May a deacon distribute Holy Communion at the Latin mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AltarSoldier
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AltarSoldier

Guest
Hello and peace and blessings of God be unto to all here.

I recently am “recovering” from a spiritual “relapse” and the past month I have been touched by the Holy Ghost once again and for the first time in about two years have had a big devotion and reborn love for my faith once more. I can honestly say I havent felt this way since my late teens! I have been blessed with living near a church that Does the Latin mass 3 times a week. This Sunday was my second Sunday attending it and although Im slowly getting better at following the missal I am absolutely thrilled and in awe - almost to the point of tears - when attending the Latin mass. Its something I always wanted to be a part of and now I am finally able to be a frequent attendee.

With all this being said I received communion today (Latin mass of course) from the deacon. Now this would be the second time. I spoke to the priest on my way out after mass and asked him if he (the deacon who gave me communion) was a priest, and he said no a deacon. My original thought was he was a second priest who was just taking the role of a deacon (I thought that was common if an actual deacon wasnt present). This left me perplexed because even though his sash was diagonally placed as we all know he was also wearing the black biretta on his head.

This also concerned me a bit because I believe only the consecrated hands of the Priest may touch and distribute communion except only in grave situations the deacon may give communion. Even Thomas Aquinas said Only the fingers of a priest may touch the host. The deacon didnt do anything but say the gospel and distribute communion with the priest. Can anyone educate me here? Did I indirectly do anything wrong by going to a deacon for communion in the Latin mass?
 
Last edited:
Deacons have always been able to give communion in the Latin Rite. I recall that in the early 1960’s, most deacons were transitional deacons in their final year of seminary. It was not customary for them to participate in the Mass until priesthood, but it was certainly possible, because as deacons they have received the first step of Holy Orders and are ordinary ministers of holy communion.

(In my brother’s seminary at the time, the seminarians wore cassocks and birettas even before 4th Theology year.)
 
Last edited:
Interesting. I read that there is/was debacle over “transitional deacons” and “Permanent deacons”. I dont know if there is a specific reason of difference between married and unmarried in the Extraordinary practice of the Mass so i wanted to be sure,
 
AltarSoldier said:
if there is a specific reason of difference between married and unmarried in the Extraordinary practice of the Mass so i wanted to be sure,
Click to expand...
Trust you priest’s judgment in employing the deacon in the distribution of the sacrament. Even if not orthodox, while the practice might be illicit, it certainly does not make the sacrament invalid.

Rejoice in the Lord Always!
 
Among the functions of a deacon are to distribute communion, present the gospel, give sermons, witness marriages, and perform baptisms. These functions are not lost once ordained to the priesthood.
 
JimG said:
deacons they have received the first step of Holy Orders and are ordinary ministers of holy communion
Click to expand...
Just wanted to clarify that in the traditional Mass the Deacon was only an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. Regardless I don’t think it’s illicit to employ a Deacon, even if it may be “unorthodox” in a traditional Mass.
 
AltarSoldier said:
This also concerned me a bit because I believe only the consecrated hands of the Priest may touch and distribute communion except only in grave situations the deacon may give communion.
Click to expand...
This isn’t what the Church believes, teaches, or practices.
AltarSoldier said:
The deacon didnt do anything but say the gospel and distribute communion with the priest. Can anyone educate me here?
Click to expand...
The deacon does both of these things, yes.
AltarSoldier said:
Did I indirectly do anything wrong by going to a deacon for communion in the Latin mass?
Click to expand...
No. I know you are coming back to the faith, but don’t be overzealous to the level where you see things that are “wrong” where in fact nothing is wrong.

Don’t try to be “more” Catholic than the actual Church.
 
1ke said:
I know you are coming back to the faith, but don’t be overzealous to the level where you see things that are “wrong” where in fact nothing is wrong.
Click to expand...
Good advice.
1ke said:
Don’t try to be “more” Catholic than the actual Church.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think if everyone in the Church tried to be holier than the Church that’d be great. I don’t find the Church hierarchy at current the best measure for zeal.
 
Actually, I think if everyone in the Church tried to be holier than the Church that’d be great. I don’t find the Church hierarchy at current the best measure for zeal.
Click to expand...
Exactly. We all tend to forget how many lowly saints either outwitted or “outholied” others throughout the ages lol Just cause we arent in Politics in DC that doesnt mean the average American doesnt know or shouldnt try to be more political than those in Washington 😜
 
“Latin mass of course”? OK. Anyway, I would worry more about the sinful tongue which receives our Eucharistic Lord than the ordained fingers which touch Him.
 
I would worry more about the sinful tongue which receives our Eucharistic Lord than the ordained fingers which touch Him
Click to expand...
I simply restating that I went to the Latin Mass. I meant no harm in it. You read between the lines there and I dont know if that comment is directed towards me
 
ioannes_pius said:
40.png
JimG:
and are ordinary ministers of holy communion.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, this was not the case until the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
Click to expand...
Does that matter in this case?
 
Last edited:
As the Latin Mass must be celebrated according to the rubrics in force in 1962, those still regarding whether deacons can or cannot distribute communion still applies.

With that said, according to Fr. Edward McNamara in a May 21, 2019 article on Zenit - LITURGY Q & A: Deacons and Baptisms in Extraordinary Form 1962 Law Sets Parameters he says:-
" With respect to distributing holy Communion, Father Daniel C. Gill points out that there is a change wrought by canon law (CIC 910, §1) making the deacon an ordinary rather than an extraordinary minister of Communion. The 1917 code (845, §2) said that the deacon:

“Was an extraordinary minister of communion, who needed the permission of the pastor or local ordinary and a legitimate reason in order to distribute communion. With the change from extraordinary to ordinary minister, the deacon now would no longer need permission and a legitimate reason in order to distribute communion. Ceremonially there is no change. The 1952 Roman Ritual allowed the deacon to distribute communion using the same ritual as a priest (cf. 1952 RR, Order of Administering Holy Comm. outside Mass , n. 10) and could also give the blessing found at the end of the rite (see Cod. Comm., Resp. 13 July 1930). Similarly, the ritual allowed the deacon to administer Viaticum (cf. 1952 RR, Order of Communion to the Sick , n. 29). That this included the blessing within the rite was made clear, first, by an 1858 response by the Sacred Congregation of Rites (see S.R.C. 5270, Tonkini Occidentalis [14 Aug 1858]), and then, by 1917 CIC 1274, §2. Deacons and Summorum Pontificum | Servatis Servandis"
 
DIERM said:
40.png
AltarSoldier:
if there is a specific reason of difference between married and unmarried in the Extraordinary practice of the Mass so i wanted to be sure,
Click to expand...
Trust you priest’s judgment in employing the deacon in the distribution of the sacrament. Even if not orthodox, while the practice might be illicit, it certainly does not make the sacrament invalid.

Rejoice in the Lord Always!
Click to expand...
Except that is it not illicit or unorthodox. The FSSP uses their deacons to distribute communion whenever they’re available.

And there is absolutely no difference between this and employing a married permanent deacon. A deacon is a deacon is a deacon. If a married deacon wants to serve the traditional Mass, the priest and the community ought to welcome that with gratitude, because that’s yet another cleric wanting to help. Get two deacons, and you have the setup for a Solemn Mass every time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top