Struggling with lay ministers and the Eucharist

  • Thread starter Thread starter Flavius
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Flavius

Guest
I don’t like receiving the Host from lay ministers. I usually try and casually cut into the Priest’s line. I think having consecrated hands is important. At times I have simply skipped receiving the Host not knowing whether it is better to avoid it from the lay minister. Any advice or someone more knowledgeable than me willing to chime in?
 
Last edited:
Well…they are commissioned by the Bishop if that’s a start. Sure, I guess receiving from the Priest can be your choice. Though if the Eucharist is so scared that it requires a priest’s hands, why would you want to pass it up simply because it’s given by lay minister? I guess there’s a bit of a dichotomy for me in that you seem to choose one extreme or the other. I’d err on receiving than not receiving in the way you’d like to.
 
PJH_74 said:
Though if the Eucharist is so scared that it requires a priest’s hands, why would you want to pass it up simply because it’s given by lay minister?
Click to expand...
Typo. I think you mean “sacred”. 🙂
Flavius said:
I don’t like receiving the Host from lay ministers. I usually try and casually cut into the Priest’s line. I think having consecrated hands is important. At times I have simply skipped receiving the Host not knowing whether it is better to avoid it from the lay minister. Any advice or someone more knowledgeable than me willing to chime in?
Click to expand...
I’m not trying to be “smart”, but AFAIK the priests’ hands aren’t “consecrated”. He is ordained to the priesthood, but not physically “consecrated”.

I may be wrong. 🙂
 
Last edited:
As far as struggling with lay ministers and the Eucharist, that hardly seems like a reverent thing to do in the communion line… 😁

Seriously, though, the ordinary ministers of the Eucharist include deacons - their hands aren’t consecrated. The Church has stated that it is perfectly licit for laypersons to receive in the hand, which also aren’t consecrated. Why would it matter, then, if another lay person moves the Eucharist from ciborium to your hand or mouth? Consecrated hands are for the confection of the Eucharist, not its transfer.
 
Edmundus1581 said:
AFAIK the priests’ hands aren’t “consecrated”.
Click to expand...
I don’t know about the newer rite, but the 1962 rite the priests’ hands are at least blessed, perhaps consecrated (?) at ordination, because they’re going to use them to bless and consecrate in turn.
Cor_ad_Cor said:
As far as struggling with lay ministers and the Eucharist, that hardly seems like a reverent thing to do in the communion line… 😁
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly. 😅
 
I’m not a fan of lay ministers either, but some (same goes for Priests) treat it more reverently than others. I usually try to sit on the side the Priest or Deacon normally serves if I am familiar with the parish, but I won’t cut lines. As someone who chooses to receive on the tongue, if I’m in the Lay Minister’s line, I usually watch the others in front if me, and if no one else receives on the tongue, I’ll sometimes just receive in the hand to avoid confusion or an awkward transfer where the Host gets dropped.
 
Last edited:
This sounds very much like my own merry little middle of the road.
 
Lord, I am not worthy that thou should enter under my roof. How can I make judgements about anyone else’s worthiness.
 
As a new Eucharistic Minister, I would not be offended if you prefer to receive from the priest ❤️
 
Flavius said:
At times I have simply skipped receiving the Host not knowing whether it is better to avoid it from the lay minister.
Click to expand...
In other words, you reject receiving Jesus from someone the Church has authorized to distribute.

Sorry, I don’t get it.
 
I dont recieve from EMHCs whenever possible. And if you are struggling with it, just recieve from a priest or deacon. There really us no problem with that. You dont need to make a scene or have it be an issue, just get into the priests line and go!
 
As far as I’m concerned, if Father says the lay minister is kosher, then he/she is.
 
Thanks so much for the replies everyone, I appreciate your thoughts!
 
A Deacon is ordained to serve at the altar and preach the Gospel. With regards to the eucharist he’s no less an extraordinary minister than a layman. That’s how I see it anyway.
 
Personally, I have no objection to receiving Communion from an EMHC. I receive on the hand and my hands are no more worthy to hold the sacred species than an EMHC. Remember the Church permits them so they should not be a problem to you.

I do sometimes have problems with EMHCs. My first problem is really with the priest as he is the one who opts to use them. They should really be used only when the number of communicants is large and the number of priests and deacons are not sufficient to distribute Communion in a reasonable time (although that is not defined).

My other problem arises with certain individual EMHCs who behave incorrectly. I am not going to rehearse a list of the abuses sometimes committed but my biggest bugbear is those who behave as if they were a priest.
 
I think you can look at it from another angle: most parishes I’ve been to really don’t need to use extraordinary ministers, so they shouldn’t. I’d personally rather stand in line a little longer and receive the ordinary way, so that’s the line I pick. I’d argue making use of the extraordinary minister justifies his being there. So unless you PREFER receiving from someone not the ORDINARY minister, don’t.
 
It’s not like the extraordinary ministers are attempting to consecrate. The priest has already done this. They are merely distributing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top