|
1 members (Roman),
1,969
guests, and
150
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,526
Posts417,651
Members6,181
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,960 |
I had a discussion the other day with a friend who would like to become a Eucharistic Minister in the Byzantine Catholic Church since our bishops approve of this ministry. Personally, I would like to see minor orders re-instated, but the drift seems more oriented towards "commissioned" volunteer ministries rather ordained ministers. You gotta go where the bishops are. The woman's daughter would also like to become a Eucharistic server like I've seen in Cleveland. Both women consider the minor orders as a means of discrimination and are happy that our bishops are finally listening to them.
I was once chastised by a cleric for using the term "minister" in referring to non-ordained volunteers such as catechists, readers, and cantors/schola members. However, in the eparchial "commissioning" service for catechists, they are referred to as "ministers". Some pastors even have lay pastoral ministers. Can someone clarify when it is appropriate to use the term "minister" in referring to the various ministries in the church? Does it depend on the eparchy or the particular parish one is in?
Thanks,
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674 |
Originally posted by J Thur:
Does it depend on the eparchy or the particular parish one is in?
Thanks,
Joe Yes, it does.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
I'm going to have to ask since the OP doesn't make sense to me. What is a eucharistic minister? The use of the word "server" seems to imply to me that non-ordained individuals (even women it appears) would somehow handle the holy mysteries. I know that is not possible though.
What am I missing?
Andrew
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 40
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 40 |
The use of "Eucharistic Ministers" in the Byzantine Rite is a most unfortunate development. Clearly the model is current practice in the Latin Church, as there is no historical model. Does this, then, represent a Latinization?
In any case, even the Latin Church in its official instructions indicates that such ministers must only be used in cases where the shortage of priests is so acute that people would be without the sacrament without these "non-clerical ministers."
Dr. Michael
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517 |
Apart from the utterly rare case of genuine emergency, the use of anyone who is not a deacon or priest - or bishop, of course - to administer Holy Communion is a Latinization and a scandal.
What might be considered genuine emergencies?
1) a severe persecution, when in order to protect the priest trusted laypeople must secretly carry the Eucharist to communicate those who are unable to come to the Divine Liturgy.
2) a priest who is severely paralyzed, so as to be unable to administer Holy Communion, but can barely manage to celebrate the Divine Liturgy while seated in a wheel chair and does so because of the severe shortage of priests.
Notice that there is a difference between those two cases. In a persecution, we do what we have to do. In the case of ongoing paralysis of the priest, who can barely manage to celebrate, it is up to the bishop to ordain a suitable candidate to the diaconate as soon as possible, even if this deacon's function must be restricted to distributing Holy Communion.
Incognitus
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 674 |
Some parishes and eparchies prefer Eastern language and styles, and some mirror Roman Catholic language and styles. There is a difference of opinion about which is better. I'm with Incognitus, and I think the idea of extraordinary ordinary lay ministers of communion is a scandal.
Nick
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070 |
I'd like to add that it is also highly unusual for even a deacon to administer communion under normal circumstances in most eastern churches, let alone a lay person.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 780
Administrator Member
|
|
Administrator Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 780 |
Originally posted by Jim:
I'd like to add that it is also highly unusual for even a deacon to administer communion under normal circumstances in most eastern churches, let alone a lay person. This is not my experience. Unless there are sufficient priests deacons are always used to assist with giving communion. At least, this is the case with the Melkites -- your mileage may vary. Fr. Deacon Edward
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 576 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 576 Likes: 1 |
In any case, even the Latin Church in its official instructions indicates that such ministers must only be used in cases where the shortage of priests is so acute that people would be without the sacrament without these "non-clerical ministers." Which makes me wonder why here at a very small military installation where at the most 7 or 8 people were in attendance on several Sundays a female eucharistic minister, who also happened to be a colonel, gave the eucharist together with the priest? Not a shortage of priests there!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 249
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 249 |
Originally posted by J Thur:
I was once chastised by a cleric for using the term "minister" in referring to non-ordained volunteers such as catechists, readers, and cantors/schola members. However, in the eparchial "commissioning" service for catechists, they are referred to as "ministers". Some pastors even have lay pastoral ministers. Can someone clarify when it is appropriate to use the term "minister" in referring to the various ministries in the church? Does it depend on the eparchy or the particular parish one is in?
Thanks,
Joe Joe, The Latin Church is very specific wth regard to the proper terminology for those lay individuals who distribute Holy Communion (although it seems that many choose to ignore this directive and use whatever terminology they wish). This, from Redemptionis Sacramentum, the document that establishes the "ground rules" for this ministry... 1. The Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion
154. As has already been recalled, �the only minister who can confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist in persona Christi is a validly ordained Priest�.254 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,255 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.
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. 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.257
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. Seems (at least in the West) that the semantic issue would involve the use of the term "Eucharist" or "Eucharistic" and not the term "minister," so long as it is prefaced with the term "extraordinary." Again, I stress the above is with regard to the Church of the West... don't know if the same terminology applies to the Churches of the East. Al (a pilgrim)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,231
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,231 |
Not this again! Does anyone actually have a number of how many lay people are actually distributing the Eucharist in the 4 Ruthenian eparchies??? And how often? Weekly? Adhoc basis? I thought that this fell by the wayside. Obviously not. Once the door is open and the foot is in, there is no turning back.
This is, IMHO, one of the "new latinizations" taking place in the Church today and should be surpressed. Did our ancestors "distribute the Eucharist" when they first came to these shores and there was a lack of priests? Did they care how long communion actually took during the Liturgy?
We're dancing farther and farther from our roots and from our Orthodox brothers and sisters...and nobody seems to care.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Aug 1998
Posts: 4,337 Likes: 24 |
From the Particular Law of the Metropolia
"Canon 707 �l
�8. Women are prohibited from serving at the altar.
Canon 709 �2
�l. In cases of true necessity, deacons may distribute the Divine Eucharist.
�2. In the same cases, even minor clerics and members of the laity can be designated to distribute the Divine Eucharist.
1o. A parish may have one person designated for this purpose plus another for each 75 communicants at the Liturgy.
2o. The metropolitan Liturgical Commission is to prepare a program of training that includes theological and spiritual formation, the selection process for candidates and a practicum.
3o. Those persons may take communion to those who, by reason of illness, infirmity or age, cannot attend the Divine Liturgy regularly.
4o. If any priest or deacon is present at the Liturgy, in any capacity whatever, he is to make himself known to the principal celebrant and shall distribute the divine Eucharist, vested insofar as possible, and taking precedence over any minor cleric or lay person present."
A quick glance at this shows greater care was taken by our Church than the Latin Church in allowing this possibility. How many of our parishes have more than 75 communicants at a single Liturgy? A handful in the Metropolia? I wouldn't get upset about this. It was intended to help elderly priests who were already using Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion by dispensation anyway.
Fr. Deacon Lance
My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,070 |
Outside of churches in communion with Rome, most Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox churches, and OCA ones I have been to do not provide for deacons to give communion except by special episcopal authorization, under unusual circumstances. What those circumstances happen to be for them, I do not know. There are likely to be parishioners who would forego communion rather than receive from a deacon there, however. Anyhow, you could go a long way before you find a Greek Orthodox church that even has a deacon. Most around here have one parish priest, possibly a retired priest as well, who may be serving a very large community. Any male parishioner there in good standing can assist the priest by holding the cloth at the cup, but no one else. If communion takes a long time, that's the way it happens. In my own Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic parish only a priest has distributed communion as long as I have been there (which is not all that long), just like the Greeks, Russians, or OCA. Lay persons and deacons assist with the cloth only. Perhaps churches from the middle east differ in this regard. Like Fr. Deacon Ed says, different mileage.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,516
Forum Keilbasa Sleuth Member
|
|
Forum Keilbasa Sleuth Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,516 |
The question is out there.
Which parishes have them and how many people are eucharistic ministers?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517 |
The search for statistics is highly to the point. Meanwhile, to respond on the matter of deacons: it is true that it has become quite unusual for deacons to distribute Holy Communion throughout the Orthodox world - partly because of the deplorable shortage of deacons, and partly because of the infrequency with which many Orthodox approach Holy Communion. But any serious Orthodox theologians know full well that a deacon may, in fact, distribute Holy Communion.
On one not so funny occasion a priest of my acquaintance - whom I prefer not to name - was "ordered" by a professional deacon whom I also shall not name, to consume and purify the Chalice, so as to free up the deacon to go and intone the Polychronion in true operatic style. The priest quite properly - and without the use of inappropriate language - told the deacon that it was for the deacon to consume and purify the Chalice and that the priest would not dream of usurping that diaconal function! I do hope the deacon got the point.
Incognitus
|
|
|
|
|
