Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion

[qfnol31]

One of the reasons why it could be argued that we need EMs today and never before is that there are so many more people in the world. If you wanted to take this argument, you could see how it would go. Never before has there been 6 billion people. Only 100 years ago did we hit the 1 billion mark. What's right for one generation isn't always necessarily right for another. Each teaching must be looked at in context.

[D0RK4JP2]

But but but but, there should be NO EM's that abuse their privilege. The fact that, at least the ones i know, aren't doing the right thing is because they are ignorant. Their superiors, if there are any, are not teaching them correctly for the position they may need to take if necessity calls it.

If there are 6 billion people that increases the need of EM's, yes. It also increases the needs of priests MORESO. The same goes for the priests that are meant to teach us; we can have alot of priests but it is better to have priests who are faithful and literate to the teachings of the Church than alot of priests who don't do what they are supposed to out of pride, malice and/or ignorance.

I know good priests and i know unfaithful priests. The good priests are all to happy to take the time to hand out Communion to 100 or so Communicants. the unfaithful priest let's "the liturgy commitee" run the Mass more or less, so you end up getting a whole stack of EM's up there (this is in my experience anyway - in Australia).

The fact that you have liturgy commitees that do not listen or pressure the priest into unlawful things in Mass or in the Church is wrong too. It is a two-way thing: weak-priests/over-powering layity. The priest is in charge of the Church he is stationed to unequivocaly (unless he himself is being unlawful). If both parties recognised their office correctly alot of these problems would be just left to just the heretics, not the ignorant doing damage without knowing.

I agree qfnol31 that the use of EM's is a response to the vastly increased population but alose the slower rate of which vocations are increasing. However, i was just reading the Poland have 25 extra priests with, more or less, nothing to do in the country because ALL THE PARISHES ARE FULL UP! In Australia we have some priests doing 3 parishes, we have parishes being combined etc. Where are the priests for Australia???

JMJ.

[toledo_jesus]

This is something that bothers me: Extraordinary ministers blessing people. Mostly it's small children and babies, and they do a little cross on their forehead. I thought that only priests could do blessings like that.
It's sad because the priest at this parish is really great, wears a cassock and has said to me that he would sometimes much rather be facing away from the congregation so as to better focus on what's happening (showing he has a true concept of what is going on up there and how special it is). I think that he is in a power struggle of sorts with these lay ministers.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='D0RK4JP2' date='Oct 14 2004, 12:06 AM'] The whole idea of Extraordinary ministers is a sound idea, but as usual, like in the Old Testament, it was not the Law that was wrong it was the people.

The Church teaches that you need to have a "PARTICULARLY LARGE NUMBER" that is in that instruction i got a link to up the top. It is reasonable if there were a priest who was 80 yrs old, with a cain and a gammy leg, handing out communion to 2000 or so communicants, however this is RARILY the case. Like the Old Testament, this instruction is good in istelf because it recognises the limits of the priest, but people ABUSE that instruction by minimising how big 'PARTICULARLY LARGE' really is.

Also it states that there should NEVER be any roster of EM's. They are after the use of ordained ministers, so the use of the 'regulars' at the local parish when other acolytes, deacons, priests etc is a WRONG also. And the use of a roster, well that's just stupid because it's clericalising the layity and secularising the clerics by putting them up on the sanctuary all the time.

Here's a thought. You know how you go up to get a blessing if you are not in a state of grace instead of receiving Communion? WHY THE HECK WOULD YOU WANT A BLESSING EM WHO WOULD ORDINARILY SIT NEXT TO YOU IN THE CONGREGATION??? they're just other people, NOT other Christ's!

JMJ. [/quote]
THe Bishop decides what constitutes a really large number, not us. Most parishes today only have one priest and most do NOT have other priests , deacons, or acolytes at Mass. They are alone.

Blessings are not part of the Mass.

[D0RK4JP2]

Nowhere in the "INSTRUCTION on certain questions regarding the collaboration of the non-ordained faithful in the sacred ministry of priests" does it give the option of the Bishop deciding how LARGE "particularly large". I watched a video once by Cardinal Arinze on the matter - he never once mentioned the station of the Bishop deciding how large 'particularly large' is, and he is the prefect of the congregation that looks after divine worship and the sacraments. The job of the Bishop to do with EM's is to deploy them in necessity. It is very necessary to read this
instruction.

In our diocese, in Brisbane Australia, the case is that a few priests look after a few Church's. They are put on a roster with 1 priest in charge. I know a priest in the scenario who tells me often how many 'days off' he gets so he ends up finding somewhere else to celebrate Mass. Maybe the condition is different in your country and diocese but here our Church's usally have about 50-200 per parish.

I think the priest, outside of Communion, gives about 7 blessings during Mass. In the tridentine rite, i dunno exactly, but that number was far greater.

So a non-Catholic or a Communicant not in a state of grace is not supposed to go up for a blessing from the priest? That i would believe but source documents to prove that case are always helpful.

Thanks for the corrections m8! it's always helpful because it makes you think, 'well, am i really right?' Which inturn is very humbling! Thankyou .

JMJ.

Edited October 14, 2004 by D0RK4JP2

[cmotherofpirl]

The Bishop is the chief liturgist in his diocese and he is the boss. For example, in our diocese, Communion on is always with both species and Confirmation is in 8th grade. In our neighboring diocese, Communion is under one species and Confirmation is at age 8.
So deciding how many constitute a "large number" is well within his parameters.

Edited October 15, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[qfnol31]

Sadly most are liberal (not meaning that so much in the normal use, but freer) with EMs and letting Priests decide. My parish has 27 at each Mass. I go to a Mass here that has 2 (Priests) and there are 1/3 as many people at the Mass. Communion isn't that slow, and it's very reverent. I just wish that there would be much more discretion when using EMs.

[D0RK4JP2]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Oct 15 2004, 03:10 PM'] Sadly most are liberal (not meaning that so much in the normal use, but freer) with EMs and letting Priests decide. My parish has 27 at each Mass. I go to a Mass here that has 2 (Priests) and there are 1/3 as many people at the Mass. Communion isn't that slow, and it's very reverent. I just wish that there would be much more discretion when using EMs. [/quote]
Gday,

I can empathise with ya. At our Cathedral, where you would assume the MOST people go (hardly the case) for Mass. For the 5:10 daily mass, which is in the chapel next door, about 20 ppl go2 Mass. there is ALWAYS 2 other EM's there, usually the same persons each time.

There is a balance. [b]There has to be a balance[/b]. The use of EM's is good...where the Church says it is good to use them. Using them like 'extra priests', or, this term really gets me fired up, extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist (NO SUCH THING!), instead of lay people filling in the duty of what ordinarliy should be acolytes, deacons and (always preferably) priests.

Has that term sunk in at your Church anyone? "extraordinary minister of the Eucharist"? It is entirely different to the proper term "extraordinary minister of Communion".

What would be lovely if all EM's were given proper catechetical training. I'm an alter server at a Latin Mass community (1962), and i had to get training for that, and i'm not even handling the Blessed Sacrament!

It would be an easy thing to accept if EM's were taught correctly and did their job correctly. Then we wouldn't need to go on and on (more or less) about it because there would be no crisis to discuss...

JMJ.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Oct 15 2004, 01:10 AM'] Sadly most are liberal (not meaning that so much in the normal use, but freer) with EMs and letting Priests decide. My parish has 27 at each Mass. I go to a Mass here that has 2 (Priests) and there are 1/3 as many people at the Mass. Communion isn't that slow, and it's very reverent. I just wish that there would be much more discretion when using EMs. [/quote]
How many people are at the Mass?

[qfnol31]

About 400 at the Mass with two Priests (it's a monastery so they could easily have more) and about 1200 at the Mass with 29 ministers (normally 2 ordinary and 27 extraordinary).

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Oct 14 2004, 10:44 AM'] This is something that bothers me: Extraordinary ministers blessing people. [/quote]
haha! that annoys me too.

Something else that I don't like is when you have a parish that uses lots of EMs (which seems to suggest that they have a "large congregation") and has Communion under both kinds. The reason this is funny to me is because Communion under both kinds is encouraged for small congregations, but since they are using EMs they must believe they have a large congregation.
Part of the reason that is such an issue for me is because for some reason I am constantly witnessing scandalous abuses of the Eucharist as a result of the over-zealous use of EMs and the distribution of the Precious Blood.
Another connected with this that bothers me is when you have some dopey lay people that may or may not even recognize the Real Presence purifying the vessels after Mass. I say may or may not because I have some bad memories; for example watching this lady in stretch pants (and showing major cleavage) purifying the vessels and I noticed that some Precious Blood dripped onto her hands, she proceeded to look around (presumably to see if anyone was watching) and then wiped her hands on her pants.
Ok.. I could gripe all day.. I must stop before I get carried away.

God bless

[CatholicforChrist]

People like that deserve to burn in Hell, and they certainly will if they do not convert. In any event, this is one good reason to abandon EMoHC in general, but it is even more clear that they should be abandoned in nearly every case because they are so widely abused. It is good enough to ban them universally to prevent abuses. If they are banned universally then there can be no justification, and if they are ever used, an appeal can be sent to the Bishop.

[D0RK4JP2]

Gday,

Laudate_Dominum & CatholicforChrist = lol!

At our Cathedral i know there are people that come and steal the Eucharist when receiving Communion - well, i've seen 1 person do it; i've been told there are more just at the Cathedral. However this hasn't much to do with EM's it has to do with the discipline of receiving on the hand: the rulse is you need to consume the Blessed Sacrament in the view of the Acolyte, Deacon or Priest or (*GULP!*) EM, because it is so easy just to "pocket it" (Him).

If anyone knows an EM i think it's good to just chat with them about what they are ACTUALLY doing. When you put the truth in someones face, in a charitable way (*imagines throwing the denziger at one of em* lol), they reall probably to listen. I remember doing it with a friend of mine and she was totally suprised - this was to do with the 'EM of Communion' NOT 'EM of the Eucharist'. Suffice it to say most of them JUST DON'T KNOW THE WISER (unfortuanetly )

JMJ.

[CatholicforChrist]

I agree with you completely that most are oblivious but certainly some genuinely believe that they have some right to do this (I know a woman who believes in women priests who is permitted to be an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion). In addition, I agree with you that hand Communion is another problem and, if forbidden outright, would serve a great good for the Church. What detriment would there be in banning hand Communion? Some people will have their "rights" taken from them, is that it? I mean, honestly, what detriment could there possibly be from banning it?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 15 2004, 03:12 PM'] People like that deserve to burn in Hell, and they certainly will if they do not convert. In any event, this is one good reason to abandon EMoHC in general, but it is even more clear that they should be abandoned in nearly every case because they are so widely abused. It is good enough to ban them universally to prevent abuses. If they are banned universally then there can be no justification, and if they are ever used, an appeal can be sent to the Bishop. [/quote]
Ouch! I wouldn't go that far. I'm sure they are just poorly catechized or lack faith or both. I feel bad for such people because some day they will be before Our Lord in His glory and will no doubt feel like jerks for treating Him miserably in the Most Blessed Sacrament.
Honestly I cannot put blame on the laity, its not like they are being catechized, and if they are the catechesis is likely to be watered down, banal, and/or heretical. I've hitch-hiked around alot and been to a wide variety of parishes, and it is sad to say that--based on my expericen-- it is rare to hear a homily that can be called profoundly Catholic in America today.
The temptation (at least as I've experienced it) is to become cynical, judgemental, bitter, despairing, etc.. But I'm convinced that the most appropriate response to the state of affairs is to let it be a source of motivation in evangelization and/or intercessory prayer; especially prayer for the clergy. I regret not approaching that lady (from above post) and talking with her about the Eucharist. I dropped the ball there. Insofar as I was in a position to do something I am partly to blame. I am partly responsible for her ignorance and thus subsequent abuses of the Eucharist.

Peace and Love

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 15 2004, 05:12 PM'] People like that deserve to burn in Hell, and they certainly will if they do not convert. In any event, this is one good reason to abandon EMoHC in general, but it is even more clear that they should be abandoned in nearly every case because they are so widely abused. It is good enough to ban them universally to prevent abuses. If they are banned universally then there can be no justification, and if they are ever used, an appeal can be sent to the Bishop. [/quote]
Fortunately God God judges people, not us.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Oct 15 2004, 04:40 PM'] Fortunately God God judges people, not us. [/quote]
teehee

[voiciblanche]

[quote name='D0RK4JP2' date='Oct 14 2004, 11:22 PM'] It would be an easy thing to accept if EM's were taught correctly and did their job correctly. Then we wouldn't need to go on and on (more or less) about it because there would be no crisis to discuss... [/quote]
We have a good thirty or so Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion at my parish, and I'd say they're all very well taught and do their jobs correctly. I personally know many of them and they're very good people; good Catholics. They [i]do[/i] know what they're doing, some of us would just prefer they didn't do it as often, as in, when it doesn't seem needed. However, as Cmom has said, it's the decision of the Bishop, so I try to be less... ranty... then I used to be.

[voiciblanche]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 15 2004, 03:12 PM'] In any event, this is one good reason to abandon EMoHC in general, but it is even more clear that they should be abandoned in nearly every case because they are so widely abused. It is good enough to ban them universally to prevent abuses. If they are banned universally then there can be no justification, and if they are ever used, an appeal can be sent to the Bishop. [/quote]
We should abandon all EMHC's because of the abuses of some?

This seems like saying that we should abandon priests because some have participated in scandals.


Anyway, I'd say the best way to reduce the number of EMHC's, especially when they don't seem needed, is to make sure that people with vocations to the priesthood are responding to the call - of course, there's no straight-out way for us to do this, but we can pray, and we can teach, etc. Hopefully, we'd have more deacons and acolytes that way, too.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='CatholicforChrist' date='Oct 15 2004, 03:12 PM'] People like that deserve to burn in Hell, and they certainly will if they do not convert. [/quote]
I have two things to say, first of all, people who are ignorant do not deserve to burn in Hell. I believe that is St. Thomas Aquinas.

[quote]In any event, this is one good reason to abandon EMoHC in general, but it is even more clear that they should be abandoned in nearly every case because they are so widely abused.[/quote]

Secondly, abuses isn't a good argument in my honest opinion because our free will is abused and we still have it today...