SPLIT: Term EMHC same as Eucharistic Minister

[Marie77]

Yes, they are of course. Extraordinary MINISTERS…

Anyway…What a wonderful predicament to be in! Isn’t it wonderful that so many people were coming to be fed?!! I would assume that the reserved was removed from the tabernacle as well.(Then that causes another problem if communion for the sick and for viaticum is needed.)

That being said…those in charge were definitely not prepared and organized. However, if it doesn’t happen often, I wouldn’t be concerned. Those who did not receive had good intention and I’m sure there was a spiritual communion.
Also, if this does happen again maybe it’s a sign that help is needed. Volunteer! …even if it’s just to do a head count before mass starts. That would be helpful in estimating the number of unconsecrated hosts that are needed.

An EMHC can only be called “Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion”.
They can be called nothing else.
They can not have the name ‘Eucharist’ in their title, or it is an abuse.

If anyone has anything different in the Parish bulletins or other public papers, please take the following to your Pastor for immediate correction.

Redemptionis Sacramentum
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html#Chapter VII

" [158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.
This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason."

" [154.] As has already been recalled, “the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest.
Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone."

“156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.”

.

 

[TrueLight]

Sometimes it is necessary to dissent from a teaching that is doing more harm than good. Its been that way throughout church history. The EM vs EMHC debate is just not that much of an issue. There is no scandal involved. This is a non issue and a discussion that will not convince anyone on either side of the debate. Finis…

I think more than anything Anna Claire, you should really pray about your dissent based on pride. God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.

Anytime something really annoys me, I have to step back and say, in what way does my stance bring me closer to God? If the issue does not bring me closer to God, but insteads feeds on my pride, which allows an opening for the Deceiver, then I pray to God so that he can help me to let it go.

 

[Brendan]

. This is a non issue and a discussion that will not convince anyone on either side of the debate. Finis…

I have already presented the facts about who the ministers are for the Sacraments and the titles of some related, but dissimilar roles ( best man, godparent, confirmation sponsor, emhc)

Did the Vatican II Council teach that we are to disregard facts? Did it teach that ignorance is somehow better?

Or did it call for an educated and informed laity?

Since it did, why are you opposing what the Council called for?

 

[Brendan]

In post 16, I offered this

Note what the Holy Spirit inspired in Pastor Aeternus (Vatican I)

Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

So either one holds that Ecumencial Councils are a special work of the Holy Spirt, and thus a statement of God’s Will. (in which case, one has to give obedience to the ruling on the use of the terms used by the Church

Or

One believes that Ecumenical Councils are just the work of men, and, as such, anything Vatican II said can be safely ignored.

Which one do you hold to?

I never did hear a response from you on the subject.

Are Eccumenical Councils something that are authoritative and we are to obey, or simply funtions of humans that a person ignore the teaching of Councils?

You seem to follow the teachings of Vatican II and have referenced them as if they are authoritative to Catholics. So it would seem that you hold that Councils are to be followed.

If so, how can you deny the quote above without being hypocritical?

 

[Brendan]

Quite. It’s just words. I know what my priest or deacon means by ‘Eucharistic Minister’, and I’d guess everyone else in the parish does, or at the least, they know they are not the same as priests. There’s no dissent involved. It’s just quicker and easier to say…

Actually, the Vatican via Redemptionis Sacramentum stated that the term is only to be used in regards to those who confect the Sacrament, priests and bishops.

Given that, how can you accurately state that dissent is not involved.

Does the obedience that I reference in my post above, or obedience in general, only apply when it is quick and easy to do?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

If you see someone who is hungry and you have food… What do you think Christ’s response would be?



A priest friend of mine tells the EMHC’s that he trains that every prayer for vocations is a prayer that their ministry will end.

So you are telling me that EVERYONE you see that is hungry-you feed? You must be a saint! Even in our Thanksgiving Meal ministry that my husband and I coordinate we have to set limits on the number of meals and turn people away due to resources. Now if we worked 24/7 that week then maybe we wouldn’t have to do that…but that is not reasonable nor a wise use of resources. It tends to burn people out so they don’t volunteer next year.

For me it’s the same way with the term EMHC. I know that is the proper term…I use it always…but I also know that I have a limited amount of time in my day so I typically correct those that I know they may not know and the correction would fall on fertile ground. For example, I would tell the RCIA candidate I am sponsoring the correct term but not correct the priest when he says it because I have heard him use EMHC before. Nor am I going to keep correcting my step mom who knows the proper term but refuses to use it.

As far as vocations- I would at least like to see us get a deacon…to help our one priest out!

 

[ProVobis]

Words mean things, and the people who introduced such fuzzy language in the first place knew that. Rome knows that, too.

To some extent, yes. But Rome isn’t expected to be exceptionally fluent in 7000 languages of the world. It seems that it’s bishops’ role to see that appropriate language is used concerning our faith in their countries.

 

[JimmytheButcher]

Let me correct you. An ordained priest is the ordinary minister of the Eucharist. Lay people are extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist. Both ordained and non ordained can be Eucharistic ministers. I feel that I am privileged to be a Eucharistic minister, when I “minister” to my fellow parishioners and when I “minister” to the sick in the hospital. No one will ever convince me that I am not an EM.

(I made a whole post correcting your position, but decided to delete it because it will probably incurr a refraction because I am trying to speak for the Catholic position and the not all feelie nicey nice position of American wimpy-tude… You see you’ve had to pick up the ball where all of the men decided that they would rather be little boys only not wearing diapers.)

 

[JimmytheButcher]

As far as vocations- I would at least like to see us get a deacon…to help our one priest out!

Make a push around your parish to convince some mean to become ‘they may also be called the sub-deacons’ eerrr… sorry for the papal quote… I mean formerly instituted lectors, formerly instituted cantors, formerly instituted acolytes… but thay would also require having an ordinary who complies with the wishes of Pope Paul VI. And, just think some of them might be ordained deacons some day.

A good crop of custos, sacristans, sub-deacons, and all around healthy examples of manhood will lead to a good crop of deacons and priests. Just imagine… actually having a man who is an actual extraordinary minister of holy Communion helping out in those rare situations when the priest and deacon are completely overwhelmed, and not this monkey business we got going on right now. Just imagine it.

 

[Anna_Claire]

(I made a whole post correcting your position, but decided to delete it because it will probably incurr a refraction because I am trying to speak for the Catholic position and the not all feelie nicey nice position of American wimpy-tude… You see you’ve had to pick up the ball where all of the men decided that they would rather be little boys only not wearing diapers.)

HOW RUDE!! Does that make you feel more Catholic?! It certainly isn’t Christian. I’ve noticed that often traditional Catholics cannot argue in a sane manner when trying to prove a point. Grow up…

 

[Brendan]

So you are telling me that EVERYONE you see that is hungry-you feed? You must be a saint! Even in our Thanksgiving Meal ministry that my husband and I coordinate we have to set limits on the number of meals and turn people away due to resources. Now if we worked 24/7 that week then maybe we wouldn’t have to do that…but that is not reasonable nor a wise use of resources. It tends to burn people out so they don’t volunteer next year.t!

You will note that I said to feed people when you have food. Would you have turned away any people on Thanksgiving if you had plenty of resources?

That applies to instruction on the teachings of the Church. Once you have the knowledge (as you do now), it can be given to all those who are ignorant of it.

Now, I’m sure you don’t hear people saying “Eucharistic Minister” to you 24/7, so the time issue doesn’t apply. But when you do hear it, explain the correct term and the Church’s reasons for it. Simple

 

[YoungTradCath]

Sometimes it is necessary to dissent from a teaching that is doing more harm than good. Its been that way throughout church history. The EM vs EMHC debate is just not that much of an issue. There is no scandal involved. This is a non issue and a discussion that will not convince anyone on either side of the debate. Finis…

Wow. Well that explains it, then.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

You will note that I said to feed people when you have food. Would you have turned away any people on Thanksgiving if you had plenty of resources?

That applies to instruction on the teachings of the Church. Once you have the knowledge (as you do now), it can be given to all those who are ignorant of it.

Now, I’m sure you don’t hear people saying “Eucharistic Minister” to you 24/7, so the time issue doesn’t apply. But when you do hear it, explain the correct term and the Church’s reasons for it. Simple

As far as Thanksgiving…it is a lot of deliveries…and yes…there was a point where we had to say…“sorry, we have reached our limit and are not taking any more orders.”

My whole point about it is that I don’t believe that the Church is asking us to always correct and therefore I don’t feel called to do so. Simple. Others may…that might be their mission or that might be how they see what you have quoted. I don’t. Yes…I see where we are called to use the proper term…and I do so. As far as others being encouraged…well that is a gray area my friend. You may be called one way and I am called another on it. As long as I have prayed about it…that’s the way it is.

Peace

 

[thistle]

There are so many more important things to teach people about the Faith. EMs or EMHCs is not one of them. ** If it were that important to correct every catechetical mistake or misinformation I hear.**… or even things that I read in this forum, it would be a full-time job!

Actually that is what you should do otherwise people will continue in ignorance of the truth.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Actually that is what you should do otherwise people will continue in ignorance of the truth.

I don’t know that this is what the Church requires of us…so to say we SHOULD is a little stronger then what should be used.

 

[thistle]

I don’t know that this is what the Church requires of us…so to say we SHOULD is a little stronger then what should be used.

Are you telling us that it is your opinion that Catholics who make catechetical mistakes either because they don’t know something or don’t understand something should not be told what is correct?

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

Are you telling us that it is your opinion that Catholics who make catechetical mistakes either because they don’t know something or don’t understand something should not be told what is correct?

No…I just take issue with people who think that should be EVERYTIME you hear something. Only people that are there know the setting and the people making that mistake. Also, they know too if there are more pressing issues to be dealt with. For example, if I overhear the term being used but I know that there is someone really hurting who needs an ear…then I am going to go to the person who needs the ear.

I mean come on people…there is really only so much time in a day! If I spent time correcting everyone…then I would have no time for Mass, prayer, my husband, my job, or sponsoring an RCIA canidate. Nor do I believe that is what the Church is asking us to do.

 

[thistle]

No…I just take issue with people who think that should be EVERYTIME you hear something. Only people that are there know the setting and the people making that mistake. Also, they know too if there are more pressing issues to be dealt with. For example, if I overhear the term being used but I know that there is someone really hurting who needs an ear…then I am going to go to the person who needs the ear.

I mean come on people…there is really only so much time in a day! If I spent time correcting everyone…then I would have no time for Mass, prayer, my husband, my job, or sponsoring an RCIA canidate. Nor do I believe that is what the Church is asking us to do.

I totally disagree with you, especially if you are involved with RCIA candidates. You do them a great injustice if you do not tell them what is correct or not and why. In fact it is a responsibility. If the RCIA folks are going to be left in the dark because you consider something not much of a priority you should probably rethink your involvement. I’m really glad my RCIA sponsor was not like that.

 

[grampsc]

What does being in communion with Christ have to do with being an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion? You, madam, seem like a very proud person, first with the demons thread, now with this. “Control the laity…” Oh, because I’m sure it knocks the socks off our priests and bishops to be able to “control” us. They just love doing that, right? Proper parlance is wrong, madam, and the phrase “Eucharistic Minister” does not describe your function. “Just because the hierarchy says…” Really? Yes, it does make them right, firstly because they say so and secondly because it really is right. I will illustrate:

Only priests and bishops are Eucharistic Ministers, because only they can confect the sacrament. Additionally, priests, bishops and deacons are also Ordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. Instituted acolytes have primacy as Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, with other lay people being secondary Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, with these latter two cases only being used when necessary. Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion function as such not because they have a right to, like priests, deacons and bishops do, but because that authority is delegated to them by someone else.

Would you like to know why this is? Because to minister the Eucharist means to change bread and wine into Christ’s Body and Blood. You and I can’t do that. To distribute His Body and/or Blood is to minister Holy Communion. You and I can, physically, do that. They are two different roles completely, therefore they have two completely different titles. Therefore, you are an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion, not a Eucharistic Minister.

Heaven forbid, really forbid, that we truly understand our proper roles and what they are called, and not get needlessly insulted because our Church doesn’t warp itself into political correctness for political correctness’s sake. If you can’t turn bread and wine into Christ’s Body and Blood, then you aren’t a Eucharistic Minister. It’s sort of like, if you can’t perform surgery, you’re not a surgeon. Or if you can’t cut hair, you’re not a hairstylist. Or if you can’t teach kids, you’re not a school teacher. Or if you can’t sing, you’re not a singer. Or if you can’t write, you’re not a writer. Etc., etc., etc. It really comes down to that.

I feel badly that some people must be able to do everything a priest does to feel “good enough” or whatever. That’s the worst sort of clericalism there is.

What a thoughtful and controlled response, thank you, your patience was tried I know as yu started out slightly antsy but your conclusion was spot on, the lady is quite incorrec in the total assumption she has made and you have corrected her, gently.