What do you think ? Should Extraordinary ministers and other tasks in the Church be predominately men or woman?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ucb4ume
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well said, THANK YOU. We sure have a lot of mini-pastors and mini-bishops running around. Some even sound like pope want-to-be’s.
Deacon Ed B
 
drafdog said:
Let’s talk about the necessity of extraordinary ministers. At my parish some Masses (not all) have 1200 in the congregation. With 3 priests and a deacon, we could have two teams of ciborium and chalice. If only 80% receive, and it takes 4 seconds per person (the chalice is the bottleneck operation in the system) that has distribution of Eucharist lasting 32 minutes. Run the math. That looks like a sufficient reason to use “extraordinary ministers.” We have five Masses each Sunday and two on Saturday evening.

Matthew
Click to expand...
True enough, given the scenario. The real test, however, is when you have EMHCs scheduled for a Mass, but the attendance is less than expected. Does your parich then not use the EMCHs?

Another issue raised here is receiving under both species. I believe we’re raising another generation of poorly catechized Catholics who will insist they are not receiving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ our Savior unless they receive both species.
 
cfrancis said:
Another issue raised here is receiving under both species. I believe we’re raising another generation of poorly catechized Catholics who will insist they are not receiving the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ our Savior unless they receive both species.
Click to expand...
Quite possibly, but we also need to consider those, who like myself, prefer to receive both.
 
Newbie2 said:
Quite possibly, but we also need to consider those, who like myself, prefer to receive both.
Click to expand...
As long as we can consider those who prefer to kneel to receive. However, it seems the consideration does not extend both ways.
 
I am stunned how some reduce the reception of the Holy Eucharist to an assembly line process. i.e., we have x number of priest and deacons, x number of people receiving, therefore it should be 4 seconds per person, ;yada, yada, yada. We are talking about the Eucharist, not some widget . It has never even crossed my mind to determine the number of seconds it takes to give the Eucharist. My concern is on my interior disposition giving the Eucharist and the disposition of the person receiving the Eucharist, which I am not able to discern, but trust is true and correct. I think its time for some objective self examination here.
Deacon Ed B
 
This thread has strayed from the OP. Please take any side discussions to new or existing threads. Thank you, all.
 
drafdog said:
Let’s talk about the necessity of extraordinary ministers. At my parish some Masses (not all) have 1200 in the congregation. With 3 priests and a deacon, we could have two teams of ciborium and chalice. If only 80% receive, and it takes 4 seconds per person (the chalice is the bottleneck operation in the system) that has distribution of Eucharist lasting 32 minutes. Run the math. That looks like a sufficient reason to use “extraordinary ministers.” We have five Masses each Sunday and two on Saturday evening.
Matthew
Click to expand...
I agree that your’s is a parish that really needs EEM’s. However, I must ask you whether you think your parish is typical? 1200 people in the congregation at every Mass, IMO., isn’t typical. In the parish I attended before the Motu Proprio, there were approximately 400 in attendence at the 10:30 Mass on Sunday & many less at the other Masses. Still we had 4-8 EEM’s on the altar each Sunday. To me, that is an abuse.

]From the Vatican document of 1997:
[SIGN]Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion.(99)
They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion. (100)[/SIGN]

Being a EEM., has become a Catholic status symbol in my area…especially among women. When I am forced to reveal the horrid truth…I am not an EEM., nor do I want to be, it’s as if I’ve said that I believe that Charles Manson was a good guy…just misunderstood.
Click to expand...
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
Yes we do. That is why one of the titles for Mary Magdalene is Apostle to the Apostles.
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
Really.

don’t you think the Church gets carried away with hyperbole? If someone gets me a cup of coffee, then they’re an ‘apostle’ already because they were ‘sent’ ? I don’t think so.

And, of course, this whole thread is political in the first place.

I’m really not cynical. Let women do everything! MAKE them do everything. Seriously. Everything will be better then, right? we’ll get the ‘real’ gospel, then, right? Of course, a woman can’t be a ‘pope’ (papa), maybe she will have to be the ‘mope’ (mama).
 
CradleCath said:
I agree that your’s is a parish that really needs EEM’s. However, I must ask you whether you think your parish is typical? 1200 people in the congregation at every Mass, IMO., isn’t typical. In the parish I attended before the Motu Proprio, there were approximately 400 in attendence at the 10:30 Mass on Sunday & many less at the other Masses. Still we had 4-8 EEM’s on the altar each Sunday. To me, that is an abuse.

]From the Vatican document of 1997:
[SIGN]Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion.(99)
They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion. (100)[/SIGN]

Being a EEM., has become a Catholic status symbol in my area…especially among women. When I am forced to reveal the horrid truth…I am not an EEM., nor do I want to be, it’s as if I’ve said that I believe that Charles Manson was a good guy…just misunderstood.
Click to expand...
That quotation about EMs is not complete. When the local bishop passed away, even from the beyond he had his funeral planned with lay EM’s even though there were more than a dozen bishops, tons of priests and deacons. He wanted to make a point, and he did.

Never forget the loopholes when you’re quoting a rule, because that’s where the real theology lurks.
 
Crumpy, with your snide comments, one after the other, I really question your faith, i.e., whether you are Catholic, or just like attacking the Church. Any way you put it, your comments are not worthy of a response. And don’t be so cute as to say I just did.
Deacon Ed B
 
Crumpy said:
That quotation about EMs is not complete. When the local bishop passed away, even from the beyond he had his funeral planned with lay EM’s even though there were more than a dozen bishops, tons of priests and deacons. He wanted to make a point, and he did.

Never forget the loopholes when you’re quoting a rule, because that’s where the real theology lurks.
Click to expand...
 
Crumpy said:
That quotation about EMs is not complete. **When the local bishop passed away, even from the beyond he had his funeral planned with lay EM’s even though there were more than a dozen bishops, tons of priests and deacons. He wanted to make a point, and he did. **
Never forget the loopholes when you’re quoting a rule, because that’s where the real theology lurks.
Click to expand...
I’m sure he did make his point, which I take to be “no defining line must be drawn between the priesthood & the laity”. In my opinion…there IS a difference & should be. What do you believe that your former Bishop was saying to you by his insistence on lay ministers at his funeral?

I’m asking because I want to be sure that I understand both his & your own beliefs re EEM’s.
 
Crumpy said:
**That quotation about EMs is not complete. **When the local bishop passed away, even from the beyond he had his funeral planned with lay EM’s even though there were more than a dozen bishops, tons of priests and deacons. He wanted to make a point, and he did.

Never forget the loopholes when you’re quoting a rule, because that’s where the real theology lurks.
Click to expand...
BTW. That quotation IS complete as far as distributing during Mass. I didn’t get into EEM’s taking the Eucharist to the hospital, etc. because the posts here have been primarily about distribution during the Sacrifice of the Mass. Plus, I don’t understand your usage of the word “loopholes”, nor your reference to “real theology” in connection with said “loopholes”. Please enlighten me.
 
CradleCath said:
I’m sure he did make his point, which I take to be “no defining line must be drawn between the priesthood & the laity”. In my opinion…there IS a difference & should be. What do you believe that your former Bishop was saying to you by his insistence on lay ministers at his funeral?

I’m asking because I want to be sure that I understand both his & your own beliefs re EEM’s.
Click to expand...
I had a priest argue with me that the laity were now the ordinary ministers of communion because of a lack of priests. He wouldn’t back down on that point no matter what the documents say. Considering he used to teach in the seminary is it any wonder that priests today don’t see anything wrong with sitting while the laity give communion.
 
In response to post 50 by Crumpy. I really do not find your post worthy of any intelligent response. Needless to say you will be in my prayers for enlightenment.
Deacon Ed B
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
In response to post 50 by Crumpy. I really do not find your post worthy of any intelligent response. Needless to say you will be in my prayers for enlightenment.
Deacon Ed B
Click to expand...
Thanks, exactly my point. I don’t see anything “intelligent” about calling Mary Magdalene an 'apostle." Good, Deacon Ed, you got my point exactly. There IS nothing ‘intelligent’ about it.

Another assertion I made is that a lot of people in the Church seem to want to make a mountain out of a molehole, as the expression goes. Another word is “exaggeration.” Another word is “hyperbole.” OK, the Lord tells Mary M. to go the Twelve, so she is what? a messenger? OK helper? OK. but an apostle? that seems to be watering “apostle” down quite a bit to the point of near-absurdity.
 
If you look into the original meaning of apostle, it is messenger. Is the enlightenment starting?
Deacon Ed B
 
Crumpy said:
OK, the Lord tells Mary M. to go the Twelve, so she is what? a messenger? OK helper? OK. but an apostle? that seems to be watering “apostle” down quite a bit to the point of near-absurdity.
Click to expand...
If you look up the root meaning of apostle, it comes from the Greek apostolos which means messenger . Is the enlightenment starting?
Deacon Ed B
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top