Self communicating?

[AJB328]

So I read thread a few days ago (that I can’t find now) about a priest offering the ciborium to a eucharistic minister who picked up the consecrated host and the general consensus was that this was “self communicating” and therefore an abuse. Last night at Mass I noticed the priest do the same thing for a deacon and this morning, in a different parish, the priest also offered the ciborium to the deacon.

Is this also an abuse or are deacons allowed to self communicate?

-AJ

 

[Zooman77]

The only person who may self-communicate is the priest. The deacon must receive from the priest. The GIRM points this out in #182(My emphasis added.)

182. After the Priest’s Communion, the Deacon receives Communion under both kinds from the Priest himself and then assists the Priest in distributing Communion to the people. If Communion is given under both kinds, the Deacon himself administers the chalice to the communicants; and, when the distribution is over, standing at the altar, he immediately and reverently consumes all of the Blood of Christ that remains, assisted, if the case requires, by other Deacons and Priests.

 

[Gorgias]

Last night at Mass I noticed the priest do the same thing for a deacon and this morning, in a different parish, the priest also offered the ciborium to the deacon.

Is this also an abuse or are deacons allowed to self communicate?

Ciborium or paten?

In any case, it’s been my experience that, when priests are unaccustomed to having a deacon on the altar with them, especially if they’ve been priests for quite a long while, they occasionally have the tendency to treat deacons as if they’re ‘mini-priests’, especially at Communion time. I’ve seen priests hand the paten to deacons before the “Behold the Lamb of God”… just as they would do if there were priests concelebrating with them.

So, I’d be loathe to suggest that these are deliberate ‘abuses,’ per se, and more likely to be honest mistakes or misunderstandings…

 

[Zooman77]

Gorgias:

In any case, it’s been my experience that, when priests are unaccustomed to having a deacon on the altar with them, especially if they’ve been priests for quite a long while, they occasionally have the tendency to treat deacons as if they’re ‘mini-priests’, especially at Communion time. I’ve seen priests hand the paten to deacons before the “Behold the Lamb of God”… just as they would do if there were priests concelebrating with them.

So, I’d be loathe to suggest that these are deliberate ‘abuses,’ per se, and more likely to be honest mistakes or misunderstandings…

I would agree that 99% of the time this is the reason for these occurrences.

 

[L_Marshall]

Deacons may not self-communicate, but I think it’s important to recognize that not even priests can self-communicate in all situations. A priest may only self-communicate if he is celebrating (including concelebrating) the Mass. A priest who sat in choir, or who sat in the pews for the Mass cannot self-communicate, and this is a problem that is sometimes faced.

 

[Lapey]

Deacons may not self-communicate, but I think it’s important to recognize that not even priests can self-communicate in all situations. A priest may only self-communicate if he is celebrating (including concelebrating) the Mass. A priest who sat in choir, or who sat in the pews for the Mass cannot self-communicate, and this is a problem that is sometimes faced.

This is not right. In the NO Mass for large celebrations where there are many priests, it is not uncommon nor is it improper to see the priests in the pews who are vested and part of the procession and recession to be brought the Eucharist in the pews at the proper time and self-communicate.

If they are not vested and sitting in the congregation then no they cannot self-communicate. Also, if it is an EF Mass and the priests are vested and in choir to my knowledge they would not self-communicate; but I am no expert in the EF of the Mass.

But in the Mass, a deacon is never allowed to self-communicate. As another poster stated, many priests do not know this and offer the Eucharist by way of presenting the paten or ciborium for the deacon to take the Eucharist but it is up to the deacon to politely and quietly say “no father”. Unfortunately some will not correct the priests.

 

[Phemie]

But in the Mass, a deacon is never allowed to self-communicate. As another poster stated, many priests do not know this and offer the Eucharist by way of presenting the paten or ciborium for the deacon to take the Eucharist but it is up to the deacon to politely and quietly say “no father”. Unfortunately some will not correct the priests.

One of our pastors used to do this to everyone in the sanctuary: EMHCs, altar servers, etc. it drove me crazy. Not to mention that he always did it before he, himself, communicated, in fact he always did it before the “Behold the Lamb of God…” and then everyone consumed the Host at the same time as he did.

 

[Lapey]

One of our pastors used to do this to everyone in the sanctuary: EMHCs, altar servers, etc. it drove me crazy. Not to mention that he always did it before he, himself, communicated, in fact he always did it before the “Behold the Lamb of God…” and then everyone consumed the Host at the same time as he did.

I got a cold chill up my spine as I read your post! I don’t understand the logic behind this type of action. The priest is supposed to be separate, he should be “different” so to speak. He is the one with the authority to celebrate this sacrifice; he alone has consecrated hands for this purpose, to stand in the “person of Christ the High Priest.”

In my parish we have many retired priest who help out with Mass, one in particular does this; he will consume the Sacred Body himself then distribute to me and the EMHC then he will take the Precious Blood then distribute to me and the EMHC. What is the purpose except to deemphasize the office in which he stands? I don’t get it.

 

[Phemie]

I got a cold chill up my spine as I read your post! I don’t understand the logic behind this type of action. The priest is supposed to be separate, he should be “different” so to speak. He is the one with the authority to celebrate this sacrifice; he alone has consecrated hands for this purpose, to stand in the “person of Christ the High Priest.”

In my parish we have many retired priest who help out with Mass, one in particular does this; he will consume the Sacred Body himself then distribute to me and the EMHC then he will take the Precious Blood then distribute to me and the EMHC. What is the purpose except to deemphasize the office in which he stands? I don’t get it.

This was the same guy who always changed the word ‘clergy’ in EP II to something like ‘all people’. One day I asked him why he felt the need to change the meaning of the prayer. He never did it again in our parish but he did comment that he liked celebrating Mass in his other parish **where he could do whatever he wanted **without ever being called on it. That even included having the first communicants make bannock and press grape juice for their first Communion. Nothing like illicit, and possibly invalid, matter for your First Communion.

 

[L_Marshall]

This is not right. In the NO Mass for large celebrations where there are many priests, it is not uncommon nor is it improper to see the priests in the pews who are vested and part of the procession and recession to be brought the Eucharist in the pews at the proper time and self-communicate.

Deacon,
By “in the pews,” I meant “not concelebrating,” as I used this as an example opposite my prior example of priests concelebrating. I attempted to use this metaphor to avoid a wordier response like “present as Mass, but seated with the rest of the congregation, and not functioning in a priestly capacity at the Mass.”

 

[Lapey]

Deacon,
By “in the pews,” I meant “not concelebrating,” as I used this as an example opposite my prior example of priests concelebrating. I attempted to use this metaphor to avoid a wordier response like “present as Mass, but seated with the rest of the congregation, and not functioning in a priestly capacity at the Mass.”

Thanks for the clarification!

 

[FAB]

This is not right. In the NO Mass for large celebrations where there are many priests, it is not uncommon nor is it improper to see the priests in the pews who are vested and part of the procession and recession to be brought the Eucharist in the pews at the proper time and self-communicate.

If they are not vested and sitting in the congregation then no they cannot self-communicate. Also, if it is an EF Mass and the priests are vested and in choir to my knowledge they would not self-communicate; but I am no expert in the EF of the Mass.

But in the Mass, a deacon is never allowed to self-communicate. As another poster stated, many priests do not know this and offer the Eucharist by way of presenting the paten or ciborium for the deacon to take the Eucharist but it is up to the deacon to politely and quietly say “no father”. Unfortunately some will not correct the priests.

I agree with my brethern as long as we are talking about in the context of a mass.
There are times when a deacon will self communicate, top of the list is a communin service.
To an extent it can be said that a deacon self communicates when he purifies the vessles.
When there is a mass held outside of a church and no place to reserve remaining host, the deacon along with the priest consumes the remaining host.

 

[AJB328]

Thank you all for the clarification. Now here’s another interesting thing I’ve seen the two deacons in my church do.

One of them when preparing the wine will pour water into the decanter of wine and then pour the wine into the chalice and communion cups. The other deacon will pour wine and water into the chalice, but he doesn’t add water to the other communion cups to be consecrated.

Any time I’ve seen any priest prepare for the consecration he pours wine into each vessel and then water into each vessel. The method of combining the water and wine in the decanter first doesn’t seem suspect to me, but to leave the water out of the other cups I find troubling.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[Lapey]

Thank you all for the clarification. Now here’s another interesting thing I’ve seen the two deacons in my church do.

One of them when preparing the wine will pour water into the decanter of wine and then pour the wine into the chalice and communion cups. The other deacon will pour wine and water into the chalice, but he doesn’t add water to the other communion cups to be consecrated.

Any time I’ve seen any priest prepare for the consecration he pours wine into each vessel and then water into each vessel. The method of combining the water and wine in the decanter first doesn’t seem suspect to me, but to leave the water out of the other cups I find troubling.

Any thoughts on this?

All methods you mention are acceptable. The rubrics show that the deacon or priest should add a “little water” to the wine to be consecrated. It does not have to be added to all the vessels, but it can. I too add water to the wine while still in the decanter if I can. If I cannot I add it to the celebrants chalice only.

 

[ProVobis]

If they are not vested and sitting in the congregation then no they cannot self-communicate. Also, if it is an EF Mass and the priests are vested and in choir to my knowledge they would not self-communicate; but I am no expert in the EF of the Mass.

They wouldn’t be allowed to self-communicate in this situation although I’ve never seen a priest other than the celebrant receive at all*, maybe because he would be violating the twice-a-day communion rule. (There is no violation if the bishop allows him to celebrate more than two Masses, of course.)

*In the EF Mass, it isn’t uncommon to call other priests (or deacons) within that parish to help with the communion distribution.