Extraordinary Ministers

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1432339' date='Dec 10 2007, 12:29 AM']I can agree with this. Extraordinary ministers are supposed to be just that, extraordinary.

However at a Sunday Mass with 1,200 people, with one priest (which is somewhat 'normal' in many parishes around here) seems like a good time to use some of those extraordinary ministers. Daily Masses, probably not.

Will it help reverence towards the sacrament? I highly doubt it. To me there is little to no causal connection. When I go to a church I'm not familiar with and happen to sit on a side without the Priest distributing communion, does it make me any less reverent towards the sacrament? No, it never has. Was receiving the sacrament a role in my reverence towards it? Never, it was hours of adoration, good catechesis, and a firm devotion that caused it.[/quote]

Maybe if the other priest took the extra effort to come out at Communion, it would be quicker to distribute the Sacrament. At most daily Masses I've been to with less than 40 people, there have been Extraordinary Ministers which is definitely not necessary.

And having only priests and deacons distribute Holy Communion [i]would [/i]greatly increase the reverence for the Blessed Sacrament because having just anyone handle the Host with his hands makes it appear as if the Blessed Sacrament is not really, truly and substantially the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ and can promote ideas such as consubstantiation or the Sacrament just being a symbol of Christ's Body. Moreover, having only priests and deacons distribute Holy Communion would also increase the reverence for the Sacrament of Order. Allowing laymen to on a frequent basis administer a sacrament, and in face the greatest of all sacraments, can make it seem as there is no difference between the ordained and the non-ordained.

[rkwright]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1432646' date='Dec 10 2007, 09:25 PM']Maybe if the other priest took the extra effort to come out at Communion, it would be quicker to distribute the Sacrament. At most daily Masses I've been to with less than 40 people, there have been Extraordinary Ministers which is definitely not necessary.[/quote]
I agree with this.

[quote]And having only priests and deacons distribute Holy Communion [i]would [/i]greatly increase the reverence for the Blessed Sacrament because having just anyone handle the Host with his hands makes it appear as if the Blessed Sacrament is not really, truly and substantially the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ and can promote ideas such as consubstantiation or the Sacrament just being a symbol of Christ's Body.[/quote]
Again I'd say you're reaching with this argument. If I receive from an EM it does not make me question the true presence; likewise one who doesn't believe isn't going to start to believe because a priest handles the Body of Christ.

If your argument is that simply handling the Host destroys reverence, then receiving the Host in the hand would have the same effect. Though I doubt you'll argue that...

[quote]Moreover, having only priests and deacons distribute Holy Communion would also increase the reverence for the Sacrament of Order. Allowing laymen to on a frequent basis administer a sacrament, and in face the greatest of all sacraments, can make it seem as there is no difference between the ordained and the non-ordained.[/quote]
No argument on this.

I think my point is that extraordinary ministers should only be used for those large Sunday masses where distributing Holy Communion would take longer than 20 minutes. I don't agree with you that extraordinary ministers have diminished reverence towards the sacrament, nor do I agree that eliminating them will solve the problem. There is something deeper at work here.

I do agree with you that only allowing the Priest to distribute might foster a greater respect to the ordained.

[Mercy me]

In my diocese the norm is to have communion under both species at all masses. We always have EM at our daily masses and yes, we have multiple daily masses. The only time that we don't have EMs is when we have an Eastern rite priest which is not often. How would you have us distribute communion? Do we disobey the bishop? What about the daily communicatants who are unable to have gluten? Do we distribute to all except them?

I fail to see the correlation between reverence for the blessed sacrament and using EMs.

[PopeClementI(MorClemis)]

I have a few simple solutions - have the priest distribute the Body intincted in the Precious Blood. For those who cannot receive gluten, if they approach the priest early and tell him to keep a Chalice for them, he can give it to them.


[quote name='Mercy me' post='1432758' date='Dec 11 2007, 12:49 AM']In my diocese the norm is to have communion under both species at all masses. We always have EM at our daily masses and yes, we have multiple daily masses. The only time that we don't have EMs is when we have an Eastern rite priest which is not often. How would you have us distribute communion? Do we disobey the bishop? What about the daily communicatants who are unable to have gluten? Do we distribute to all except them?

I fail to see the correlation between reverence for the blessed sacrament and using EMs.[/quote]

[Noel's angel]

At daily Mass we usually have between 3 and 5 priests, so EMHCs aren't required. But on a Sunday, in a cross-shaped church where it would be impossible to herd everyone into the middle aisle, it just isn't feasible to have 1 priest distributing Communion.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Deb' post='1432532' date='Dec 10 2007, 04:34 PM']I wonder how many people would quit receiving communion if they did away with the EM's and they had to wait a half hour in line to receive? My church only has one Priest and over 1100 active households registered. Lots of children in those households too. I know we have some deacons in training.

I have not been back in the church all that long and I was surprised that there was such a thing as a EM. I sit so that I always take from the Priest but, if at another church where I have no real choice, it does not diminish my reference for the host.

I am still stuck in the way I was brought up though. I won't receive the host in my hand nor will I get too close to the altar.[/quote]

Just a suggestion, don't anyone get horrified, but wouldn't that be a good thing if less people go up? In other words, only those who have a devotion to Christ in the Eucharist would seriously approach the altar to receive. Just a thought. I know this ain't a cookie cutter situation, but just a thought nonetheless.

[Mercy me]

[quote name='PopeClementI(MorClemis)' post='1432770' date='Dec 11 2007, 04:15 AM']I have a few simple solutions - have the priest distribute the Body intincted in the Precious Blood. For those who cannot receive gluten, if they approach the priest early and tell him to keep a Chalice for them, he can give it to them.[/quote]

Nice idea but communion by intinction is not the norm in the Latin rite. We do occasionally have it when we have a priest fill in who happens to be from another rite. However, the norm in the diocese is to have communion under both species. Are you suggesting changing the norm so that daily mass can just have communion under one species?

[Starets]

I voted no, no, and no. 'nuff said

[Deo Iuvente]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1433171' date='Dec 12 2007, 02:42 AM']Nice idea but communion by intinction is not the norm in the Latin rite.[/quote] But the Roman missal (1970 and 2002), and the General Instruction of the Roman Missal say it's a legitimate option that anyone can use,even giving instructions on how it is to be done on the roman rite.
[quote]However, the norm in the diocese is to have communion under both species. Are you suggesting changing the norm so that daily mass can just have communion under one species?[/quote]
1)Technically, it's two species
2) Even if the diocese has set a norm, as intinction is a valid option in the missal, any priest or parish can use it.
Just like the fact that standing is the norm for communion in Philadelphia doesn't prevent my parish and several others from using the communion rail, or the fact that mass facing the people is the norm for the diocese of the unites states keeps my parish and many others across the country from celebrating ad orientem.
Legitimate options cannot be canonically outlawed by the bishop or council of bishops as far as I know.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1433096' date='Dec 11 2007, 09:55 PM']Just a suggestion, don't anyone get horrified, but wouldn't that be a good thing if less people go up? In other words, only those who have a devotion to Christ in the Eucharist would seriously approach the altar to receive. Just a thought. I know this ain't a cookie cutter situation, but just a thought nonetheless.[/quote]

I would definitely agree with this. I find it hard to believe that everyone that goes to every Mass is always in a state of grace and fasting for an hour. Not to sound like I'm supporting Jansenism or any other heresy like it, but I think that there is definitely a lack of preparation for reception of the Blessed Sacrament nowadays.

[jeffpugh]

Well worded. I think the lack of Catechesis is somewhat to blame here. Maybe the priest needs to give more homilies on the Eucharist. Hey, this is a great season for that sort of thing in many ways.

[KnightofChrist]

yes, yes, and yes.

While bad catechesis is no doubt the problem, how we live and act is also the problem. For those poor souls that have trouble understanding that the "wafer" is actually Christ, it does not help that he or she regularly receives from a layperson or an equal just like them.

Everyone generally understands that the Priest is standing in for Christ or at least has a higher place in the Church, and is not an equal. If it was shown by the simple action that only the Priest may give the Eucharist , this would show that Eucharist has a higher place, because an equal is not allowed to give us the Eucharist but only the Priest.

Think of it this way, lets say there is a great gift that you are going to receive. But you dont quite understand it is a great gift. Which would make it easier for you to understand that the gift is great? To receive this gift from a great man, or your equal?

Edited December 16, 2007 by KnightofChrist

[curtins]

Yes

Yes

and I put no for number three, but I really mean maybe in some cases.


Don't get RID of Extraordinary ministers but make them what they ARE, what their NAME says they are: EXTRAORDINARY. They have become ordinary, something that tends to blur the lines between the alter/sanctuary and the congregation, a physical act that can and does translate into a blurred understanding (less defined) roll of the priesthood.

These days its like the Agnus Dei starts playing and 3 or 4 people spring up to the alter.

I agree with what has been said to expedite the distribution of communion:

-Communion rails would be so ideal
-Communion under one species if necessary (obviously not when theres rails)
-Deacons if possible


It can be done folks- it was being done for how many thousands of years

As for whether it would increase peoples belief in the real presence, I don't know. Maybe for a few people, but by and large I don't think people would notice that and take account of it (unless the priest said something like "we're reducing the extraordinary ministers to foster reverence etc etc") I think the lack of faith is partially due to rediculous catechesis

[Laudate_Dominum]

Sweet response curtins.

[jeffpugh]

Yeah, I agree. Really down to earth on the matter.