Is there any inherent reason EMHCs must receive communion before distributing?

[anfcatholic.com]

His question was based on the flawed premise that they couldn’t consume the remaining Precious Blood because they had already received Communion. Since that is not the case …

Has it been demonstrated that his premise was flawed? Did I miss where something official said it is or is not permitted for an EMHC to consume the remaining precious blood after the congregation has finished receiving?

 

[Phemie]

Has it been demonstrated that his premise was flawed? Did I miss where something official said it is or is not permitted for an EMHC to consume the remaining precious blood after the congregation has finished receiving?

Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America:

1. When more of the Precious Blood remains than was necessary for Communion, and if not consumed by the bishop or priest celebrant, “the deacon immediately and reverently consumes at the altar all of the Blood of Christ which remains; he may be assisted, if needs dictate, by other deacons and priests.” (54) When there are extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, they may consume what remains of the Precious Blood from their chalice of distribution with permission of the diocesan bishop.

I have never seen norms for this put out by the CCCB but the EMHCs in our diocese are to drink the Precious Blood remaining in their chalice.

 

[anfcatholic.com]

Norms for the distribution and reception of Holy Communion under both kinds

This is something official dealing with EMHCs and Communion but I’m not sure it has to do with whether EMHCs should finish the remaining Precious Blood after Communion if there is any left over. I’m not sure what the quote means concerning EMHCs not receiving Communion in the manner of concelebrating priests. If the EMHCs aren’t up near the altar until after the priest has consumed, as directed elsewhere, I would think that would take care of most of the problems. Is this possibly an issue where one needs to be in line with one’s Bishop since there aren’t extremely clear directives from Rome?

 

[benedictgal]

To augment what Phemie wrote, Redemptionis Sacramentum, which carries universal jurisdiction, notes that:

Furthermore all will remember that once the distribution of Holy Communion during the celebration of Mass has been completed, the prescriptions of the Roman Missal are to be observed, and in particular, whatever may remain of the Blood of Christ must be entirely and immediately consumed by the Priest or by another minister, according to the norms, while the consecrated hosts that are left are to be consumed by the Priest at the altar or carried to the place for the reservation of the Eucharist.196

I hope this helps.

 

[benedictgal]

This is something official dealing with EMHCs and Communion but I’m not sure it has to do with whether EMHCs should finish the remaining Precious Blood after Communion if there is any left over. I’m not sure what the quote means concerning EMHCs not receiving Communion in the manner of concelebrating priests. If the EMHCs aren’t up near the altar until after the priest has consumed, as directed elsewhere, I would think that would take care of most of the problems. Is this possibly an issue where one needs to be in line with one’s Bishop since there aren’t extremely clear directives from Rome?

Rome has given clear directives, anfcatholic. When Mass is concelebrated, the priests are each given a piece of the Sacred Host during the Fraction Rite, at the Agnus Dei. They consume the Body of Christ at the same time the celebrant does. Unfortunately, there have been instances when this practice has been extended to EMHCs. This is what the document prohibits. That is why EMHCs should not approach the altar until after the priest has consumed the Body and Blood of Christ.

 

[Phemie]

This is something official dealing with EMHCs and Communion but I’m not sure it has to do with whether EMHCs should finish the remaining Precious Blood after Communion if there is any left over. I’m not sure what the quote means concerning EMHCs not receiving Communion in the manner of concelebrating priests. If the EMHCs aren’t up near the altar until after the priest has consumed, as directed elsewhere, I would think that would take care of most of the problems. Is this possibly an issue where one needs to be in line with one’s Bishop since there aren’t extremely clear directives from Rome?

That quote was in reference to the suggestion that EMHCs should probably receive after everyone else so that they could consume the remaining Precious Blood.

The USCCB’s Norms address the concern with two statements: 1)that receiving last goes against liturgical law and, 2) that EMHCs may consume what remains in the chalice from which they were administering Communion.

As for not receiving ‘in the manner of concelebrating priests’, well, that’s what happens in my parish. They come to the altar at the “Lord’s Prayer” and depending on which priest is celebrating (we have 3 who alternate, depending on which one is in town) we see:

1. Priest receives both Body & Precious Blood then distributes Communion to the altar servers and EMHCs (proper way of doing things).
2. Priest distributes Hosts to the altar servers and EMHCs then they all consume it at the same time as he does. He then drinks the Precious Blood and then offers it to the EMCHs. (That’s our pastor’s way of doing things.)
3. Priest offers the ciborium to the altar servers and EMHCs and everyone takes a Host (the way concelebrants do) ; all consume the Host at the same time as the priest does. Then he drinks from the chalice and then offers it to the EMHCs. Sometimes he leaves the second chalice on the altar for the second EMHC to pick up for him/herself.

All three ways violate the directive that EMHCs should not approach the altar until after the priest has received Communion. This is in line with what I’ve heard since the directive not to approach the altar: “Define ‘approach the altar’.”

 

[anfcatholic.com]

I have never seen norms for this put out by the CCCB but the EMHCs in our diocese are to drink the Precious Blood remaining in their chalice.

I’m confused by this statement. By “CCCB” you mean USCCB right? Isn’t what the USCCB said in Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America norms put out by the USCCB?

Probably off topic, but can someone explain this to me:

Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America

On June 9, 2006 in an audience with the Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI this indult was not extended. The Conference of Bishops was informed of this by a letter from Cardinal Francis Arinze, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, dated October 12, 2006 (Prot, n. 468/05/L).

 

[benedictgal]

I’m confused by this statement. By “CCCB” you mean USCCB right? Isn’t what the USCCB said in Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America norms put out by the USCCB?

Probably off topic, but can someone explain this to me:

The indult to allow EMHCs to purify the sacred vessels was not extended by Pope Benedict XVI.

Phemie is from Canada. She is referring to the Canadian Conference of Caholic Bishops.

 

[Phemie]

I’m confused by this statement. By “CCCB” you mean USCCB right? Isn’t what the USCCB said in Norms for the Distribution and Reception of Holy Communion Under Both Kinds in the Dioceses of the United States of America norms put out by the USCCB?
The CCCB is the Canadian Conference. AFAIK, they have not issued norms on this.

Probably off topic, but can someone explain this to me:

That refers to the indult that had been granted allowing EMHCs to purify the sacred vessels after Communion. The indult was not renewed. Only priests, deacons and instituted acolytes may purify the vessels.

 

[anfcatholic.com]

It all makes sense now. Thanks. I did a quick search for CCCB and all I got were things like Child Care Choices of Boston and Chinese Christian Church of Baltimore.

 

[thomas_jd]

Yes, we covered that up in post #3. The question is whether there is any inherent reason the norm or law couldn’t be changed.

Here is one: At the" eucharistic banquet" it is always Christ who is serving and being served. Although it may seem that you are acting as a host and should wait until the guests are served, the theology of communion takes a different approach. The extraodinary minister’s ministry is a service to the Church and a help to the priest who is always acting in persona Christi capitis et persona ecclesiae ( in the person of Christ the head and in the person of the Church). As a extraordinary minister, you are sharing in that ministry;therefore, “the practise of waiting to receive Holy Communion until after the distribution of Holy Communion is not in accord with liturgical law.”

 

[otjm]

Rome has given clear directives, anfcatholic. When Mass is concelebrated, the priests are each given a piece of the Sacred Host during the Fraction Rite, at the Agnus Dei. They consume the Body of Christ at the same time the celebrant does. Unfortunately, there have been instances when this practice has been extended to EMHCs. This is what the document prohibits. That is why EMHCs should not approach the altar until after the priest has consumed the Body and Blood of Christ.

Um, what I have seen in concelebrated Masses is that the Concelebrants take a Host from the Ciborium. It is not handed to them, but the Host is handed to anyone else; no one else is to reach in as this would be self-communicating. They, however, in cncelebrating, are in the smae position as the main celebrant, and just as he does, they self communicate.

 

[JReducation]

Um, what I have seen in concelebrated Masses is that the Concelebrants take a Host from the Ciborium. It is not handed to them, but the Host is handed to anyone else; no one else is to reach in as this would be self-communicating. They, however, in cncelebrating, are in the smae position as the main celebrant, and just as he does, they self communicate.

The concelebrants may take a fraction of the host from the patten, if there is enough or from the ciborium. But they do self-communicate. A priest receives communion if he is in the congregation and even there, sometimes the priest who is in the congregation is offered the ciborium to self-communicate. There is nothing wrong with a priest and bishop self-communicating, even if they are not concelebrating. A bishop will always sit on the side of the sanctuary in a special place and the patten or ciborium is brought to him and he takes the host.

You see priests receiving communion from another priest more in religious houses where there is more than one priest in the house, but only one priest is allowed to celebrate mass. They take turns. They do not have concelebration. In some communities the ordained brother goes up and is allowed to take the host from the ciborium and in other communities this is not allowed and the ordained brother must be offered the host like any other brother. Priests not being allowed to concelebrate is more common in certain houses of Franciscans, Carmelites, Trappists, Bendedictines, Camaldolese and other orders where the priesthood is accidental not essential to the religious life. Even then, there are variations according to regional customs. But in a parish the situations are different and you usually follow the GIRM so as not to confuse the laity.

I have rarely seen priests attend a parish mass to fuflill his Sunday obligation. Most will celebrate a mass or concelebrate. If they do so, they receive communion from either the patten or the ciborium. But they self-communicate. What is meant when the rule says that it is given to them, is not that the actual host is given to them, but that the patten is offered to them. I have never seen a ruling that says that a priest or bishop has to receive communion from another cleric if he is concelebrating or is simply attending.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF