Looking Forward: Administering the Eucharist Once Masses Resume

[phil19034]

phil19034:

Administer Holy Communion ONCE when Mass resumes and not again until either (a) the Coronavirus is over, (b) offer privately to someone on their deathbed, (c ) First Communions, or (d) next Easter.

In other words, I would suggest Bishops limit people from receiving communion to once a year until the threat is gone

Except that this presumes that everyone will be able to attend and receive on that weekend.

Well, I’m sure a good priest could help people make their Easter obligation privately. It also doesn’t have to be the first weekend back, eps if we don’t return to mass until after Pentecost.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Would it be possible for each priest to celebrate three Masses (“trination”) on Saturday afternoon and evening, and three Masses on Sunday?

Typically, only in an emergency, and the thing about emergencies is… you don’t schedule them. So, if you three scheduled Masses, then it’s not an emergency, right?

On the other hand, it is an extraordinary circumstance, and I would think that the local ordinary could make an exception to the norms for a period of time, if he feels it’s warranted.

All it would take is the Church’s fiat, to make trination licit for any priest, given the present circumstances.

HomeschoolDad:

Limit attendance to X number of people

This is gonna be the big problem. My local grocery store can limit occupancy and ask me to stand outside until a sufficient number of customers leave, and I’ll stand there for 5-10 minutes and wait. At a church for Mass, though? That means “come back in two hours” or “stand here for two hours”. Not a good solution.

Moreover, who would enforce these limits? The ushers? Maybe ushers around here are different than those where you are, but I can’t picture them doing it. In fact, I can picture them stopping some folks but allowing their friends in, or not paying attention while lots of folks over the limit come in. We’d also have to monitor all doors, while thinking about the total number of people entering, unless we use one door only. At some parishes, given access issues, that means only using the door that those with mobility issues can use. That’d be a real mess!

There would have to be some sort of online scheduling system, similar to what they use for movie theater seats.

HomeschoolDad:

I have to think that keeping people in enclosed spaces, sitting still, for over an hour, is more of a health hazard than anything else would be.

It’s not the “over an hour”. Even a good 15 minutes, while praying, singing, etc, will suffice to enable our congregants to become “Typhoid Mary”…

I am staying out of any enclosed spaces with other people for the duration (home excepted), unless it’s unavoidable (pharmacy, lawn and garden, etc.), and even then, I wear my N95 ventilator — the kind used by industrial workers — and try to get “in and out” as soon as I can. I am doing all my grocery shopping online and having the clerks to bring it out to the car. I don’t do Walmart anymore — too motley, “social distancing”, and necessity of wearing a mask, mean different things to different people.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

phil19034:

My suggestion: Don’t administer Holy Communion to the faithful every day/week.

Administer Holy Communion ONCE when Mass resumes and not again until either (a) the Coronavirus is over, (b) offer privately to someone on their deathbed, (c ) First Communions, or (d) next Easter.

In other words, I would suggest Bishops limit people from receiving communion to once a year until the threat is gone (unless they are on their deathbed)

I think this is a great idea. Perhaps, small parishes or chapels, where there is a very small attendance at weekday Masses, might offer Communion on weekday Masses. Back in high school, half the time I attended weekday Morning Mass, I was the only one in attendance. Hopefully, we will not have to wait until Easter next year to resume reception of Holy Communion. Maybe the pandemic will be over by Christmas? One can only hope.

This sounds awfully draconian, and very practical, at the same time. But if there were a worldwide “Communion Sunday”, and CV has not been entirely suppressed by that time, wouldn’t this create a huge vector for possible large-scale transmission?

“Everyone receives communion every Sunday” is a modern-day innovation. In times past, receiving communion was almost the exception rather than the rule, and among the Orthodox, reception is far less common than among Catholics.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

AlbertDerGrosse:

An issue we’ve already worked out. We are in fact already doing this and have been doing this for weeks now.

I’m glad that your parish has resources to do this!

Not all do, though. And so, the more resource-poor parishes and those with maintenance crews who are less, shall we say, physically robust?.. well, they’re stuck, because these folks probably wouldn’t be able to do three turns of “whole church sanitation” on a Sunday. So again, the “haves” receive, and the “have nots” go without.

Yes, we are very fortunate. We’re also blessed to have more than one priest unlike many rural parishes so we can regularly have multiple Sunday Masses. Unless you’re suggesting we shouldn’t take advantage of opportunities presented to us simply because others somewhere else are less fortunate I don’t understand the relevance of you pointing out our privilege here.

AlbertDerGrosse:

Distribution directly into the hand as it was done pre-pandemic is just as problematic as distribution directly into the mouth unless the minister washes his hands between each and every communicant.

Not really. Do you distribute communion? If so, do you touch the hands of those to whom you distribute communion in the hand? (And, if so, then there’s a training issue there which can be easily remedied.)

I have, at another parish when I was a parishioner there. My current parish doesn’t use EMHCs. It’s not always a matter of not touching the communicants’ hands but also of having the communicants not touch your hands. Look, I will not engage in a CITH v. COTT argument here. It isn’t my intention to pit one against the other. The fact remains that part of social distancing includes taking reasonable precautions not to touch the hands or mouths of other people.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

That’s why I said “window” instead of “obligation” — designate, let’s say, noon Saturday through 8 pm on Sunday as “Sunday Mass time”. There can’t be any “obligation” until people are freely able to attend Sunday Mass at will, and that may not happen for a while. Churches and schools are two of the most difficult places to impose “social distancing”.

I’m still not clear what you mean. Are you saying then have priests celebrate Sunday liturgy earlier on Saturdays than the current allotted time for the Anticipated Mass of Sunday (i.e. “the vigil”)? I don’t believe a bishop is at liberty to do that. If you mean simply to open the doors earlier to the public and have earlier Masses those would just be a Saturday Daily Mass, no? I guess I’m having trouble understanding how this would relate to a “Sunday window.”

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

That’s why I said “window” instead of “obligation” — designate, let’s say, noon Saturday through 8 pm on Sunday as “Sunday Mass time”. There can’t be any “obligation” until people are freely able to attend Sunday Mass at will, and that may not happen for a while. Churches and schools are two of the most difficult places to impose “social distancing”.

I’m still not clear what you mean. Are you saying then have priests celebrate Sunday liturgy earlier on Saturdays than the current allotted time for the Anticipated Mass of Sunday (i.e. “the vigil”)? I don’t believe a bishop is at liberty to do that. If you mean simply to open the doors earlier to the public and have earlier Masses those would just be a Saturday Daily Mass, no? I guess I’m having trouble understanding how this would relate to a “Sunday window.”

That is what I am saying.

Is it not within the authority of Rome to say “because of the present situation, ‘evening’ is to be interpreted as meaning anytime after the middle of the day, i.e., noon, on Saturday”, and all Masses after noon on Saturday would be Sunday anticipated Masses, with the liturgy appropriate to it?

This would make Mass far more available to the people — a parish with two priests could have twelve Masses total, six on Saturday and six on Sunday.

I’m just trying to think of ways to enable as many people as possible to assist at Holy Mass.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

This sounds awfully draconian, and very practical, at the same time. But if there were a worldwide “Communion Sunday”, and CV has not been entirely suppressed by that time, wouldn’t this create a huge vector for possible large-scale transmission?

Instead of a diocesan or parish wide universal “Communion Sunday” what if each household gets an allotted time to receive, and these times are spread out over various Sundays throughout a month/6-month/year (whatever is practical for that given parish)? If this were the case and the ministers of communion are distributing only to members of a single household, or have recourse to hand washing between communicating households then I don’t think any extra precautions would even be necessary.

 

[Gorgias]

And keep the sermons short

Because they’re already ‘long’, as compared to your average Protestant preacher?

That’s why I said “window” instead of “obligation” — designate, let’s say, noon Saturday through 8 pm on Sunday as “Sunday Mass time”.

It’s already “twilight Saturday through midnight Sunday.” What does a change accomplish?

While the Church is at it, I would also like to see everyone dispensed from their Easter duty and their yearly confession duty until this is all over.

Your “Easter duty” is only “if you receive Eucharist only once in the year, it should be during the Easter season.” I’m gonna take a wild guess that the vast majority of those who will brave the Masses upon resumption have already received this year. And, those who are Creasters are coming on Easter because of Grandma and not out of a desire to receive the Eucharist, let alone “receive it properly disposed and in a state of grace.”

Of course, the Holy Father is going to read this, say “yes, HSD, you’re quite right, couldn’t have said it any better myself, I’ll get right on it”

 

[Tis_Bearself]

My suggestion: Don’t administer Holy Communion to the faithful every day/week.

What’s the point of that? You know as well as I do that the daily Mass generally gets between 15 to 30 people at it and it’s often the same people every day of the week.

The Sunday Mass is the bigger concern than 20 people receiving at weekday Masses.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Your “Easter duty” is only “if you receive Eucharist only once in the year, it should be during the Easter season.” I’m gonna take a wild guess that the vast majority of those who will brave the Masses upon resumption have already received this year.

Yep, we all pretty much met our “Easter duty” by attending Mass and receiving once during Lent. Given that most places didn’t start shutting down Mass until about the second or third week of Lent, those of us who were regularly practicing are all good. And even if you received before Lent, you’re also probably still good.

 

[27lw]

https://images.app.goo.gl/khmQALWZrCqfmsPf9

Shouldn’t the spoon be six feet long if it going to follow social distancing rules?

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

My suggestion: Don’t administer Holy Communion to the faithful every day/week.

What’s the point of that? You know as well as I do that the daily Mass generally gets between 15 to 30 people at it and it’s often the same people every day of the week.

The Sunday Mass is the bigger concern than 20 people receiving at weekday Masses.

Perhaps I should have wrote “every day and/or every Sunday”?

If they want to offer communion to at small daily masses, fine. But if small, daily masses that offer Communion become 100+ people, then they might need to reconsider.

My main point is Communion should be offered to the faithful less than normal until the threat is gone.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m trying to think of ways to satisfy the epidemiological need to socially distance, including not having our priests serve as vectors for a highly communicable disease

I thought at first you were in Europe or some country where there was stricter mandated social distancing. I’m gonna be honest here, I’ve had fast food workers, coffee shop workers, grocery store workers, the veterinarian, and the employee of another local essential business hand me stuff in the last three days. If they can do it then I don’t see a problem in having a priest hand me the Eucharist. I don’t think he’s going to become a big disease vector if he’s not touching people’s hands - and even before the Mass shutdown, I noticed the priests were being careful not to do that.

We don’t need to go through gyrations over this. At some point we’re going to have to live our lives and accept that for most of us, it’s going to mean some limited contact with other people.

 

[Gorgias]

Shouldn’t the spoon be six feet long if it going to follow social distancing rules?

And the spoon should probably be wearing a mask, too…

 

[27lw]

“It is to laugh”, but the priests would be within 8-10 inches of all the communicants, right?

 

[phil19034]

Here is how people received Holy Communion during the plague. Holy Mother Church has thought of everything during her 2000 years! We don’t have to reinvent the wheel, we just have to look at what was done centuries ago.

BTW - the text says the following (according to Google Translate)

Support from a distance
Most of the pliers were about 1 m long. In 1720 a priest in Marseille proposed a length of 2.60 m.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Gorgias]

Here is how people received Holy Communion during the plague

I’m thinking that they didn’t understand infectious disease properly, back then.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

Here is how people received Holy Communion during the plague

I’m thinking that they didn’t understand infectious disease properly, back then.

They were close. It looks like they were at 1 Meter instead of 6 feet. Just make it longer A priest in 1720 AD did recommend making the pole 2.6 Meters long

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

I’m gonna be honest here, I’ve had fast food workers, coffee shop workers, grocery store workers, the veterinarian, and the employee of another local essential business hand me stuff in the last three days.

If this stuff is food that you’re immediately putting into your mouth I would think it was either not directly handled by the worker without sufficient hand washing, or if it had to be handled directly and their hands came into close proximity of your hands or mouth that they would’ve then washed their hands again before serving the next person. This is the issue here. The minister either needs to take extra precautions as to not come into physical contact with those to whom they are ministering (e.g. communion tongs, liturgical spoons, etc.) or, barring that, wash their hands between each and every communicant unless the communicants they are ministering to live in the same household.

As this thread progresses and I think about it more Im starting to lean toward the latter being the more feasible procedure compared to my original, admittedly quite complicated, idea about frequent spoon sanitation.

 

[Gorgias]

The minister either needs to take extra precautions as to not come into physical contact with those to whom they are ministering (e.g. communion tongs, liturgical spoons, etc.) or, barring that, wash their hands between each and every communicant unless the communicants they are ministering to live in the same household.

As this thread progresses and I think about it more Im starting to lean toward the latter being the more feasible procedure compared to my original, admittedly quite complicated, idea about frequent spoon sanitation.

Or, perhaps, that we should defer reception of communion (except for priest celebrant) until we’re past these concerns…