Holy Communion

[DevotedtoHim]

This weekend I found myself in the very awkward position of being in line to receive Holy Communion from a priest that I have had very big problems with. I moved and received from another priest. I am wondering if that has ever happened to anybody else.

Katherine

Edited June 9, 2010 by DevotedtoHim

[Macies]

I have received His Body and Blood from a priest I didn't like. It was difficult and ultimately, I decided by doing so I did not abide by my conscience and for me that was wrong. I have moved - more than once - since then. In a Monastery, though, that is not possible or realistic.

[TeresaBenedicta]

I suppose I've never disliked a priest-- disagreed with his theology, perhaps. So, I've not changed lines to receive from a particular priest. I suppose it would be a possibility for me, but it would probably be something more along the lines of wanting to receive one of my newly ordained friends.

On the other hand, I will at times switch lines to receive from a priest rather than an EMHC, if it's possible. Mostly because I receive on the tongue and I don't particularly trust EMHC's to be able to properly distribute on the tongue (I've had bad experiences in the past). But, when I'm somewhere that I know the EMHC's are used to distributing on the tongue, I have not objections to receiving from one.

[CatherineM]

I think the only time I would purposely move to another line is if it was an EM that I knew was in public scandal. So far that has never happened to me. I supposed that could be because I don't listen to gossip. To be honest, I am so focused on the sacrament, half the time, I don't see or even remember who I received from.

[aalpha1989]

I would receive Communion from any priest, providing I didn't doubt the validity of the consecration. I really do try never to judge a priest because Our Lady holds them especially close to her heart and I know I've sinned in judging them before. If a sermon is particularly dissatisfactory I try to remain silent on the issue, and of course it doesn't ideally affect the objective grace available in the Most Holy Sacrament. As for me, if a priest's sermon were outright heresy I suppose I would be so distracted in confusion and anger that I might not be as open to the grace of the Sacrament, but that would be my own problem and not the priest's.

I never receive from EMHC's because they are never necessary (and, blessed be the Lord forever, my parish never uses them).

Edit: On the rare occasion I am forced to attend a Novus Ordo, I receive only from the priest.

Edited June 10, 2010 by aalpha1989

[Gregorius]

I guess I am naieve enough to think that if a person dares present him/herself to distribute the Most Blessed Sacrament, that he/she would be able to know how to do it properly.
A cool thing that happened at Mass the other day where there was only one priest was that the acolyte distributed as well. And I think this was an actual acolyte as I think this person was also a seminarian. If we have more of those (acolytes, though more seminarians would almost always be awesome too) we would have less need for EMs.

[zunshynn]

I wouldn't ever change lines because I preferred one priest over another, or because I disliked one. I would only do that if I happened to know that a priest is unwilling or will be upset by distributing Holy Communion on the tongue.

If I am at a Novus Ordo, I try to sit on the side of the Church where the priest will be distributing communion, and I would attempt to move if an extraordinary minister happened to be there, because I don't believe most situations call for EMHCs, and I don't feel comfortable encouraging their use.

[Archaeology cat]

I've switched lines to receive from a priest instead of an EMHC before, but not to receive from a different priest (of course, there is usually only one celebrant where I attend Mass). Now that I sit in the front and have two kids with me, it isn't easy to just jump over to the other queue if the EMHC happens to be on my side, so I su[i][/i]ck it up. My husband and I try to make sure the EMHC doesn't try to give our kids a blessing, and we both receive on the tongue (with me kneeling, which has thrown them off before). But the kneeling and receiving on the tongue, even with an EMHC, brings to mind my answer with whether I'd switch to a different priest or not. I kneel and receive on the tongue because of my reverence for Jesus in the Eucharist, regardless of the minister. Yes, I'll switch to a priest instead of an EMHC, but this is because the priest is the one through whom God works to consecrate the Eucharist, not the EMHC. The priest is the one ordained for that position. So even if it was a priest I didn't like, he is nevertheless an ordained minister of God, and thus I don't think I'd switch to a different one at Communion. Just my opinion, though.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Gregorius' date='13 June 2010 - 12:40 AM' timestamp='1276407657' post='2128012']
I guess I am naieve enough to think that if a person dares present him/herself to distribute the Most Blessed Sacrament, that he/she would be able to know how to do it properly.
A cool thing that happened at Mass the other day where there was only one priest was that the acolyte distributed as well. And I think this was an actual acolyte as I think this person was also a seminarian. If we have more of those (acolytes, though more seminarians would almost always be awesome too) we would have less need for EMs.
[/quote]

An acolyte [i]is[/i] an extraordinary minister of holy Communion.

"The extraordinary minister of holy communion is an acolyte or another member of the Christian faithful designated according to the norm of can. 230, §3." (Code of Canon Law, can. 910 §2)

Only those who have received the sacrament of order (bishops, priests, and deacons) are ordinary ministers of holy Communion.

Edited June 13, 2010 by Resurrexi

[TeresaBenedicta]

[quote name='Gregorius' date='13 June 2010 - 02:40 AM' timestamp='1276407657' post='2128012']
I guess I am naieve enough to think that if a person dares present him/herself to distribute the Most Blessed Sacrament, that he/she would be able to know how to do it properly.
[/quote]

Unfortunately this is not usually the case. Most EMHC's that I've had the displeasure of running into are not capable of confidently distributing on the tongue. I suppose it's because, I've noticed, 99% of the people at those parishes receive in the hand.

There are some that are very capable. My parish uses them (eh), but almost everyone receives on the tongue. Our past priest preferred it, but our current priest even more so-- he doesn't even offer to teach receiving in the hand for the first communicants and he has more than once made a comment after Mass about [i]how[/i] we should receive the Eucharist.

[thessalonian]

While I do agree that EU's are used way too much there is no differenece between a Eucharist administered by an EU and a priest. Thou dost protest too much.

[fides quarens intellectum]

I had a problem with the second question, so I nulled my vote. When you say "Eucharistic Ministers," I am thinking about ordinary, ordained ministers. If we are talking about laity, I'd go with "Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion." Also, the "yes" option read, "Yes. I have no problem receiving Holy Communion from [b]anybody[/b] in the Church." For me, that is not true - I would have a problem receiving from anyone lacking the authority/permission/training/current bishop's approval/etc to distribute Holy Communion.

I do not have a problem receiving from Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, because of reverence to those who have authority in the Church. The powers in the Church have permitted it, my local bishop allows it, and the priest in my parish allows EMOHCs to distribute. They are the ones who have the authority to decide such matters, not me, so I feel like I should respect their decision. Personally, I have my own [i]opinions:[/i] it would be great if we didn't have EMOHCs, it's a fuller sign to receive from the celebrant, etc. However, I am [u]not[/u] the one making up the rules, so I have to respect the discretion of those who do have the authority to determine who can and cannot distribute the Eucharist. I feel it would be inappropriate for me to cause a scene by changing lines just to avoid receiving from an EMOHC.

As for changing lines to receive from a different priest, I can't recall ever doing so, but then I've been to very few Masses with more than one priest. I personally have a lot of problems with the priest at the parish where I go to daily Mass, but we're talking about the True Presence in the Eucharist - it's not about my differences of opinion with the priest I am receiving from.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='14 June 2010 - 06:32 AM' timestamp='1276515120' post='2128474']
While I do agree that EU's are used way too much there is no differenece between a Eucharist administered by an EU and a priest.
[/quote]

There is also no difference between the Eucharist consecrated at a valid and licit Catholic Mass and the Eucharist consecrated at an illict but valid Liturgy celebrated by a schismatic and/or heretical priest. That doesn't mean we should receive holy Communion at the latter.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='14 June 2010 - 06:34 PM' timestamp='1276554874' post='2128839']
There is also no difference between the Eucharist consecrated at a valid and licit Catholic Mass and the Eucharist consecrated at an illict but valid Liturgy celebrated by a schismatic and/or heretical priest. That doesn't mean we should receive holy Communion at the latter.
[/quote]

This is like saying a penny is equal in value to a hundred dollar bill. There is a significant order of magnatude difference and EUs are allowed by the Church. You are not participating in a schism or heresy by recieving from an EU. Reciving the Eucharist is an act of associating yourself with the Church you recieve it in. Yes, the Eucharist would be the same but the message you send in receiving it from a schismatic group is quite different. So your point is only in a very minor way valid.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='15 June 2010 - 01:38 PM' timestamp='1276623510' post='2129297']
This is like saying a penny is equal in value to a hundred dollar bill. There is a significant order of magnatude difference and EUs are allowed by the Church. You are not participating in a schism or heresy by recieving from an EU. Reciving the Eucharist is an act of associating yourself with the Church you recieve it in. Yes, the Eucharist would be the same but the message you send in receiving it from a schismatic group is quite different. So your point is only in a very minor way valid.
[/quote]

First: EU's?

Second: By receiving from an EMHC one is very likely participating in sacrilige, sadly. Yes, it is most likely unintentional by all parties involved, but there it is. Not to mention the great level of irreverence which is a result of allowing non-ordained ministers to handle the holy vessels. One need only open one's eyes to see the casual way the Eucharist is treated today, and there are a few reasons for it; a major one being EMHC's.

EU is not and has never been an abbreviation for Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion.

[Macies]

Back to this question. Interesting. This weekend, I found myself in the presence of a priest (in all fairness, he is "more" than a priest - he holds high authority) and I could not bring myself to receive from him. He has spoken out against the basic precepts of our Faith and he has gone against Church teachings. He has had the "privilege" of doing damage to the Church (in my humble opinion) and I couldn't - in good conscience - receive from him. I felt in doing so would be against my love of our Faith and Church. Timing seems so very much in the Providence of Our Lord.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='15 June 2010 - 12:38 PM' timestamp='1276623510' post='2129297']
This is like saying a penny is equal in value to a hundred dollar bill. There is a significant order of magnatude difference and EUs are allowed by the Church. You are not participating in a schism or heresy by recieving from an EU. Reciving the Eucharist is an act of associating yourself with the Church you recieve it in. Yes, the Eucharist would be the same but the message you send in receiving it from a schismatic group is quite different. So your point is only in a very minor way valid.
[/quote]

Actually, having extraordinary ministers in ordinary circumstances, no matter how commonly it is seen, is [i]contra legem[/i] (against the law). But more importantly, it is [i]contra traditionem[/i]: it is against the universal liturgical tradition of the Church. Inasmuch as it is against the law and against tradition, the use of extraordinary ministers in ordinary circumstances is actually very similar to receiving holy Communion at the Mass of a schismatic and/or heretical priest. Obviously, however, in any comparison there will be similarities as well as differences, so the two are obviously not exactly the same.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='15 June 2010 - 07:16 PM' timestamp='1276643812' post='2129549']
Actually, having extraordinary ministers in ordinary circumstances, no matter how commonly it is seen, is [i]contra legem[/i] (against the law). But more importantly, it is [i]contra traditionem[/i]: it is against the universal liturgical tradition of the Church. Inasmuch as it is against the law and against tradition, the use of extraordinary ministers in ordinary circumstances is actually very similar to receiving holy Communion at the Mass of a schismatic and/or heretical priest. Obviously, however, in any comparison there will be similarities as well as differences, so the two are obviously not exactly the same.
[/quote]

Even at otherwise highly orthodox parishes, I have noticed that this is, in my experience, the most violated rubric in the Novus Ordo. This, and failure to bow the head at the name of Christ. It is arguable that the Sacramentary presupposes ad orientum, but I don't know if it is really a violation or not.

In any case, re: OP - I can't really imagine a scenario where I would deliberately refuse to receive the Lord from a priest. I might skip out on an EMHC in preference of a priest, however.

[thessalonian]

I first of all do not like the wide use of EUs but it is not on the same level at all as heresy. It is a matter of discipline not (T) Tradition. I agree that there is abuse. I agree that it should be reigned in. I agree that people are too causual. But again I am not going to let that affect my love for the Eucharist and further as long as the Bishops and Popes are not excommunicating people for it (my bishop is quite orthodox), I dont see it as a point to divide over. Perhaps I should write my bishop of my feelings against it. I am for that. I can in no way see it as similar to going to a schismatic mass. It is not a doctrinal matter. Priests commit sacralidge. The Eucharist does not depend on the holiness or lack thereof of the people we recieve it from.

[Slappo]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='15 June 2010 - 04:27 PM' timestamp='1276644427' post='2129553']
Even at otherwise highly orthodox parishes, I have noticed that this is, in my experience, the most violated rubric in the Novus Ordo. This, and [b]failure to bow the head at the name of Christ[/b]. It is arguable that the Sacramentary presupposes ad orientum, but I don't know if it is really a violation or not.

In any case, re: OP - I can't really imagine a scenario where I would deliberately refuse to receive the Lord from a priest. I might skip out on an EMHC in preference of a priest, however.
[/quote]

And when the three Divine Persons are named, the Blessed Virgin, and the Saint whose feast (solemnity, feast, memorial, or commemoration) is celebrated that day...

From the GIRM

[quote]275. A bow signifies reverence and honor shown to the persons themselves or to the signs that
represent them. There are two kinds of bows: a bow of the head and a bow of the body.
a. A bow of the head is made when the [b]three Divine Persons[/b] are named together and at
the [b]names of Jesus[/b], of [b]the Blessed Virgin Mary[/b], and of the [b]Saint in whose honor
Mass is being celebrated[/b].
b. A bow of the body, that is to say a profound bow, is made to the altar; during the
prayers Munda cor meum (Almighty God, cleanse my heart) and In spiritu humilitatis
(Lord God, we ask you to receive); in the Creed at the words Et incarnatus est (by the
power of the Holy Spirit . . . made man); in the Roman Canon at the words Supplices
te rogamus (Almighty God, we pray that your angel). The same kind of bow is made
by the deacon when he asks for a blessing before the proclamation of the Gospel. In
addition, the priest bows slightly as he speaks the words of the Lord at the
consecration.[/quote]