Extrordinary Ministers of the Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter cccnative
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cccnative

Guest
Is anyone aware of a guideline for married Extrordinary Ministers of the Eucharist with regard to sexual abstinance before mass?
 
None that I am aware of.

I also haven’t heard anything in my diaconate classes about that.

Maybe one of the deacons on the board know of any requirements placed upon them.

IIRC, the Eastern Catholic Church require their married priests to refrain from sexual realtion from midnight the night before saying Divine Liturgy.

That might be the closest thing I can think of.
 
Thanks for your response. It is hard to believe, given how common Extrordinary Ministers of the Eucharist are these days that there was not more interest. Consider your response the most authoritative one on this thread.
 
40.png
cccnative:
Is anyone aware of a guideline for married Extrordinary Ministers of the Eucharist with regard to sexual abstinance before mass?
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard of any. Do you know of any?
 
The only recommendations are that you be in the state of grace and in a faithful and sacramental marriage,free from mortal sin and have abstained from food and drink for one our prior to receiving the Holy Eucharist. They are just like anyone who is about to receive communion.
 
40.png
Brendan:
the Eastern Catholic Church require their married priests to refrain from sexual realtion from midnight the night before saying Divine Liturgy.

That might be the closest thing I can think of.
Click to expand...
This is something from tradition but it is not a requirment that you will find spelt out in any offical Church documents.
 
Maybe one of the deacons on the board know of any requirements placed upon them.
Click to expand...
I’ll bite as a deacon and a former director of deacons.

No such requirement of “ritual purity” is attached to deacons in the Latin Church, and none is attached to “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion” (which is the correct term).

By the very nature of marriage and the rights that are exchanged, though, it is unclear to me that Church authority would understand itself competent to issue such instructions or “guidelines.” Saint Paul himself made recommendations for married couples, but not in the context of a ritual purity, and then not with any normative force.

Brendan, might you have a reference regarding the Eastern Catholic practice you mention? This intrigues me, because I am not familiar with the Eastern practices as much as I’d like. Does it apply in each of the 21 Eastern Churches sui iuris? I was aware that it was a custom at one time, but am unaware of any legislation that obliges at present. I did not see this in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, nor any provision for the individual Churches to make such law. Perhaps it is something less than a requirement?

A study of the history of celibacy and its development would however show that arguments for celibacy (both as perfect sexual continence and as the state of not cohabiting with a woman, whether in marriage or not) were drawn forth in part from the “ritual purity” of the Old Testament. While the notions or purity, chastity, celibacy, and continence can be distinguished from one another, they are closedly connected in that rather complex history.

Deacon John M. Cameron, JCL
Diocese of Lansing
 
40.png
cameron_lansing:
I’ll bite as a deacon and a former director of deacons.

No such requirement of “ritual purity” is attached to deacons in the Latin Church, and none is attached to “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion” (which is the correct term).

By the very nature of marriage and the rights that are exchanged, though, it is unclear to me that Church authority would understand itself competent to issue such instructions or “guidelines.” Saint Paul himself made recommendations for married couples, but not in the context of a ritual purity, and then not with any normative force.

Brendan, might you have a reference regarding the Eastern Catholic practice you mention? This intrigues me, because I am not familiar with the Eastern practices as much as I’d like. Does it apply in each of the 21 Eastern Churches sui iuris? I was aware that it was a custom at one time, but am unaware of any legislation that obliges at present. I did not see this in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, nor any provision for the individual Churches to make such law. Perhaps it is something less than a requirement?

A study of the history of celibacy and its development would however show that arguments for celibacy (both as perfect sexual continence and as the state of not cohabiting with a woman, whether in marriage or not) were drawn forth in part from the “ritual purity” of the Old Testament. While the notions or purity, chastity, celibacy, and continence can be distinguished from one another, they are closedly connected in that rather complex history.

Deacon John M. Cameron, JCL
Diocese of Lansing
Click to expand...
The best thing=get rid of the EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF HOLY COMMUNION IN MASS=NOT NEEDED IN THE USA. FATHER SITS WHILE THE ARMY OF WOMEN (SOME MARRIED WHO SHOULD BE ATTENDING TO THEIR HUSBANDS AND KIDS AT HOME) AND SOME FEW MEN GET UP TO FUNCTION AS THE PRIEST.
 
40.png
misericordie:
The best thing=get rid of the EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF HOLY COMMUNION IN MASS=NOT NEEDED IN THE USA. FATHER SITS WHILE THE ARMY OF WOMEN (SOME MARRIED WHO SHOULD BE ATTENDING TO THEIR HUSBANDS AND KIDS AT HOME) AND SOME FEW MEN GET UP TO FUNCTION AS THE PRIEST.
Click to expand...
This was not the question asked, you are starting to become a broken record. You seem to bring up your issues with your priest in every thread you post in lately.

I have never been to a Mass where the priest sits down during Communion. I would guess that if it is happening that it is not something that happens all that often.

You also seem to have issues with women and they should be at the Mass and not at home “attending to their husbands and kids”.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
This was not the question asked, you are starting to become a broken record. You seem to bring up your issues with your priest in every thread you post in lately.

I have never been to a Mass where the priest sits down during Communion. I would guess that if it is happening that it is not something that happens all that often.

You also seem to have issues with women and they should be at the Mass and not at home “attending to their husbands and kids”.
Click to expand...
I am starting to think you have dyslexia, as per you read INTO a post. Where if you may, can you point out I mention anything about my priests? Give me a break. Stop being so subjective, and be more well read.
 
40.png
misericordie:
I am starting to think you have dyslexia, as per you read INTO a post. Where if you may, can you point out I mention anything about my priests? Give me a break. Stop being so subjective, and be more well read.
Click to expand...
Okay, I will.

You said,
40.png
misericordie:
The best thing=get rid of the EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF HOLY COMMUNION IN MASS=NOT NEEDED IN THE USA. FATHER SITS WHILE THE ARMY OF WOMEN (SOME MARRIED WHO SHOULD BE ATTENDING TO THEIR HUSBANDS AND KIDS AT HOME) AND SOME FEW MEN GET UP TO FUNCTION AS THE PRIEST.
Click to expand...
So lets leave out my comment about your priest so that rather than ignoring the majority of my post and fixating on one part you can read the rest and maybe comment.

I have never been to a Mass where the priest sits down during Communion. I would guess that if it is happening that it is not something that happens all that often.

You also seem to have issues with women and they should be at the Mass and not at home “attending to their husbands and kids”.

It does seem you have issues with priests in general as a lot of your posts seem to contain derogatory comments towards “FATHER” as you put it.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
It does seem you have issues with priests in general
Click to expand...
With attitudes such as have been demonstrated in this thread, it’s becoming more and more clear to me why this is.
 
40.png
misericordie:
The best thing=get rid of the EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF HOLY COMMUNION IN MASS=NOT NEEDED IN THE USA. FATHER SITS WHILE THE ARMY OF WOMEN (SOME MARRIED WHO SHOULD BE ATTENDING TO THEIR HUSBANDS AND KIDS AT HOME) AND SOME FEW MEN GET UP TO FUNCTION AS THE PRIEST.
Click to expand...
While I enjoy receiving communion in a parish that has a few extra priests, therefore no need for EMHC’s, we need to be respectful of the fact that they are allowed under certain circumstances. We cannot stereotype any group of people (i.e. “army of women…”).

I’m a female, but no feminst with regards to church matters. But the Church does permit women to participate as EMHC’s. Under no circumstances is it right for a priest to sit while lay people distribute. Also, imho, it is more prudent when all priests at a parish involve themselves in the Masses, whether they are celebrating or not. In my parish, the priests avail themselves for confession prior to Mass, and during the distribution of Communion, which happens to be at a rail. I respect this.

I would also encourage more charitable tones in the threads. If, there are issues taking place in any one parish there are remedies for that. Write to the Bishop and the CDW if abuses are taking place. If you cannot stand it, shop around for another parish like I did. It took me nearly 20 years to find a parish that fit me and this one happens to be just 15 minutes away from my house. Never knew it was there. It is traditional and orthodox with an emphasis on devotions, adoration & benediction, processions, and solid Catholic culture loyal to the Magisterium. It is so pleasant to be in an environment which assents rather than dissents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top