...In the last couple of decades, Communion under both species (with the congregation able to receive the Pre-cious Blood as well as the Sacred Host) has become routine in our experience. I knew (as many of you do) that Communion under both species was first introduced, on a limited basis, after the Second Vatican Council, and that it has become much more common since. What I did not know was that the widespread American practice of offering both species at most Sunday Masses began here under an indult (special permission) given by the Vatican in 1975, which expired in 2005.
That letter from Mgr K Holmes, rector of the Cathedral in Madison. Looks like it's going to phase out starting 1 Advent.
The flocks of "ministers" (and minister-ettes) in some Milwaukee parishes is almost 10% of the entire congregation; the traffic near-requires a cop to keep them all orderly.
About time it ends here, too.
9 comments:
But what will the 17 "Eucharistic Ministers" do at each Mass?
One would hope they'll receive Communion worthily and pray for an end to the Obozo Regime.
At Cathedral in La Crosse, I've seen people jogging up the isle because getting out of the pews takes longer than actually walking up and receiving.
Isn't the title Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist (EME)? Which somehow brings to mind Kaempfert and Gabler,
"...very, very extraordinary,
E is even more than anyone that you adore..."
Please explain the controversy to me, my friend; is this about the practicality of Mass, or about the authority of the Vatican, or is it about theology in some way? I have read your writing about it, but I'm not sure exactly what is at issue.
Brief and not nuanced:
The Church teaches that each species (bread and wine), after the consecration, is the entire body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ.
Some had argued that it is more--whatever-- that both the consecrated bread and wine (body and blood) be given at communion. It was sort of a literalist argument. But it also allowed for the thinking that the (consecrated) host was ONLY the Body and the (consecrated) wine was ONLY the Blood.
IOW, the practice could lead to inaccurate thought. Therefore, the practice should be stopped.
(There were practical problems, too, with the cast of dozens usually required for all this distributing.)
(There were practical problems, too, with the cast of dozens usually required for all this distributing.)
This is also part of the issue, I think. Dozens of people lining up on the altar to distribute also lead to a...lax...view of the Eucharist in general (in my opinion) what with laity doing things like washing out chalices, etc.
Actually Terrence, the current term (unless it has changed again…) is Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion (EMHC). But yes, they’re quite ‘extraordinary’ and extraordinarily numerous in most parishes, regardless of the number of communicants.
I think they and Communion Under Both Species should be done away with, except on special and rare occasions as was the original intent – like Ordinations and Marriages, for example. If it were up to me – which of course it isn’t – I would not allow Communion Under Both Species unless there were sufficient Ordinary Ministers present to accommodate it.
unless there were sufficient Ordinary Ministers present
Yah, well, pray for vocations.
Post a Comment