Sinner Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 Went to another Parish for Mass today. They did not consume all the Blood of Christ, but covered it and the remaining Body of Christ. After Mass, the "Eucharistic Ministers" as they called them went to the side table and consumed the "leftovers". I know it looked sad to me. It felt wrong..... was it? -I winced, I prayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christina Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 (edited) Usually, the Precious Blood is consumed by the Extraordinary Ministers or Priest right after Communion and then the Hosts that are left over are put into the Blessed Sacrament for later use. Edited August 22, 2004 by Christina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justified Saint Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 I had to watch painfully today as one of the extraordinary ministers ran out of consecrated hosts and went and got more from the tabernacle and dropped one on the floor as they were being transferred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christina Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 [quote name='Justified Saint' date='Aug 22 2004, 02:54 PM'] I had to watch painfully today as one of the extraordinary ministers ran out of consecrated hosts and went and got more from the tabernacle and dropped one on the floor as they were being transferred. [/quote] What did they do with the Host after they picked it up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justified Saint Posted August 22, 2004 Share Posted August 22, 2004 She picked it up and put it back in the tabernacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreaMercer Posted August 23, 2004 Share Posted August 23, 2004 I think that the church needs to take greater care in training their em's. Honestly, if the em doesn't compeletely understand and accept the HUGE responsiblity that they have, how are they suposed to revere the eucharist as it should be. That makes me sad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 (edited) I hate needing EMs. I very rarely will take Communion where there are EMs, because I invariably sit on the side the EM distributes to. My distaste boils down to 'I don't know where they've been.' I honestly can't tell whether this person is for abortion or what. Are they even in a state of grace to receive the Eucharist themselves? More Deacons, I says! Edited August 26, 2004 by toledo_jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picchick Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 Yeah. A Extraordinary Minister or a priest (I would rather a priest) needs to consume the Blood of Christ if there'd be any that was left. If not then there is no where to put Him without a problem of spilling His Precious Blood. Same thing with the Hosts. For example, I was on a retreat where we had Mass. The priest consecrated too many Hosts. Since there were no tabernacle he and my brother (the server) consumed them. It was done reverently. As far as the Host falling on the floor, sometimes it happens. However there are steps that have to be taken when that does happen. The host has to be consumed. Then the spot where Jesus fell needs to be cleaned with Holy Water. It once happened at my Church and the seminarian took care of it with the Pastor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 [quote name='Sinner' date='Aug 22 2004, 03:01 PM'] Went to another Parish for Mass today. They did not consume all the Blood of Christ, but covered it and the remaining Body of Christ. After Mass, the "Eucharistic Ministers" as they called them went to the side table and consumed the "leftovers". I know it looked sad to me. It felt wrong..... was it? -I winced, I prayed. [/quote] A churh in Arlington does this, and it made me feel uncomfortable too. I talked to an orthodox priest about it and he said that it was liturgically legal, although he doesn't see why they don't consume the remaining blood immediately after communion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noel's angel Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 why didnt she eat it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picchick Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 [quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Aug 25 2004, 11:41 PM'] I hate needing EMs. I very rarely will take Communion where there are EMs, because I invariably sit on the side the EM distributes to. My distaste boils down to 'I don't know where they've been.' I honestly can't tell whether this person is for abortion or what. Are they even in a state of grace to receive the Eucharist themselves? More Deacons, I says! [/quote] I agree with you. Sometimes it may be "necessary" but I mean really. There is nothing wrong with taking extra time to distribute communion with out an extra ordinary minister. Also I have seen some EM at my Church make it their "right" which is DEAD wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 yeah, everything is a right nowadays. the right to choose, the right to be a priest, the right to be an EM, etc. I hate rights! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toledo_jesus Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 (edited) [quote name='dUSt' date='Aug 26 2004, 11:16 AM'] A churh in Arlington does this, and it made me feel uncomfortable too. I talked to an orthodox priest about it and he said that it was liturgically legal, although he doesn't see why they don't consume the remaining blood immediately after communion. [/quote] dang it, Arlington is supposed to be orthodox. I mean it is compared to Richmond (though that's changing! God Bless Bishop DiLorenzo). Anyway, I need to come visit some of these parishes I keep hearing about that are apparently so much more orthodox than anything I've seen. Edited August 26, 2004 by toledo_jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picchick Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 I have only seen it done right after communion. I think that everything should be consumed right away. It takes away any risks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted August 26, 2004 Share Posted August 26, 2004 [quote name='picchick' date='Aug 26 2004, 04:07 PM'] I agree with you. Sometimes it may be "necessary" but I mean really. There is nothing wrong with taking extra time to distribute communion with out an extra ordinary minister. Also I have seen some EM at my Church make it their "right" which is DEAD wrong. [/quote] Taking a bit longer is fine, if you have the time. My parents parish has approx. 1700 families. There are 6 Masses at that parish every weekend (there are 4 other Catholic Churches in the town of about 20,000). If you use a conservative estimate of 3 people for families (taking into account the elderly couples and college students), you have about 850 people at each Mass. Because there are six Masses, they only have about 1 hour to have Mass and allow for change-over in the parking lot (Masses are 1 1/2 hour apart so they can fit them all in). They have two priests assigned to the parish, each takes three Masses each weekend. If the did not use EMHCs, they would not be able to provide the Eucharist even under one species to all the people, and there would never be the option of receiving under both (which, while not necessary, is a fuller sign). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now