Too Many EMHC's?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
pianistclare said:
Intinction is forbidden in this Archdiocese.
.
Click to expand...
Really? That goes exactly against what the Vatican has said.

from Redemptionis Sacramentum:
[103.] The norms of the Roman Missal admit the principle that in cases where Communion is administered under both kinds, “the Blood of the Lord may be received either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon”.[191] As regards the administering of Communion to lay members of Christ’s faithful, the Bishops may exclude Communion with the tube or the spoon where this is not the local custom, though the option of administering Communion by intinction always remains. If this modality is employed, however, hosts should be used which are neither too thin nor too small, and the communicant should receive the Sacrament from the Priest only on the tongue.[192]
Click to expand...
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20040423_redemptionis-sacramentum_en.html
 
A Bishop decides how Mass is to be celebrated in his diocese. He has every right to prohibit distribution of Communion by intinction in the Roman rite if he so chooses.
 
tee_eff_em said:
Who else gets the irony that the “Liturgy Guy” rails (heh) against Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, but also praises the liturgy he refers to as the Traditional Latin Mass, rather than referring to it as the Extraordinary Form?

tee
Click to expand...
Which sort of begs the question: if the form of the Mass he appreciates does not have EMHCs, why is he wading in on what occurs in the other form?
 
DaveBj said:
If you go back and look at Herculees’ post, you will see from the information at the top right that he is Maronite. Maronite rules differ from Roman rite rules.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I caught that after the post was cast in concrete. It has been a few years since I went to our local Maronite Rite liturgy; but my recollection was that they distributed in the hand as well as on the tongue.

They are on my list this year, so I will see…
 
tee_eff_em said:
Heck, apparently, even some archbishops have not read it?

cf. (With
Code: 
emphasis
added)

🤷
tee
Click to expand...
It is optional, so the Archbishop has the option to not permit it, as he is the chief liturgist in that archdiocese.
 
Oneofthewomen said:
A Bishop decides how Mass is to be celebrated in his diocese. He has every right to prohibit distribution of Communion by intinction in the Roman rite if he so chooses.
Click to expand...
The Bishop does not have unlimited rights in this regard. I might be wrong, and would love for an expert to tell me how I am misinterpreting Rome’s instructions, but they seem rather clear to me:
As regards the administering of Communion to lay members of Christ’s faithful, the Bishops may exclude Communion with the tube or the spoon where this is not the local custom, though the option of administering Communion by intinction always remains
Click to expand...
The other option is a misunderstanding of the rule put in place in the archdiocese in question. Perhaps pianistclare could post the exact rule of her’s archdiocese.
 
tee_eff_em said:
With every due respect:

I think it’s a funny interpretation of the word always.

🤷
tee
Click to expand...
Again, talk to the Arch.
This is his directive. We obey.
I’m sure he’d be delighted to hear your objections.
 
otjm said:
It is optional, so the Archbishop has the option to not permit it, as he is the chief liturgist in that archdiocese.
Click to expand...
But since the option exists everywhere, it still exists in his Archdiocese.
 
pianistclare said:
Again, talk to the Arch.
This is his directive. We obey.
I’m sure he’d be delighted to hear your objections.
Click to expand...
Actually, I really rather doubt your Archbishop would be delighted to receive objections.

The decision is his as it is vested in him – and he quite well knows this decision is vested in him…because he knows how to read the dispositve texts, in their layering, in proper succession.
 
Brendan said:
But since the option exists everywhere, it still exists in his Archdiocese.
Click to expand...
My understanding of his role as chief liturgist, is that if there is an option, he has authority over the use of that option. Which would not say that the option no longer exists in his archdiocese, but that there is a matter of discipline and authority.

I am not trying to defend the matter - I happen to live on the West Coast and the likelihood of my ever venturing into his archdiocese is somewhere between slim and none. So I am unlikely to come up against the matter in any form there.

Priests make a promise of obedience to their bishop (often referred to as a vow, but a lower level). I would presume that would not prevent one from appealing to the proper dicastery in Rome, although going over one’s boss’s head is perhaps not likely to enhance one’s relationship with same.

I do not profess to be a Canon lawyer, but my understanding is that if the matter is optional, and the bishops says it is not to be used, any matter as to the "existence’ of the option is merely a technical discussion. If you understand otherwise, I would be open to knowing more. 🙂
 
pensmama87 said:
It would seem to me that an altar rail could speed up reception quite a lot, and not require so many people, ordinary or extraordinary, to distribute.

(I’m not a hardline trad, but altar rails seem to me to be very practical.)
Click to expand...
I wish we had an altar rail, but our church is built semi round so I doubt it would work.
 
pianistclare said:
Again, talk to the Arch.
This is his directive. We obey.
I’m sure he’d be delighted to hear your objections.
Click to expand...
Oh, I’m sure he wouldn’t.

He’s not my Arch.
I’m not his charge.

I do live in the jurisdiction of an Arch, but I am likewise not his subject, since I am of the Roman Rite. I am pretty sure, in any case, that the Byzantine *Metro Arch *in whose jurisdiction I reside would not forbid intinction.

Cheers,
tee
 
Don_Ruggero said:
Actually, I really rather doubt your Archbishop would be delighted to receive objections.

The decision is his as it is vested in him – and he quite well knows this decision is vested in him…because he knows how to read the dispositve texts, in their layering, in proper succession.
Click to expand...
Fr, I admit maybe I do not know how to read the texts, in their layering and proper succession. Help me out a little.
 
Phemie said:
The Anglicans in my town don’t seem to think so. They both kneel at the rail and receive from the Cup.
.
Click to expand...
They know the protocol and they follow it, the key is to get the minister and the acolytes and EHMC’s on point, and it really isn’t rocket science.

I don’t think its something you decide to do on the spot.
 
Kielbasi said:
They know the protocol and they follow it, the key is to get the minister and the acolytes and EHMC’s on point, and it really isn’t rocket science.

I don’t think its something you decide to do on the spot.
Click to expand...
Nope, doesn’t take much to get everyone in line doing it. Even new comers pick it up fast. My church practices open communion with the rail and I’ve never personally seen a problem even with those that have never partaken of Eucharist before.
 
I tend to agree. I go to a small church, and yet there are 7-8 EMHC per service. My personal preference is to only receive from the Priest, but I know others don’t mind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top