It is frustrating.

According to the former pastor, the Bishop has said that RS has not been implemented in our diocese. I believe it since they are still using glass chalices and bowls at the basilica which used to be the cathedral.

It shouldn’t matter though, when it comes to EMHCs RS only reiterates what was already in
1973’s Immensae Caritatis which originally permitted EMHCs
1980’s Inaestimabile donum (#10)
1997’s Ecclesiae de Mysterio (Part II, Article 8)

When I said in a meeting that using EMHCs the way we were flew in the face of every document on the topic one priest got up, shook his finger at me and yelled “We’ve never paid attention to those documents before and we’re not about to start now.” That’s when I called it quits with the Liturgy committee. Unfortunately, by virtue of my job, I’m always involved in some capacity and it’s hard to keep biting my tongue.

 

[jmcrae]

According to the former pastor, the Bishop has said that RS has not been implemented in our diocese.

So, we just get to ignore the Pope, if we want to?

I always thought these documents were automatically in effect at the moment that the Bishop is made aware (or begins to suspect) that they exist.

 

[Phemie]

So, we just get to ignore the Pope, if we want to?

I always thought these documents were automatically in effect at the moment that the Bishop is made aware (or begins to suspect) that they exist.

Only if he promulgates them I guess.

It’s funny. We are on our third pastor since RS was released. I was expecting this document so went to the Vatican website and downloaded it the day it was published and gave it to my then-pastor. He read it and made changes the next Sunday: no more consecrating in the flagon; he immediately started to purify the vessels himself and he also started rinsing the purificators and corporals before handing them to the sacristan to wash.

He became ill and retired and the next pastor categorically refused to purify the vessels and refused to acknowledge RS’s existence. He’s the one who apparently discussed it with the bishop and was told “no, we haven’t promulgated this in our diocese.”

This latest pastor just wants the community to take upon itself everything about the running of the parish unless it specifically requires a priest. Distribution of Communion and purification of the vessels are not on his “Things I must be the one to do” list.

 

[PJM]

So, we just get to ignore the Pope, if we want to?

I always thought these documents were automatically in effect at the moment that the Bishop is made aware (or begins to suspect) that they exist.

Hi friend,

That’s what God

The Pope

& The Magistrium thought too :crying: