Eeeek! Another "Eucharistic Minister"!

A few years ago I was at St. George right before a Sunday Mass and a visitor showed up. I went through my usual introductions and "heads up" that things would look different in the Mass from what she was used to. She kindly said "thank you" and then said, "I'm a Eucharistic minister, so I'd be happy to help serve communion for you". I hid my angst and I politely told her that I would not need her assistance, and she was clearly shocked, and even seemed slightly offended. She told me "it's ok, really, I don't mind helping; I've been fully trained if you're worried about that". I came right out and made it clear: "thank you for your willingness to help, but I do not use Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion here at St. George." The look she gave me could have sunk an aircraft carrier.

I do not know what she was "trained" in, but it was not in full accord with the teaching of the Catholic Church. Let me go through the list here. First, there is technically no such thing as a "Eucharistic minister"; it is not a proper term in the Church. If we want to be accurate, the only one who "ministers" the "Eucharist" is the Priest (or Bishop), since ministering the Eucharist means to bring about the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, and that is only done by a properly ordained Priest.

Second, the term "Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion" (hereafter, "EMHC") that I used with her was the proper term (post Vatican II!) for a layperson who is temporarily allowed to assist with the distribution of Holy Communion in his own parish. Let us examine the term. First it is "Extraordinary". This means--get this, it is highly technical--"extra-ordinary" and not "ordinary". In other words it should not be the norm. Second, the person is called a "minister of Holy Communion", which is the only way to refer to the distribution of Communion.

Third, the appointed position of EMHC is only done by the person's own parish priest and is not transferable to any other parish. In addition, when a person is appointed to this position, it is, according to the Pope's rule, only to be done on a temporary basis. It is supposed to be for the purpose of helping out when something "extraordinary" happens (there's that word again!). These laity are specificially referred to as "extraordinary" because the "ordinary" lay-minister of Holy Communion is only an Instituted Acolyte, not just any warm body in the pew that the priest drafts into the position on a moment's notice (as I have heard happens often).

I did not go into the fact that no EMHC is allowed (by Canon Law) to distribute Holy Communion by intinction (when the host is dipped in the precious Blood and served directly on the communicant's tongue). This is strictly forbidden for the laity to do; which is one of the reasons why we use this method at St. George. I also did not mention to her that I had no authority to appoint her as an EMHC, even if we did not use intinction, since she was not my parishioner. I am uncertain what she had experienced in the past at other parishes, but my stating that she was not needed at St. George seemed to be the first time she had gotten that response.

This whole incident is a clear picture of the disorder and mayhem that we are experiencing as a result of Bishops and Priests failing to teach their people rightly. I do not really fault the woman who was so confused by the fact that we at St. George were only doing what the Church had done consistently for the twenty centuries before 1965. I fault the first priest who "appointed" her to the position of EMHC. It does not take a genius to figure out the rules, but it takes someone who respects his own ordination vows enough to teach accurately. She was not "trained fully" as she had said, but she (God love her) trusted her priest to teach her correctly. Woe to the Shepherds who do not protect their flocks; their blood will be on their own heads.