Intinction Confusion

[d4862y]

GIRM 287 makes it clear that distribution of Communion to the faithful by intinction is proper to the Priest — and I assume also to the Bishop without that being explicitly stated in the GIRM.

RS 104 makes it clear that the faithful are never to self-intinct.

HOWEVER:

(a) Is it ever permissible for the Deacon to distribute Communion by intinction to the faithful using the procedures in GIRM 287?

(b) Is it ever permissible for the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion to distribute Communion by intinction to the faithful using the procedures in GIRM 287?

Is there specific documentation which supports the answers to (a) and (b)?

THANK YOU!!!

 

[tridentinecanon]

You are right - it does say “priest.”

This is an intriguing question. I have a couple thoughts, but regrattably, I have no authoirty to offer you.

1. No communicant, except for the celebrating priest, may self-communicate. That is to say, no communicant may “take” communion. They must receive it.

This rule has the implication that no communicant may dip the Sacred Host into the Precious Blood, as that would constitute, or essentially lead to, self-communication.

Taking this reasoning a bit further, and keeping in mind that Paragraph 287 of the G.I.R.M. only states “priest,” whereas the foregoing paragrahs are explicit as to the role of other ministers, it is probably best to leave the distribution of communion by intinction to the celebrating priest.

1. Paragraph 83 of the G.I.R.M. gives the following instruction:

“The priest breaks the Bread and puts a piece of the host into the chalice to signify the unity of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the work of salvation, namely, of the living and glorious Body of Jesus Christ.”

That part of the celebration is clearly left to the celebrating priest for obvious reasons. Since the two acts are so similar, it makes sense that if the priest does one, he should also do the other.

 

[Brendan]

(a) Is it ever permissible for the Deacon to distribute Communion by intinction to the faithful using the procedures in GIRM 287?

There was a responsum from the Vatican that confirmed that a Deacon is permitted under the GIRM to offer intincted Communion.

The question was specific to Deacons, so EMHC’s were not addressed,

 

[tee_eff_em]

There was a responsum from the Vatican that confirmed that a Deacon is permitted under the GIRM to offer intincted Communion.

The question was specific to Deacons, so EMHC’s were not addressed,

Brendan, can you be more specific? I’ve never been able to find such a dubium/responsum.

:tiphat:
tee

 

[Brendan]

Brendan, can you be more specific? I’ve never been able to find such a dubium/responsum.

:tiphat:
tee

I haven’t seen it online. It was published in Notatiae and we discussed in during one of my diaconate classes. I had it in hardcopy once but it got lost.

 

[John_Lilburne]

…(a) Is it ever permissible for the Deacon to distribute Communion by intinction to the faithful using the procedures in GIRM 287?

(b) Is it ever permissible for the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion to distribute Communion by intinction to the faithful using the procedures in GIRM 287?

Is there specific documentation which supports the answers to (a) and (b)?

THANK YOU!!!

My view is that it is permissible for a Deacon and an Extraordinary Minister to distribute Communion by intinction.

The main document that supports this is another part of the GIRM:
“161. If Communion is given only under the species of bread, the priest raises the host slightly and shows it to each, saying, Corpus Christi (The Body of Christ). …”.
Compare it to:
“287. If Communion from the chalice is carried out by intinction, each communicant, holding a communion-plate under the chin, approaches the priest, who holds a vessel with the sacred particles, a minister standing at his side and holding the chalice. The priest takes a host, dips it partly into the chalice and, showing it, says, Corpus et Sanguis Christi (The Body and Blood of Christ). …”.

I interpret GIRM 161 as allowing an Extraordinary Minister to do this, even though it says “priest”. I interpret GIRM 287 in the same way.

Another document that supports this is “This Holy and Living Sacrifice”. According to an introduction by John Huels, it was published in 1984 following the approval of the Apostolic See in 1984 of the 1978 resolution of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops (now the USCCB). (The Liturgy Documents Third Edition, Liturgy Training Publications, 1991, ISBN 0929650468, page 250).
It includes:
“45. When Communion is given by intinction, the minister shall say “The Body and Blood of Christ,” to which the communicant responds, “Amen”.”
(The Liturgy Documents Third Edition, Liturgy Training Publications, 1991, ISBN 0929650468, page 264).

The document has been superseded by a new document of the USCCB and a new Roman Missal. But it does use the word “minister” rather than “priest”.

There is a good reason for GIRM 287 to the word “priest” for the person holding the consecrated hosts and “minister” for the person holding the chalice. It is indicating the role for the higher ranking person. So if an extraordinary minister were being used, I would see as wrong for the deacon to be holding the chalice while they extraordinary minister distributed Communion.

There are times when intinction should be used, rather than drinking from the chalice. The 1970 Instruction Sacramentali Communione emphasised this:

“Otherwise the preference should be for the rite of communion under both kinds by intinction: it is more likely to obviate the practical difficulties and to ensure the reverence due the sacrament more effectively. Intinction makes access to communion under both kinds easier and safer for the faithful of all ages and conditions; at the same time it preserves the truth present in the more complete sign.”
(Documents on the Liturgy 1963-1979, Liturgical Press, Minnesota, 1982, ISBN 0-8146-1281-4, margin number 2115).

As I see it, it would be unfortunate if intinction was not regarded as an option, because of time constraints and an incorrect interpretation that only the priest could do this, while extraordinary ministers could assist with presenting the chalice.

The GIRM can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html .

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

I think John has a good point with parallel passages saying priest where we know an extraordinary minister may do the job. It seems to be couched in the language of the “most ordinary” minister since the deacon, though an ordinary minister, is typically seen as attached to the chalice.