In the time it takes to ceremoniously distribute both species to all the EMHC's..

[Cojuanco]

One would think not.

At the Spanish Masses I attend, fewer than 50%, if that many, go to receive. One priest and one EMHC and communion is done in less than 5 minutes.

Of course, that’s a topic for another discussion, i.e. how to get Anglophones to not recieve the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin.

 

[otjm]

Seriously if it take seven (7) minutes to distribute communion to the EMHC’s by the priest there is a problem. 1) priest and/or deacon are moving way to slow. or 2) You really do need to distribute one species only.

I am not fast but it takes about 5-8 seconds per communicant receiving the body of Christ. some of our priest can roll through it at a pace a communicant every 3-5 seconds.

That means even at a super slow pace we are talking you have about 25- 50 EMHC’s. That would seem excessive.

Wow! 3 to 5 seconds! I am absolutely astounded at the reverence! Why, we should just whip that Host out there and MOVE!

 

[otjm]

Because it’s not “traditional and proper”. Go and look at all of the threads of Communion on the hand vs tougne. Even though the Church has said it’s okay to receive in the hand, many on this board feel that’s not right and the “traditional and proper” way to receive Communion is on the knees and on the tounge.

And many people in these forums feel that in the few years they have been on earth, they have received much more wisdom than the Church has in 2000 years.

In the Roman rite communion in the hand was practiced for the first 800 years at least, if not for the first 1000. And in the 1200’s, the church gave permission, in the Roman rite to the Franciscans to receive in the hand, so that practice has been going on for between 1600 and 1800 years of the 2000 total.

But that is not sufficient tradition for those who know better.

These same self-anointed liturgists are among the first to carp when someone else strays off the rubrics. That borders on the pot calling the kettle black.

I have no problem with someone who wants to receive on the tongue; none whatsoever. I do find that when one person out of the whole congregation decides they must kneel to receive when everyone else stands to do so, that they are immediately seen by so many that it is hard not to think that they are trying to draw attention to themseves. Maybe not. Never mind that is exactly what it does.

But I do get tired of the “holier than thou” attitude that seems to seep out when they make references to how wrong the Church is.

 

[ProVobis]

In the Roman rite communion in the hand was practiced for the first 800 years at least, if not for the first 1000.

There may also have been some kind of cloth used, but I don’t have the full history of the practice.

In any case, the practice was discontinued and probably for good reasons. Just saying.

 

[Brendan]

They believe that the laity is not worthy to touch the Body of Christ. Heck I feel that way as an EMHC…it’s a awesome responsibility…and we are not worthy…and neither is the priest…no one is…something to always remember.

The priest as a person is not worthy, but also remember that the priest at Mass is an alter-Christus, Christ acting through the priest.

As it is the voice of Christ, acting through the voice of the priest, through which the Eucharist is confected, it is likewise the hands of Christ, via the hands of the priest, that holds and offers the Eucharist.

Thus even in the Ministration of Holy Communion, the role of the priest differs in essence and degree from that of an EMHC.

That is not to say that the use of EMHC’s are not permitted, but there are decided theological differences between a priest doing so and an EMHC performing the same action.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

The priest as a person is not worthy, but also remember that the priest at Mass is an alter-Christus, Christ acting through the priest.

As it is the voice of Christ, acting through the voice of the priest, through which the Eucharist is confected, it is likewise the hands of Christ, via the hands of the priest, that holds and offers the Eucharist.

Thus even in the Ministration of Holy Communion, the role of the priest differs in essence and degree from that of an EMHC.

That is not to say that the use of EMHC’s are not permitted, but there are decided theological differences between a priest doing so and an EMHC performing the same action.

I don’t disagree. My point was that everyone should remember that no one is worthy. The day that I (as an EMHC) start thinking of it as a right…rather than an awesome responsibility that should put fear and trembling in me…is the day I should resign as an EMHC.

Sadly…I have seen too many EMHC’s and a few priest who treat it as no big deal…some more like poker chips then what it actually is.

None of us are worthy…a priest is made more worthy by his ordination.

Does that clarify what I meant?

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

When you get rid of Communion under both species, you actually save a lot more than 50% of the time. Receiving from the chalice is considerably lengthier than receiving a host.

Around where I am, there isn’t such thing as a church big enough to require a single EMHC, yet we’re overloaded with them.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

When you get rid of Communion under both species, you actually save a lot more than 50% of the time. Receiving from the chalice is considerably lengthier than receiving a host.

Around where I am, there isn’t such thing as a church big enough to require a single EMHC, yet we’re overloaded with them.

When you are Bishop…then you can decide that

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

When you are Bishop…then you can decide that

Um.

So if I were to take a stop watch and time a person receiving Communion under one species vs. both and find out that the one takes more than twice the amount of time, I’d have to be a bishop to state my findings? This isn’t a situation of faith and morals, it’s just a basic timing issue.

As for whether or not EMHCs are necessary in my area, it’s yet again another fact. They aren’t needed. They are supposed to be extraordinary… in other words, only used when ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. When there are about 100 people in the congregation, that is hardly too much for a priest to handle, especially when he is not overloaded with a tight schedule.

 

[SMHW]

Yes, but you might have to be the bishop to reascend the requirement to offer Communion under both forms. Where I live we are required to have both species offered on Sundays.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Yes, but you might have to be the bishop to reascend the requirement to offer Communion under both forms. Where I live we are required to have both species offered on Sundays.

It’s not a requirement in this diocese.

 

[JustaServant]

When you get rid of Communion under both species, you actually save a lot more than 50% of the time. Receiving from the chalice is considerably lengthier than receiving a host.

Around where I am, there isn’t such thing as a church big enough to require a single EMHC, yet we’re overloaded with them.

What’s the rush?

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

What’s the rush?

Exactly. We don’t need any EMHCs at all!

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Um.

So if I were to take a stop watch and time a person receiving Communion under one species vs. both and find out that the one takes more than twice the amount of time, I’d have to be a bishop to state my findings? This isn’t a situation of faith and morals, it’s just a basic timing issue.

As for whether or not EMHCs are necessary in my area, it’s yet again another fact. They aren’t needed. They are supposed to be extraordinary… in other words, only used when ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. When there are about 100 people in the congregation, that is hardly too much for a priest to handle, especially when he is not overloaded with a tight schedule.

You are going to take a stop watch and time communion? Yikes! It is not Joe pewsitters decision to make regarding EMHC’s is it?

It appears that you are trying to make that judgement as well as the judgement regarding the priests schedule and whether he is overloaded or not.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

You are going to take a stop watch and time communion? Yikes! It is not Joe pewsitters decision to make regarding EMHC’s is it?

It appears that you are trying to make that judgement as well as the judgement regarding the priests schedule and whether he is overloaded or not.

No, I’m not going to use a stop watch. It’s easy enough to tell without doing so.

Also, please stop with the “you’re being too judgmental” arguments already. Way too many people fall back on that. However, I’m not going to speak more about what I think about priests schedules since your post is an obvious attempt to bait me.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

No, I’m not going to use a stop watch. It’s easy enough to tell without doing so.

Also, please stop with the “you’re being too judgmental” arguments already. Way too many people fall back on that. However, I’m not going to speak more about what I think about priests schedules since your post is an obvious attempt to bait me.

I really am not trying to bait you. In where the Church speaks about EMHC’s, she says it is the priest’s decision. It’s also the priest’s decision regarding both species. So unless you are a priest…it’s not your judgement call to make.

I don’t care if you are using a stop watch or not…it seems to me that communion time is inappropriate to spend judging how many seconds communion takes…this is not a manufacturing line…

 

[Armor_of_Light]

I really am not trying to bait you. In where the Church speaks about EMHC’s, she says it is the priest’s decision. It’s also the priest’s decision regarding both species. So unless you are a priest…it’s not your judgement call to make.

I don’t care if you are using a stop watch or not…it seems to me that communion time is inappropriate to spend judging how many seconds communion takes…this is not a manufacturing line…

Oh…it says some other things about it, too!

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Oh…it says some other things about it, too!

but again…those are still the priests decision to make…not the laity’s–in either direction.

We can trust the priest to concecrate the Eucharist…but not enough to make a decision on what is best regarding time delay or both species???

 

[larsont7]

but again…those are still the priests decision to make…not the laity’s–in either direction.

We can trust the priest to concecrate the Eucharist…but not enough to make a decision on what is best regarding time delay or both species???

You seem to suggest that all priests do what they are supposed to do 100% of the time, and the laity should accept it no matter what. The purpose of EHMCs is for “extraordinary” purposes, and if some priests are abusing this allowance, the laity have a right to call them out on it. The same goes for bishops, as some bishops are not faithful (some even downright in opposition to) the rubrics of the Church. I will remain obedient to my bishop, but if he’s wrong on something, it would be my duty to point it out to him.

Let’s say your priest decides it’s OK for him to wear shorts and a T-shirt to Mass. Should we still be able to trust him to make those decisions for himself? Or for a more apt example, if a young, healthy priest is saying Mass and only 3 people are in attendance, would you not question him if he still used an EMHC just because he could?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

You seem to suggest that all priests do what they are supposed to do 100% of the time, and the laity should accept it no matter what. The purpose of EHMCs is for “extraordinary” purposes, and if some priests are abusing this allowance, the laity have a right to call them out on it. The same goes for bishops, as some bishops are not faithful (some even downright in opposition to) the rubrics of the Church. I will remain obedient to my bishop, but if he’s wrong on something, it would be my duty to point it out to him.

Let’s say your priest decides it’s OK for him to wear shorts and a T-shirt to Mass. Should we still be able to trust him to make those decisions for himself? Or for a more apt example, if a young, healthy priest is saying Mass and only 3 people are in attendance, would you not question him if he still used an EMHC just because he could?

But this thread is not about priests in shorts…or 3 people in attendance…although if both species are used…he will still need one.

This thread has been about people deciding that they know better and they have all the facts. It’s about people deciding that both species should not be offered. It’s about timing communion times and concentrating at communion time on things other then out precious Lord.

Why can we not treat our clergy with respect and not complain to him that he is doing it wrong on things that are within his purview? We should submit to his authority and not try to change things to fit us when the Church has already spoken.