To report or not to report...

[OraProNobisIHM]

Maybe we should say “no” when the pastor asks us to help?

And who is more qualified to make that determination? A priest / Pastor who has training and experience in these matters or someone sitting in the pews who has neither the experience or training?

We very well should be saying no.

And, I’m merely giving my opinion. I do not see the possible need for NINE EMHCs at ONE MASS. This is not a major celebration, it is your “standard fare” Sunday Mass. I have even seen EMHCs at the Daily Mass, where no more than 20 people show up. It has 2500 parishioners. Say half of them attend (which is being more generous than studies/surveys would show), that leaves 1250 attending in one weekend. There are four Masses per weekend, so that gives us an average of 300 people receiving. Do we really need nine EMHCs? For the “last” Masses of the day (Saturday evening, Sunday 11am Mass, and Sunday evening Mass) there are no Masses following - time is not an issue here. Next, the only Mass that has a Mass immediately after it is the 9:00am Mass. Now, this 9:00am Mass is an hour long (as are all Masses at this church), leaving a full hour between the end of Mass and the start of the next Mass. Tacking on 5-10 minutes for Communion imposes a burden on NO ONE. No one has a need to be out of the church in an hour, and if they do, they are probably given some dispensation (sickness, what have you).

So, for my case, no, I don’t think we need nine EMHCs (plus Father). We have 30 people per Minister, on average. That is simply ridiculous, and only increases the chance of an accident happening.

Oh, did I mention this is the pastor who thinks it is acceptable to use the glass chalices and patens they currently have, merely because the archdiocese said they could continue using the vessels if they couldn’t afford it, but then go on a multi-million dollar campaign to renovate a parish hall and office (while they have perfectly fine vessels sitting in the sacristy collecting dust)? Or the pastor who refuses to use the Sanctus bells because "he doesn’t know exactly when the consecration occurs?

Plus, I would WELCOME the additional time after Communion to pray - as we all OUGHT to be doing. A mere two minutes is not nearly enough to converse with Our Lord after having received Him in the Blessed Sacrament.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I think we should say no when we see no need for ‘help’.

I think the average person in the pew, given the documents that Rome has issued on the topic, could easily make the determination.

But all the priests I’ve worked with in the past ten years, save 2, felt that EMHCs are absolutely necessary at every Mass and the more the merrier.

Again, they have the training and the experience, you do not. Doesn’t the Word of God COMMAND us to be obedient to our spiritual leaders because they have authority over our souls?

I had one tell me that they are no longer ‘extraordinary’ but ordinary ministers and that that’s a good thing. That same priest shook his finger in my face and yelled that they have never paid any attention to any document from Rome and they aren’t about to start now.

Sorry, even my present pastor has an agenda when it comes to EMHCs. He’ll let them give out Communion while he sits because “that’s their job and their right and people have to get used to it.”

Then, perhaps a chat with the Bishop would be in order. After all, they are suppose to be “Overseers”. But if you decide on your own that you are going to be disobedient to your spiritual leader, how does that differ from his disobedience to Rome?

 

[Sir_Knight]

We very well should be saying no. And, I’m merely giving my opinion. I do not see the possible need for NINE EMHCs at ONE MASS. This is not a major celebration, it is your “standard fare” Sunday Mass. I have even seen EMHCs at the Daily Mass, where no more than 20 people show up. It has 2500 parishioners. Say half of them attend (which is being more generous than studies/surveys would show), that leaves 1250 attending in one weekend. There are four Masses per weekend, so that gives us an average of 300 people receiving. Do we really need nine EMHCs? For the “last” Masses of the day (Saturday evening, Sunday 11am Mass, and Sunday evening Mass) there are no Masses following - time is not an issue here. Next, the only Mass that has a Mass immediately after it is the 9:00am Mass. Now, this 9:00am Mass is an hour long (as are all Masses at this church), leaving a full hour between the end of Mass and the start of the next Mass. Tacking on 5-10 minutes for Communion imposes a burden on NO ONE. No one has a need to be out of the church in an hour, and if they do, they are probably given some dispensation (sickness, what have you). So, for my case, no, I don’t think we need nine EMHCs (plus Father). We have 30 people per Minister, on average. That is simply ridiculous, and only increases the chance of an accident happening. Oh, did I mention this is the pastor who thinks it is acceptable to use the glass chalices and patens they currently have, merely because the archdiocese said they could continue using the vessels if they couldn’t afford it, but then go on a multi-million dollar campaign to renovate a parish hall and office (while they have perfectly fine vessels sitting in the sacristy collecting dust)? Or the pastor who refuses to use the Sanctus bells because "he doesn’t know exactly when the consecration occurs? Plus, I would WELCOME the additional time after Communion to pray - as we all OUGHT to be doing. A mere two minutes is not nearly enough to converse with Our Lord after having received Him in the Blessed Sacrament.

As I said, you do not have the training nor the experience that your pastor has. There may be circumstances which you are not aware of, and which the pastor is not required to make you aware of, which can justify the decisions that have been made. Remember, the shepherd does not answer to the sheep but the sheep are expected to follow and obey the shepherd. The Church, established by the Son of God, via the local bishop, has placed your pastor to be your spiritual leader and the Word of God commands that we be obedient to him in spiritual and moral matters.

A private does not disobey his sergeant’s orders because he THINKS that they might conflict with the general’s instructions. Bringing it up to the sergeant’s superior would be the appropriate course of action to take. In our case, as I explained in the previous post, bringing any possible disobedience to Church rules & regulations to the attention of our Bishop would be appropriate but in absence of that, failing to obey / follow the instructions of our pastor would be inappropriate.

 

[OraProNobisIHM]

As I said, you do not have the training nor the experience that your pastor has. There may be circumstances which you are not aware of, and which the pastor is not required to make you aware of, which can justify the decisions that have been made. Remember, the shepherd does not answer to the sheep but the sheep are expected to follow and obey the shepherd. The Church, established by the Son of God, via the local bishop, has placed your pastor to be your spiritual leader and the Word of God commands that we be obedient to him in spiritual and moral matters.

A private does not disobey his sergeant’s orders because he THINKS that they might conflict with the general’s instructions. Bringing it up to the sergeant’s superior would be the appropriate course of action to take. In our case, as I explained in the previous post, bringing any possible disobedience to Church rules & regulations to the attention of our Bishop would be appropriate but in absence of that, failing to obey / follow the instructions of our pastor would be inappropriate.

And when he is wrong, he is wrong. We have no obligation to follow something that is dangerous to our spiritual health. It’s also one of the many reasons I won’t be attending that parish, but driving an hour for Mass.

Also, the students at this parish had over $400 pledged to replace the vessels for use at our on-campus Mass. This was pledged by students and alumni in a matter of no more than two weeks. He denied our pledged gift (we had vessels picked out and everything), saying he thought it was better that the vessels were glass, because then people can see the Host and Blood. Even though it goes directly against Vatican documents.

In any case, you have no basis on which to judge me, especially if i have no basis to judge the actions of my former pastor.

 

[Sir_Knight]

And when he is wrong, he is wrong.

And the sheep do not pass judgement upon the shepherd.

We have no obligation to follow something that is dangerous to our spiritual health.

And WHO has determined that it is dangerous to your spiritual health? YOU have. And what qualifies you to be able to make a better judgement call over somebody who has training and experience in these areas?

It’s also one of the many reasons I won’t be attending that parish, but driving an hour for Mass.

That is entirely within your right.

Also, the students at this parish had over $400 pledged to replace the vessels for use at our on-campus Mass. This was pledged by students and alumni in a matter of no more than two weeks. He denied our pledged gift (we had vessels picked out and everything), saying he thought it was better that the vessels were glass, because then people can see the Host and Blood.

And the Bishop, whose job it is to oversee such matters, has not been notified because … ?

Even though it goes directly against Vatican documents.

Again, you are not aware of all of the circumstances and the pastor is NOT required to make you aware of such circumstances. Perhaps the priest has some rare allergy and the alcohol in the wine coming in cnotact with a metal vessel would be physically dangerous to his health. Perhaps the only choice is a glass vessel or no consecration of the previous blood and thus an invalid mass.

In any case, you have no basis on which to judge me, especially if i have no basis to judge the actions of my former pastor.

Your comments are very telling. You find nothing wrong in passing judgement on your priest and refusing to be obedient to him when scripture specifically commands us to be obedient to our spiritual leaders; yet when a peer challenges these actions, you take exception over being “judged”. Most interesting.

 

[John_Lilburne]

From the 2002 General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) approved for the USA, which can be accessed from romanrite.com/girm.html :
“161. If Communion is given only under the species of bread, the priest raises the host slightly
and shows it to each, saying, Corpus Christi (The Body of Christ). The communicant replies,
Amen, and receives the Sacrament either on the tongue or, where this is allowed and if the
communicant so chooses, in the hand. As soon as the communicant receives the host, he or she
consumes it entirely.”

From the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum:
“[92.] Although each of the faithful always has the right to receive Holy Communion on the
tongue, at his choice,[178] if any communicant should wish to receive the Sacrament in the
hand, in areas where the Bishops’ Conference with the recognitio of the Apostolic See has
given permission, the sacred host is to be administered to him or her. However, special care
should be taken to ensure that the host is consumed by the communicant in the presence of
the minister, so that no one goes away carrying the Eucharistic species in his hand. If there
is a risk of profanation, then Holy Communion should not be given in the hand to the
faithful.[179] …
[94.] It is not licit for the faithful “to take . . . by themselves . . . and, still less, to hand . . .
from one to another” the sacred host or the sacred chalice.[181]”
Footnotes for this section:
[178] Cf. Missale Romanum, Institutio Generalis, n. 161.
[179]Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Dubium:
Notitiae 35 (1999) pp. 160-161.
[180]Cf. Missale Romanum, Institutio Generalis, n. 118.
[181]Ibidem, n. 160.

“[159.] It is never allowed for the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion to delegate
anyone else to administer the Eucharist, as for example a parent or spouse or child of the
sick person who is the communicant.”

And near the conclusion of Redemptionis Sacramentum:
“[183.] In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure
that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every
irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious
duty incumbent upon each and every one, and all are bound to carry it out without any
favouritism.”

 

[LilFranciscan25]

I wouldn’t take action unless the priest had told me to. Of course, it’s disturbing, but the priest is the one that should make the call on what to do. Bring it up in a charitable manner, addressing what you witnessed, and voice your concern. If he deems it necessary, he will speak to the woman about what happened, or make a general comment after Mass.

 

[Halos1n2Horns]

I would like to ask you a question.

Why aren’t your extraordinary minsters watching the people ? they should of caught this, and followed that woman to the pew .

I am a minster of the body and blood of christ and I watch people very closely for this simple reason. We always have to be on the look out for incidents like this not to happen,

Please tell your Priest, so he can take care of this.

Halos

body of Christ, save me
blood of Christ, inebriate me

 

[Sir_Knight]

Why aren’t your extraordinary minsters watching the people ? they should of caught this, and followed that woman to the pew .

I am a minster of the body and blood of christ and I watch people very closely for this simple reason. We always have to be on the look out for incidents like this not to happen

Please share with us how you do this? Some people step to the side and consume the host. Others walk away and consume the host as they are walking. Do you wait until you see the host go in the person’s mouth before giving the host to the next person in line?

In our parish we have an usher standing next to the EMHC who does the watching.

 

[Halos1n2Horns]

Our Church is small so , its not hard to spot something out of the ordinary, as in a person recieving the host. I was serving the blood of christ during Christmas ,and i had to retrieve the host from a person , who wasn’t even a catholic, why the person ( the one with the body of christ) gave it to her without watching her put it in her pocket i dont know, Our congregation isn’t that big for them not to watch what is happening. But when u are serving the blood of christ and theres not alot who are receiving the blood, it’s easy to watch the people. I am a very watchful; person when it comes to giving the eurcharist.

Halos

 

[Phemie]

In our parish there is no way that the EMHCs would take any kind of action, they won’t even stop someone from ‘self-intincting’ saying it’s not their place to do that. Since Fr. will give Communion to known non-Catholics (and he received ‘communion’ at the Anglican Church) he’d be no help in that matter.

One of our parishioners has recently become an EMHC but even before that she has always received from the Chalice and then turned around and offered the chalice to her son. Every EMHC is upset at that but Fr. refuses to even talk to her, he wants them to tell her not to do that.