Extraordinary

[Knittycat]

If the extraordinary form of mass is only to be used for extraordinary circumstances, therefore not to be used all the time, why is it you see extraordinary ministers of holy communion all the time? Aren’t they also supposed to be for extraordinary circumstances?

 

[YoungTradCath]

I don’t think the use of the term “extraordinary” mandates or encourages that that Form of mass be used less than the Ordinary Form. Rather, I think that the term “extraordinary” was chosen out of reaction to what the situation already was, that the Ordinary Form was more prevalent.

I suspect that if the liturgy according to the Missal of 1570 were to overtake, in terms of people attending, the liturgy according to the Missal of 1970, then it’s likely that the names “Ordinary Form” and “Extraordinary Form” would switch.

There is nothing that says that the Extraordinary Form MUST only be used in extraordinary circumstances. In fact, that’s exactly the notion that the Holy Father wanted to get away from with his Summorum Pontificum.

Anyways… to answer your question about EMsHC, I would guess that there are two reasons they are used more than they ought to be.

First, most churches don’t even have a lot of Ordinary Ministers. Most churches have a priest, and probably one deacon (although I’m thankful my small Southern church has two priests and three deacons). Not every mass celebrated has a deacon present, so in many cases, the only Ordinary Minister actually ministering the communion is the priest himself. If there are two lines of laity to receive, that’s three (if Blood is distributed) EMs to be had. Clergy shortage. It’s not fun, but that’s the way it is right now.

Second, part of our “modern Catholic” mindset infecting our church right now is a perversion of the call for more “active participation” of the laity in mass. The use of 8 EMs for a Sunday mass is part of this sad truth. People don’t realize, unfortunately, that “active participation” is as simple as actually absorbing the prayers, music, and silence of mass. They think that they have to “do” something to “participate,” as if it’s a field day or a school play or something.

 

[Knittycat]

Thank you so much for your thoughtful response! It’s similar to my fiance’s response, but better thought out and explained. And the fact that he says that I, the mormon convert, know more about his faith than he, the cradle catholic, does, didn’t inspire much confidence

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Ordinary: the norm or that which has authority in and if itself.

Extraordinary: that which is permitted or that which only has authority because of another.

The Ordinary form of the Mass is that which any priest may say becaue by virtue of his ordination he is free to use all Church rites/rituals/liturgies that are the norm. The extraordinary form of the Mass may be said by any priest due to the permission from the Holy Father.

Ordinary ministers of communion are bishops, priests, and deacons. By virtue of their ordination they have the authority/right to distribute communion. Extraordinary ministers of communion are appointed by the bishop/pastor for a specific time, location, and purpose.

 

[Servulus]

First, most churches don’t even have a lot of Ordinary Ministers. Most churches have a priest, and probably one deacon (although I’m thankful my small Southern church has two priests and three deacons). Not every mass celebrated has a deacon present, so in many cases, the only Ordinary Minister actually ministering the communion is the priest himself. If there are two lines of laity to receive, that’s three (if Blood is distributed) EMs to be had. Clergy shortage. It’s not fun, but that’s the way it is right now.

Second, part of our “modern Catholic” mindset infecting our church right now is a perversion of the call for more “active participation” of the laity in mass. The use of 8 EMs for a Sunday mass is part of this sad truth. People don’t realize, unfortunately, that “active participation” is as simple as actually absorbing the prayers, music, and silence of mass. They think that they have to “do” something to “participate,” as if it’s a field day or a school play or something.

YTC makes some valid points. However, it should also be noted that distribution of Communion under both forms is an option, not a requirement. If sufficient ordinary ministers are not available, the option ought not be exercised. In addition, we are instructed that if a significant number of the faithful do not partake under both forms, the option should not be exercised. Given those guidelines, it is easier to see why a daily Mass participant at a suburban Midwest parish with two priests (and a third in residence) as well as two active (and two retired, but still-serving) deacons would wonder why an early-morning Mass with no more than 30 in attendance (fewer than half of whom receive under both forms) would require Communion under both forms and two “Extraordinary” Ministers of Holy Communion every day.

Pray for priests - those who are obedient and those who are not.

 

[Matthew_Holford]

If the extraordinary form of mass is only to be used for extraordinary circumstances, therefore not to be used all the time, why is it you see extraordinary ministers of holy communion all the time? Aren’t they also supposed to be for extraordinary circumstances?

Here ‘extraordinary’ does not quite have its everyday meaning. The extraordinary form of the Mass is not limited to extraordinary circumstances. Any priest or bishop can celebrate the extraordinary form of the Holy Mass at any time and in any place. Any Catholic can go to an extraordinary form of the Holy Mass at any time. I am not sure why the Pope called it the ‘extraordinary’ form.

With regards to ministers of Holy Communion the term is a little easier to explain. The Church says which ministers can do certain things. These are the ordinary ministers. In some circumstances it allows others to do these things and they are called extraordinary ministers. When it comes to distributing Holy Communion the Church says the ordinary ministers are bishops, priests, and deacons. In some circumstances it will allow non-ordained men and women to administer Holy Communion. These men and women are called extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion (EMHCs). Sometimes people think the ‘extraordinary’ means ‘special’ which, of course, it does not.

EMHCs should only be used in cases where there is a lack of ordinary ministers (bishops, priests, and deacons) and it would take a long time to administer Holy Communion. One of the problems here is that no one has defined what would be too long a time to distribute Holy Communion.

You are, unfortunately, correct in your assessment that EMHCs are used too frequently, when they’re not required.

 

[ConstantineTG]

If the extraordinary form of mass is only to be used for extraordinary circumstances, therefore not to be used all the time, why is it you see extraordinary ministers of holy communion all the time? Aren’t they also supposed to be for extraordinary circumstances?

The term “ordinary” means the norm, or something that is or should be common usage. Extraordinary just means that its not the norm and not the common usage, but doesn’t mean you can’t use it frequently.

 

[hilde_the_dog]

Knittycat if you have not noticed the Catholic Church will use words differently than society at large. Thus extraordinary does not necessarily mean the same thing in the common world and the church. Look at the word “vulgar” to the church it does not imply anything bad, rather common. Many people use it as something offensive.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Any priest or bishop can celebrate the extraordinary form of the Holy Mass at any time and in any place. Any Catholic can go to an extraordinary form of the Holy Mass at any time. I am not sure why the Pope called it the ‘extraordinary’ form.

It is “extraordinary” because permission is/was required to say it. That permission was very limited under Paul VI, it was widened under BJP2, and now is extended to all under BXVI. However there are still a few restrictions (only 1 latin Mass on Sundays in an ordinary parish) and the permission for all to say the Latin Mass could be revoked at any time by the Apostolic See.
On the other hand, whatever is considered the “ordindary” is always and everywhere able to be said by any priest.

 

[ProVobis]

Extraordinary extends to other sacraments as well:

Sacrament - Ordinary ministers - Extraordinary ministers

Baptism - clergy - laity or an unbaptized person (illicit except in emergencies, but still valid))
Confirmation - bishop - priest (invalid except in emergencies or with permission of the bishop e.g. as for adult confirmation)
Eucharist (consecration) - bishop or priest - none; always invalid
Distribution of Holy Communion - clergy (including deacons) - acolyte (licit when not enough or no clergy are available) / other laity (legal when not enough or no clergy or acolytes available)
Reconciliation - bishop or priest - none; invalid if done by a layperson or by a priest without faculties (except in emergency).
Anointing of the Sick - bishop or priest - none; invalid if done by anyone else
Holy Matrimony - husband and wife with clergy as witness - husband and wife alone, or with specially deputized lay person as ecclesial witness. If there is no witness, the marriage is valid but must be regularised at a later date.
Holy Orders (bishop) - a bishop acting as principal consecrator with two or more bishops as co-consecrators - fewer than three bishops; licit after permission of the Pope, but still valid without this permission.
Holy Orders (priest and deacon) - bishop - only a validly ordained bishop may ordain a priest or deacon; historically minor orders and subdiaconate were also conferred by (cardinal) priests and abbots with papal indult

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_(Catholic_Church