My Catholic School Employer Wants Me to Become a Eucharistic Minister

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Growing up on the fringes of the American South, we referred to everyone east of Cleveland and north of the Mason-Dixon Line as “New Yorkers”

I grew up deep in the old South, not anywhere near the fringes, and I never used or heard anyone use “New Yorker” for anyone other than someone from New York (usually meaning the city, but could also be applied to the state). The general term we used for someone from the areas you mentioned was “Yankee”, or maybe “Northerner” if we weren’t too mad at them at the time.

We were really neither Northern nor Southern, but were “more Southern than we were anything else”, even though we were Union territory, we viewed Northerners as fast-talking, sometimes overbearing outsiders (we had industries that attracted a lot of executive transplants), but on the other hand, we viewed Southerners as “something other than us”, slow-talking people who ate weird stuff like grits and okra. America is full of all kinds of interesting subcultures. We always said either “Northerner” or “New Yorker”. Never “Yankee”. Don’t know why. I can well imagine that if you went to, for instance, Paris, and heard Frenchmen speaking of ceux américains, this would come with all kinds of mental pictures, some of them unflattering.

 

[FiveLinden]

“Novus Ordo” does not have an intrinsically pejorative connotation, it just means “new order”

Connotations are always extrinsic, not intrinsic. I had never heard the term ‘novus ordo’ until I stumbled across CAF. Having now read thousands of posts using the term I think it is clear that it is typically used as a pejorative term. This is made clear by the availability of the terms ‘ordinary form’ and ‘extraordinary form’ which people choose not to use despite them being the more accurate terms.

 

[redcatholic]

I wouldn’t do it. Absolutely not.

 

[ewohdrol]

But it does tend to come up in the TC threads often.

 

[pnewton]

I’ve heard this argument before, that only the very first revised missal (1969) is correctly called the “Novus Ordo”.

Just please do not abbreviate it. That does have a bad connotation.

I do not know what good going to a state labor board would do over this. It is a religious issue and one over which a religious organization has control, just like it can deny a non-Catholic from distributing communion. What makes this dicier, is that the pastor is also the boss, and visa versa. I guess an appeal might be made to the bishop, though that is not a great way to start a new job.

It is not that I agree with the pastor, but he might be within his authority, though I really do not know.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

“Novus Ordo” does not have an intrinsically pejorative connotation, it just means “new order”

Connotations are always extrinsic, not intrinsic. I had never heard the term ‘novus ordo’ until I stumbled across CAF. Having now read thousands of posts using the term I think it is clear that it is typically used as a pejorative term. This is made clear by the availability of the terms ‘ordinary form’ and ‘extraordinary form’ which people choose not to use despite them being the more accurate terms.

Well, if you read things about the Traditional Latin Mass, you will hear it all the time. I feel no need to sanitize my speech or writing because this is a term that some people dislike or, on the other hand, use pejoratively.

It is similar to the term “Chinese virus”. I do not use it myself, but it is no more pejorative than “Spanish flu”, and nobody has an issue with the latter. Ditto for “German measles”.

HomeschoolDad:

I’ve heard this argument before, that only the very first revised missal (1969) is correctly called the “Novus Ordo”.

Just please do not abbreviate it. That does have a bad connotation.

I don’t abbreviate it.

 

[BlueMaxx]

Does your parish actually call them “Eucharistic Ministers”?

Our parish had always called them this till the past few years when it was changed to Extraordinary Minister…

I do not think the name makes much difference…it is what is being entrusted to the individual that is important.

 

[dochawk]

I think it is quite dystopian to suggest we stop using the proper term, Novus Ordo, to refer to a Novus Ordo mass or parish when that’s what it is.

Except that neither of those premises is true!

When it was new, the Missals did indeed describe themselves as the novus ordo.. This hasn’t been the case for some time.

And to describe a parish as that, rather than “Catholic” or “Roman Catholic”, when it is engaged in the normative liturgy, is condescending and offensive.

There are Catholic parishes, and I suppose TLM parishes/missions, but to tack the extra qualifier to distinguish a normal parish is just plain inappropriate.

Actually, Novus Ordo is not the correct term, as a true Novus Ordo hasn’t been celebrated in about 4 decades.

This.

If it were even made a condition of your employment, you might try filing a complaint with your state labor board.

No.

And the United States Supreme Court just said so a couple of weeks ago. The religious organization defines the scope of ministerial role of their employees.

The alternative, which has come up in those cases, is the flaunting of pregnancy in shacked up couples flaunting church teaching, or with gay marriage.

There isn’t a way to make exceptions for the deviations from church teaching that one agrees with, while still banning the other ones . . .,

(I’m not getting into whether it’s a good idea or not to require faculty to be extra-ordinary ministers of the Eucharist, just clarifying that the law on this is settled).

“Novus Ordo” does not have an intrinsically pejorative connotation,

neither do many older terms for skin color, or medical conditions. Yet common usage has caused the clinical medical term “moron”, as well as the term that replaced it, to leave usage.

 

[FiveLinden]

n

I feel no need to sanitize my speech or writing because this is a term that some people dislike or, on the other hand, use pejoratively.

I do not mind if you sanitise or not. I have no horse in this race. But when you use words it makes sense to be aware of how people will react to them. In that way you can avoid giving offence where none was intended.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

I feel no need to sanitize my speech or writing because this is a term that some people dislike or, on the other hand, use pejoratively.

I do not mind if you sanitise or not. I have no horse in this race. But when you use words it makes sense to be aware of how people will react to them. In that way you can avoid giving offence where none was intended.

I suppose I don’t understand why it’s taken as offensive. Who is it hurting? How is it disrespectful? It may be technically inaccurate, but there are a lot of usages in everyday life that aren’t as precise as they could be, but are still accepted. “Holland” as a pars pro toto for the Netherlands is one example — but I can imagine why a resident of Limburg, that little appendix-like thing that dangles off the rest of the country between Belgium and Germany, could take umbrage and say “don’t call this ‘Holland’ — we’re nowhere near Holland, does this look like Holland to you? — do you see any polders or windmills?”. College students in rural states frequently give the name of their county seat or nearest larger city, rather than the little village nobody’s ever heard of, when telling where they’re from, or at least they did when I was in school.

The “Extraordinary Form” (a term I dislike, by the way, it’s made-up and non-descriptive, but I won’t go so far as to say I find it offensive) is variously called the Traditional Latin Mass, simply “the Latin Mass” (imprecise, the OF can also be said in Latin), the “old Mass”, the “Mass of All Time”, the “Mass of the Ages”, and a term that has largely fallen out of usage, the “Tridentine Latin Mass”. None of these are in the least bit offensive. Only calling it the “true Mass” (and I have heard it called this) is offensive, and calls into doubt the indefectibility of the Church.

 

[dochawk]

I suppose I don’t understand why it’s taken as offensive. Who is it hurting? How is it disrespectful?

If one identifiable group decided to refer to homeschoolers as “glurgenbfrutae” as a way to dismiss them or put them down, and said it commonly, the fact that the word had long been used as a technical term combining the words “house” and “to teach” wouldn’t cause others to not recognize it as dismissive . . .

 

[FiveLinden]

From comments I have read on CAF I think it is taken as offensive because those who use it are invariably highly critical of the ordinary form and use a range of words, some of them extreme, to describe it. As the ordinary form is central to the lives of the majority of practising Catholics anything associated with criticism of it may cause offence. And as with most words that may cause offence there are other words available. I guess this is the reason Catholics do not introduce the partners of divorced Catholics as ‘Her so-called husband’ and have stopped using terms like ‘perfidious Jews’ in liturgy. People have their feelings, right or wrong, and it is possible to take care not to hurt them. I try, but then I’m an atheist.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

I suppose I don’t understand why it’s taken as offensive. Who is it hurting? How is it disrespectful?

If one identifiable group decided to refer to homeschoolers as “glurgenbfrutae” as a way to dismiss them or put them down, and said it commonly, the fact that the word had long been used as a technical term combining the words “house” and “to teach” wouldn’t cause others to not recognize it as dismissive . . .

From comments I have read on CAF I think it is taken as offensive because those who use it are invariably highly critical of the ordinary form and use a range of words, some of them extreme, to describe it. As the ordinary form is central to the lives of the majority of practising Catholics anything associated with criticism of it may cause offence. And as with most words that may cause offence there are other words available. I guess this is the reason Catholics do not introduce the partners of divorced Catholics as ‘Her so-called husband’ and have stopped using terms like ‘perfidious Jews’ in liturgy. People have their feelings, right or wrong, and it is possible to take care not to hurt them. I try, but then I’m an atheist.

I have ten things to happen in my life that could “offend” me, before noon, on a good day, but I get past it, and that leaves the rest of the day. It takes a lot to offend me. I grew up among some very plain-spoken people and learned to roll with it. I’m reminded of the scene from Terms of Endearment where the cashier, perceived as being rude and just doesn’t see it, is told “you must be from New York”.

Okay, I hear everyone. Really, “Novus Ordo” is a term I don’t use in daily life all that much, because to tell the truth, I don’t spend all that much time thinking about the OF in the first place. I go to the TLM/EF when I can (which isn’t nearly as often as I’d like), and when I do go to the OF, it is from a combination of obligation and true devotion. Mixed feelings are a part of life, and there are things in life more important than feelings. I do derive a great peace from the OF, maybe because I’m rested and have only had to drive downtown, not two hours each way. So there may be some who are “highly critical” of the OF, but I’m not one of them. My first preference, no. A means of salvation for me, yes.

 

[billsherman]

I work as a teacher in a Diocesan Catholic School. The students are going to be attending virtual mass during the year, and my school wants all of us classroom teachers to become Eucharistic Ministers to distribute the Eucharist during the virtual masses.

Does the school have exclusively Catholic teachers?

I’ve done a lot of work with various Dioceses across the country and they frequently have plenty of non-Catholic employees. While they were expected to attend the occasional work-related retreat and mass, they were never compelled to participate, let alone play a role.

 

[27lw]

If the kids are going to watch Mass on TV then why not attend somewhere really great like the Vatican or somewhere? St. John Cantius?
Could you watch a virtual Mass from anywhere, and then consume communion that was consecrated locally? Why, or why not? Don’t you have to be in the same building or something?

 

[jeannetherese]

But it does tend to come up in the TC threads often.

Perhaps you (or some other posters) are confusing an association with a necessary causal link?
Correlation does not equal causation.

 

[RoseScented]

If the kids are going to watch Mass on TV then why not attend somewhere really great like the Vatican or somewhere?

I believe the reason they’re watching their school priest celebrate mass is because then the students could be said to have attended mass. It’s similar to how churches put TV screens in other rooms (cry rooms, overflow areas, large gatherings where people can’t see the altar, etc.). As far as I’m aware, as long as the priest has done the proper steps and asked permission from their bishop, then the students and faculty are actually considered “at mass” for that part.

Simply watching a televised or streamed mass does not fulfill any mass obligations because the watcher isn’t considered as being “at mass”. It’s why people still need the dispensation from the Sunday observance during quarantine even with all the churches streaming their masses. I haven’t gone to mass since March, but I have watched the mass every Sunday from my home.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

If the kids are going to watch Mass on TV then why not attend somewhere really great like the Vatican or somewhere? St. John Cantius?
Could you watch a virtual Mass from anywhere, and then consume communion that was consecrated locally? Why, or why not? Don’t you have to be in the same building or something?

Yes, you could, and it’s an interesting idea, but that would vitiate the idea of everyone assisting at one and the same Mass, right there on the premises, in as close proximity as possible given the circumstances. As I said upthread, it’s in all likelihood a daily Mass, there is no question of fulfilling an obligation (unless it were a Holy Day), so even if it doesn’t “count as being at Mass”, no harm is done.

Just a thought, having live Masses streamed and shown on a large-screen monitor might be a way to allow people in mission or far-flung areas to have the benefit of “attending Mass” — in a manner of speaking — coupled with receiving communion at their parish church, consecrated at a previous Mass, where no priest is available. I’m not sure how “regular” this would be, but with the technology for live streaming that we have now, I wonder if anyone has ever thought of it. No, strictly speaking, the faithful would not be “fulfilling their Sunday obligation”, but they would be no worse off, than if they didn’t have the live-streamed Mass in the first place.

 

[TheLittleLady]

To go a step further, it is not unusual for Catholic schools to hire non Catholic teachers for nonreligious subjects.

That this school took the time to make sure every room has a teacher who is a practicing Catholic tells me.that they anticipate these teachers to be willing to serve in emhc capacity.

 

[ewohdrol]

Really? Interesting. I realise it is anecdotal only but in my experience traditionalists are much more rigid in distribution of communion.