Under another post there is a question in a comment:
QUAERITUR:
Does a communicant have the right to receive communion from a cleric?
Yes, and no.
The 1997 Instruction On Certain Questions Regarding the Collaboration of the Non-Ordained Faithful in the Sacred Ministry of Priest (Ecclesiae de mysterio) – Art. 8 – and the 2004 Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum provide the basis for saying “yes, communicants have the right” to receive from a bishop, priest or deacon. Bishops and priests are the only “ministers of the Eucharist” and, with deacons, are the only “ordinary ministers of Communion”. Hence, if they are present in sufficient numbers so that communion may be distributed in a reasonable length of time, they and only they should distribute without the assistance of extraordinary (lay) ministers (EMHC).
If a person is properly disposed and there is no danger of profanation, that person should be admitted to communion. So, a person has a right to receive but not an absolute right.
We can also say that, yes, a person has the right to receive from a cleric (bishop, priest, deacon) but that right is not absolute. Off the top of my head I can think of a situation where an elderly and infirm priest (the only cleric present) is just able to celebrate Mass, but is not mobile or strong enough to distribute communion. In that case, one wouldn’t have an absolute right to receive from him alone. Redemptionis Sacramentum backs this up:
[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged. This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.
All this being the case, it is entirely unreasonable to oblige a person to receive from a layperson if there are clerics there also to distribute.
Of course, if a person feels strongly about not receiving communion from a lay person, but only from a cleric, he could choose not to receive at all and, instead, make a spiritual communion. People are obliged to receive only once a year as per can. 920 §1: “After being initiated into the Most Holy Eucharist, each of the faithful is obliged to receive holy communion at least once a year.”
Loading ...
I received my First Communion when I was 8 from two EMHCs. I do think priests should be required to distribute First Holy Communion unless genuinely unable to do so.
I remember once, quite a while ago, when there was a Mass with a hale and hearty young-ish (below 50 yo?) Priest, and when communion was to be distributed, around 4 or 5 extraordinary ministers arrived at the altar. He took a look around, and let them distribute whilst he sat down.
That was one of the few Masses that drove the final nail in the coffin of me never wanting to go to a Novus Ordo Mass if I could possible help it ever again. There were other Masses that did the same (and worse incidents than this, most not in the heady days of the early 90s, but in the 2000s).
Also, “unduly prolonged” as a phrase (RS158) does a LOT of heavy lifting in the church today.
I often go to a parish that is very tradition-minded, and they even offer the TLM several times a week. Their NO Masses are all very reverent, and they use one EMHC. However, that one EMHC is an instituted Acolyte in diaconate formation. He only distributes when he is vested and actually serving the Mass, and only during the packed Sunday Masses. This parish also uses an altar rail.
In my humble opinion, if you insist on using an EMHC, do it like this. It still feels sacerdotal.
Also, in my opinion, he isn’t needed. Father can do it alone. But this is better than 99.9% of parishes.
We had an elderly Priest ( may He rest in peace) , who had difficulty walking. He would sit on a chair and we would approach side by side, two by two, kneel and receive.It never “prolonged “ the Mass! That was Vatican II’s excuse for Eucharistic ministers. [No. Extraordinary Minister of Communion. They are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.] How horrible if Mass takes a little longer.
APX :
“I received my First Communion when I was 8 from two EMHCs. I do think priests should be required to distribute First Holy Communion unless genuinely unable to do so.”
That is outrageous.
—
Father Z :
“All this being the case, it is entirely unreasonable to oblige a person to receive from a layperson if there are clerics there also to distribute.”
Does it not make a difference when the layman is an instituted Lector and Acolyte or a Seminarian similarly instituted ?
My diocese takes the position that a communicant always has the right to receive from a cleric if a cleric is available to administer. I don’t know if there’s a specific stated basis for this position, such as what’s cited here, or if it’s a matter of particular law or simply the office of worship’s policy when asked.
Let’s suppose: A very sick Catholic man is lying in a hospital bed. He hears a gentle knock on the door and a woman enters his room. It is his friend Kristin, who coordinates the adorers at the Perpetual Adoration Chapel and is a Eucharistic Minister at his parish. She smiles and says, “Hello Charles. I’m so sorry to hear that you are sick. You can’t imagine how many people have asked about you, especially your friends from daily Mass. I brought you Jesus.”
Charles’ answer: “Oh, thank you! I have been praying and asking Jesus for help to suffer well. This has been so hard for me. You are truly an answer to my prayer. Thank you for bringing me Jesus!”
Charles’ answer after watching the Catholic Youtube videos and reading blogs: “Oh, Kristin. I think I’ll skip it and just make a Spiritual Communion. Thanks, anyway.”
It is Jesus in the Host in the priest’s ciborium.
It is Jesus in the Host in the deacon’s ciborium.
It is Jesus in the Host in the eucharistic minister’s ciborium.
It is the same Jesus. The same Jesus.
Same. Jesus
“Of course, if a person FEELS strongly about not receiving communion from a lay person, but only from a cleric, he could choose NOT to receive at all and, instead, make a spiritual communion. ”
It is Jesus in the Host in the priest’s ciborium.
It is Jesus in the Host in the deacon’s ciborium.
It is Jesus in the Host in the eucharistic minister’s ciborium.
Same Jesus.
[Yes yes… of course. However, I think the question was mainly about reception in Church at Mass, which is the NORMAL way to receive. This example is not the norm, but rather an exception.]
The parish I regularly attend the priest and if present the deacon distribute communion in one section. The EMHC’s normally distribute on other rows. Normally I am able to receive from the priest or if present the deacon in their respective rows on the tongue. I can present myself without being a distraction and the last few years I have made more of an effort to receive communion from a priest or a deacon.
I don’t always take communion from both species but my regular parish brought this option back within the last few years (during the Wuhan Devil communion was under one species). Another parish that I sometimes attend utilizes the altar rail which I think makes it easier for a priest and if present a deacon to distribute communion, particularly while kneeling.
“Also, ‘unduly prolonged’ as a phrase (RS158) does a LOT of heavy lifting in the church today.”
Add the time to prepare and cleanse the sacred vessels, and subtract the time saved by multiple EMHCs administering communion. At best, it’s a wash in my parish with six to eight EMHCs.
In a parish church I used to call “The Church of What’s Happening Now!” the flaky pastor and his supports would “go” for whatever was current and transgressive. They remade the old church, installing a weird wooden screen with African squiggles on it to replace the old altar, installed an honest-to-God Jacuzzi as a holy water and baptismal font (the jets were turned on for Sunday Mass!), and during the distribution of Communion the pastor would take one of several cups and trot over to the side of the church so that no one could insist on receiving a host from him. He was, and I think still is, held in great favor in the Chancery, with our corrupt former Bishop describing him, with admiration (!), as “an innovative liturgist.”
Yes, but the question you are really asking boils down to lay Eucharistic Ministers. (I’m talking respectful, modest, faithfilled, reverent lay people like I see at my parish.) [No. Extraordinary Minister of Communion. They are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.] So, you admit it’s okay to receive from “Kristin” the lay Eucharistic Minister [No. Extraordinary Minister of Communion. They are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.] in one situation (in the hospital) but not okay to receive from “Kristin” at Mass if I “feel” it’s not right (and how is that consistent with the “consecrated hands” argument?) So I’ll just skip receiving Holy Communion at Mass and make a spiritual Communion if I can’t receive from the priest, which btw, I actually saw in real time the other day at daily Mass when a faithful elderly priest had a long line with people coming from the back, with the lay Eucharistic minister [No. Extraordinary Minister of Communion. They are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.] who had finished distributing from the back and was now standing on the other side of him with nobody coming, (they were both behind a Communion rail, where people can kneel and receive on the tongue from both.) What did he do? After distributing for awhile, he turned and walked back up to the altar because the long line of people ignored him when he pointed for some of them to go to the other empty line. Forget what the bishop says about this for his diocese right now in 2025 or what faithful pastors are trying to balance and implement. I’m telling you, Fr. Z, in faithful parishes, this is the great divider right now. “You people in the back, go ahead and receive from the lay EM. [No. Extraordinary Minister of Communion. They are NOT Eucharistic Ministers.] But I’m going up front because I’m…” more enlightened? Know better? Want to receive Jesus in the way I want to receive Him? Because I know better than the bishop or pastor in this situation? I’m just saying. Right now, in 2025, in N.O. faithful parishes, it’s the great divider. Of course, ideally, if we could all go to TLM Masses and receive kneeling from only a priest. Yes, how wonderful that would be. But, that’s not where we are at in 2025. I’m just trying to challenge the statement that to tell the faithful in this time of much confusion that they can go ahead and skip receiving our Lord because they don’t feel like receiving from a lay person… well, those words carry a lot of weight and can affect a lot of souls. I’m just saying. [And I think you have unfairly characterized my post. But you perhaps did not read it carefully.]
[The solution is not more lay people doing what the ordained do. And I note that even though the terms were explained in the post, it is so deeply embedded in your thought that “Eucharistic Minister” for lay people is throughout your comment. Probably not your fault, since that is all you have ever heard. However, I did explain the terms.]