Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion

[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...

[D0RK4JP2]

[quote name='voiciblanche' date='Oct 16 2004, 08:53 AM'] 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. [/quote]
I have to question the whole 'bishop decides what particularly large is' for 3 reasons:

1. [and foremost] I haven't seen any Church document on it (please provide if possible).
2. What if the Bishop is unfaithful to the Churches teaching on the matter and reduces (or even extenuates) the reality of what 'particularly large' really means.
3. How can the Bishop decide what is best for each parish priest when he isn't in charge of the parish at all, only the priest; (also) for it is up to the priest to use EM's, not the parish (or the Bishop).

voiciblanche, it sounds like your parish are doing an awesome job . praise the Lord for it ay!

I rant alot about it because i like seeing the priests in charge, not the 'liturgy council' or whateva . Your parish sounds good because it does the right thing, my parish is good because we don't have any because it's 1962 Latin Mass. What do you think the best approach is to 'cope' with this matter because it is so easy to get overwelled and lose perspective,?

JMJ.

[qfnol31]

I think voici's parish has too many.

[voiciblanche]

[quote name='D0RK4JP2' date='Oct 16 2004, 02:47 AM'] What do you think the best approach is to 'cope' with this matter because it is so easy to get overwelled and lose perspective,? [/quote]
Well, as far as coping with it, all you can really do there is get over it, to be honest. There are actions you could take, but "coping" doesn't seem to get us anywhere. This sounds mean, but it's just my observation in general, not aimed back at you.


[quote]I think voici's parish has too many. [/quote]

Voici, in most cases, agrees with you.

I just think it's strange that we have nearly thirty when we've got a priest and a deacon or two at every Mass - seems like enough, but, hey, we might be getting a new Bishop rather soon, so maybe he'll think differently than Bishop Delaney. -shruggs-

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='D0RK4JP2' date='Oct 16 2004, 04:47 AM'] I have to question the whole 'bishop decides what particularly large is' for 3 reasons:

1. [and foremost] I haven't seen any Church document on it (please provide if possible).
2. What if the Bishop is unfaithful to the Churches teaching on the matter and reduces (or even extenuates) the reality of what 'particularly large' really means.
3. How can the Bishop decide what is best for each parish priest when he isn't in charge of the parish at all, only the priest; (also) for it is up to the priest to use EM's, not the parish (or the Bishop).

voiciblanche, it sounds like your parish are doing an awesome job . praise the Lord for it ay!

I rant alot about it because i like seeing the priests in charge, not the 'liturgy council' or whateva . Your parish sounds good because it does the right thing, my parish is good because we don't have any because it's 1962 Latin Mass. What do you think the best approach is to 'cope' with this matter because it is so easy to get overwelled and lose perspective,?

JMJ. [/quote]
AS I said the Bishop is the chief liturgist of each particular diocese, so you will have to check your dioceses policies on EMOHC.

If the Bishop is unfaithful he answers to the Holy Father and to God.

The bishop is in charge of each parish as head of the diocese, he sets the particulars for the whole diocese and expects the priest to enforce them in each parish. A good bishop has a general idea of what each parish is like, and who would need exceptions.

[D0RK4JP2]

FROM THE INSTRUCTION "REDEMPTIONIS SACRAMENTUM" WRITTEN BY THE CONGREGATION FOR DIVINE WORSHIP AND THE DISCIPLINE OF THE SACRAMENTS WRITTEN UNDER THE MANDATE OF POPE JOHN PAUL II. (Prefect, Card Arinze)

"[151.] Only out of true necessity is there be recourse to the assistance of extraordinary ministers in the celebration of the Liturgy. Such recourse is not intended for the sake of fuller participation of the laity but rather, but its very nature, is supplementary and provisional. Furthermore, when recourse is had out of necessity to the functions of extradordinary ministers, special urgent prayers of intercession shuld be multiplied that the Lord may soon send a priest for the service of the community and raise up an abundance of vocations to sacred Orders."

cmotherofpirl, i think the reason we keep on disagreeing on the EM's is because we are talking about slightly different things.

in [155.] of "Redemptionis Sacramentum" it says, "If...necessity prompt it, another lay member of Christ's faithful may also be delegated by the diocesan Bishop, in accordance with the norm of the law." norm of the law = can. 230, §3.

So where we have the miscommunicatio. I believe we would both agree that, yes the Bishop delegates - picked for the job - but the priest decides to use them when necessary.

JMJ.