Why are “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion” called “extraordinary”?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, @(name removed by moderator) has it exactly right. My closest friend is an Extraordinary Minister, and her way of explaining it was that ordained ministers are “ordinary,” and then anyone else serving is an “extra” ordinary minister. This may have been her way of simplifying it for a convert, lol, but it definitely helped me to understand.
 
Concur with @(name removed by moderator)

I am also troubled by the implication in the article that some ministers function as such by consequence of their baptism !?

❔ ⁉️ ❓
 
It appears that the authors of the article did really sloppy research in coming up with a meaning for "extraordinary " that is not correct, when a 5-minute conversation with an ordained clergyman would have cleared that up. They’ve shown themselves to be an unreliable source and I certainly will take anything they say going forward with a grain of salt.
 
Maybe “Peculiar” or “Unusual” would be appropriate to demonstrate the separation, the difference, and in my case, instill a modicum of humility.

OK, maybe a bit tongue-in-cheek there…
 
I understand the point being made by the editors although I cannot say the article is well written.

An ordinary minister is the one who normally administers a sacrament. An extraordinary minister is one who may do so in certain circumstances if an ordinary minister is unavailable.

An ordinary minister does not have to be ordained. One only needs look at the sacrament of marriage where the ordinary ministers are the bridegroom and bride.

Not all sacraments permit extraordinary ministers, e.g. marriage, penance, holy orders.
 
TomH1 said:
I understand the point being made by the editors although I cannot say the article is well written.

An ordinary minister is the one who normally administers a sacrament. An extraordinary minister is one who may do so in certain circumstances if an ordinary minister is unavailable.

An ordinary minister does not have to be ordained. One only needs look at the sacrament of marriage where the ordinary ministers are the bridegroom and bride.

Not all sacraments permit extraordinary ministers, e.g. marriage, penance, holy orders.
Click to expand...
see Deacon Jeff’s post above.
 
goout said:
see Deacon Jeff’s post above.
Click to expand...
I read it and all other posts prior to posting. Ordinary ministers of a sacrament do not have to be ordained. When a man and woman marry they are the ordinary ministers of the sacrament. They are not ordained.

Ordinary in this sense refers to the only minister who can administer a sacrament, e.g. only bishops can administer the sacrament of holy orders. Bishops are also the ordinary minister of confirmation. However, there are circumstances when priests can administer confirmation. When they do they are the extraordinary minister. A priest who administers confirmation is certainly ordained so extraordinary does not mean not ordained.
 
While the faithful do not have it in their baptismal “job description” to distribute Holy Communion, the pastors find such distribution an essential role of ordination.
Click to expand...
“The Faithful” don’t. Those of the Faithful who participate in the Extraordinary Ministry of Holy Communion, however, do have it “in their job description”.
 
Last edited:
so the TLM is the extraordinary form of the mass. So does the same word usage apply to it also?
i.e. the ordiany form of the mass should be what is celebrated, leaving the extraordiany one only in extreme circumstances.
 
Last edited:
TomH1 said:
An extraordinary minister is one who may do so in certain circumstances if an ordinary minister is unavailable.
Click to expand...
Except those qualifiers are opinion.

An extraordinary minister is someone who is not the ordinary minister who has been granted permission by their pastor or bishop.

That is it, no other qualifiers such as “ordinary ministers not available”
 
TheLittleLady said:
That is it, no other qualifiers such as “ordinary ministers not available”
Click to expand...
Except, of course, there are. A priest can confirm in danger of death if no bishop is available. I can baptism if someone is in danger of death and no priest can be had in time.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
It appears that the authors of the article did really sloppy research in coming up with a meaning for "extraordinary " that is not correct, when a 5-minute conversation with an ordained clergyman would have cleared that up. They’ve shown themselves to be an unreliable source and I certainly will take anything they say going forward with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure who “the editors” are but Mr. Carstens (who is the editor of the bulletin) has more education in liturgical matters than the typical clergyman. I’m sure he has discussed the issue with many people, ordained and lay. I am not sure if he is the author, though. He must have read it, at least, and approved it.

Dan
 
I suspect that the phrase “special minister of communion” was used due to the fact that, at the time this term was coined, deacons were “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.” So, “the Vatican” didn’t want to put lay people in that same category. That’s my guess, anyway.

After that, the use of “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” was just … not well-considered. The return to “extraordinary minister of Holy Communion” (which was what was used in the 1917 Code in this context) is a welcome development.

I think the word “extraordinary”, in this context, refers both to the fact that these lay people are not ordained as well as the fact that their service is supplementary to that of the ordained and should only be used in those circumstances that are envisioned/limited by the law.

Dan
 
acanonlawyer said:
I suspect that the phrase “special minister of communion” was used due to the fact that, at the time this term was coined, deacons were “extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion.” So, “the Vatican” didn’t want to put lay people in that same category. That’s my guess, anyway.
Click to expand...
Looking into this a bit more, I’ll have to disavow my guess. It looks to me like the Latin texts always used “extraordinary minister” but ICEL decided to translate it as “special minister.” So, there was no concern about possible confusion about the earlier designation of deacons as extraordinary ministers.

Dan
 
That is not a distinction I have ever previously encountered when reading widely on the subject. Can you please substantiate the claim that ordinary ministers have to be ordained?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top