Something that did not seem right at Mass this morning

[TimothyH]

Why was there an EMHC at all for so few people? They are ‘extraordinary’ and ever since Mediator Dei popes have been declaring that EMHC’s being used on a regular basis is a grave abuse.

If the Precious Blood was distributed then there would have been an EMHC.

-Tim-

 

[silicasandra]

This priest does Mass a couple of time a week regularly. There are a couple of people that act as EMHC. This person does it regularly, at least for the past five years that I have been going. There area actually several people who participate.
I was really taken back as I witnessed this. I think the Holy Spirit was yelling at me that this was not right.

How strange. If you’ve witnessed both of them at Mass before, and everything has been okay, I have to think that one of them just had a momentary lapse of some kind. It’s not ideal, and certainly one shouldn’t be absentminded when partaking of or distributing the Eucharist, but it doesn’t seem like an ongoing abuse (which is definitely a good thing!)

 

[CB_Catholic]

Instead of asking people on the forums who didn’t see what happened wouldn’t it be better to ask the priest himself? It can be done in a polite way. Then you will have the real answer.

 

[lakotak]

Instead of asking people on the forums who didn’t see what happened wouldn’t it be better to ask the priest himself? It can be done in a polite way. Then you will have the real answer.

If this happens again, I will ask him. I will give him the benefit of the doubt that this was an off day for him. However, sometimes it is nice to know if others have witnessed or experienced the same thing or something similar. Thanks for your suggestion.

 

[Phemie]

This does not seem right. It is the first time I have ever seen it happen in all the time I have been going to Masses.

It was just before the distribution of the Eucharist. The person was standing waiting to receive Jesus and also to distribute. The priest turned to him and offered him the paten and he took one of consecrated host off of it himself. The priest did not offer to hand him a host. Does anyone else think this was not right? Maybe I am just ignorant of something here.

I suspect that, since the priest and this person are known to you and this has never happened before, it was an off moment for both.

OTOH, in my parish that’s how the EMCHs and the altar servers received for years. The pastor just passed around the ciborium like a candy dish and they helped themselves.

 

[St_Hilary]

This does not seem right. It is the first time I have ever seen it happen in all the time I have been going to Masses.

It was just before the distribution of the Eucharist. The person was standing waiting to receive Jesus and also to distribute. The priest turned to him and offered him the paten and he took one of consecrated host off of it himself. The priest did not offer to hand him a host. Does anyone else think this was not right? Maybe I am just ignorant of something here.

 

[St_Hilary]

St_Hilary:
This is very wrong. As a layman, the priest is suppose to offer you the sacrament, in no way are you allowed to self communicate.

The only way one can taake the hose out of the ciborium during communion if he is a priest; the presider does not give him the host, he takes it himself

 

[jmcrae]

Was the other person waiting to receive a concelebrating priest? That’s the only instance I can think of where such a thing would happen.

Or a Deacon, without his vestments (maybe he came to Mass as a parishioner, and then was called upon to assist with the distribution?)

Otherwise, this was incorrect - but the EMHC was not at fault; the priest was. Since it would have been very disruptive to correct the priest in the middle of Mass, he did the right thing by going with the flow.

I don’t really know how a lay person corrects a priest - you can know that something is wrong, but you don’t have the authority to tell the priest what to do.

 

[theyoungmonk]

Or a Deacon, without his vestments (maybe he came to Mass as a parishioner, and then was called upon to assist with the distribution?)

QUOTE]

A cleric should never distribute communion without a stole.

Though I just can’t see the reason for having an extra minister for communion at all in this case, why have communion under both kinds, it is perfectly good to receive under one alone. Indeed it reamins the norm of the Universal Church to receive under under the Species of bread alone, and in most places where it is permitted to receive under both species it is technically only to be done on feasts and special events such as Ordinations etc. I do see that if it was a Sunday Mass and there was a Cleric (Ordinary Minister of Holy Communion) either concelebrating or sat in choir then it may be practical and may even be said by some to be suitible to distribute both species, preferably by intiction.

As it is late here I will restrict myself to finishing by quoting from The Roman Catechism.

**"Why The Celebrant Alone Receives Under Both Species **
It is clear that the Church was influenced by numerous and most cogent reasons, not only to approve, but also to confirm by authority of its decree, the general practice of communicating under one species. In the first place, the greatest caution was necessary to avoid spilling the blood of the Lord on the ground, a thing that seemed not easily to be avoided, if the chalice were administered in a large assemblage of the people.

In the next place, whereas the Holy Eucharist ought to be in readiness for the sick, it was very much to be apprehended, were the species of wine to remain long unconsumed, that it might turn acid.

Besides, there are many who cannot at all bear the taste or even the smell of wine. Lest, therefore, what is intended for the spiritual health should prove hurtful to the health of the body, it has been most prudently provided by the Church that it should be administered to the people under the species of bread only.

We may also further observe that in many countries wine is extremely scarce; nor can it, moreover, be brought from elsewhere without incurring very heavy expenses and encountering very tedious and difficult journeys.

Finally, a most important reason was the necessity of opposing the heresy of those who denied that Christ, whole and entire, is contained under either species, and asserted that the body is contained under the species of bread without the blood, and the blood under the species of wine without the body. In order, therefore, to place more clearly before the eyes of all the truth of the Catholic faith, Communion under one kind, that is, under the species of bread, was most wisely introduced.

There are also other reasons, collected by those who have treated on this subject, and which, if it shall appear necessary, can be brought forward by pastors."

 

[GwenL]

First, the EMHC can only receive; they may not take a host off any paten.

Second, many people call small, shallow ciboria by the name “paten.” We have several of these; they have a rim about an inch high. Probably this is what the OP is referring to. A real paten is almost flat, and has no rim, and is made to contain only the priest’s host.

Third, there is no problem at all with having an EMHC distribute the Precious Blood while the priest distributes the Sacred Host.

If the priest tried to offer me the ciborium, before he had given me communion, I’d try to open my mouth, stick out my tongue, and close my eyes. My hands are already clasped in prayer. Any priest should be sharp enough to quickly transition to placing a host on my tongue, without disrupting the flow. And any priest with respect for the rubrics would appreciate being silently, and subtly, reminded that I can’t self-communicate.

 

[fred_conty]

I may be that neither the priest nor the EMC knew it was not allowed.

That’s my best guess.