Have you ever intentionally avoided receiving communion from an EMHC so as to receive from a priest or deacon?

[Brendan]

The word dissent ought to be used in regards to doctrinal matters.

Exactly!

Like, for example, when someone insists that the role of the priest in the distrubution of Holy Communion and the role of lay people in the distrubution of Holy Communion are identical.

As that is a doctrinal matter, such a person would be a dissenter

 

[Sarabande]

When I go to Mass I am there to participate in the Holy Sacrifice and to receive Jesus body, blood, soul and divinity. Whom I receive it from changes nothing. Jesus’ presence is not lessened because an EMHC distributes it as opposed to a priest. It is exactly the same. I will not waste my time at Mass concentrating on whom I am receiving it from when I should be concentrating on whom I am receiving. I would find it an incredible distraction to have to jostle around to find a place in the line of a priest instead of an EMHC when my Lord is the same received from either. It seems completely illogical to me.

I can understand why you’d feel like doing something like this would distract you. But for those who prefer to receive from a priest, deciding where to sit in the church prior to mass or inconspicuously switching lines during communion takes no great amount of thought and concentration. It’s a fleeting instantaneous thought, like a snap of a finger - hardly a thought and takes no concentration whatsoever. It’s as fleeting as any other thought that passes through everyone’s brain. Sometimes it’s not even a thought and is completely second nature. So, where is the self-distraction? It is already known long before attending mass that the person would want to receive from the priest. It’s not like these people suddenly get this revelation during mass and continuously think about how they are going to switch lines rather than concentration on the mass and the Eucharist.

 

[Orionthehunter]

Yes, as the word dissent connotes a repudiation of a doctrine of the Church (thus we think of a “dissenter” as someone who is repudiating a doctrine of the Church).

I would use the word “disagree” in regards to someone who disagrees with a prudential decision of the Church.

Is the Church’s decision that we are to bow before recieving communion prudential? Is the Church’s decision that we have Permanent Deacons prudential? Is the Church decision that we are to stand to hear the Gospel prudential? How do they differ from authorizing the use of EMHCs? Or is it just a matter of you determining which decisions about practices and ministers of the Mass that you agree.

Sure looks to me like an attitude of pick and choose.

 

[pmoo]

While at Mass, have you ever intentionally avoided receiving communion from an EMHC so as to receive from a priest or deacon?

If so, why?

Did you jump communion lines or go “far” out of your way?

I don’t go that far, but I intentionally sit on the right side of the church as that is where our priests always end up distributing the host. I prefer to take the body from the priest, but I receive the precious blood from a Eucharist minister as they are the only ones distributing it.

 

[Contarini]

While at Mass, have you ever intentionally avoided receiving communion from an EMHC so as to receive from a priest or deacon?

Well, this doesn’t really count, but when I go to Mass I often go forward for a blessing if I can get in the line heading for the priest, though I’ve received blessings from EMHC’s on occasion as well.

Edwin

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Is the Church’s decision that we are to bow before recieving communion prudential? Is the Church’s decision that we have Permanent Deacons prudential? Is the Church decision that we are to stand to hear the Gospel prudential? How do they differ from authorizing the use of EMHCs? Or is it just a matter of you determining which decisions about practices and ministers of the Mass that you agree.

Sure looks to me like an attitude of pick and choose.

Yes, they are all prudential.

When I use the term prudential I don’t mean they are things one can pick and choose, one does have to obey. I merely mean they are not infallible dogmas of the Church. Thus, the Church could forbid people from standing to receive Holy Communion and enforce kneeling tomorrow and there would be no violation of an infallible dogma. However, the Church could not, say, abolish Her teaching on Purgatory tomorrow as that is an infallible dogma.

There was a helpful phrase Dietrich von Hildebrand once used in regards to a prudential decision one may not believe is good: “I obey, but I do not agree.” So no, it is not an attitude of “pick and choose.” Thus, even though I think kneeling when receiving Holy Communion is more fitting than standing with a slight bow of the head, when I am at a church with no communion rails I make a slight bow and receive Holy Communion. Or even though I don’t agree with allowing communion in the hand, I don’t start tackling people in the communion line if I think they are going to receive communion in the hand.

 

[BritishCatholic]

Yes, they are all prudential.

When I use the term prudential I don’t mean they are things one can pick and choose, one does have to obey. I merely mean they are not infallible dogmas of the Church. Thus, the Church could forbid people from standing to receive Holy Communion and enforce kneeling tomorrow and there would be no violation of an infallible dogma. However, the Church could not, say, abolish Her teaching on Purgatory tomorrow as that is an infallible dogma.

There was a helpful phrase Dietrich von Hildebrand once used in regards to a prudential decision one may not believe is good: “I obey, but I do not agree.” So no, it is not an attitude of “pick and choose.” Thus, even though I think kneeling when receiving Holy Communion is more fitting than standing with a slight bow of the head, when I am at a church with no communion rails I make a slight bow and receive Holy Communion. Or even though I don’t agree with allowing communion in the hand, I don’t start tackling people in the communion line if I think they are going to receive communion in the hand.

Very well said. I agree.

If a person prefers, like you stated, to kneel while receiving Holy Commuion, or to receive it on the tongue and so forth, and he/she is at a Mass when the complete opposite is being done, all that said person can do is to receive it on the tongue themselves, and, if everyone is standing to receive Communion, then he/she should simply genuflect and then get up to receive.

That’s what I do.

 

[Brennan_Doherty]

Very well said. I agree.

If a person prefers, like you stated, to kneel while receiving Holy Commuion, or to receive it on the tongue and so forth, and he/she is at a Mass when the complete opposite is being done, all that said person can do is to receive it on the tongue themselves, and, if everyone is standing to receive Communion, then he/she should simply genuflect and then get up to receive.

That’s what I do.

Yes, and from what I understand, someone could kneel to receive Communion even if everyone else is standing, from what I understand the Vatican has said that Priests are not to refuse such people Communion.

 

[Lepanto]

Well, this doesn’t really count, but when I go to Mass I often go forward for a blessing

Communion is for receiving blessings?

though I’ve received blessings from EMHC’s on occasion as well.

EMHC’s have the authority to impart blessings?

 

[Aramis]

Communion is for receiving blessings?

EMHC’s have the authority to impart blessings?

It is custom in many dioceses for children and the professed-but-not-communing to come forward for a blessing.

In the Eastern Churches (including Eastern Catholics), any chrismated individual may give a minor blessing; some theologians ascribe the same in the west.

Many of us do so every time some one sneezes… in the East, the saying of “Bless you!” is accompanied by making the sign of the cross.

Many of us also do it before every meal “Bless us, Oh Lord, and these thy gifts, which we are about to receive from thy bounty. We ask this, through Christ, our Lord, Amen.”

The difference is in form. A cleric “commands” a blessing in persona Christi; a layman requests it of the Holy Spirit, with no assurance.

(Save when addressing a Cleric… in which case it’s an imperative statement “Father, Bless” invoking the cleric to give the blessing.)

Protocol in Anchorage is specific for EMHC’s: A cross is traced upon the forehead with the thumb used for giving the host; nothing is said.

 

[BritishCatholic]

Protocol in Anchorage is specific for EMHC’s: A cross is traced upon the forehead with the thumb used for giving the host; nothing is said.

I find this very interesting.

I commited a very bad mortal sin once without going to Confession. So that Sunday I didn’t receive Holy Communion. So I just thought I’d go up for a blessing with my arms crossed across my chest. This was the Sunday when the bishop came to celebrate Mass during Lent. And what he did was exactly what you say the Eucharistic Ministers in your Diocese do: He traced a cross on my forehead and didn’t say anything.

I find it interesting that my bishop and your EM bless people coming up for Communion the same way…

 

[Aramis]

Archbishops Hurley (ret) and Schweitz, and almost all of the priests, and all the deacons, bless non-communicants in the communion line with “I bless you in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen!”, with the blessing hand tracing a cross in the air, and then the laying of hand upon head.

So there is a clear distinction in the Archdiocese of Anchorage. (I’ve seen the same distinction in the suffragan dicoeses of Fairbanks and Juneau.)

 

[Petergee]

Of course anyone may bless anyone else. I’ve blessed my children countless times when they were little.
But in the context of Mass, only a priest should be blessing people. It is liturgically incorrect for a layperson to do it when acting as EMHC. And if a priest blesses people during Communion, it is liturgically tautological, because he is about to (and in fact is compelled to) bless the whole congregation straight after Communion.

Would you approach a priest straight after Mass and ask him to individually bless you? Of course you wouldn’t, because he has just blessed you, there’s no point in repeating it.
So why ask him for an individual blessing during the Communion rite, when you know he’s about to give you a blessing a couple of minutes later?

 

[Brendan]

Of course anyone may bless anyone else. I’ve blessed my children countless times when they were little.

Any person may bless via the Grace God has given them, but only Clergy may bless in the Name of the Church. A blessing from the Clergy differs in essence from a lay person’s blessing. It is, in effect, Christ, along will all the angels and saints, imparting God’s favor upon the recipient.

A layperson only blesses with the Grace they have present and cannot do so in the Name of the Church Militant, Suffering and Triumphant.

 

[sojo]

My parish priests do not do blessings in the Communion line. Everybody gets a blessing before the end of Mass, whether they received Communion or not.

My son would dearly love to take communion, but due to physical problems with his disability, he is unable (but getting close!!). He is 11 years old with Down syndrome, and getting a personal blessing is important to him. He sits through a (for him) long service, and getting a universal blessing at the end just isn’t the same. He desperately desires his First Communion – he has been preparing for nearly 5years now.

When we have visiting priests, including once the Bishop, we were in the “wrong” line. Not wanting to upset the balance of things with a visitor, we just stayed in the line with the EM and gently moved my son to the side (no, an EM cannot do a blessing in the communion line according to the Vatican, anyway) while we received. We have been surprised EVERY single time to see the visiting priest and even the Bishop step out of their position to come over and bless my son. We were very touched. After the Mass, we did stand in line to shake the Bishop’s hand (doesn’t come out to our little rural parish often!), and my son threw himself into the man’s arms.

If the guys in charge don’t mind taking a moment to bless my son, then I guess it is OK to bring him up for communion. We can’t leave him alone in the pew, and though it sounds like some of you would prefer I leave him home with a sitter.

We’ve been told that seeing the Priest and Bishop take the time to do a heartfelt blessing to a disabled child to be a true reflection of the Priest acting in person Christi.

I am quite shocked at the lack of charity of some so-called pious Catholics.

sojo

 

[Sarabande]

Yes, and from what I understand, someone could kneel to receive Communion even if everyone else is standing, from what I understand the Vatican has said that Priests are not to refuse such people Communion.

I believe this is true. I’ve been seeing more people kneeling when they receive the Eucharist from the priest and my parish is one where most people don’t kneel. The priest will not refuse communion, although I have seen a video of a priest totally ignoring a woman who knelt to receive. I don’t know what parish that was, though.

 

[vz71]

While at Mass, have you ever intentionally avoided receiving communion from an EMHC so as to receive from a priest or deacon?

If so, why?

Did you jump communion lines or go “far” out of your way?

Absolutely.
But only when my kids are attending with me.

They are too young to receive.
The priest will usually give some sort of blessing to the children that cannot receive.
I have seen EMHC’s give blessings before, but I am uncertain of the validity involved there. I suspect that giving a blessing such as that exceeds the authority of the EMHC.

Also the priest is less likely to give communion to children then the EMHC. He works at the Catholic school, and knows those children that have not received the sacrament yet.

 

[Petergee]

My son would dearly love to take communion, but due to physical problems with his disability, he is unable (but getting close!!). He is 11 years old with Down syndrome, and getting a personal blessing is important to him. He sits through a (for him) long service, and getting a universal blessing at the end just isn’t the same. He desperately desires his First Communion – he has been preparing for nearly 5years now.

When we have visiting priests, including once the Bishop, we were in the “wrong” line. Not wanting to upset the balance of things with a visitor, we just stayed in the line with the EM and gently moved my son to the side (no, an EM cannot do a blessing in the communion line according to the Vatican, anyway) while we received. We have been surprised EVERY single time to see the visiting priest and even the Bishop step out of their position to come over and bless my son. We were very touched. After the Mass, we did stand in line to shake the Bishop’s hand (doesn’t come out to our little rural parish often!), and my son threw himself into the man’s arms.

If the guys in charge don’t mind taking a moment to bless my son, then I guess it is OK to bring him up for communion. We can’t leave him alone in the pew, and though it sounds like some of you would prefer I leave him home with a sitter.

We’ve been told that seeing the Priest and Bishop take the time to do a heartfelt blessing to a disabled child to be a true reflection of the Priest acting in person Christi.

I am quite shocked at the lack of charity of some so-called pious Catholics.

sojo

Of course no-one is suggesting that your son, or children too young to receive communion, should be left in the pew by themselves, or left at home. Bring them up with you by all means. But I don’t think you should teach him to expect an individual blessing. If your son really can’t understand why this isn’t correct (and I have known several Downs syndrome kids who would have no trouble understanfding this) there may be a special case for giving him an individual blessing during communion.

But I was referring to the attitude, ironically most prevalent in Catholic schools, where the commandment “Thou shalt not exclude anyone from anything, ever” trumps everything else. A teacher protested to me “But the poor little kids, they don’t understand why they can’t receive communion or get a blessing” (which they are taught by implication is the non-catholic equivalent of communion). If 7 year old Catholics can learn a basic understanding of what Communion is, then surely 8 to 13 year old non-catholics can understand why only Catholics can have it and why giving each non-Catholic an individual blessing during communion is inappropriate.

 

[Chatter163]

The word “ordinary” in “ordinary minister” (or “extra-ordinary minister”) refers to the ordained (or non-ordained) state of those clergy who have received the sacrament of Holy Orders (or of those laity or religious who have not received this sacrament, respectively.) So the deacon is indeed today and has been as long as this clerical state has existed, an ordinary minister of the Blessed Sacrament under either species. Where or when he has customarily been used to exercise this ministry is another matter.

I am sorry; I do not understand what you are trying to say. I have posted the old code of canon law, which clearly stated that only a priest was the ordinary minister of the Body of Christ and that a deacon was extraordinary. (This was pre-Vatican II.)

What exactly are you trying to say, something which seems in complete contradiction to this very clear law and practice of previous centuries?

 

[Brendan]

What exactly are you trying to say, something which seems in complete contradiction to this very clear law and practice of previous centuries?

The practice is disciplinary, not doctrinal. For example the Deacon has always been an Ordinary Minster in the Eastern Churches.

So even in centuries past, the designation of Deacons as Extraordinary was not Universal.