 One of the things I really love about reading Catholic blogs is that I learn something new every day. The latest interesting piece of information comes from David Alexander, aka The Man with Black Hat.
He mentions St. Tarcisius (sometimes spelled Tarciscus), who appears to have been the first Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion. St. Tarcisius was a young boy, possibly an acolyte, who in the absence of available deacons was asked to deliver the Blessed Sacrament to some prisoners. On the way he was beset by pagan boys his own age, and when questioned to show them the "mystery" he was carrying, he refused. They jumped him and beat him to death. Legend has it, when they looked for what it was that he was carrying, the Blessed Sacrament was nowhere to be found.
This is the attitude I strive for when I approach Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.
Sadly this is not the attitude that I (nor it appears David) find with regard to the handling of the Body and Blood of Jesus. Sometimes you see "the one handed grab", or the "attempted dunk". Sometimes you see a communicant walk down the aisle still clutching the Body of Christ in his or her hand.
David relates some of his experiences:
But it was during that experience that I learned, for all their pretense, of how unaware people could be of what it was they were handling. I saw the Precious Blood poured into the sacrarium (a practice that ended on my watch). I saw the ciborium being passed from one to another in the choirloft, with people partaking of the Body of Christ with all the reverence of a bowl of potato chips.
I would say unbelievable, but it is not. I have seen EMEs grab handfuls of consecrated hosts and transfer them from one ciborum to the other. I have heard of an altar boy running out to a priest after mass with a chalice of Precious Blood in his hand and giving it to the priest saying goodbye to parishioners afer mass and saying "here father, drink this".
David speaks about Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist. He writes:
First and foremost, was the people who normally do it. Not that there's anything wrong with them. It's just that you get the feeling that it's a lark, a thing to do to "make lay people feel involved." Especially when there just has to be one no matter if only a few dozen people show up, or if four or five priests show up.
And involvement has become a primary virtue in the post Vatican II Church. I have heard things like "we don't have to kneel, we are an 'Easter people'".
David also describes the preference for EMEs as outlined in Immensae Caritatis:
The document which officially laid down the guidelines for this practice in the Latin rite was Paul VI's 1973 document Immensae Caritatis. An interesting provision was the order of preference for candidates, in the absence of sufficient priests, deacons, or installed Acolytes: "The fit person... will be designated according to the order of this listing (which may be changed at the prudent discretion of the local Ordinary): reader, major seminarian, man religious, woman religious, catechist, one of the faithful -- a man or a woman." Contrary to what a certain pastor in the Virginia suburbs has led his parish to believe, there is no strict preference for men over women, as a female Religious or catechist could conceivably be chosen over a noncommissioned or unconsecrated male. (Besides, guys who think they're "by the book" should try reading it once in a while.)
If we had no EMEs (or maybe one minister of the Precious Blood), the mass would be, in my parish... oh... 10 minutes longer. And here we are, in the presence of our Lord and Savior in the flesh, and like Jesus berated his Apostles at Gethsemene: "Can't you stay awake and pray with me for one hour?"
Many people, especially in the US, have become uncomfortable with sacred silence. They say their prayers, and then don't listen quietly for God to answer them. They seem to want to "get it over with" as soon as possible so they can get on with the "important stuff" like the football game. I used to be like that.
So to avoid 10 extra minutes of quiet prayer time (or filled with "meditation music") you need an EME for every 20 people.
David then discusses what he'd do if he were Bishop.
Oh, then there is one other thing. The whole idea of something being scheduled is that it becomes regular, therefore ordinary. If they show up, they expect to be employed. Since the function we are discussing is, by definition, EXTRAordinary, those assigned to a parish would consider themselves "on call" for a particular Mass. That is to say, they may be used, or they may not. They would be told if they are needed once they arrive at Mass, by which time it has been determined whether there are enough priests and/or deacons available. Besides, they were gonna come to Mass that weekend anyway, right?
Right. This turns it into a "here I am, Lord" moment. A "use me if you need me" moment. Much like St. Tarcisius, the acolyte who was "drafted" in the absence of ordained deacons in extraordinary circumstances.
David continues with:
There are those who would say that this threatens the role of the laity in the Church. I suppose it would, if the administration of the Blessed Sacrament were actually the task of the laity. There is nothing in the two millenia of Church teaching and practice, including any document of the Second Vatican Council, that would even remotely support this claim. There is, then, no threat to the role of the laity.
Nope, it's not. This is all due to flexibility of interpretation of mushy ecclesial documents. If you leave "wiggle room" there will not only be "wiggling", there will, in many cases, be whirling like dervishes.
Oh, sure. The bishops should have a decent degree of latitude with regard to running their diocese. But bishops who "don't get it" need to be instructed. If they understand and still won't comply, they need to be disciplined, and if discipline doesn't work, they need to be retired.
Read David's The whole article. It's quite good.
Saint Tarcisius, ora pro nobis.
|
