To answer the second part of my friend’s question, I, again, looked to Redemptionis Sacramentum. No 154 explains that the priest and deacon are the proper ministers of Holy Communion.
As has already been recalled, “the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest”. Hence the name “minister of the Eucharist” belongs properly to the Priest alone. Moreover, also by reason of their sacred Ordination, the ordinary ministers of Holy Communion are the Bishop, the Priest and the Deacon, to whom it belongs therefore to administer Holy Communion to the lay members of Christ’s faithful during the celebration of Mass. In this way their ministerial office in the Church is fully and accurately brought to light, and the sign value of the Sacrament is made complete.
The last sentence is very important: The sign of Sacrament is only complete when the priest or deacon administer Communion. Then the instruction goes on to name the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion in 155,
In addition to the ordinary ministers there is the formally instituted acolyte, who by virtue of his institution is an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion even outside the celebration of Mass.
This instituted acolyte, called for by Paul VI In Ministeria quaedam (English available here), is a minister with an intergal function in the liturgy described in the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani. It has currently become popular in the United States to simply neglect this usage.
However, there is permission for other extraordinary ministers for an even more extreme case, 155,
If, moreover, reasons of real necessity prompt it, another lay member of Christ’s faithful may also be delegated by the diocesan Bishop, in accordance with the norm of law,[256] for one occasion or for a specified time, and an appropriate formula of blessing may be used for the occasion. This act of appointment, however, does not necessarily take a liturgical form, nor, if it does take a liturgical form, should it resemble sacred Ordination in any way. Finally, in special cases of an unforeseen nature, permission can be given for a single occasion by the Priest who presides at the celebration of the Eucharist.
So, the diocesan bishop may ask any laymen for a “specified time” or “one occasion.” The priest can also do so, but only in “special cases” which have an “unforeseen nature.” Therefore, we must go the diocesan bishop for the answer in our local church. Again, the pastor should have this permission in written form, or it will be available at the chancery office. Redemptionis Sacramentum tells us what to call these ministers in No 156,
This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened.
Now that we know how these extraordinary ministers are to be appointed and what they are called, what is the proper use of them? Redemptionis Sacramentum states in No 157,
Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged. This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason. (Emphasis mine)
The use of extraordinary ministers, is therefore extraordinary, hence the name. The Vatican’s instruction “On certain questions regarding the collaboration of the non-ordained faithful in the sacred ministry of the priest”, Ecclesiae de mysterio states, in article eight,
This function is supplementary and extraordinary and must be exercised in accordance with the norm of law.
It then addresses specific abuses at the bottom of that same article,
To avoid creating confusion, certain practices are to be avoided and eliminated where such have emerged in particular Churches:
- extraordinary ministers receiving Holy Communion apart from the other faithful as though concelebrants;
- association with the renewal of promises made by priests at the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, as well as other categories of faithful who renew religious vows or receive a mandate as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion;
- the habitual use of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion at Mass thus arbitrarily extending the concept of “a great number of the faithful”.
Notice the last abuse listed. Many would have you believe the ordinary use of extraordinary ministers is what the Church is encouraging us to do. In reality, she is telling to avoid exactly that. Then, in the conclusion of this instruction, all contrary customs are rejected,
All particular laws, customs and faculties conceded by the Holy See ad experimentum or other ecclesiastical authorities which are contrary to the foregoing norms are hereby revoked.
In Brief
- Extraordinary ministers are “supplementary and extraordinary.” (Ecclesiae de mysterio 8.)
- “The habitual use of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion at Mass” is to be eliminated. (Ecclesiae de mysterio 8.)
Now we’ve covered the Church’s law on the matter; my commentary will come in the post to follow.
6 Comments
: number of faithful coming to Communion is so great
: that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly
: prolonged
And this is the universal loophole. What is “unduly prolonged”? 10 minutes? 30 minutes? 3 Hours?
In our parish, the “Eucharistic ministers” (that’s what we call them) have become a regular part of the Mass. I even remember a case where we had 7 concelebrating priests for a special Mass, and 6 of them sat down for the distribution of Communion.
How did we get to this point, and how do we get back?
How did we get to this point?
Incrementalism - little by little the extraordinary was phased in to become ordinary (in practice, if not in name)
By now the faithful are so confused as to think that (and I have actually heard this said) the priest not extending the chalice to the lay faithful is a “liturgical abuse.”
I once arrived at a parish and immediately ended the former practice whereby the extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion would truck up the choir loft steps with hosts and a chalice containing the precious blood so as to distribute Holy Communion to the organist and cantor. I still allowed the hosts to be carried - in a closed ciborium, but no longer permitted them to carry the precious blood to the choir loft. One cantor was appalled! I explained my reasoning, even citing REdemptionis Sacramentum that every effort should be taken so as to avoid profanation of the Sacred Species (even by accident) She countered that the free exercise of her “right” to receive under both species (”as it is a fuller sign”) was a higher value than protecting the Blessed Sacrament from profanation.
In the end, she chose to descend from the choir loft in order to receive Holy Communion under both species.
You may also want to emphasize (in another post, perhaps) that “ordinary” and “extraordinary” do not refer primarily to the frequency of performing a ministry but rather to the propriety of performing it. “Extraordinary ministers” of something are not the proper ministers of it, i.e., they are not “within the order” of that ministry.
The frequency ought to reflect the hierarchical nature of the ministries. Thus, extraordinary ministers would be seen truly as something “out of order.”
but no longer permitted them to carry the precious blood to the choir loft. One cantor was appalled! I explained my reasoning, even citing REdemptionis Sacramentum that every effort should be taken so as to avoid profanation of the Sacred Species
God bless you, Father. When I was “lofted”, we would come down after Mass (after the closing hymn) to receive.
In our new wrecktovated church, the choir area is up front and to the right of the sanctuary (physically a little lower than the sanctuary, but a little higher than the congregation; I don’t like that particular symbolism). We now receive right before the communion hymn (since there are so few of us now, but that’s a story for another day).
But slowly, our pastor has been bringing us back in line. With the retired pastor, we had eucharistic ministers gathered around behind the altar during the fractioning rite. Father would break the host, then distribute it to each of the minsisters and himself. Then all of them would consume them at the same time (like co-priests).
When our new pastor stopped that practice, and had the EMEs line up in front of the sanctuary one of the EMEs left our church because father “took her place on the altar away!”.
First, thank you for the research and information. It is very helpful to me. I would like for you to clarify somehting for me.
Redemptionis Sacramentum No. 155: “Finally, in special cases of an unforeseen nature, permission can be given for a single occasion by the Priest who presides at the celebration of the Eucharist.”
In commenting on the above quote, you made the following statement.
“So, the diocesan bishop may ask any laymen for a “specified time” or “one occasion.” The priest can also do so, but only in “special cases” which have an “unforeseen nature.””
I may have misunderstood your comment or Redemptionis Sacramentum No. 155 (or probably both), but it seems that the priest is restricted to giving permission for only a “single occassion.” It doesn’t appear to me that the priest has the authority under any condition to give permission to the lay faithful for “a specified time.”
Thank you again for your help.
Larry,
You are correct. The priest is only able to appoint a laymen when he encounters a situation “at the liturgy” (Ecclesiae de mysterio), thus being a “single occasion.” This is more limited than the bishop who can also appointed for a “specified time.” My commentary here is a bit sloppy. Sorry about that.
Post a Comment