L
LilyM
Guest
The squirrelling is mutual
and I am not in the US, so it’s afternoon here.
In the time it takes to ceremoniously distribute both species to all the EMHC's..
- Status
and I am not in the US, so it’s afternoon here.
C
CalCatholic
Guest
Our parish has one priest and no deacons, so I guess he could hold the ciborium in his right hand and the chalice in his left hand, and the parishioners could help themselves…
But heaven forbid he should ask any of the sinful laity to help him! 
But heaven forbid he should ask any of the sinful laity to help him!
A
Armor_of_Light
Guest
Nice…I bet it is warm, too. Rub it in!The squirrelling is mutual
Back to the topic…You & I are roughly the same age I gather…
I have belonged to… lets see here…6 different parishes in my lifetime. All urban parishes with roughly the same numbers I guess. Like 1500 to 2000 families. When I was a kid, we had 3 priests and no deacons and no EMHC’s. We had 2 Sunday masses and 1 Saturday mass. That has really been my experience all my life. Roughly the same give or take a priest and a mass and add a deacon…
But nowadays (I don’t think that is really a word) we have 12 EMHC’s? What gives? Why? If it was not a ‘necessity’ 20-30-40 years ago, why is it a ‘necessity’ now? I remember the whole EMHC thing started rather slowly and innocently with 2 guys doing it and now it is 12? C’mon…you can’t say it is not getting out of control. All to be more what? “Inclusive”?
And consider this if you will…
Lets say for the sake of the discussion that every diocese has multiple TLM’s or is blessed with a FSSP chapel, and of course…they are well attended as you know they would be. You know they wouldn’t buy into the EMHC’s. And not because they are fuddy-duddies.
A
Armor_of_Light
Guest
That would be a serious abuse. Also, both species are not necessary.Our parish has one priest and no deacons, so I guess he could hold the ciborium in his right hand and the chalice in his left hand, and the parishioners could help themselves…
L
LilyM
Guest
When I was a kid most EVERY parish had two or three priests, now most of those same parishes have only one. If that - many are now sharing. And as I said earlier, the age of those priests on average was what? From memory maybe late 40s or early 50s? Now it would be into the 70s. I know I’ve grown a heap slower and less physically capable in the past 20 years, and I’m nowhere near that old! If priests in your neck of the woods haven’t gotten substantially older and frailer since your childhood then consider yourself extremely blessed, for you would be very much an exception to the rule. And yes, you would have a point for your area which would by no means hold true for all.
And the simple fact is it is not up to you or me to decide what constitutes ‘necessity’. If particular priests want to spend more time and effort distributing Communion, more power to them. Some like to chant as much of the Mass as possible, or use incense in the OF where such is not required by the rubrics, as well. Others do not.
I just don’t see it as being such a critical point that those who seek some extra help and to expedite the process of distribution deserve the level of vitriol and criticism that is sometimes heaped upon them.
A
Armor_of_Light
Guest
The age of the priests in my experience…Hmmm…When I was a kid most EVERY parish had two or three priests, now most of those same parishes have only one. If that - many are now sharing. And as I said earlier, the age of those priests on average was what? From memory maybe late 40s or early 50s? Now it would be into the 70s. I know I’ve grown a heap slower and less physically capable in the past 20 years, and I’m nowhere near that old! If priests in your neck of the woods haven’t gotten substantially older and frailer since your childhood then consider yourself extremely blessed, for you would be very much an exception to the rule. And yes, you would have a point for your area which would by no means hold true for all.
And the simple fact is it is not up to you or me to decide what constitutes ‘necessity’. If particular priests want to spend more time and effort distributing Communion, more power to them. Some like to chant as much of the Mass as possible, or use incense in the OF where such is not required by the rubrics, as well. Others do not.
I just don’t see it as being such a critical point that those who seek some extra help and to expedite the process of distribution deserve the level of vitriol and criticism that is sometimes heaped upon them.
When I was a kid of course they seemed older, but I’d say roughly the same. One of the three was newly ordained and one was pretty old (but still rode his bicycle around town!). The pastor was in his 60’s. But yes, I guess that overall they have aged. Our priest now is a very spry 72. He is very animated. Our deacon is 80ish and kind of slow. The other deacon is going to jail…
so I guess we can consider him retired.I rant sometimes, but this thread was not intended with personal vitriol towards the priests.
L
larsont7
Guest
Considering that over 75% of Catholics contracept, less than 25% attend weekly Mass, and close to 50% support abortion rights, I’d say most Catholics need to go to Confession. I wonder how many Catholics who cohabit or contracept receive Holy Communion each week?So you know for a fact that every single one of your fellow parishioners is currently in a state of mortal sin?
L
LilyM
Guest
And each and every one knows that these things are grave sins? Highly doubtful. If you asked those who do them I doubt many if any would say ‘yes, of course I know that is a grave sin.’ Remember, full knowledge is a requirement without which there is no mortal sin and hence no need for confession. Not that I at all approve of this woeful level of ignorance but it is undeniable fact that many do not know Church teaching on these issues.Considering that over 75% of Catholics contracept, less than 25% attend weekly Mass, and close to 50% support abortion rights, I’d say most Catholics need to go to Confession. I wonder how many Catholics who cohabit or contracept receive Holy Communion each week?
After all, most do not murder - which is something everyone DOES most assuredly know is a grave sin.
L
larsont7
Guest
True, full knowledge is a requirement for a sin to be considered mortal, but if we’re talking strictly about the Catholic Church in the United States, I find ignorance of this teaching to be considered willful ignorance. There has been so much in the media regarding the HHS Mandate and the US Bishops opposing it due to the contraception funding that one would have to be living a hermit-like life to not know contraception is against Church teaching.
And one who willfully lives in ignorance of Church teaching is also committing a grave sin, otherwise we’d all just pretend not to know anything so that we could all be guaranteed salvation. Sorry, but Our Lord just doesn’t work that way. He may be all merciful, but He is also just. Truthfully, I pray that I’m wrong and that all the statistics are wrong and that everyone who receives Holy Communion is doing so worthily, but my common sense tells me otherwise.
B
buc_fan33
Guest
I have a serious question that I would like answered. As far as I can tell, this mentality is prevalent…
EXTRAORDINARY ministers of Holy Communion=bad
EXTRAORDINARY form of the Roman Rite=good.
Both are extraordinary, as in, beyond what is considered the norm. Why is one criticized and one lauded?
EXTRAORDINARY ministers of Holy Communion=bad
EXTRAORDINARY form of the Roman Rite=good.
Both are extraordinary, as in, beyond what is considered the norm. Why is one criticized and one lauded?
A
ajecphotos
Guest
Our Bishop was telling us last week that he hates the word Extraordinary and prefers the term Eucharistic Minister!
C
CalCatholic
Guest
The Church is only right when it agrees with their point of view.
S
SecretaryMonday
Guest
You (we) Catholics are hilarious…the Reformed church I used to attend had sermons that typically ran about an hour, and that was just the sermon alone. The hip young music leader took up probably 45 minutes beyond that. When I started attending Mass, the priest talked for 10 minutes…I thought, “He’s DONE? Seriously? That was easy.”
G
garn9173
Guest
Here’s a novice idea. There are some on this board who will drive an hour one way just to attend a Mass celebrated in a language that most of us don’t know (Latin). For those who are obsessed with receving Communion only from a Priest without the assistance of Eucharistic Minister’s, perhaps you need to do the same.
Sorry to be blunt, but sometimes the truth hurt’s. As a kid in the 80’s I often received either the Body or Blood of Christ from my GRANDMA. It’s not like the need for Eucharistic Minister’s is a new idea…just saying.
Sorry to be blunt, but sometimes the truth hurt’s. As a kid in the 80’s I often received either the Body or Blood of Christ from my GRANDMA. It’s not like the need for Eucharistic Minister’s is a new idea…just saying.
C
CalCatholic
Guest
I know that that is the official name, but the only place I ever hear it pronounced that way is on this board. It is always ‘Eucharistic Minister’ at our parish and the others I have attended.
A
ajecphotos
Guest
I know. Even our parish priest heads the newsletters for us as ‘Eucharistic Mininsters’.
C
cothrige
Guest
This is a strange question. Why are you suggesting that EF Mass = good and EMHC = bad? Nothing posted here seems to say this. I think a more telling question would be to follow your reasoning of seeing a correlation between the two extraordinary things and ask yourself why one is hardly extraordinary at all? What if tomorrow you woke up and your church was having two or three EF Masses and only one OF. Would you say this made sense? If you thought it didn’t would that mean you thought EF Masses were “bad”? That is what I read from people here, questions about why so many are used all the time even in small parishes. It seems a valid question to me.
Let us take this a step further and really consider the real facts behind your question. In most churches there are ten to one extraordinary ministers to ordinary. The extraordinary outnumbers the ordinary, not the other way around. And this is scheduled and locked in day after day in all churches everywhere. Think about that. And yet when people want the EF Mass they are told that one per week for the entire diocese is more than adequate. After all, we are told, they are supposed to be “extraordinary.” Huh? In my diocese that can amount, for people at the farthest distance, to four hundred miles of driving to get to and from that Mass. In one situation the ordinary outnumbers the extraordinary at ratios of hundreds to one, and in the other it is the extraordinary that outnumbers the ordinary at more than ten to one. Just ask yourself if either makes sense and why these numbers are what they are.
If you believe that these people just asking about EMHCs is a declaration that they perceive them to be altogether bad, even when these questions have never impacted their use in any way whatsoever, what then must you think those who actually keep EF Masses from being offered at all believe them to be? They must see them as only slightly this side of satanic ritual child abuse.
C
cothrige
Guest
Interesting how people don’t understand the difference between Eucharist and Holy Communion. Our church, during First Holy Communion preparation, insisted on printing everything up as “First Eucharist.” For whom? These children had been to hundreds of Eucharists. Was it the priest’s first one? I doubt it. It was their first Holy Communion, and should have been referred to as that. Saying Eucharist instead mangles the entire meaning and confuses people.
These ministers are called extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion for the same reason. They minister Holy Communion, not the Eucharist. A Eucharistic minister confects the Eucharist, meaning priests and bishops. There are no extraordinary Eucharistic ministers. The idea is just ludicrous. These words are not interchangeable, and it is sad that so many do not seem to understand this. That a bishop wouldn’t know this is just depressing.
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
I for one…know the difference…it’s just easier to use the EM term each time when so many other people are. Especially when it’s your job to assign them to their stations.
C
cothrige
Guest
Wouldn’t it be easier to say priest?I for one…know the difference…it’s just easier to use the EM term each time when so many other people are. Especially when it’s your job to assign them to their stations.
- Status