But the Church manages for over 1900 years without resorting to this innovation!
You serve more than one Liturgy on the same day !?!?!? If so, THAT'S a Latinization and break with ancient custom.

Photius

That does not answer the Latin pastoral realities of today- more parishes, more parishioners, less priests. So your solution is to unduly prolong the communion rite so that ancient practice is served?

Admittedly, the practice at our parish is a break with custom, but it meets a pastoral need. There simply is no way to presently accomodate all the parishioners in the temple at one Divine Liturgy, nor are there enough priests to begin new parishes.

CHRIST IS RISEN!

Dear Photius,
You write that "on the streets of Greece, any man in a rason may be called "despota", at least by unlearned folk, and I have been so called, inappropriate as that may have been."

How true - it's happened to me in the post office in Athens any number of times, for no apparent reason. But I'm not complaining; the same phenomenon got me free admission without even the need to stand in line for the exhibition of the treasures of Mount Athos at the museum in Salonica a few years ago.

fraternally in the Risen Lord,

Incognitus

I think pastoral need bears defining a little more closely. I have seen a church that seats 600 people with 3 or 4 masses on Sunday. At mass 1 there are 60 people, mass 2 has 100, mass 3 has 150 and so on. Is there a pastoral need for an army of lay ministers to help poor overworked father at work here? No, this is a case of bad scheduling where one, or at most 2, masses would accomodate everyone. I have also seen elderly or even infirm priests who do need some help. In that case, the ministers are being used properly. I also think the arguments based on lenghth of time for communion could bear some scrutiny. If not using ministers increases the time from 10 minutes to 15, and the priest is well and healthy, then I don't see a valid need for the lay ministers. Part of the reason for using these ministers in the first place was a desire to emphasize the priesthood of believers and de-emphasize the role of the ordained priest. At the time these lay ministers originated, I don't remember there being any necessity in most places for using them. Granted, that has changed as more priests have aged, died, or retired. But I think the automatic argument that we have to have lay ministers is not always valid. In some places they are needed, in others they are used when they are not needed.