Resent receiving Communion from Eucharistic Minister

  • Thread starter Thread starter pmp147236
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is a story that goes with this. There was a time in Spain where St Teresa of Avila lived that there was a priest living in almost open sin with a particular woman. Sometimes one wonders where was the bishop while all this was going on. St Teresa was at mass said by this priest when Jesus appeared to her. He said, "My love for you is so great that I allow myself to be handled by this enemy of mine just so that I can be with you.
In your case the love that Jesus has for you is so great that he is allowing you to be handled by this extraordinary minister (who probably never did half the things that that vile priest was doing with that woman) just so that he can be with you. This extreme discomfort that you feel is probably a temptation from the devil in order to prevent you from receiving holy communion. Satan hates us and he will do anything he can to prevent us from being in communion with the Jesus who loves us.
 
pmp147236 said:
Perhaps it’s the attitude that the flesh and blood of Christ can be handled by just anyone…the church takes great pains to protect the species from falling to to floor, special laundering of altar linens, etc. So I csnt fathom how just any person who hasn’t had the theological formation to truly understand the sanctity of the host would feel comfortable even touching the chalice. Maybe that’s it… I have a problem with lay persobs believing they are worthy to touch the specie without having undergone the psycho spiritual journey one goes through via seminary.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you might read these words of St John of the Cross:

“Some souls suffer from another kind of spiritual anger. They watch over others with a kind of restless fervor, perpetually annoyed by the transgressions they perceive. The impulse arises to reprove the other souls in an angry way. Sometimes they even indulge this nasty urge, elevating themselves as masters of virtue. This is all contrary to spiritual meekness.”
 
I don’t struggle with the problem because I always go to the priest to receive. As for resentment that doesn’t serve any purpose. There is plenty that the Church does that one may find imprudent. You being resentful doesn’t help you and doesn’t change the situation. I find there is a lot one has to ignore these days otherwise it will drive you mad.
 
Well put @exnihilo. Someone else’s words, but I’m in it for the game and not the players.
 
anon48198893 said:
I think a good practice to go by is to observe and emulate the Eastern Catholic churches, since they were less prone to innovations.

Do they offer communion in the hand by laypersons?
Click to expand...
I think it’s a better practice to trust and be obedient to the teachings of bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, especially one’s local ordinary if it’s a Roman Catholic Church that one attends. If it’s allowed and permitted by Rome and the local diocese then it ought to be accepted by everyone in that diocese.
 
Last edited:
anon48198893 said:
Even when a cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church, a prince of the Church, calls communion in the hand a satanic attack against the dignity of the Holy Eucharist?
Click to expand...
Who is misinformed enough to be making a statement like that?
 
anon48198893 said:
Even when a cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church, a prince of the Church, calls communion in the hand a satanic attack against the dignity of the Holy Eucharist?
Click to expand...
Yes. Because it’s still permitted by the Church regardless his own personal objections to it. Of course the local ordinary (or a country’s Episcopal Conference) has the latitude to permit it or not to permit it.

It’s my duty and obligation as a member of the laity to be obedient to Rome and my local ordinary, and not to be so arrogant to believe that I know more about these matters than they do.
 
Last edited:
In 1961, would it have been okay to have EMHCs?
In 1961, would it have been okay to receive in the hand?
 
F_Marturana said:
One of the first martyrs of the Church was St. Tarcisius, a young boy who was charged by the Bishop to carry the Eucharist to some Christian prisoners.

St. Tarcisius – Martyr of the Eucharist
Click to expand...
Oh please. St Tarcisius literally died to STOP laypersons from touching the Eucharist! He didn’t distribute Holy Communion. He didn’t touch the Eucharist with his hands, the Eucharist was wrapped in a linen cloth.
How could someone think this story supports the use of EMHCs?
 
Last edited:
poche said:
There is a story that goes with this. There was a time in Spain where St Teresa of Avila lived that there was a priest living in almost open sin with a particular woman. Sometimes one wonders where was the bishop while all this was going on. St Teresa was at mass said by this priest when Jesus appeared to her. He said, "My love for you is so great that I allow myself to be handled by this enemy of mine just so that I can be with you.
In your case the love that Jesus has for you is so great that he is allowing you to be handled by this extraordinary minister (who probably never did half the things that that vile priest was doing with that woman) just so that he can be with you. This extreme discomfort that you feel is probably a temptation from the devil in order to prevent you from receiving holy communion. Satan hates us and he will do anything he can to prevent us from being in communion with the Jesus who loves us.
Click to expand...
Um…what do you mean by “never did half the things that that vile priest was doing,” exactly? Have I missed the post where the OP said that the laypeople helping to distribute Holy Communion were in a situation of notorious sin? For all anyone knows, that person spends more time in adoration than he or she does and agreed to do it out of obedience to the request by the pastor and knowledge that he or she would do it with great care to always be reverent, just as we presume that those who agree to help the priests to take Holy Communion to the sick do.

If neither you nor the original poster has any reason to believe that the extraordinary minister is guilty of anything other than helping the priest only after help was asked for and only in the way the help was requested, please refrain from implying a sin where there is no evidence of a sin. I don’t think the OP ought to punish himself or herself for having a feeling, but I believe charity requires the admission that the people doing this deserve to be presumed to be acting obediently and out of motives of reverence for the Lord unless they give the OP a reason to believe otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Loud-living-dogma said:
Oh please. St Tarcisius literally died to STOP laypersons from touching the Eucharist! He didn’t distribute Holy Communion. He didn’t touch the Eucharist with his hands, the Eucharist was wrapped in a linen cloth.
How could someone think this story supports the use of EMHCs?
Click to expand...
He was taking Holy Communion to the infirm and he was killed by non-Christian acquaintances who harmed him because they did not understand what he was keeping from them or why. Practically speaking, if no layperson was going to be touching the Blessed Sacrament, how do we think St. Tarcisius thought the sick were going to get it into their mouths?

If the number or the behavior of laypersons deputized to distribute Holy Communion is not in keeping with the norms laid down by the bishops, that is reason to bring the matter to the attention of those with the responsibility to maintain the norms. If Holy Communion is being distributed according to the norms laid down by those with the authority to make those norms, then it is out of place to consider it an immoral or even an improper situation.
 
Last edited:
He was taking the Eucharist to priests and bishops who were in hiding in the catacombs. Did you read the link? I think that’s why the story makes a point of saying that he was taking it to priests and bishops, then we the readers would know that Tarcisius would not be the one distributing communion.
 
Last edited:
I’m no theological expert, but I see no reason why such matters cannot be delegated. Our parish has two priests and three Masses on Sundays, with two of the three locations being ~60 miles from each other. Did not Jesus delegate matters?
 
Seeksadvice said:
I’m no theological expert, but I see no reason why such matters cannot be delegated. Our parish has two priests and three Masses on Sundays, with two of the three locations being ~60 miles from each other. Did not Jesus delegate matters?
Click to expand...
www.eyeofthetiber.com

Android Priests Being Developed To Help Say Mass, Hear Confessions | EOTT LLC

Vatican––The Vatican has confirmed reports today that an agreement has been reached with the International Federation of Robotics (IFR) to begin development of
www.eyeofthetiber.com
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
He was taking the Eucharist to priests and bishops who were in hiding in the catacombs. Did you read the link?
Click to expand...
Here is Pope Benedict’s explanation of what is known:
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/audiences/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20100804.html
“Who was St Tarcisius? We do not have much information about him…”

So…would you have resented receiving the Most Holy Eucharist from the “weak hands” of a boy such as Tarcisius?
 
Last edited:
Well, yes, there are lots of details missing. But there are two things we certainly know:
  1. St Tarcisius died to stop the Eucharist from being profaned.
  2. He wasn’t distributing Holy Communion like modern EMHCs do.
 
He never distributed Holy Communion. He was the one who brought it to the other priests and bishops.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top