Lay mininsters may not cleanse Communion vessels, Pope Benedict says

[Dr.Bombay]

Many priests are lazy. If they’d pull the tv out of the rectory and give up their 2 or 3 tee times a week, they’d have plenty of time to take Communion to the homebound.

And if the hoardes of EMHCs, instead of hauling Our Lord from here to breakfast, would pick up a couple of old people and bring them to Mass on Sunday, they wouldn’t have to drag Jesus out of the Tabernacle at all.

I know. I make too much sense. Someone’s going to drop a couple of Australian algebra equations on me that make my suggestion untenable. “There are 5,000 people who can’t set foot outside their homes in my parish alone. If 30 EMHCs leave the church at 10 am and each covers 12 square miles…”

 

[Distressed]

Ha! I don’t think I’ll be letting you tell me where to go to church.

You exhibit the worst qualities of a cafeteria Catholics. Church direction isn’t good enough for you? You think you know better than the Church? The very idea sounds so Protestant in nature…

 

[Sir_Knight]

Many priests are lazy. If they’d pull the tv out of the rectory and give up their 2 or 3 tee times a week, they’d have plenty of time to take Communion to the homebound.

First off, I think that it is most uncharitable for you to paint MOST priests as being lazy. I’m not saying that SOME aren’t but to paint MOST of them in that light is not right.

Secondly, as I explained in my particular situation, there are 40+ EMHC in our parish who tend to the homebound. This past Sunday I spent 3+ hours ministering to the homebound. I dropped my family off at home at 12:50pm and immediately went to do the communion distributions and did not return home until 4:10pm. If all other EMHC spend a similar amount of time (some might spend less but that might be off-set by those that spend more), that adds up to 120+ hours a week. I can’t see how two priests can add an extra 60 hours into their work week. Can you?

If you include our Deacon, that comes out to 40 extra hours each. I still don’t see how that would be do’able.

And if the hoardes of EMHCs, instead of hauling Our Lord from here to breakfast, would pick up a couple of old people and bring them to Mass on Sunday, they wouldn’t have to drag Jesus out of the Tabernacle at all.

The EMHC’s are already volunteering their time in bringing our Lord to those that can’t leave the house – some of whom are either bed-ridden or in wheelchairs and getting them into a car would be virtually impossible and not advisable. Maybe the folks in church who are are NOT volunteering their time should SHARE some of the workload and pick up a couple of old people who CAN leave the house and bring them to Mass so that the EMHC’s would then have less house calls to make.

I know. I make too much sense. Someone’s going to drop a couple of Australian algebra equations on me that make my suggestion untenable. “There are 5,000 people who can’t set foot outside their homes in my parish alone. If 30 EMHCs leave the church at 10 am and each covers 12 square miles…”

Maybe actual numbers are needed to SHOW you the error in your thinking.

 

[AlexV]

We need to distinguish here between “the Church”, the pope, national conference of bishops, etc…

When the rules change so frequently on matters that apparently mean so much to some people (amazing how ALL this tedium could be avoided if you had no lay distribution of Communion!), it’s inevitable that people will disregard and undervalue said “rules.”

In other words, one day, under pain of “obedience”, we must assent that it’s right and proper for people to do X. Then, the next day, we must assert the opposite. Then, later, back to X.

That’s not how liturgy should or even does work.

 

[prv]

First off, I think that it is most uncharitable for you to paint MOST priests as being lazy. I’m not saying that SOME aren’t but to paint MOST of them in that light is not right.

Secondly, as I explained in my particular situation, there are 40+ EMHC in our parish who tend to the homebound. This past Sunday I spent 3+ hours ministering to the homebound. I dropped my family off at home at 12:50pm and immediately went to do the communion distributions and did not return home until 4:10pm. If all other EMHC spend a similar amount of time (some might spend less but that might be off-set by those that spend more), that adds up to 120+ hours a week. I can’t see how two priests can add an extra 60 hours into their work week. Can you?

If you include our Deacon, that comes out to 40 extra hours each. I still don’t see how that would be do’able.

The EMHC’s are already volunteering there time in bringing our Lord to those that can’t leave the house – some of whom are either bed-ridden or in wheelchairs and getting them into a car would be virtually impossible and not advisable. Maybe the folks in church are are NOT volunteering there time should SHARE some of the workload and pick up a couple of old people who CAN leave the house and bring them to Mass so that the EMHC’s would then have less house calls to make.

Maybe actual numbers are needed to SHOW you the error in your thinking.

First, in defense of Dr. Bombay, he said “many,” not “most”. Finally, against Dr. Bombay, priests, like everyone else, have the right to access the communications media.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

First off, I think that it is most uncharitable for you to paint MOST priests as being lazy. I’m not saying that SOME aren’t but to paint MOST of them in that light is not right.

I didn’t say “most.” I said “many.” There is a distinct difference between those words in the English language. As an aside, there is also a difference between “many” and “all.” But I digress.

Secondly, as I explained in my particular situation, there are 40+ EMHC in our parish who tend to the homebound. This past Sunday I spent 3+ hours ministering to the homebound. I dropped my family off at home at 12:50pm and immediately went to do the communion distributions and did not return home until 4:10pm. If all other EMHC spend a similar amount of time (some might spend less but that might be off-set by those that spend more), that adds up to 120+ hours a week. I can’t see how two priests can add an extra 60 hours into their work week. Can you?

If you include our Deacon, that comes out to 40 extra hours each. I still don’t see how that would be do’able.

The EMHC’s are already volunteering there time in bringing our Lord to those that can’t leave the house – some of whom are either bed-ridden or in wheelchairs and getting them into a car would be virtually impossible and not advisable. Maybe the folks in church are are NOT volunteering there time should SHARE some of the workload and pick up a couple of old people who CAN leave the house and bring them to Mass so that the EMHC’s would then have less house calls to make.

Maybe actual numbers are needed to SHOW you the error in your thinking.

Yeah, but I’m still not catching the error…

 

[Victorious]

:nope:

Mmm. That doesn’t work for me.

Why not? Are you afraid the Church will steer you wrong? If you’re not, why shouldn’t her word be good enough in matters of liturgy and worship? And if you are, why be Catholic?

 

[Stu]

There is certainly a distinction between EMHCs taking communion to the sick and disabled. If that were their only charge I would have no problem with the ministry. What is in question is the veritable cavalcade of players distributing the Eucharist every Sunday when they aren’t needed in the slightest. As we have seen, it only leads to the Body of Christ being treated as something all to ordinary.

It’s funny in that I was raised Lutheran and in going to communion at my childhood church a great deal more respect and reverence was shown there than I see among Catholics nowadays. Not only did we kneel at the altar rail but we also didn’t use our hands. Missouri Synod BTW.

I applaud Papa in this decision. I will follow my Pope anywhere he leads as I know the ultimate destination will be with Christ.

Vivat Iesus!

 

[Stu]

As an aside, there is also a difference between “many” and “all.” But I digress.

Sneaky!

 

[Dr.Bombay]

First, in defense of Dr. Bombay, he said “many,” not “most”. Finally, against Dr. Bombay, priests, like everyone else, have the right to access the communications media.

Never claimed they don’t have a “right.” It’s about priorities. So many people (not just priests) complain nowadays about “not having time” to do anything. No time to pray. No time to spend with the family. No time to volunteer. But they’ve got plenty of time to park their behinds in front of the tv for hours each week.

Priorities. Bringing Our Lord to a bedridden, elderly parishoner, or catching Montel? Hmmmm…that’s a true moral dilemma…

 

[Victorious]

The problem in your diocese may be the lack of openness to life. How big are your families?

Could also be a lack of openness to orthodox candidates for the seminary. When the rubber meets the road, how much of our priest shortage is self-inflicted?

I sincerely hope the ban on lay ministers purifying the Communion vessels is a step toward abolishing the noisome practice of cramming the Mass full of EMHCs. Where there are plenty of ordinary ministers (like at an ordination, when every last priest in the diocese is present), there is no excuse for using even one EMHC.

 

[prv]

Never claimed they don’t have a “right.” It’s about priorities. So many people (not just priests) complain nowadays about “not having time” to do anything. No time to pray. No time to spend with the family. No time to volunteer. But they’ve got plenty of time to park their behinds in front of the tv for hours each week.

Priorities. Bringing Our Lord to a bedridden, elderly parishoner, or catching Montel? Hmmmm…that’s a true moral dilemma…

How do we know that they are watching Montel or whatever is the newest T.V. garbage?

 

[AlexV]

"The problem in your diocese may be the lack of openness to life. How big are your families? We average five children. Ten are not unknown. Lots of kids means better odds for priests.
And of course we have no Girl Altar Servers. That helps.

Thank God He is in charge of our Holy Mother Church and His humble servant B16 is righting the wrongs of the last 20 years."

A diocese can’t have a “lack of openness to life”. If one means that a majority of Catholics in a given diocese are either aborting or using artificial birth control, show the proof. Otherwise, it’s an offensive remark. It leads all too easily to the attitude that the families with 10 children are models of Catholic tradition and those with 2-3-4 are…somehow less than ideal…snicker snicker, maybe there was some artificial contraception to prevent 10-12…

As for “Girl Altar Servers”…John Paul approved them. If Benedict is supposed to “right the wongs of the last 20 years”, I guess that means much of JP’s reign was not so hot.

My advice: don’t view popes as saviors. There’s only been one of those.

 

[steve_green_2]

There is a difference between many and all. Golly, where did I hear that one from hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Sir_Knight]

First, in defense of Dr. Bombay, he said “many,” not “most”. .

I didn’t say “most.” I said “many.” There is a distinct difference between those words in the English language. As an aside, there is also a difference between “many” and “all.” But I digress.

Same thing …

man‧y  /ˈmɛni/ adjective, more, most, noun, pronoun –adjective … Source.

… I stand by my original comment.

 

[AlexV]

Wrong. Many is a positive adjective, and most a superlative.

They are most certainly NOT the same. To argue they are is ungrammatical.

 

[FredM]

The article said “no longer assist”. Probably this means they can continue to do it “all by themselves”

Fred

 

[Sir_Knight]

Wrong. Many is a positive adjective, and most a superlative.

They are most certainly NOT the same. To argue they are is ungrammatical.

The MEANING of “many” and “most” is the SAME according to the American Heritage Dictionary. Look up “most” and “many” and you’ll see that they are used to define each other – thus they have a similar MEANING.

 

[AlexV]

Wrong.

And sorry, the American Heritage Dictionary isn’t a definitive source of information on English lexicography.

If you have 20 people, and 19 are uneducated, then most are uneducated. So are many.

But if 10 are uneducated, you could say many are uneducated, but you can’t say most are. Because most aren’t. Just half. Or, in this case, “many”.

Words have subtle distinctions in meaning. MANY is a positive degree adjective. MOST is superlative.

They’re not the same; one means a majority, the other just a large number. Of course a majority is also a large number - but a large number isn’t always a majority.

An important semantic distinction.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Yeah, but I’m still not catching the error…

Tell me how a priest is to fit 60+ extra hours into his week? Or, are you assuming that they do absolutely nothing right now?

That may be true of your priests but I can assure you that is not the case with our priests.