extraordinary ministers of holy communion

[sticknstring73]

Sometimes I see people switching lines in mass for communion. What happens is that there will be two lines,left and right, for the host and if the lines are long the Eucharistic lay minister will come to help out the priest. At this point people jump to the priests line.

Is this frowned upon? Are there any eucharistic lay ministers here to comment and if so what do you think?

Not looking for a fight, just trying to learn.

 

[Usige]

Is it frowned upon by whom? Yes there are those that frown upon it, but I don’t know of any Church teaching that says the faithful are required to receive from an EHMC.

Remember that the preference is always that ordinary ministers of Holy Communion (i.e. the clergy) distribute and EMHCs only distribute if not enough ordinary ministers are available. By that thinking it would seem that the norm is to receive from the clergy and a member of the faithful always has the right to receive via the norms.

 

[Big_Feet]

I am an EMofHC at my parish (in fact, it is me who our pastor has tasked with training and scheduling all non-clergy liturgical ministers)

I see no issue, nor am I offended when someone switches lines to receive from a bishop, priest or deacon, or even another lay minister. It is the communicants rite to receive from whom they wish, in a manner they wish (as long as approved and respectful).

 

[ProVobis]

The Mass I attended last night (OF) had just two priests distributing communion. Sometimes they have three or four, including a deacon. There is also a communion rail for those wishing to receive kneeling, which many did. Granted, it took a little bit longer but what’s the rush?

 

[pianistclare]

It’s not about rushing or disapproving.
It’s about people who believe that receiving from a lay person is somehow “less” or flawed.
This is not true. Christ is present.

 

[ProVobis]

It’s not about rushing or disapproving.
It’s about people who believe that receiving from a lay person is somehow “less” or flawed.
This is not true. Christ is present.

So EMHC were established to prove a point? That’s what it seems like to me.

 

[QuiteCatholic]

It’s not about rushing or disapproving.
It’s about people who believe that receiving from a lay person is somehow “less” or flawed.
This is not true. Christ is present.

I prefer to received from the Priest, of course if he is not giving on my side I don’t change lines. But if in a Priest line I will never which over because the EMHC line is empty. One time an usher tried to get me into the empty EMHC line but I won’t budge. There is no rush and I always thought EMHC were for extraordinary circumstances.

 

[Arizona_Fat_Gir]

I am an EMHC for the hospital.

Priests cannot go to the hospital all the time to bring Communion to all the Catholic patients. Not all hospitals have this ministry. I was aware of people who actually cried when I brought them Communion. It did not seem to matter to them that I am not a priest.

It is a lot of walking, and of course, some reject Communion for their own reasons.

 

[Antegin]

I would say that if there is not an erroneous belief that the consecrated host in the hands of an EMHC is not the Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Jesus, there is no problem switching lines. If it weren’t for EMHC, a lot of people would be denied the Blessed Sacrament when they need Him most. EMHC’s are used to ensure that everyone at mass and in any skilled nursing care centers, gets to have the Body of Christ.

The ratio of priests to Catholics in 1950 was 1 to 650. In 2010 it was 1 to 1650. The American population is growing at a rate of 78%. Only recently have ordinations increased a modest 25% after being flat for a long time. Nationally, in 2010, 1 in 5 parishes were unstaffed. The Church in Vietnam sends missionary priests to St. Mary’s county in MD. Twenty three percent of the clergy in Germany come as missionaries from an African country called Burundi.

EMHC are not only here to stay, ‘‘The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest.’’ Luke 10:2

 

[ProVobis]

It is a lot of walking, and of course, some reject Communion for their own reasons.

This is an unfair statement to make. There are those who value confession to a priest (and communion from him if there are no dietary restrictions) a little higher. I was recently hospitalized and for the first two days I was not to eat anything, just given fluids, yet they didn’t seem to understand this. The other days I was eating small amounts over the course of the day so just for this reason alone I wasn’t properly disposed. Again they didn’t seem to understand this. And from a patient perspective I wasn’t in the mood for a theological debate so I simply said, “No thank you.” I wasn’t rejecting Christ.

 

[casslean]

It’s not about rushing or disapproving.
It’s about people who believe that receiving from a lay person is somehow “less” or flawed.
This is not true. Christ is present.

I recall reading a book about Saint John Paul. He was presiding at a large opne-air Mass during one of his visits. After observing a number of people trying to “sneak” into the line where he was distributing Communion (which I believe was reserved for only a few people chosen by his staff), he commented that it didn’t matter who gave you the Eucharist; what was important was only that you received.

 

[triumphguy]

Sometimes I see people switching lines in mass for communion. What happens is that there will be two lines,left and right, for the host and if the lines are long the Eucharistic lay minister will come to help out the priest. At this point people jump to the priests line.

Is this frowned upon? Are there any eucharistic lay ministers here to comment and if so what do you think?

Not looking for a fight, just trying to learn.

The host is the Body and Blood, soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. It cannot be more holy than it already is since it is Divinity itself in the form of bread and wine.

Who gives out communion does not matter at all.

Communion from Padre Pio, Pope Pius X, Benedict XVI or Mrs. Smith the EMHC from the local parish are all equal.

 

[ProVobis]

I recall reading a book about Saint John Paul. He was presiding at a large opne-air Mass during one of his visits. After observing a number of people trying to “sneak” into the line where he was distributing Communion (which I believe was reserved for only a few people chosen by his staff), he commented that it didn’t matter who gave you the Eucharist; what was important was only that you received.

That’s interesting because at some recent Papal Masses people were seen PASSING communion to one another. No communion lines, no “Corpus Christi/Amen.” EHMC’s became a moot point, it appears.

 

[triumphguy]

That’s interesting because at some recent Papal Masses people were seen PASSING communion to one another. No communion lines, no “Corpus Christi/Amen.” EHMC’s became a moot point, it appears.

Was that encouraged? I think not.

Was that a rare occurrence? I think so.

 

[ProVobis]

Was that encouraged? I think not.

Was that a rare occurrence? I think so.

Okay but some will argue that because of the “demand” and crowd size, there was no other way to distribute, no? My argument of “what’s the hurry?” would probably not hold much water.

 

[pianistclare]

So EMHC were established to prove a point? That’s what it seems like to me.

No, and you know that.
Stop trying to bait people into an argument.
The fact that parishes use them is a topic to bring up with your pastor.
But getting out of a line because you don’t like the minister is to miss the point of receiving Christ.

 

[ProVobis]

But getting out of a line because you don’t like the minister

It has nothing to do with liking the minister. In fact one of the ministers I “rejected” at the hospital was someone I knew and used to work with. Actually, the doctor pre-empted the visit but I didn’t ask for him to come back. Again I would have welcomed a priest for confession to receive Christ but I see that argument is getting me nowhere here.

And I’m done with this thread.

 

[Usige]

But getting out of a line because you don’t like the minister is to miss the point of receiving Christ.

Not everyone is moving because they reject receiving from an EMHC in of itself. In my neck of the woods, EMHCs appear to be completely confounded by distributing communion on the tongue. Those who prefer to receive on the tongue generally end up going to a line with one of the clergy because they have had bad experiences with EMHCs not placing the host squarely and it almost falling. Charity would seem to require that we not project ill intent without knowing their reasoning.

Even if they do prefer to receive from the clergy for other reasons, so what? Yes, perhaps they need better catechesis. On the other hand there is a reason that the Church differentiates between ordinary and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, so an EMHC is different than a member of the clergy. The difference might not be what some think, but that doesn’t mean they are equivalent either.

 

[pianistclare]

Not everyone is moving because they reject receiving from an EMHC in of itself. In my neck of the woods, EMHCs appear to be completely confounded by distributing communion on the tongue. Those who prefer to receive on the tongue generally end up going to a line with one of the clergy because they have had bad experiences with EMHCs not placing the host squarely and it almost falling. Charity would seem to require that we not project ill intent without knowing their reasoning.

Even if they do prefer to receive from the clergy for other reasons, so what? Yes, perhaps they need better catechesis. On the other hand there is a reason that the Church differentiates between ordinary and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, so an EMHC is different than a member of the clergy. The difference might not be what some think, but that doesn’t mean they are equivalent either.

Sheesh.
I just go to Mass to receive the Lord and hear the Word.
I don’t get all worked up about the disposition or assumed disposition of others.
I mind my own soul.

 

[Gorgias]

I don’t get all worked up about the disposition or assumed disposition of others.

‘Disposition’? I didn’t see anyone in this thread talk about the disposition of a minister. The vocation of a minister? That’s a different consideration, isn’t it…?